Neil Patrick Harris vs Hugh Jackman Host Off (Video)

Neil Patrick Harris, Hugh Jackman Have a ‘Host-Off’ at Tony Awards

How I Met Your Mother’ star Neil Patrick Harris defended his right to host the Tony Awards against former Tony MC Hugh Jackman.

Dueling it out, Harris and Jackman referenced the past 60 years of Broadway and Hollywood musicals in a toe-tapping bid to outdo one another onstage at New York’s Beacon Theatre.

So who won the oh-so-charming dance-off, and who proved to be a hacky pop culture icon disguised as a bonafide Broadway talent? It’s hard to tell. Both Harris and Jackman never seemed to miss a step as they kicked off Tony night or, should we say, ‘The Book of Mormon’ night?

The critically acclaimed musical from Trey Parker and Matt Stone, the creators of ‘South Park,’ earned nine Tony Awards, including Best Musical, Best Original Score and Best Book of a Musical.

Please visit my legal website: Nevada DUI Attorneys
See me on YouTube: Seattle Cop Punches Black Teenage Girl

I’m Just Sayin: Chicks Can’t Wield Two Handed Swords

Female Heroes in Movies Are Dumb

Man with Zweihander

Don’t call me a woman hater or something stupid like that, but when I sit down to watch a period piece, i.e. movie set in a specific date in history, and the hero of the story is a woman, I know it is time to walk out of the movie.  Am I against women?  No!  I kinda prefer women; wink wink; nudge nudge.  But, having a woman jump thirty feet, kick ten guys, while punching five others and then body slamming two, is a bit much for my whole “reality-embedded” brain to handle.  Don’t get me wrong.  I am all for equal pay for women.  I am all for sharing of household responsibilities.  But, I am not going to divest my brain of all sanity and reason for 90 minutes just for the off chance, some obscure lesbian somewhere will get a kick out of watching a brainless bimbo do super heroic feats of strength by taking down 20 men twice her size and weight, in a single punch.  That might be great for that chick, but don’t expect me to buy into it.

What’s worse is, what message does this send to idiot chicks who think this is reality.  And, if you think I am joking around, let me tell you a story.

A chick came to my apartment once, when I was living with two other guys, and she proceeded to manhandle my roommate.  My roommate, being Latino, felt it his duty to allow her to thrash, not only, him, but our entire living room.  She proceeded to body slam him into shelves, desks, books and the t.v.  Well, I being the Capricorn and believer in equality that I am, grabbed her with 2 fingers, by the scruff of her neck and literally tossed her out of our apartment.  I then grabbed the two 90 lb guys that came in with her and told all of them, that they would never set foot in the apartment, as long as I lived there, ever again.  I think closed and locked the front door; told my roommates to clean up the front room; and went to bed.  I forgot to mention, I was completely naked except for a blanket I was holding around me with one hand, so this all took place with me doing this one-handed.

So let’s get back to these movies.  The person watching a movie is expected to identify with the hero of a story, somehow.  When it is a man, male viewers put themselves in the place of the hero, and women put themselves in the place of the damsel in distress.  When it is a female… noone identifies with her.  To this day, men still want to be heroes and women still want their knight in shining armor to come save them.

The reality is chicks cannot wield two handed swords.  Let’s take a look at a two handed sword.  The epitome of two handed swords, at least in Europe was that Zweihänder.  It weighed up to 16lbs and was up to 6 feet in length.

Guards could be plain or ornate, while hilts usually ended with heart or pear shaped heavy pommels. Occasionally a blunted portion of the forte, the ricasso or Fehlschärfe (meaning “missing sharpness”) at the base of the blade allowed a hand to be placed below the lower guard to “shorten the grip” and make the handle like a polearm. This allowed the user to crudely repel a cavalry charge. The swords have hilt-mounted side-rings and enlarged cross-guards of up to 35 cm (14 in) across. Along the blade, some 10–20 cm (4–8 in) from the upper guard, Parierhaken (“parrying hooks”) shaped like lugs or flanges acted as a guard for the ricasso to prevent other weapons from sliding down the blade. – wikipedia

Let’s see how a real man used the two handed sword:

Perhaps the best known user of a Zweihänder was Pier Gerlofs Donia who is reputed to have wielded it with such skill, strength and efficiency that he managed to behead multiple people with it in a single blow. The Zweihänder ascribed to him is, as of 2008, on display in the Frisian museum. It has a length of 213 cm (84 in) and a weight of about 6.6 kg (14½ lb). – wikipedia

So, a man used a 7 foot sword that weighed 14 1/2 pounds.  Excluding a few freaks of nature, for the most part, women cannot even hold that sword, even today’s much larger woman.  Remember we are talking about humans that lived about 400 years ago, and they were not 5’8.  The women definitely weren’t.

