Comments

I think the Seinfeld thread backlash got a little out of control, but it is one of the best shows ever and has a rabid fanbase and when that happens, a lukewarm reaction can be more infuriating than a negative one. If you are wondering why people got so mad, Gabe, just think about your reaction to another show where fans (and, seemingly, you) are clamoring for a reunion: Arrested Development. Imagine if someone came along and said "Arrested Development's humor holds up OK. Kind of. I guess. But why would anyone care about an Arrested Development movie?" Feel that blind anger building in your chest? OK, maybe you don't, but I've been around rabid AD fans and even "I don't see what the big deal is" are fighting words. When it comes to beloved shows and their fans, there is no grey area.

Oops, that was meant as a reply to another post, not on its own. I didn't mean you Gabe, don't hate me!

These types of pretentious bashes are funny because this is television we are talking about. Actually television sitcoms, which is pretty much as low-brow as you can get. If Seinfeld is only what us simpletons think is the best TV sitcom of all-time, then what do you think actually is? Again, this is television, not movies, so it's not like you can name-check some 1950s black-and-white French foreign language sitcom.

I've never understood why anyone would watch a Michael Moore movie. Why deal with all the blatant misinformation, the spliced together videos, the sympathetic-yet-really-condescending interviews with "regular people", the lies, and the "everyone please look at me!" attention whoring Moore fills his movies with to learn...that you were completely right on this issue. No one goes into a Moore movie not completely certain that they agree with him and considering all the screwed information, no one ever would, so what's the point? He's just Left Rush Limbaugh.

The Ugly Truth About Katherine Heigl

I'm glad Tucker Max is classy enough to ask that his women must be 18, considering, you know, the fact that he's 34 years old. Because that's a perfectly reasonable age to hit on high school seniors (for reference, I believe Matthew McConaughey's character in Dazed and Confused is supposed to be in his mid TWENTIES).

Well between Screech's sex tape and Mr. Belding's depressing voicemail-message-for-hire, they've both basically hit the cesspool of celebrity. The rest of the cast has, surprisingly, been able to avoid such humiliating situations (besides maybe Showgirls and Mario Lopez's friendship with Sleeze King Joe Francis). Those two seem to be a little too pathetic, yes, even for the former cast of Saved By The Bell. Plus, I wouldn't be surprised if both Dustin Diamond and Dennis Haskins have peddled pathetic Saved By The Bell tell-alls (because that has to be an option before the Dirty Sanchez, doesn't it?).

Sigh. One last kick in the face to The Shield, the best non-premium television series of all-time (and probably the only one that wrapped its story in a way that made every episode before it better, not worse). It's telling that the closest we've ever gotten to a complete television-series-as-novel are The Shield and The Wire and past the first season of The Shield, they don't have a single Emmy between them.

I also used to enjoy Family Guy, especially the first few seasons, but you know what? The true awfulness of the past 2 seasons of Family Guy can only be understood by people that used to watch it. That's the only way you can recognize the absurd level of self-referencing they do, which on FG, is exactly defined as "using the exact same joke, in the exact same way, again." It's as if the writers bet that they could create an entire new season of episodes based entirely on jokes from past episodes. I've never seen anything like it. It's been a true awe-inspiring display of laziness. You know how they say lazy comedy is referencing other things in the hope that the simple recognition of those things will draw a laugh? Well, Family Guy drops in references to Family Guy in hope that the simple recognition of past Family Guys will draw a laugh. That's an entirely new definition of lazy comedy.

You know what, you are probably right, but being a liberal, I'm fine with it. Yes, that's hypocritical, but that's just the way things are. The only time people care about one side holding too much power is when they aren't on that side. Conservatives weren't worried about too much power from 2000-2006, when Congress stopped just short of building a gold statue of George Bush on the Senate floor. Plus, you actually think that this is scarier than all of Bush's executive orders and such? At least here, the checks and balances are out of wack because we as a democracy voted them that way. The Bush Administration basically said, "these checks and balances are getting in our way, so we are just going to ignore them, what are you going to do about it?" for 8 years. Dick Cheney said that the Vice Presidency wasn't a part of any branch, so he didn't have to listen to anybody. Democrats now have a supermajority because the American people voted them into office. How can you even compare the two in terms of frightening amounts of power?

I don't think you have to worry. The general consensus I've seen says that Senator Franken (never going to get old) will be on his best behavior now that he's elected. He knows he's going to have to if he wants to be taken seriously. Plus he knows that the greatest way to kick conservatives in the mouth now is to remain professional and dignified. They want badly to display him as some hatemongering clown whose just there for another joke. If he shows that he is a serious politician, it will provide a greater punch to the Rushs of the country than any book title or joke could.

