A day or so ago, I got a notification from CNN on my phone about a news story that I only got around to reading now. CNN summarizes the article as "Two decades later, a traffic stop on a country road is still teaching police officers about deadly force – and the cost of hesitation." The article is part of a series, the rest of which is also worth a read.
The article is about the death (murder) of a Georgia police officer back in 1998, which was caught on video from a dashboard camera of the police car. This murder incidentally occurred only two days after my birthday, which is a morbid fact to notice. The police officer was killed while making a traffic stop; the man who he had stopped was apparently somewhat unhinged and started shooting at him. Some theorize that he was trying to commit suicide by cop, which he ultimately failed to do. [As an aside, I enjoy living in a place where most people are not gun fanatics/owners. So you would assume that something like that is less likely to happen here. The most recent local police officer to have been killed was killed by a drunk driver, which is still unfortunate. In somewhat related matters, the local police department hasn't been at the center of any controversies recently, which is good.]
You can actually watch a portion of the video, interspersed with some commentary from the officer's father and other members of law enforcement. The part where he gets shot is out of the frame of the camera, but you can still hear him screaming as he is killed, which is, to say the least, at least a little chilling. For the more faint-hearted among us, it's probably quite chilling and possibly veering into the territory of somewhat disturbing. As they say on television, viewer discretion is advised.
Then the article goes on to say "Most humans would rather not kill, even when society asks them to," which I thought was sort of interesting, especially in light of having watched the movie Experimenter, which was all about obedience experiments and how far people are willing to go in following orders. I suppose the willingness of one person to kill another can vary according to circumstances; the degree to which people were obedient in the obedience experiments changed when some of the conditions in the experiment were altered. The Nazis certainly seemed willing to be complicit in committing a genocide, which is why Stanley Milgram decided to conduct his obedience experiments. Also, fighting in a war sort of entails at least the possibility of having to kill other people.
In general, I think that people would be more willing to kill another person if it were in the interest of self defense. Notwithstanding the whole legal (not to mention psychological) consequences of killing other human beings, self defense seems like the most likely motivation that would bring an ordinary person to kill another person. I know I'd kill someone in self defense if my life depended on it. Of course I can only speak for myself.
Interestingly enough, this particular incident would have been a perfect justification for killing someone in self defense, yet the police officer did not. In contrast to recent controversies where police have killed civilians, this police officer was killed by a civilian because he (the police officer) was too hesitant to kill the civilian. The article says "The line between firing too slowly and too quickly can be very, very thin," which I think is a pretty good summary regarding these kinds of incidents.
The murderer was eventually captured, convicted of murder, sentenced to death, and finally, executed. In his defense, it was argued that he was mentally ill and had PTSD, which caused him to commit the murder, but regardless, the jury convicted him.
I do think that this whole incident and the aftermath could be an interesting thing to portray in a movie. I'm pretty sure there have been Law and Order episodes based around criminals who have killed a police officer, I just can't think of any specific ones off the top of my head.
Sunday, August 6, 2017
Friday, August 4, 2017
Postsecret review 9
A somewhat less late delivery date on this one. I can't sleep and I think it's because I had a caffeinated soda with dinner. So here we go.
"I think men who order their coffee with cream are sissies!" (written on a coffee cup) That's a ridiculous thing to be judgmental about (and this is coming from someone who's probably fairly judgmental herself).
"When you were hit by that car, I promised God I'd believe in him if you lived. I never knew it was one I'd have to keep." (with the h in him marked with the capitalization symbol and a question mark) Well, this is something... I wonder what kind of unfortunate consequences this person thinks will happen if they don't keep the promise to believe in God? That the other person in question will get killed somehow if the secret writer isn't faithful enough?
"I like to snoop through other people's medicine cabinets" This is something I can pretty much understand, because I like to look at other people's stuff as well.
"I don't want to lower my standards just because I'm overweight" I don't want to lower my standards because I think I deserve to date a good looking person. Being overweight or not doesn't really have anything to do with it in my case.
"being an atheist was boring" I guess if you like feeling guilty for sinning and not being spiritual/faithful enough, being religious could be fun.. I think being an atheist is more exciting because you don't have to deal with religious guilt over things you do that are considered sinful/unreligious. And (in the case of Mormonism), you don't have to pay tithing, which means more $$$ to spend on yourself.
"My friend buys drugs from people he knows at church!" This reminds me of some article I read in the past about people in Utah (Mormon land) being addicted to prescription painkillers.