The Zweihander was Monstrous

So, what is hollywood trying to push when it makes women wield two handed swords, slide down banisters and kill 30 men?  Well, the answer is simple.  It’s a male fantasy porno.  Mind, you, it’s not mine.  I don’t do porno.

Please visit my legal website: Nevada DUI Attorneys
See me on YouTube: Seattle Cop Punches Black Teenage Girl

Sci-Fi is Not Porn

Stop Putting Sex Scenes in My Sci-Fi

Sci-Fi Porn Queen

Buzz Megachip, readied his phaser, peaked around the corner of the Martaplex employee lounge and found Sarah Bimbolucious.  For the next 5 minutes of the movie a sex scene ensues.  Now for the average non-sci-fi nerd, this would seem like a normal scene.  Gotta have a sex scene in a “movie”.  That might be true, except the “movie” is called “Buzz Megachip and the 3rd Quadrant”, a pure nerd-fest sci-fi flick.  The people that would be attracted to this movie are disgusted at the complete porn scene that is in them.  And, for those who do not think a sex scene is porn in a movie, let us go over exactly what is NOW shown in sex scenes:

  • full frontal male nudity
  • full frontal female nudity
  • full back male nudity
  • full back female nudity
  • full sexual intercourse wide shots [ i.e. the guys bare butt, thrusting into a female, while seeing tits ]

That, my friend, is called porn.

Now, let us go over why it is a bad thing to have porn in a sci-fi.

  1. once you start writing a full-fledged fleshed out porn scene in a movie, you have to get super permission from actors willing to do the scene
  2. you have to pay extra for the “sex” scene
  3. you then have to get people to write the “sex” scene
  4. people who write “sex” scenes are not super nerd friendly sci-fi screen writers
  5. there is little to no sci-fi story
  6. the studio is concerned with putting butts into the seats and not nerd butts into audience seats
  7. instead of pandering to the very crowd that made a particular series popular, they try to reach for a larger audience that has never even heard of Buzz Megachip, and usually alienates the very people that made the particular title popular

Yes that means that Buzz Megachip is completely short changed on the entire sci-fi story.  All these riveting “that was not cannon Buzz Megachip storyline” conversations and nerd arguments are not going to take place, after watching the movie.

Of course there is no Buzz Megachip, but this applies to all sci-fi.  In an effort to get everyone to see a movie, hollywood studios try to pander to everyone’s interests.  This is the very same argument against being politically correct.  Instead of actually defining something, they make it so general that noone likes it, or worse, everyone hates it.

 Please visit my legal website: Nevada DUI Attorneys
See me on YouTube: Seattle Cop Punches Black Teenage Girl

There is No More Love in America

The Scam of Love

There is almost no romance on t.v. or in movies any more.  “Falling in Love”, apparently now, is a 4 letter word.  The entire notion of the fantasy love story of a man and woman having a love so strong that it lasts, even beyond death is non-existent.  It has all been replaced with problems and problems, or slutty images and graphic sex.  They portray love stories now as being problematic to get the point across that loving someone is ALWAYS problematic.  They seek to destroy whatever notion of happiness you find in another human.  Why?  So you can look to them for your happiness.

The national entertainment outlets always create love “stories” in the same lame format:

  • boy meets girl
  • boy and girl aren’t perfect
  • they obviously need changing
  • problems
  • problems
  • problems
  • story over

I want you to go sit through any 5 chick flicks in the past 5 years.  I want you to keep track of the outline I just set and see if I am wrong.  If you have been reading my blog for any time, you’ve seen my movie reviews.  I do not want to sound jaded or too cynical, but entertainment is now depressing and not fun.  Even kids’ movies are not fun.

