Strange Days

So anyway - seems to be quite the odd little world we live on here in the last couple weeks or so, eh? My celebrity obit column has more or less imploded on itself, kinda like the Freeling house at the end of Poltergeist - you know, leaving nothing but this glimmer of light just sort of emanating from nowhere. If things like this really come in three's, then I figure we should expect two more within the next few days. First good ol' Ed McMahon, then Farrah and MJ on the same day. Then, day before yesterday we get Bill Mays (aka - the Screaming Salesman/Guy-who-single-handedly-made-me-want-to-destroy-my-TV-every-time-he-came-on-it). So technically...that's four (you can debate the pros v cons of calling Mays a celebrity to yourselves - I count him because, unfortunately, he was on my TV...a lot). I was watching CNN when the ticker at the bottom said that Billy Mays was dead. I...smiled. Is that completely awful, or just mostly awful? I mean really, the first thing that popped into my mind was "Well...at least I won't have that asshole screaming at me anymore." What's worse, Mrs. Pikey kinda smiled too when I told her...and more or less said the same thing I did. So...did she start out evil or have I turned her to the dark side after all these years? If it's the latter, then sorry baby! But if it's the former...shit, what kind of gal did I hitch myself to anyway?!?!

So...Michael Jackson. Lew Black said once that Michael Jackson had basically become a punchline for any joke - Why did the chicken cross the road?...Michael Jackson! Yeah, ok...so it works. Still, regardless of your thoughts on the man, his music, his turmoil, his...erm, eccentricities, consider this for a second: Michael Jackson's death has garnered more worldwide attention than any other person or event (save 9/11) since Elvis died. In fact, his death has done to the world wide web what no other event (including 9/11) has done since it's inception - it nearly collapsed it. The headline on CNN.com read "Michael Jackson dies and nearly takes the Internet with him!" Now that is funny! Servers all around the world were locking-up and even crashing because of the influx of people craving more information on what happened to this one man. Good or bad, love him or loathe him, that says an awful lot about the effect he had on this world. I for one have never had a real problem with Michael Jackson. I've always been a fan of his early musical output - yes...I had a Thriller jacket when I was six - fuck you very much. And argue with me all you want, but I never really bought into the whole paedophilia thing...fuck you again, I'm sorry, but I don't believe it. I give you that yes - the man was weird. Eccentric doesn't cut the mustard here - he was downright weird. He was a black man who seemingly had a child's mentality...and also had a desire to become a strange, white woman (and the bank account to make it happen). Did he place himself into the questionable position of getting too close to several young boys? Absolutely! Did he ever actually do anything illegal with them...I don't think so. But what do I know? I always saw the man who loved children and spent untold fortunes for the benefit of needy children around the world - call it naivete, call it a little gleam of light trying to escape the black hole that is my soul, whatever. That's just how I feel about the subject. "But Pikey - the guy spent millions in payoff to shut that one kid up!" Yeah...he did. That's exactly what he did - he spent millions to make a problem go away, that's not an admission of guilt. Ask yourself this...who was he really paying off? The kid, or his money-grubbing parents who saw an opportunity to make a quick buck by exploiting an odd situation that they allowed their child to get into?! Did anyone ever consider that the mere accusation was devastating to the man and that throwing a shitload of money at it was simply a way to make it go away so he could move on? It's a stretch, but it's possible! Rest in Peace Mike...you really were the King. Anyway, a person could go on and on about this shit (too late?)...

Then there's Bernie Madoff. Yesterday, he got 150 years for bilking all those people out of billions of dollars. I'll say that again - yesterday, he got 150 years for bilking all those people out of billions of dollars. I'd say he got off easy. Sure, he's 71, he'll serve (I'd guess) about 10 years of that sentence before he either dies of old age or trauma from his weekly ass-pounding. The government has seized over $160 million of his assets for restitution to his victims. That's nice - sorry you lost everything, here's a coupon for a free cheeseburger and a prostate massage! His wife, Ruth, was allowed to keep something in the neighborhood of $2.5 million in assets so as not to be left with nothing...awwwwwww...poor, poor lady! This was also to avoid prosecution as an accomplice. Too bad she's gonna charter the first flight to Switzerland she can get and start siphoning off the billions from the offshore accounts the U.S. government couldn't touch. It's going to happen...you know it, I know it, she knows it! Which in my mind makes her as big a crook as him! If there was any real justice in the world, he would've been sentenced to having his nuts smashed repeatedly by all his victims, one by one, with one of those carnival "ring-the-bell" hammers. "WINNER, WINNER, CHICKEN DINNER!" Then they could all take turns showing Mrs. Madoff's asshole the business end of a cattle prod. I see a reality TV show somewhere in the near future...