"I steal my neighbor's Netflix movies!" Wouldn't this just have you end up with an assortment of movies you very well might not be interested in? I doubt that the neighbors have the same taste in movies as the secret writer. It would be better (in a way) to steal movies from a store, so you could have more choice in the matter of which movies you end up with. Although maybe it's easier to steal the neighbor's Netflix movies instead of doing it from a store. (if you want to take this as me condoning theft, you're free to, but consider the possibility that maybe I didn't mean it that way.)
"I tell everyone I'm happy in my polyamorous marriage... ... but I'm not. And I'll lose my husband if I go back now." Ooh, a polygamy secret!! If this lady isn't happy, then why would she particularly care if she loses her husband from the polygamous marriage? I'm sure there are other men out there who she might like and who wouldn't mind having a monogamous marriage.
Anyways, that's it for this week... the secrets were alright, but I think other weeks have been more interesting on the whole.
"I think men who order their coffee with cream are sissies!" (written on a coffee cup) That's a ridiculous thing to be judgmental about (and this is coming from someone who's probably fairly judgmental herself).
"When you were hit by that car, I promised God I'd believe in him if you lived. I never knew it was one I'd have to keep." (with the h in him marked with the capitalization symbol and a question mark) Well, this is something... I wonder what kind of unfortunate consequences this person thinks will happen if they don't keep the promise to believe in God? That the other person in question will get killed somehow if the secret writer isn't faithful enough?
"I like to snoop through other people's medicine cabinets" This is something I can pretty much understand, because I like to look at other people's stuff as well.
"I don't want to lower my standards just because I'm overweight" I don't want to lower my standards because I think I deserve to date a good looking person. Being overweight or not doesn't really have anything to do with it in my case.
"being an atheist was boring" I guess if you like feeling guilty for sinning and not being spiritual/faithful enough, being religious could be fun.. I think being an atheist is more exciting because you don't have to deal with religious guilt over things you do that are considered sinful/unreligious. And (in the case of Mormonism), you don't have to pay tithing, which means more $$$ to spend on yourself.
"My friend buys drugs from people he knows at church!" This reminds me of some article I read in the past about people in Utah (Mormon land) being addicted to prescription painkillers.
"I steal my neighbor's Netflix movies!" Wouldn't this just have you end up with an assortment of movies you very well might not be interested in? I doubt that the neighbors have the same taste in movies as the secret writer. It would be better (in a way) to steal movies from a store, so you could have more choice in the matter of which movies you end up with. Although maybe it's easier to steal the neighbor's Netflix movies instead of doing it from a store. (if you want to take this as me condoning theft, you're free to, but consider the possibility that maybe I didn't mean it that way.)
"I tell everyone I'm happy in my polyamorous marriage... ... but I'm not. And I'll lose my husband if I go back now." Ooh, a polygamy secret!! If this lady isn't happy, then why would she particularly care if she loses her husband from the polygamous marriage? I'm sure there are other men out there who she might like and who wouldn't mind having a monogamous marriage.
Anyways, that's it for this week... the secrets were alright, but I think other weeks have been more interesting on the whole.
Thursday, August 3, 2017
More actors, quick movie review of Contagion
It seems that one of my preferred subject matters when I have a lot of free time is admiring the looks of various good looking people, usually actors or models. In that pattern, another post on that topic.. (and a quick movie review)
Oh boy! I was looking at an illustrated list of "50 most beautiful men" compiled by Harper's magazine. There was a decent assortment; some of them were more historical examples like Robert Redford and Elvis Presley, and some were more modern like Jake Gyllenhaal, Brad Pitt, Ryan Gosling, Johnny Depp (although they used a picture from when he was young and not creepy looking) and Alexander Skarsgard, among others. Come to think of it, I'm a little surprised Colin Firth wasn't on the list. Anyways, someone else who was on the list... the British actor Henry Cavill. I had been vaguely aware of him in the past and I think maybe I kind of associated him with Hugh Jackman for some reason, but anyways, they chose a really nice picture of him for the list and I thought "Wow, his face is so... even." He sort of looks a little like Ian Somerhalder. By 'even', I mean that his facial features seem to me to be really well balanced between more masculine and more delicate. His face sort of seems like one of those things where they overlay a ton of different pictures of people and it comes out with an 'average' face. That's a compliment, by the way. Anyways, it's too bad he hasn't really been in any other notable movies aside from playing Superman. I'm not really that into superhero movies/tv shows. Nevertheless, I can still appreciate his appearance.