The entertainment now seeks to depress you to such a degree as to make you discontent with your own life.  You’ve been programmed that you must return to the movies to get your entertainment.  Having a dinner party and inviting friends and playing board games is ancient history.  [although I did just that last year, was great fun]  People are now programmed to think that going to dinner, club and the movies are the ONLY ways to have “fun”.  The movies and t.v. for their part depress you to such a degree that it bleeds over into your real life.  Since they try to define what a “relationship” is for you, when you leave the movie depressed you will then seek out the problems in your own relationship.

“AHA, you did squeeze the toothpaste tube in the middle, this relationship is over.”

As stupid as that sounds, it is oh so sadly true.  The movies present generalities about problems in relationships and people watching these movies take it to heart thinking it is a universal truth, and break up with their loved one.

“Why did she break up with you man?”
“I don’t know, I guess we grew apart.”

No man, she, like an idiot, watched MTV or some stupid movie and thought that you checking your cell phone every 5 minutes was factual evidence that you were cheating on her.   She didn’t stop to realize that your grandma was in the hospital with cancer, on her death bed.  So now you’ve lost your grandma and your girl friend all in one day.

I can guarantee you this scenario happens daily across the land.

Oh don’t let me leave out the chick magazines.  When they aren’t depressing women with evidence that they are somehow not beautiful for NOT having a heroin induced, malnurished body, they are telling them that:

  1. something is wrong with their man
  2. you can change your man
  3. if your man doesn’t listen to you, he’s obvious broken
  4. if the mail-room boy asks you out on a date that somehow he’s a pervert and needs to be sued

The magazines defining women’s lives is completely over the top and out of hand.  A dress-size zero woman is not good looking to a man.  End of story.  If the bones in her arms and legs are the largest section of that particular appendage, men will stay away from them.  Also malnourished women look like children, and only a man with a tendency towards pedophilia would like that look.  How many men have to come out and say they like big breasts, big hips, big legs, before females GET IT.  How many real life celebs with larger measurements become the idol of millions of men, before females GET IT.  Stop reading these stupid magazines that tell you that the anorexic look is OK.

Then the magazines set you up for disaster in your relationship, by telling you, you can change your man.  Yes, simply go out and grab the nearest man you can find, and change him.  Obviously, putting effort into finding a decent man FOR YOU, is far too much trouble.  Isn’t that the message they are actually trying to say?  And, what human thinks that they can change an adult male?  “An old dogs does not learn new tricks.”  It’s not just a funny saying.  It is true.  If your ulterior motive in a relationship is to get some good looking guy and MOLD him into what you want him to be, then you are setting you and him up for a disastrous relationship.  Get off your lazy anorexic butt and go find a GOOD MAN.  And, if the one you find is not perfect, then you might need to change your notions of what perfect is.  Ask yourself, who taught you what a perfect man is?  I’m not saying go marry an axe murderer, but I am saying if he drinks beer and likes video games, that does not mean he is imperfect.  If you require 24/7 attention, the problem is with you, not him.  You be you, and let him be him.  If you’re doing it right, you will “grow together.”  If you go into a relationship with that open mindedness, then you will never break up / get divorced.

The magazines try to tell you what you want to hear.  Apparently, if your man does not listen to you 100% of the time, then something must be wrong with him.  Get rid of him.  That’s the message right?  Let’s see!   Movies and comics and magazines always say that females are “always right.”  You and me both, know that is a lie.  If you do not know all the facts and details about something, there is no possible way you could always be right.  You need to wake up and smell the coffee.  They are trying to sell you something by flattering your ego.  Females are not always right.  Men are not always right.  Noone is always right.  If these magazines are saying females are always right and their men should always listen to them, they are setting you up for a complete break down in communication.  How?  Because as soon as you get it in your head that “I am always right,” then that means you shut down when your man tries to say something.  You see how horrible that is?  And, you wonder why your relationships are rocky at best.