How is Adopted a legitimate Pauly Shore movie when it doesn't appear on Pauly Shore's wikipedia page? Because its pretty obvious there's only one person in the world that updates Pauly Shore's wikpedia page and thats Pauly Shore. Bio-Dome is there. Encino Man is there. Some Snoop Dog movie where he literally plays "Man in Trunk" is there. But this Adopted movie is one he is too ashamed of to take credit for.

The best part of that article was when the writer basically flat out said: "We didn't want to have two racist black stereotype robots, but Michael Bay was really, really insistent that we have two racist black stereotype robots." Like Michael Bay needed any more reasons for being the absolute worst.

Yeah this is really old, but more recognition for The Gaslight Anthem is always welcome. The '59 Sound is one of my favorite albums of the past few years.

Here's the thing though: how is environmentalism against the Church? Isn't Kirk Cameron always going on about how evolution is wrong because "look at this amazing banana!"? Call me crazy but if God made all these wonderful things, I'm sure he's pretty fucking pissed off that we are destroying them. Secondly, empathy (which conservatives seem to hate with a passion) could be considered one of the main themes of the Bible. Plus, the Bible has just as much, if not more, to say against things just as torture and war as it does homosexuality or abortion. That's what I find probably most sickening about this whole thing (well, among many others): these parents who send their children off to this brainwashing camp aren't even worried that their kids are going to move against God, they're worried that their kids are going to move against the Republican Party. That's who these idiots really worship. They could care less if their kids believe the stuff the Bible says, they're just scared shitless that their kids will stop believing the filth Rush Limbaugh says.

Is it just me or does this whole thing seem fake? It seems like this kid is just trying to pretend he's some Axl Rose figure, rather than actually being one. For one, I'm pretty sure most people with drug problems, especially people in the public eye, don't go out and broadcast the exact combination of drugs they did before they performed, unless they want to be known for those problems. Drug problems seem to be things bands push under the rug until long after the band has split up. And the on stage fighting seems to be too choreographed to be real, again, as if they were trying to fake some big Axl-Slash riffs in the band. To me this whole thing just seems like young, over-privileged kids pretending their big, self-destructive rock stars, instead of actually being ones.

I thought the same thing when I saw it: Who is this for? I consider myself a pretty big liberal (though admittedly not as much on environmental issues) and even I didn't understand half the references. How are conservatives supposed to? Conservatives aren't going to laugh at stuff they don't understand, even if its making fun of their enemies, and liberals aren't going to laugh because, no matter what anyone says, no one likes to laugh at themselves. Asking hardcore liberals to laugh at this would be like asking hardcore Christians to laugh at an entire show based around the Flanders family. Its not funny when the jokes are making fun of your beliefs, especially when they are a gross exaggeration. So who exactly is supposed to like this?

It depends on what you mean by "big deal". It was hacky and tasteless. Was it hacky and tasteless enough to start a riot on J.J. Abrams' front lawn? No, but it was hacky and tasteless enough to roll your eyes at every time you see it. You don't have to be outraged to think it was a dumb decision. And even if you don't think the exact image was all that bad, reading that the producers went with the twist because the standing towers are "an image like no other" has to make your skin crawl just a little. Yes its been eight years, but I still think more thought should go into their usage then "Hey, you wanna know what would be really cool...."

The real question is, who is this appealing to? The adolescents who listened to Marilyn Manson are, what, 27 now? What person under the age of 12 (really the only age that ever listened to MM) has any idea who the fuck this guy is? I mean if you're 12-13, you weren't even born when he had anything resembling a hit single. At this point, you're more likely to find an at-one-time Marilyn Manson fan among the parents of young angst-ridden kids then you are the kids themselves. And we all know the worst possible way to express adolescent angst is to listen to something your parents enjoyed when they were your age.

The stuff with Jacob, especially both scenes near the statue, was some of the best Lost moments so far. The sad thing? If you take those parts out, this is easily the worst Lost episode of the whole series. The reasons for these characters wanting to blow up the bomb were beyond groan-inducing. They completely butchered the entire character of Juliet, right before they killed her off. Basically for the whole series she has been strong and independent and at the drop of the hat she turns into a jealous sixteen year old? Her "because you looked at Kate" answer might as well be answering the question: "So why don't you want to go to the prom with me anymore?" The same with Jack's "because I lost her" answer. You'd think after 5 seasons, these characters could have some motivations that at least hint at actual human thinking. And these characters all go along with Jack wanting to blow up a hydrogen bomb, despite it making no sense? No one stopped for a second and said: "Hey Jack, you do know you can't prevent ever being on this island by being on this island to blow up a hydrogen bomb, right?" or "If you're in Los Angeles, whose going to be here to blow up this bomb? Maybe this plan isn't so good after all, we should probably get out of here."