And, while we're on this topic, Trevor Noah of the Daily Show recently interviewed Massachusetts congressman Joe Kennedy III. Who, I must mention, is pretty nice looking. I wonder if he will ever run for president. As it stands, I'd vote for him. He might be too young to run though. I think the Kennedy family on the whole are/were all pretty nice looking, at least in their youth. And I should get around to watching the movie Jackie, where Peter Sarsgaard plays Bobby Kennedy.. Also, I thought it would be worth a mention here that perhaps the initial catalyst for Peter Sarsgaard becoming one of my favorite actors was when I took the AP Psychology class in high school. In the second semester, we learned about social psychology and touched on the topic of some unethical psychological experiments, which possibly is what caused me to think that Experimenter would be an interesting movie to watch. So, thank you, Ms. Sabet, however tangentially she is related to Peter becoming one of my favorite actors.
I think a relevant concept that can apply here and to my similar past blog posts is that of the 'female gaze', a counterpart/opposite of the male gaze, which is summed up nicely by this quote from a LA Times article: "You don't have to be a women's studies major to be familiar with “the male gaze,” a term coined by film theorist Laura Mulvey in 1975 to describe film created through the lens of a heterosexual male, a gaze so ubiquitous in Western media as to be self-explanatory."
So, my blog posts here are sort of an example of the female gaze, I'd say. The difference between the female gaze and male gaze has to do with what is focused on/the perspective in which something is cast/seen (this is my simplified interpretation of the concepts, from my understanding). In the interest of feminism, I will continue to shamelessly admire the appearances of various male actors/models (and blog about my thoughts regarding such). However, I don't think that my appreciation of these various actors counts as objectification, which google defines as "the action of degrading someone to the status of a mere object." I don't treat these actors as nothing more than pleasing things to look at, although perhaps it may seem that way. Objectification is inherently degrading to the people being objectified, and I wouldn't consider my views on these various actors to be degrading to them. Maybe I should take a class in women's studies where I would assume these types of concepts are explored. Out of curiosity, I wonder if there are many male professors of women's studies?? [Honestly, look at me/this! I could totally write for some website...]
Quick movie review: Contagion
I watched this movie because I was looking to watch something else Matt Damon has been in, aside from the Bourne series and Good Will Hunting/Saving Private Ryan (both of which maybe I should rewatch and pay specific attention to Matt's performance, although SPR was quite a brutal experience to watch and I'm not sure I want to put myself through that again).
The movie was alright; it wasn't bad although it probably could have been better. It wasn't exactly a stunning role/performance from Matt, but it wasn't horrible either. A pretty average/decent movie, I'd say. I think it could have made more of an impression than it did; it was one of those middle of the road movies. Not a waste of time though. The premise is about a virus that is quickly spreading around the world, which eventually leads to a lot of chaos/problems as normal society begins to break down due to the disease. It was sort of an interesting thing regarding what could possibly happen if a virus were to occur like that in real life. Matt Damon plays a guy whose wife is the first person to die from the virus. He had a really awkward length hairstyle in this movie which didn't really look good on him, but I guess maybe they were trying to convey an average family man type of person (he had a son and a daughter). It also seemed like he was a little pudgy in the face/chin area. At first I thought he was Mark Wahlberg. Again, I guess they were trying to convey him as a pretty normal kind of guy who just happens to get caught up in things regarding the outbreak of a virus. I think I was used to seeing him with short hair due to watching the various Jason Bourne movies (which I should probably rewatch, but in order this time).
As a closing thought, I'll leave you with this sentiment, which I've expressed in the past but I feel is worth repeating: Online dating is such an ordeal... ugh. I think I'm probably just better off staying single.
Oh boy! I was looking at an illustrated list of "50 most beautiful men" compiled by Harper's magazine. There was a decent assortment; some of them were more historical examples like Robert Redford and Elvis Presley, and some were more modern like Jake Gyllenhaal, Brad Pitt, Ryan Gosling, Johnny Depp (although they used a picture from when he was young and not creepy looking) and Alexander Skarsgard, among others. Come to think of it, I'm a little surprised Colin Firth wasn't on the list. Anyways, someone else who was on the list... the British actor Henry Cavill. I had been vaguely aware of him in the past and I think maybe I kind of associated him with Hugh Jackman for some reason, but anyways, they chose a really nice picture of him for the list and I thought "Wow, his face is so... even." He sort of looks a little like Ian Somerhalder. By 'even', I mean that his facial features seem to me to be really well balanced between more masculine and more delicate. His face sort of seems like one of those things where they overlay a ton of different pictures of people and it comes out with an 'average' face. That's a compliment, by the way. Anyways, it's too bad he hasn't really been in any other notable movies aside from playing Superman. I'm not really that into superhero movies/tv shows. Nevertheless, I can still appreciate his appearance.