Finally, these womens’ magazines try to get across that if some random guy invites you to dinner, that obviously there is something wrong with him and he needs to be sued, and the company he works for needs to be sued.  The sexual harassment craze has gotten so far out of hand that it is destroying large segments of the populations.  Groups of  women are living completely single and wonder why, yet should any man approach them, they look for the sexual harassment umbrella.  The UPS guy asks them out to dinner – law suit.  The pizza delivery guy asks them out on a movie – law suit.  The mail-room clerk asks them for their number – law suit.  They look up 20 years later, surrounded by cats and wonder why.  Sexual harassment was intended to protect men / women from some ongoing pervert inside the workplace that holds their career in the palm of their hand.  While your boss asking you out to dinner, one time, might be unethical, it is not sexual harassment.  Sometimes people meet people they are attracted to and want to see if it is going to go somewhere.  You never know who might be the man of your dreams if you open yourself up to possibilities.  Sometimes the most unlikely sources are the best choices.  While everyone laughs at the mail-room clerk for hitting on the vice president, how chagrined are they when he gets a three million dollar inheritance from his dead uncle?  Or, the UPS truck driver that actually owns 20 routes and works one himself, making half a million a year?

These are just examples of how we take national media and let them define our reality, specifically relationship reality.  You should always hear stories from magazines, movies and t.v. as only applying to those particular people.  You should repeat to yourself, “that does not apply to me.”  Even if your mother is trying to give you sage womanly advice and she went through problems, “that does not apply to me.”  One person’s heartaches and mishaps does not mean that everyone is going to have heartache and mishaps in their relationships.

I know of so many women that are man-haters.  When I hear their story, it dawns on me that they are man-haters because they were and are immature and did not understand that the trivial problem they had with one man, does not apply to all men.  Even that one man, normally, did not do something to them, to deserve full on hate.  More than likely, they were listening to another man-hater or saw a stupid movie or read a stupid magazine telling them that if a man does ‘XYZ’ that he deserves hatred.

I met a lovely Black girl, long ago, that I wanted to date.  She stopped me one day and told me that she does not like Black men.  When I asked why, she said because her uncle had molested her.  I was speechless.  I still am.  I can only guess that it was just an excuse to hate all Black men.  Noone gets something done to them by someone and then equates everyone with some aspect of that one person as evidence that they are all completely like that person.  It would be like saying, all men with mustaches are Hitler.  As I think about it, I bet my computer that that Black girl had some ridiculous mother or aunt tell her that all Black men are just like her perverted uncle and all deserve to be hated.  But, as sure as I sit here typing this, I know thousands upon thousands of women have similar messed up stories like that and are so messed up that they write off whole segments of the population due to something someone told them, i.e. movies, magazines and t.v.

Please visit my legal website: Las Vegas Nevada DUI Penalties
See me on YouTube: Seattle Cop Punches Black Teenage Girl

Movie Review: Flipped

Flipped Needs to be Flipped Off

Rob Reiner takes us through a very weird tale of “young love”.  With an all star cast, how could you go wrong with this movie?  But, he does it in style and with aplomb, crashes like a Japanese Kamakazi going down in a blaze of glory.  It is 90 minutes of torture.  I don’t think the Alquaeda could have done a better job.

Cast: Juli Baker by Madeline Carroll; Bryce Loski by Callan McAuliffe; Patsy Loski by Rebecca De Mornay; Steven Loski by Anthony Edwards; Chet Duncan by John Mahoney; Trina Baker by Penelope Ann Miller; Richard Baker by Aidan Quinn; Daniel Baker by Kevin Weisman.

Flipped is a period piece of two very young kids and their changing opinions of each other through the ages from age 4 – 12 years old, and their coming into a mutual affection.  It is an on again, off again affection, on both sides.  The young girl admires the young boy, while the boy dislikes the young girl.  We are made to watch this scenario play out for 8 years of their life.

What was right about the movie?: The movie did have the correct cars and costumes for the period.  There were some wide shots of landscape vistas that were pretty.  That is the only thing the movie did right.

What was wrong with the movie?:

  • first and foremost the movie sexualized children.  It was 90 minutes of cringing.  It was sick, sick, sick.
  • the movie was a period piece and so many things were wrong
    1. none of the dialogue was from the 40s or 50s. The very essence of the period was the very proper and fantastic way Americans spoke at that time. The slang they used in those days was so colorful. All of this was completely gone in the movie and replaced with regular modern vocabulary and 2010 euphemisms. It’s a travesty.
    2. none of the manners that were widely observed in the 40s and 50s were apparent. If this movie is really targeted at baby boomers, as the movie suggests, they will be horrified by how the kids treat the adults.
    3. everyone cursed in the movie. To my knowledge, and I am fairly old, people did not walk around cursing each other out, however in this movie, kids, teens and adults cursed like sailors.
    4. other than people wearing funky clothes, there was nothing that took you back to the 40s and 50s.
  • there was no point to the entire movie. The diaglogue was boring, and the entire screenplay was narrated. To add insult to injury, the narration “flipped” between both lead characters. The only relief of something actually happening was when the kids interacted with the adults in the movie. I don’t hate kids, but come on, they are not fun to watch.
  • Finally, kids acting like kids, but written by hairy old white men, with Harvard Business School vocabularies, removes all semblance of somehow being transported into a “kid’s” world. Someone should have clued Rob Reiner into how kids actually talk, before he sat down to write an entire screenplay about them.