Its actually a pretty smart move on his part, because after this and My Super Ex-Girlfriend among others, its clear he's taking the Paul Rudd style of accepting crappy movies: "This is going to be terrible....wait, how much are they paying me? For how much work? And I can be high and/or drunk the entire time? Ahh, fuck it, I'll do it." These are movies where the motivations are so clear and the performance so phoned in that its as if the guy is actually mocking the movie with every scene he's in. See: Paul Rudd in Friends or Over Her Dead Body. You can tell he's probably not even reading the script he cares so little: "Wait, that wasn't the right line? Does it really matter? I'm talking to a ghost played by Eva Longoria, will another take make that fact any less stupid? Are we done here, I'm losing my buzz?" Trust me, Rainn Wilson is going to sleepwalk through this, with a "I know exactly how stupid this sounds" wink to the audience with every line he's given and it will make everyone like him more, not less.

Michael Bay does realize he's taking creative credit for robots actually created by a toy company to sell action figures to prepubescent boys in the 1980s, right? That they aren't really "your robots" if every kid under the age of 12 had one lying on the floor of their closet a decade before anyone knew who you were and the world was a better place?

I've realized that listening to Cuse and Lindelof explain away the questions they aren't going to answer is like watching a little kid explain to his teacher that he left his homework at home. "Really guys, if you don't have an answer for us, just tell us. We won't be mad, just tell us the truth." "No, no we really did it. We filled it out and everything, but then we got distracted by a big boat and the 70s, and then the bus pulled up and we had to run to catch it, and I must have left it on the table. Maybe Carlton's dog got ahold of it. I don't know, but when I looked in my bookbag it wasn't there, but I swear we actually did it."

This is why I've always had a love/hate relationship with Lost. They've said the same thing about the numbers. They said "The numbers aren't anything, they are just bad luck for Hurley", which is complete bullshit considering how much the storyline revolved on them early on. What they don't get and what Lost apologists don't get is that the main thing here isn't that Libby's little side adventures or the numbers are crucial to the story or would be particularly interesting to tell. The problem is that, by saying "This really doesn't interest us", they are admitting this is one (of too many to count) question, that never had any answer. If this had a solid answer, it could be woven into the storyline. What they are saying is this: "We have too much on our plate already to bother thinking of a reason why she was in the hospital". I mean, if they have an answer, but don't have the time to put into a story, just tell us what it/she is. Put it in one of those stupid online games they loved using to rope in people early on. Drop it in an easter egg on the website. Spout it in an interview. Will they do that? No, because there's only one reason she was in the hospital: they needed another lazy WTF moment to keep people hooked. They planned on thinking of something later, but they added so many of those same questions-with-no-answers that right now they just need to focus on thinking up answers for the big questions. I've told my friends, I already know how Lost is going to end. Its going to end in some "I guess we'll never really know what happened on that island" debacle, the hardcore fans will defend it to the death as some "They knew the answers, they just kept them a secret to preserve the mystery" rationale, and in the end, these two will be the ones with the last laugh....and they will be laughing at all of us.

I agree in the sense that I believe there's a very fine line between laughing at racism and laughing at something racist (basically Dave Chapelle's rationale for leaving his show). I mean I'm sure the (most likely) predominately white kids who laugh at this justify it by saying "we aren't laughing at the stereotype or the black people in the video, we are laughing at the stupid white people who made it", but I'm fairly sure it's also not a video they are going to forward to all their black friends with giant LOLZ scattered underneath it. So I do find it a little hypocritical to pull the "shame on them" routine, while at the same time laughing because of it while making sure there's not a black person within a ten feet radius when you do.

Well, first off, agreeing to perform with a band and then making t-shirts bashing them (Which he obviously thinks was the Cleverest Thing In The World because he spelled sucks with two xxs, when its less clever and more something a jealous 12 year old would do) is one of the most pointlessly elitist, conceited things you could do. Not only is it basically a cheap bully tactic, but basically requires him to think of his own talent as something along the lines of more talented John Lennon. Which he is far from. Secondly, pulling the "I make music for me, I don't care about anyone else" (otherwise known as the Billy Corgan tactic) is not only insulting to anyone that actually likes his band (It's basically saying, "I don't give a shit about the fans, I just show up as a favor to them because I'm too good to keep my music to myself"), but it looks really pathetic in an interview smothered in bitterness over people liking other bands over his.