And, while we're on this topic, Trevor Noah of the Daily Show recently interviewed Massachusetts congressman Joe Kennedy III. Who, I must mention, is pretty nice looking. I wonder if he will ever run for president. As it stands, I'd vote for him. He might be too young to run though. I think the Kennedy family on the whole are/were all pretty nice looking, at least in their youth. And I should get around to watching the movie Jackie, where Peter Sarsgaard plays Bobby Kennedy.. Also, I thought it would be worth a mention here that perhaps the initial catalyst for Peter Sarsgaard becoming one of my favorite actors was when I took the AP Psychology class in high school. In the second semester, we learned about social psychology and touched on the topic of some unethical psychological experiments, which possibly is what caused me to think that Experimenter would be an interesting movie to watch. So, thank you, Ms. Sabet, however tangentially she is related to Peter becoming one of my favorite actors.
I think a relevant concept that can apply here and to my similar past blog posts is that of the 'female gaze', a counterpart/opposite of the male gaze, which is summed up nicely by this quote from a LA Times article: "You don't have to be a women's studies major to be familiar with “the male gaze,” a term coined by film theorist Laura Mulvey in 1975 to describe film created through the lens of a heterosexual male, a gaze so ubiquitous in Western media as to be self-explanatory."
So, my blog posts here are sort of an example of the female gaze, I'd say. The difference between the female gaze and male gaze has to do with what is focused on/the perspective in which something is cast/seen (this is my simplified interpretation of the concepts, from my understanding). In the interest of feminism, I will continue to shamelessly admire the appearances of various male actors/models (and blog about my thoughts regarding such). However, I don't think that my appreciation of these various actors counts as objectification, which google defines as "the action of degrading someone to the status of a mere object." I don't treat these actors as nothing more than pleasing things to look at, although perhaps it may seem that way. Objectification is inherently degrading to the people being objectified, and I wouldn't consider my views on these various actors to be degrading to them. Maybe I should take a class in women's studies where I would assume these types of concepts are explored. Out of curiosity, I wonder if there are many male professors of women's studies?? [Honestly, look at me/this! I could totally write for some website...]
Quick movie review: Contagion
I watched this movie because I was looking to watch something else Matt Damon has been in, aside from the Bourne series and Good Will Hunting/Saving Private Ryan (both of which maybe I should rewatch and pay specific attention to Matt's performance, although SPR was quite a brutal experience to watch and I'm not sure I want to put myself through that again).
The movie was alright; it wasn't bad although it probably could have been better. It wasn't exactly a stunning role/performance from Matt, but it wasn't horrible either. A pretty average/decent movie, I'd say. I think it could have made more of an impression than it did; it was one of those middle of the road movies. Not a waste of time though. The premise is about a virus that is quickly spreading around the world, which eventually leads to a lot of chaos/problems as normal society begins to break down due to the disease. It was sort of an interesting thing regarding what could possibly happen if a virus were to occur like that in real life. Matt Damon plays a guy whose wife is the first person to die from the virus. He had a really awkward length hairstyle in this movie which didn't really look good on him, but I guess maybe they were trying to convey an average family man type of person (he had a son and a daughter). It also seemed like he was a little pudgy in the face/chin area. At first I thought he was Mark Wahlberg. Again, I guess they were trying to convey him as a pretty normal kind of guy who just happens to get caught up in things regarding the outbreak of a virus. I think I was used to seeing him with short hair due to watching the various Jason Bourne movies (which I should probably rewatch, but in order this time).
As a closing thought, I'll leave you with this sentiment, which I've expressed in the past but I feel is worth repeating: Online dating is such an ordeal... ugh. I think I'm probably just better off staying single.
Tuesday, August 1, 2017
Actor attractiveness ranking
Firstly, a quick little update about the recent happenings in online dating for me. The online dating website has introduced a feature that crowdsources moderation for pictures users have reported. I was bored so I decided to participate. After actually not that many, I got this notice: (as an aside, it seems that some people don't understand the "No conservatives need apply" notice on my new and improved profile. And I haven't netted any Peter Sarsgaard lookalikes yet.)
"Congratulations
You've made it to the end of the flagged objects, come back later and there may be more offenders for you to moderate. OkCupid thanks you for all of your help."
I wonder how long it'll take until there are more offenders for me to moderate.
Anyways, recently I decided that I should try to figure out what exactly I find to be good looking - to try and narrow down what constitutes delicate looking, that kind of thing. So for a start, I decided to rank some various actors according to how good looking I find them.
At the top of the list - unsurprisingly: Peter Sarsgaard (clean shaven), James D'Arcy - they are very good looking.