So, forgive the righteous indignation for a moment, but when the fuck are we just going to go ahead and nuke the entire Middle East and get it over with?!?! We don't like them, they don't like us - they're never going to like us. The West is always going to be the scapegoat for everything that's wrong in their world. A world that, I might add, seems perpetually stuck in the dark ages. It's wonderful that the U.S. military is going to start pulling out of the major cities in Iraq, really it is! But the real tragedy of it all (aside from the 5000+ American lives pointlessly lost over there) is that as soon as we're gone for good, the place is going to erupt into an all-out civil war anyway! The Muslims can't even get along with each other...how the hell can anyone expect them to get along with us pathetic infidels?! Don't even get me started on Iran...that "election" was the most ginormous, stinkiest pile of camel shit in the long, sad history of camel shit analogous elections. They know it...the rest of the world knows it...they know the rest of the world knows it! The Ayatollah and Ahmenlkaasdflgksadflhse1241tdfgw45rtporjad want "the bomb"...and that wasn't going to happen with Moussavi in charge. Sorry if that all seemed kind of like a buttload of generalized angst, but if I think too hard or get into too many details - the bad people in my head start talking to me! While we're on the subject (the Middle East, not my psyche), my mom's neighbor's son Josh is getting shipped over to Afghanistan in 3 months...he's a good kid, played Horn in band, got decent grades, never gave his folks a lot of grief, so if you've got a free prayer or blessing handy, might want to shoot it his way for me.

Alright, suppose I'll cut this one off...wouldn't want Brad's eyes melting out of his head from reading too much or anything! Too late Brad? Fuck it...you'll live.

SQUIRREL!!!

So anyway, this past Saturday we were supposed to make our long overdue (as usual) trip to St. Joe to visit the in-laws. Why the hell after all this time they can't band up in an SUV or something and come-the-fuck down here to see their grandson/nephew/etc is beyond me, but I digest (ahem...). Unfortunately, the Monkey broke his wrist on Thursday, and by Saturday morning, he didn't seem all that up for a road trip. See, there's a silver lining in there...my poor boy's misery worked to my advantage - cruel sounding I know, but hey, whatever avoids a day in hillbilly hell is good for me no matter how it came about. At any rate...we seized the opportunity to take the little bugger to his first movie...

...Up.

Mrs. Pikey and I had already seen it once, though regrettably not in 3D (we're gonna make one more round of it to cover that base soon). Michael's been kinda itching for it ever since he saw the teaser trailer on the Wall E DVD. For him, watching that 30-second trailer was almost as exciting as the 90 minutes of movie that followed. Inevitabry, every time we would put the disc in for him the first thing out of his mouth would be: BOONS!!! (that's balloons in 3-year-old!). So...between the boons, the talking dogs, and that giant, goofy bird, it was just about a shoe-in that lil' man would love his first experience at a cinema. And boy did he! And why not...Pixar's now 10 for 10. It's like they just do not know how to make a bad movie. I'll admit, Up didn't have that certain something that, as I was watching, made me think, "Wow, I'm witnessing something really special here!" the way Wall E did. Honestly, of all of Pixar's feature films, Wall E's the only one that had that effect on me. The Incredibles was close...a credit to Brad Bird I think, but don't take any of that as a slant against the company's other works. I wonder what it would take to wrestle the rights to The Iron Giant away from Warners and let Bird direct a Pixar produced sequel? Pipe dreams I'm sure...but wow what a movie that'd be! Anyway...