You are so wrong and so many issues, I'll just focus on one that drives me absolutely crazy. You are essentially using the Rick Warren "just because you were born this way doesn't mean its what God's wants you to be" argument. This argument makes no sense from a RELIGIOUS perspective. For one, if homosexuals are born that means God wants them that way. If God didn't want homosexuals, he wouldn't make homosexuals. God's not an idiot. In that case, if you are a believer, it's time to look through the Biblical translations because someone fucked up somewhere (and any Biblical scholar with half a brain will tell that the Bible is a lot more vague on homosexuality than modern translations and modern preachers want you to believe). If you want to claim hatred in the name of God, at least do some research and not just spit some bullshit you took in for 10 minutes half asleep on some random Sunday morning. Secondly, and here's a piece of irony that makes me want to (no offense!) punch you in the face: You see my "God makes you how he wants you" argument up there? Do you recognize it? You should. It's the exact same argument Christian fundamentalists (and probably YOU) use to condemn transgenders. The idea is, you can't have a sex change because if God wanted you to be a woman, he'd have made you a woman (and vice versa). That's YOUR argument. So either start accepting the gays or start accepting transgenders, you can't have both (Of course that's a trick question, because the Christian right never lets religious doctrine get in the way of hatred). Either way, even your own belief system tells you you are a moron. Congratulations.

This is pretty funny, but after watching the 20-minute video and some of the others on his site, these little 2 minute videos just won't do. Lindsay, you really need to post the 16-minute Joel Bauer skiing video found on his blog (he taped it while in the middle of a skiing session for some reason) that basically goes through his entire life. It's basically Joel Bauer: Origin Story: http://infotainer.com/infotainer/blog/category/blog/page/3/

I fear another angry letter from Kevin Barnes coming. Remember kids, next time a favorite band of yours scalps their own tickets and and charges you 20 times the face value, if you complain you are just "confused young people running around now polluted by this alloyed version of the tenets of the punk rock manifesto". Sorry Kevin Barnes, your entire pathetic anthem just got torn apart. If artists are exploiting their own fans in order to skim off the top, selling out is indeed still possible.

Ummm......who else has a sinking suspicion that Billy Corgan and Smashing Pumpkins are one of the bands that participate and share in Ticketmaster's charges (what Bruce Springsteen denied doing during the last Ticketmaster fiasco)?

I really don't understand this program. It seems so anti-Fox News. I mean, like you pointed out, this is a station that flipped the fuck out during the day over Britney Spearsjust spelling the word out......and then they have Fucked Up on at night? You could say the main idea was "No one that actually watches Fox News is up at this hour", but then I'm guessing no one who listens to Fucked Up ever asks the question "So what's on Fox News?" in a serious, non-let's-turn-it-on-to-mock-it way. So whose the audience here?

No one comes to Cleveland. Ever.

I'm beginning to think Kevin Barnes and Billy Corgan would be best friends if they ever got together. They're both pretentious snobs, they both want to sell their songs to everything possible and still be seen as the absolute pinnacle of artistry, and both love to attack and degrade their fans if those fans happen to disagree with them in the slightest. Seriously, read KB's "Selling Out Isn't Possible" letter and BC's "I Want to be Nickelback" interview back to back. They are like 2 parts to one big dickhead manifesto.

Something missing here? I find it strange that they don't mention that it's THOM YORKE OF RADIOHEAD at the beginning (or Thom Yorke of Radiohead, You Know That Band Who Had The Song Creep in the 90s?). I mean how many CBS/Grammys watchers even know who Radiohead is, much less Thom Yorke, much less can identify him by simply his voice and face? And if the reason for that is to appeal to a different audience, won't the inevitable "LIVE PERFORMANCES FROM KENNY CHESNEY AND THE JONAS BROTHERS" commercials counteract any goodwill this thing creates? Is the answer as simple as: The Grammys think we are all idiots?

People questioning how they made this list obviously don't watch a lot of VH1 (That would be a compliment). This is VH1's rules for making these types of lists: 1) "Hard Rock" is defined as every piece of guitar-based music that wouldn't fall under the category of "Soft Rock", which by VH1's definition, means Phil Collins and everyone who could draw comparisons to Phil Collins. 2) Recognizable to the average VH1 viewer (meaning either a Top 10 hit or a piece of music that is frequently used as a pop culture reference joke on one of the other VH1 programs) 3) A large chunk of which must come from the 80s, particularly Hair Metal because VH1 refuses to give up the notion that the 80s weren't both awesome and hilarious, no matter how much evidence to the contrary (The Horribleness of the 80s is to a VH1 viewer what evolution is to a Creationist). Under these rules, this list makes perfect sense.