In the second place position, I thought that Matt Damon would fit; this decision is possibly influenced by me having watched the Jason Bourne movies recently. Right close below, Leonardo DiCaprio and Dane DeHaan, who sort of look similar. Sort of in between Leo/Dane and Matt Damon, I thought that Sebastian Stan would fit in - he's quite good looking but I haven't paid much attention to him/seen things he's been in. Below Leo/Dane, Colin Firth. Below that, Jake Gyllenhaal, George Clooney, Tom Cruise, Brad Pitt, Patrick Dempsey, and Mark Ruffalo - this category comprises actors who are generally recognized as being good looking, which I agree that they're pretty decent/good looking, but that just aren't quite as good looking to me personally as the people above.
Below that, actors who are also generally known as not bad looking (or so I gather) but who I don't personally have strong "he is good looking" thoughts about: Hugh Jackman (he's just kind of... weird looking, in a way. Very subtly weird looking though.), Michael Fassbender (his eyebrows are too flat). Slightly below but still in the same category, Matthew McCollardgreens (frog), Ezra Miller (eyes too high up), Jeremy Renner (strange eyebrows, facial features look kind of weirdly squished - although he did a decent job in The Bourne Legacy, so nothing against him as an actor). Below that, Adam Driver (nose too long, really). Below him, Johnny Depp, who I've discussed before about him being creepy and not good looking. Although he used to look alright, but now he doesn't.
A cleaned up list, potentially to be added to, but this is a start:
1) Peter Sarsgaard, James D'Arcy
2) Matt Damon
3) Leonardo DiCaprio
4)Dane DeHaan/Sebastian Stan (both quite good looking but I just haven't watched them in stuff, really)
5) Colin Firth
6) Jake Gyllenhaal, George Clooney, Tom Cruise, Brad Pitt, Patrick Dempsey, Mark Ruffalo. In no particular order, but Brad Pitt might slightly edge out the others in this category.
7) Hugh Jackman, Michael Fassbender. Slightly below: Matthew McCollardgreens, Ezra Miller, Jeremy Renner
8) Adam Driver
9) Johnny Depp
I'm not sure how to analyze these rankings exactly, but I'll try to think about it. Maybe it has to do with face shape??
Saturday, July 29, 2017
Postsecret review 8
I'm pretty late on this one again... oh well. It's getting done now; better late than never.
"I haven't sent out the thank yous yet because that will make this mistake real" (with a drawing of a wedding ring) I struggle to understand why one would still go through with a marriage even if they knew it was a mistake...
"SNL is my only source of news" That's not very intellectual.
"I love traveling without my husband :)" Can you say 'extramarital affair'??
"I avoid meeting up with friends from college because I don't want them to know I'm a waitress" Fair enough. If I ended up as a waitress after going to college I'd be ashamed too.
"Whenever I finish a good book I eat the last page" This is just a downright weird thing to do.
"I showed up to your wedding... for the food"
"I'm afraid eating meat will mess up my intuition" What the heck?
"I judge people in checkout lanes by the quality of food they buy for their pets." That's elitist. Not everyone can afford gourmet pet food.
"Sometimes when I'm not sure if something in the refrigerator is spoiled or not, I send it in my husband's lunch." I wonder if he's ever gotten food poisoning because of that.
"I am so sick of counting calories!" And I'm sick of having to put up with other people being obnoxious about counting calories.
"Before I cook - I spank myself with the spatula!!" That's not sanitary.
"I take steal breakfast from hotels on the weekends. I've been doing this for about a year at the same ones and no one has said anything. I don't feel guilty." Why should you?
"I feel more guilty buying with food stamps than I did when I stole to make ends meet." I don't really see why food stamps would make someone feel guilty, but whatever floats your boat.
"When people refuse to try spicy foods I judge them boring" Come to think of it, I kind of do as well.
"I hate catering to my VEGAN friends at potlucks & dinners." Isn't the whole concept of a potluck for everyone to bring something? So the vegan people should be bringing their own vegan foods if they so desire.
"I only eat 'store bought' food at potlucks because I can't help thinking about how disgusting people's kitchens probably are." Interesting, I guess? You haven't met my mother. Her kitchen is far from disgusting. The handwriting on this one is really cool.
"My son told me I was fat, so I sent him to his room... and ate some of his leftover Easter candy!" That's... interesting. I wonder how old this son was. After a certain age you'd hope children would know it's rude to tell people that they're fat (even if they are).
"My drug" (over a picture of sushi) Mine too, to some extent.
"I talk to the mirror in my kitchen like I have my own cooking show" What kind of a person has a mirror in their kitchen??