Pixar just has this magic touch...more than Fox, or Dreamworks, or even Disney's Cell Animation studio (past and present) - they just have the right combination of talent and vision to put out a fantastic product with every effort. I know Cars isn't everyone's cup of tea, and some folks have issues with Toy Story 2 and/or Ratatouille, but even if I initially wasn't sure about one of those films (or any of them), I've grown to love them (yeah...even Cars!). I'll take Pixar on a bad day over any two of the other animation studios combined. And Up is no exception. If anything, the film serves to further solidify how smart Pixar is...and how with every film they get better and better at making animation for everyone! Their movies aren't out of reach for even a 3-year-old...and yet have plenty of depth and humor without resorting to silliness for just about any adult. Twice now, Pixar has (arguably) made the best film of the year (with The Incredibles and Wall E), yet Oscar was just too afraid to admit that a cartoon was better than anything made with "real" people. That may very well hold true again this year - I don't know what's in store for the fall season, but it's gonna have to be damn good. Like I said, Up isn't Wall E, but it's still fan-fuckin'-tastic. And besides...how many Wall E's can any one studio have in a lifetime?!

I do have to say that Up is likely Pixar's most "adult" film to date...despite the obvious ideas aimed at children (I'll get to that in a second). Sure, The Incredibles had its share of violence and mayhem, marking the studio's first PG-rated effort - but I wouldn't say that's necessarily cause to call it an "adult" film. Up has it's share of violence, but that isn't what makes it a little more grown up. Without giving away much detail, what stands apart with this film is the way it deals with life and living, and death. It might sail over the heads of some of the film's core audience, but that's ok...there's plenty there for the wee folk too. Death, as most child development experts and psychiatric types will tell you, is a subject most people are physically unable to really grasp until after the age of 5 or 6, sometimes even later than that. The brain of a child that age just can't grasp the concept yet. Up deals with this in a touching, unique, and really damned intelligent way...and that's through implication. And while it's tragic (particularly in one instance), it's also very touching (I'll admit it...I cried...a couple of times).

Then...there's Dug! Pixar always has that one character...one that's simple, and cute, and just uproariously funny. Here - that's Dug. Dug...is a dog, a dog with a collar that let's him talk to people. We've all wondered what exactly our pets are thinking (assuming they could think in our language). Watch a dog on an average day...what could possibly be going through that brain while it: chases its own tail, sniffs and licks its butt, pinches a loaf, harasses the mailman, finds endless hours of pleasure in a rubber ball? I can only say you'd be hard pressed to ever find a better representation of that than what Pixar has done with Dug. Case in point:

"Hi there! My name is Dug! I don't know you...but I LOVE YOU! My master made me this collar so that I could talk to people! He is a good and loving master and he made me this collar so that I could talk to people...SQUIRREL!!!!!!...Hi there!"

You've likely already seen most of that moment in the trailer...so I'll assume I'm not spoiling much for anyone. If so sorry, but...what fuckin' rock have you been living under anyway?! Dug doesn't even have to say anything...like any good dog, he makes things a little brighter just by being there. Having said that...keep an ear open of his, umm..."joke"! It's one of the most awesomely stupid/morbid moments I can recall in recent memory! And Dug isn't alone in the canine absurdity...the introduction of Alpha is likely to leave you in stitches as well. They got Michael's seal of approval - which basically amounts to a festive shouting of "PUPPIES!!!" every time they came on the screen.

Michael Giacchino is a busy muthafucka! He's already blown (most of) us away with his Star Trek score. I have no doubt that regardless of whatever kind of movie it is, the Land of the Lost score is a lot of fun. And now here's Up. Who does a summer blockbuster hat trick anymore? Michael Fuckin' Giacchino, that's who! Pixar really seems to bring out the best in him. Which is kind of a shame because the next two Pixar movies are going to Randy Newman (Toy Story 3 and Cars 2 - 2010 and 2011 respectively). Because let's face it - those are John Lassiter's babies, and he ain't lettin' nobody but Newman score them - though, really...that's probably not going to be a bad thing either. Anyway, as for the Up score, who knew Giacchino had such awesome "throwback to the golden age of scoring" chops?! The overall feel of it is very...vintage. Think MGM from the 40's through the early 60's. The piano work, while simple, is very moving and eloquent. It really pulls at the heartstrings, in ways that would give Tom Newman a run for his money. The whole thing just has an amazing whimsy to it. There's a "jungle trek" cue that really stands out for me - you'll know what I'm talking about when you see/hear it. It's just a shame really that there's no current plans for a CD release. Luckily, it's available on iTunes and other online digital download sites. Or if you'd prefer, and your a dirty fucking PIRATE (I'm not naming names - *Brad...COUGH...COUGH*), I'm sure you'll find some way to get your hands on it...and you really should.