The movie does not fit into any demographic that I could tell. I have no idea who this movie would appeal to. I say that to say, don’t go see it, but if you’re … I have no idea … then go see it, but… I have no idea who would like this trash.  It was agonizing to watch this.

I kept expecting something to happen and … then the movie ended.  It was a very Sopranos ending.  I am sure more than a few people will be angry at having sat through this movie only to have it end without any conclusion to the story whatsoever.

Please visit my legal website: Las Vegas Nevada DUI Laws
See me on YouTube: Shakaama Live

Movie Review: Predators

Predators 2010

Predators 2010

Predators (2010) directed by Nimrod Antal, stars Lawrence Fishburne, Adrien Brody, Topher Grace.  It is possibly the worst movie I’ve ever seen in my life.  It was boring, one dimensional and added nothing to the franchise.  To say there were plot holes everywhere, would suggest there was a plot of some sort.  After consulting some of the behind the scenes, perhaps the editor of the film itself is to blame, because some of the explanation as to why some characters are doing what in the film made it only to the cutting room floor.

This is no Dark Knight.  Adrien Brody attempts a cool, calm performance with a gruff, raspy voice throughout the film.  Instead of adding color to his character, you just wanted him to go gargle and STOP IT!  I’m not saying the acting was bad but, I’m just saying the acting was bad, or maybe it was the lack of script.

Predators opens up with several humans being dropped on an alien planet, presumably a reserve, predator hunting ground.  The humans all turn out to be various caricatures of earth’s version of “killers”, all except one, or is he?  But, the character has all of 12 lines in the movie so it doesn’t even matter.  There’s a plot twist, there’s that word plat again, but when we realize the “twist” we don’t care, we just want the predator to die and the human to win.

The characters, are all one dimensional portrayals of what we think of as killers here on earth, i.e. soldiers, mass-murderers, serial killers, thugs and mafia types.  It would be one thing if this movie could have explored each of these class of “killers” and add some depth to them, but any such explanation was not even touched upon in this 107 minute movie.  The movie was cut so short, as to appear to be a music video, more than a movie.  At any moment in the movie where you think you might see a glimmer of character coming from one of the members of this elite team of humans, they are killed off, almost always in mid-sentence to actually introducing a plot device.  “By the way I know how you can lure predators in because I used to …”kkkkkkkshuk thunkkkkk dead.  In fact my sarcasm is more interesting than any line in the movie.

Lawrence Fishburne Stars as Noland in Predators

Although Lawrence Fishburne gets top billing in the movie he literally has 5 lines in the movie.  Apparently he was on loan, simply to make a cameo and set up a plot… yeah right.  I already told you there was no plot.  I’m guessing someone got the bright idea to have him make a cameo and pay him untold sums of money for it.  You could literally remove his entire scene and the movie would have not been any different.  It’s literally just that bad.  Oh, not Lawrence Fishburne.  He was amazing.  But, his character and dialogue were… inconsequential to anything going on in the movie.  Except for the Japanese guy got a cool samurai sword from meeting him… racist much?  Here’s a guy that’s an expert with handguns, but apparently he wants to throw that away and get a katana, to fight against the 10 foot tall alien with dread locks and energy beam weaponry.  And, we all know crazy Black men, always have an ancient samurai sword laying around their lair … on alien planets?  Who writes this crap?  It’s like 7 degrees of trash.