"Watching men eat meat turns me on" I guess this person should stay away from vegetarians.
"I am not allergic to seafood like I have everyone believe. I just hate it." That's... one way of avoiding having to eat it, I guess. I wonder why people hate seafood though. I like seafood. Fried shrimp don't even taste that shrimpy or anything.
"When I'm grocering falic [phallic] vegetables I'm always afraid people think I'm choosing them by size to use as sex toys." Um.
"My husband stole strawberries for me on Valentines Day" how romantic! :) <3
"I was the one that ate all the fortune cookies last night... I was looking for an answer." What kind of a person thinks they're going to find serious answers in fortune cookies??!
Well, that's it for this week. Maybe tomorrow I can get a quick start on the next batch... we'll see.
"I haven't sent out the thank yous yet because that will make this mistake real" (with a drawing of a wedding ring) I struggle to understand why one would still go through with a marriage even if they knew it was a mistake...
"SNL is my only source of news" That's not very intellectual.
"I love traveling without my husband :)" Can you say 'extramarital affair'??
"I avoid meeting up with friends from college because I don't want them to know I'm a waitress" Fair enough. If I ended up as a waitress after going to college I'd be ashamed too.
"Whenever I finish a good book I eat the last page" This is just a downright weird thing to do.
"I showed up to your wedding... for the food"
"I'm afraid eating meat will mess up my intuition" What the heck?
"I judge people in checkout lanes by the quality of food they buy for their pets." That's elitist. Not everyone can afford gourmet pet food.
"Sometimes when I'm not sure if something in the refrigerator is spoiled or not, I send it in my husband's lunch." I wonder if he's ever gotten food poisoning because of that.
"I am so sick of counting calories!" And I'm sick of having to put up with other people being obnoxious about counting calories.
"Before I cook - I spank myself with the spatula!!" That's not sanitary.
"I take steal breakfast from hotels on the weekends. I've been doing this for about a year at the same ones and no one has said anything. I don't feel guilty." Why should you?
"I feel more guilty buying with food stamps than I did when I stole to make ends meet." I don't really see why food stamps would make someone feel guilty, but whatever floats your boat.
"When people refuse to try spicy foods I judge them boring" Come to think of it, I kind of do as well.
"I hate catering to my VEGAN friends at potlucks & dinners." Isn't the whole concept of a potluck for everyone to bring something? So the vegan people should be bringing their own vegan foods if they so desire.
"I only eat 'store bought' food at potlucks because I can't help thinking about how disgusting people's kitchens probably are." Interesting, I guess? You haven't met my mother. Her kitchen is far from disgusting. The handwriting on this one is really cool.
"My son told me I was fat, so I sent him to his room... and ate some of his leftover Easter candy!" That's... interesting. I wonder how old this son was. After a certain age you'd hope children would know it's rude to tell people that they're fat (even if they are).
"My drug" (over a picture of sushi) Mine too, to some extent.
"I talk to the mirror in my kitchen like I have my own cooking show" What kind of a person has a mirror in their kitchen??
"Watching men eat meat turns me on" I guess this person should stay away from vegetarians.
"I am not allergic to seafood like I have everyone believe. I just hate it." That's... one way of avoiding having to eat it, I guess. I wonder why people hate seafood though. I like seafood. Fried shrimp don't even taste that shrimpy or anything.
"When I'm grocering falic [phallic] vegetables I'm always afraid people think I'm choosing them by size to use as sex toys." Um.
"My husband stole strawberries for me on Valentines Day" how romantic! :) <3
"I was the one that ate all the fortune cookies last night... I was looking for an answer." What kind of a person thinks they're going to find serious answers in fortune cookies??!
Well, that's it for this week. Maybe tomorrow I can get a quick start on the next batch... we'll see.
Movie review: The Bourne Ultimatum
Now that's how you do a movie! I wasn't bored for a second. This happened to be on tv and I caught it just as it was beginning so I didn't miss anything. Also pleasantly, the commercials seemed to be spaced fairly far apart, like 18 or 19 minutes instead of 12 or 15 minutes. 5/5 (I know I said I wasn't really the type to do numerical ratings, but I did for the last one so I thought I should continue the trend.)
I was quite happy that this movie was good, as opposed to the absolute waste of time No Country for Old Men was. A few weeks ago, I caught most of the first Jason Bourne movie on television. I thought that this one was the second, but it's actually the third, so it wouldn't hurt to go and watch the second and fill that in. And now I need to watch the rest of the series as well.
I don't remember noticing it in the first movie, but I really liked the style of cinematography used in this movie. It was shaky and frantic, which I think enhanced the movie and suspense. Although I could see other people hating it for being too unsteady and headache causing.
There were a couple of scenes I want to note - one where Jason Bourne is being handed a towel in some apartment/hotel room and the camera lingers a little bit on his hands holding it. I liked that. Then, there was a scene where the lady he was with was changing her appearance by cutting and dyeing her hair darker. She was washing it out in the sink, although I thought it was sort of odd that her hands weren't stained by the dye as she wasn't wearing gloves. I doubt they actually had the actress dye her own hair in that scene, so I can see why the inconsistency occurred. But I've done a bit of DIY hair dyeing myself and you really should wear gloves. And clothes you don't mind possibly ruining.
Naturally I think the Jason Bourne series probably gets compared to James Bond fairly often, and they are sort of similar in that they're about spies. But the Bourne series takes a fairly different approach/angle on the spy concept, which I would say ends up having a bit more depth than James Bond (although the Daniel Craig era films have a bit more substance to them than previous ones). And Matt Damon as Jason Bourne has a more boyish look than Daniel Craig ever did. As far as I can say, they aren't that similar in terms of the underlying themes and all. Jason Bourne seems like a more introspective character than 007. That's probably due to the amnesia.
I was quite happy that this movie was good, as opposed to the absolute waste of time No Country for Old Men was. A few weeks ago, I caught most of the first Jason Bourne movie on television. I thought that this one was the second, but it's actually the third, so it wouldn't hurt to go and watch the second and fill that in. And now I need to watch the rest of the series as well.
I don't remember noticing it in the first movie, but I really liked the style of cinematography used in this movie. It was shaky and frantic, which I think enhanced the movie and suspense. Although I could see other people hating it for being too unsteady and headache causing.
There were a couple of scenes I want to note - one where Jason Bourne is being handed a towel in some apartment/hotel room and the camera lingers a little bit on his hands holding it. I liked that. Then, there was a scene where the lady he was with was changing her appearance by cutting and dyeing her hair darker. She was washing it out in the sink, although I thought it was sort of odd that her hands weren't stained by the dye as she wasn't wearing gloves. I doubt they actually had the actress dye her own hair in that scene, so I can see why the inconsistency occurred. But I've done a bit of DIY hair dyeing myself and you really should wear gloves. And clothes you don't mind possibly ruining.
Naturally I think the Jason Bourne series probably gets compared to James Bond fairly often, and they are sort of similar in that they're about spies. But the Bourne series takes a fairly different approach/angle on the spy concept, which I would say ends up having a bit more depth than James Bond (although the Daniel Craig era films have a bit more substance to them than previous ones). And Matt Damon as Jason Bourne has a more boyish look than Daniel Craig ever did. As far as I can say, they aren't that similar in terms of the underlying themes and all. Jason Bourne seems like a more introspective character than 007. That's probably due to the amnesia.
Also, Jason is a nice name. If I were to have a kid, which I won't, but theoretically, that wouldn't be a bad name. Although I feel like it'd be kind of weird to name your kid Jason as in after Jason Bourne.
As far as Muse songs and movies go, I think Citizen Erased is a pretty good fit for this one (perhaps the whole series, even), as Falling Away With You fits really well with Requiem for a Dream. Come to think of it, Ruled by Secrecy fits the whole Jason Bourne thing pretty well too.
As far as Muse songs and movies go, I think Citizen Erased is a pretty good fit for this one (perhaps the whole series, even), as Falling Away With You fits really well with Requiem for a Dream. Come to think of it, Ruled by Secrecy fits the whole Jason Bourne thing pretty well too.
Movie review: No Country for Old Men
The short of it: what an overrated snooze fest. 0/5
The long of it: One of my first thoughts towards the beginning of the movie was that maybe I'd like it better if Peter Sarsgaard were in it. That shouldn't be surprising. I thought I'd watch this movie because it was on Netflix and supposedly it's good and it's fairly well known. I think it's right about on par with The Shining in terms of my opinion about it. Also, this one guy I'm messaging on the online dating website said that it was a good movie. How wrong was he!
This movie was very boring and languid and had very little tension/excitement. Blah. Shattered Glass was more exciting than this and that movie didn't even have any murder in it, just a lack of journalistic integrity on the part of Stephen Glass. Hayden Christensen was good in that role.
This movie was supposed to be a crime movie but it was really boring for a crime movie. Nightcrawler was better than this movie.