Thank God there is no sex scene in this movie, because there is, in fact, a woman in it.  I was just cringing, thinking how they were going to work that in the movie.  And, with whom: the serial killer; the mass murderer; or the unemotional, completely detached and devoid of feelings lead character.  Because everyone knows unemotional, completely detached and devoid of human feelings men always desire to have a sexual encounter in the middle of a jungle, while being hunted down by aliens with ridiculously superior technology, to boot.  Surprisingly, Hollywood did let me down, or up.  I can’t figure out what I want, to disappointed that the movie wasn’t as horrible as I feared it would be or that a cliche’, out-of-place sex scene was not included in the God awful movie.

If I were grading the cinematography, this movie would fail so horribly.  Supposedly they are on a “jungle” planet.  But, they movie from Amazon like flora to … birch trees?  REALLY?  I heard of suspending belief, but this is God Damned Ridiculous.  At one point in the movie they are walking on shale rock.  Who was keeping track for them?  Could they not afford to shoot on location in Brazil for the whole movie?  Or has the rain-forest been decimated that much by clear cutting that you can’t shoot an actor walking in it for more than 5 minutes?

A whole lot of stuff just made no sense in the movie.  And, by no sense, I mean it was just meaningless.  At one point they sick predator looking hounds on the group.  The hounds are called off, and the viewer is left pondering what the point was.  Oh, oh, until the lead character “explains” that it’s just a test.  *FACEPALM*  That’s the best explanation they could come up with and excuse to show a CGI dog?  They literally could have had one of the dumber characters just say, “oh man those were wicked looking,” and it would have made more sense.  Because, that’s what the scene was actually about.  “Let me show you how cool these CGI dogs look.”

Who will like this movie?  Probably boys ages 9 – 14.  I can’t see anyone, with a brain, even sitting through this short film.

Please visit my legal website: Nevada DUI Attorney
See me on YouTube: Shakaama Live

Movie Review: The American "A Must Not Watch"

The American

This is a Gun and Two People in the Movie

So everyone hates Hollywood as much as I do right?  RIGHT?  I thought so.  And, apparently, so does  Director Anton Corbijn, but he’s Dutch so…  Well, anyway, so he directed writer Rowan Joffe’s The American.  He really really REALLY tried to make it minimalist, existensialist and super cool, right?  Yeah, so if I’m reviewing it, you know he failed.  I only review what I think are failed movies.  I’m kidding.  I’m sure I’ve given good reviews of something, somewhere.  I can’t remember.  But this is not one of those, “oh my gosh, what a great movie” reviews.

So, Academy Award winner George Clooney stars in the title role of the American. He plays the role of Jack, a lone assassin. After a gruesom job in Sweden ends, he hidey holes in the a small medieval Italian countryside. Against his better judgement and wishes, he takes on an assignment to construct a weapon for a sexy yet cold contact, Mathilde (Thekla Reuten). To add another layer of suspense to the already “suspenseful” plot ,in the mountains of Abruzzo, Jack becomes the object of friendship of a local priest Father Benedetto (Paolo Bonacelli). To add even more layers to the already convoluted onion wrap, he gets embroiled in a torrid liaison with a “lady”, Clara (Violante Placido). Jack and Clara’s escapades turn into a somewhat nebulous romance, however it does offer an out from his current “profession”.

Director: Anton Corbijn
Writer: Rowan Joffe
George Clooney – Jack
Paolo Bonacelli – Father Benedetto
Thekla Reuten – Mathilde
Violante Placido – Clara
Irina Bjorklund – Ingrid
Johan Leysen – Pavel

So where does it fail?  The entire movie you have NO idea what is going on, who’s on the screen, and why do you care.  It’s as if they cast George Clooney so the audience would just feel like, “oh this must be a great, I don’t understand a damn thing, but it must be great”.  Basic storytelling dictates that you at least tell your listener / viewer who you’re talking about.  This movie never tells you who the characters are.

Father Benedetto who’s Crucial to the Plot Somehow

While the settings are beautiful and the acting superb, there’s just no movie here.  Who can watch a movie where they have no idea what the story is.  You don’ t know who any single character is in the whole thing, nor what their motivation is.  Trust me, I don’t like being spoon fed a story, but at least I’d like to know why the main character is going to be murdered.

Why so many inconsequential subplots?  The entire cast is all of just 5 people.  Outside of the main character, in the end, after remembering the movie, you suddenly realize that half the subplots were meaningless to the story and had absolutely no closure.

This is a: Must Not Watch.

Please visit my legal website: DUI Las Vegas
See me on YouTube: Shakaama Live