Anyways, that's about 2 hours of my life down the drain that I COULD HAVE spent watching Peter Sarsgaard in something, like, say, Garden State or An Education. Javier Bardem was in this movie as a murderer and he was, I guess, sort of creepy but not that much because the movie as a whole was boring and wooden. And what an awful anticlimactic ending. Not to mention an awful haircut on his character in this movie. He was good in Skyfall though, where he had a less boring role and a less anticlimactic ending. It would've been interesting if Peter Sarsgaard had had his role in this movie. The movie still probably would've been boring but at least it'd have had Peter in it who I could gaze at and hear say things, which I'm always happy to do.
There was a scene where Javier Bardem's character had recently gotten shot, so he exploded a car in front of a pharmacy so he could rob it for drugs and medical supplies while everyone else got distracted by the car fire. Which he did and then he was in a bath tub washing the blood off of his leg where he had gotten shot, and the water got all bloody. Then he started picking out the bullet fragments and stuff and injecting lidocaine into it. Ick. This whole scene was sort of gross. In an alternate universe where the movie was better and an actor I liked were playing the character washing blood off and picking out bullet fragments, maybe a scene like that could be weirdly attractive, but in this case it was just gross. Hmm, come to think of it, there was sort of a similar scene in The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, which I probably liked better (the scene). I definitely liked that movie better.
I just don't think western movies are cut out for me. This one wasn't exactly a western movie, but it was set in Texas. I have NO IDEA how this movie won an Oscar... it was so, so mediocre. Gah.
Conclusion: unless you like boring movies and/or looking at Javier Bardem in the way that I like looking at Peter Sarsgaard, don't waste your time.
As a parting thought, it seems like I'm thinking everyone and their brother looks like Peter Sarsgaard these days. Anthony Scaramucci, this guy in Congress I saw on CNN this evening (Lee Zeldin, if you're wondering), this guy I saw in person today (who didn't look super similar to Peter exactly, but something about him just seemed to resemble Peter in some way or another...)... my 'facial recognition software' is most definitely a bit screwy, I think.
The long of it: One of my first thoughts towards the beginning of the movie was that maybe I'd like it better if Peter Sarsgaard were in it. That shouldn't be surprising. I thought I'd watch this movie because it was on Netflix and supposedly it's good and it's fairly well known. I think it's right about on par with The Shining in terms of my opinion about it. Also, this one guy I'm messaging on the online dating website said that it was a good movie. How wrong was he!
This movie was very boring and languid and had very little tension/excitement. Blah. Shattered Glass was more exciting than this and that movie didn't even have any murder in it, just a lack of journalistic integrity on the part of Stephen Glass. Hayden Christensen was good in that role.
This movie was supposed to be a crime movie but it was really boring for a crime movie. Nightcrawler was better than this movie.
Anyways, that's about 2 hours of my life down the drain that I COULD HAVE spent watching Peter Sarsgaard in something, like, say, Garden State or An Education. Javier Bardem was in this movie as a murderer and he was, I guess, sort of creepy but not that much because the movie as a whole was boring and wooden. And what an awful anticlimactic ending. Not to mention an awful haircut on his character in this movie. He was good in Skyfall though, where he had a less boring role and a less anticlimactic ending. It would've been interesting if Peter Sarsgaard had had his role in this movie. The movie still probably would've been boring but at least it'd have had Peter in it who I could gaze at and hear say things, which I'm always happy to do.
There was a scene where Javier Bardem's character had recently gotten shot, so he exploded a car in front of a pharmacy so he could rob it for drugs and medical supplies while everyone else got distracted by the car fire. Which he did and then he was in a bath tub washing the blood off of his leg where he had gotten shot, and the water got all bloody. Then he started picking out the bullet fragments and stuff and injecting lidocaine into it. Ick. This whole scene was sort of gross. In an alternate universe where the movie was better and an actor I liked were playing the character washing blood off and picking out bullet fragments, maybe a scene like that could be weirdly attractive, but in this case it was just gross. Hmm, come to think of it, there was sort of a similar scene in The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, which I probably liked better (the scene). I definitely liked that movie better.
I just don't think western movies are cut out for me. This one wasn't exactly a western movie, but it was set in Texas. I have NO IDEA how this movie won an Oscar... it was so, so mediocre. Gah.
Conclusion: unless you like boring movies and/or looking at Javier Bardem in the way that I like looking at Peter Sarsgaard, don't waste your time.
As a parting thought, it seems like I'm thinking everyone and their brother looks like Peter Sarsgaard these days. Anthony Scaramucci, this guy in Congress I saw on CNN this evening (Lee Zeldin, if you're wondering), this guy I saw in person today (who didn't look super similar to Peter exactly, but something about him just seemed to resemble Peter in some way or another...)... my 'facial recognition software' is most definitely a bit screwy, I think.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)