So, that's my take on things I reckon. After that last post I thought I'd keep it a little shorter for you folks (but just a little). Anyway...up and away, get out and see the gold standard in animation soon as you can - it's well worth it...even if you are the only adults without children in the audience (creeeeeeeeppppppyyyyyyyy!!!).

To Boldly Go...and All That Shit...

So anyway, enough fiddle-fucking around I suppose. So...Star Trek. Has anyone not seen it yet? No? Good...then I can proceed without fear of pissing on anyone's Corn Flakes. So where to begin. I suppose HOLY FUCKIN' SHIT is as good a place as any! My initial reaction after my first viewing was nothing short of complete and total geek-gasm in my pants. Seriously...the last time I had a smile like that on my face, my wife had just finished...er, uh, ummmmmm...never mind. But I thought, "No...I'll wait. I'll save my thoughts and reactions until I've had a second viewing. You know Mike, be a little more objective once you've had a second run at absorbing everything."

Did that work out like I planned. Yeah, um...not so much no (Sorry, thanks for playing - here's a lovely parting gift for you. What do we have for our contestant today Bill? Why it's a toaster Bob...that you can FUCK!). In all seriousness though, you'd have to be one bitter, hostile and cold motherfucker not to find something awesome to love in this new iteration on the adventures of Captain James T. I-Should-Totally-Have-Lost-My-Cock-To-Space-Chlamydia-By-Now Kirk and Co. In Insurrection, Ad'har Ru'afu insultingly commented that the Federation was old. And so too it seemed was Star Trek after the complete and utter box-office failure that was Nemesis (still largely the fault of Paramount's advertising department if you ask me), and Enterprise getting cut off after four struggling seasons. Prior to this film, the longest gap between any two Star Trek films was four years (between Insurrection and Nemesis), and averaged 2-and-a-half years. So it would seem, seven really is a lucky number.

So, from the minds of wunder-producer/director/writer J.J. Abrahms, and hit-or-miss screenwriters Alex Kurtzman & Roberto Orci (I mean really...The Island?!) comes a...restart/reboot/re-imagining of one of the most (arguably, I suppose) beloved ideas (sci-fi or otherwise) of at least the last century. I must admit, I hate this whole Hollywood concept of reboots/re-imaginings - there's just something so fake about it. With a few exceptions (this film being one of them), it demonstrates an unnerving laziness and lack of originality worming its way through the film and television industry. Remakes are nothing new in La La Land. There are 3 film versions and one TV miniseries about Beau Geste, and about 15 or so variations on Jane Eyre. I suppose that's the more "high-brow" end of the spectrum. Then there's the polar opposite, the likes of say...Friday the 13th. A film who just last year saw a "remake/re-imagining" even though the original is not even 30 years old and spawned 9 sequels.

Wait a minute...30 years/9 sequels - ok...that's weird. I just used that little factoid to piss all over one franchise when the exact same rule (or nearly so) applies to the subject at hand. Or at least the Star Trek film universe anyway. I suppose the difference is that one is an intelligent, engaging, and optimistic view of the future of humanity, and the other is about a mutant, all-pro linebacker in a hockey mask that likes to hack n' slash co-ed's whilst their boobies be showin'. Anyway, to get back on track, Star Trek as a concept has been desperately in need of a new set of eyes for a while - fresh blood if you will. I say they got it in spades. Dicking around with the space-time continuum is a bit of an old hat in the Trek universe. So, initially, hearing that this story was another time travel plot met with many a groan throughout fandom. But I think the take Abrahms and Co. took with it is actually quite refreshing. It basically allowed them to tell an origins story, and do it essentially with a clean slate - not always having to adhere to the 'oh-so-precious' Trek canon that so many Trekkies (literally in some cases I think) live their lives by. One of the really cool things (something I think some of the more hostile fans haven't considered) is that some or perhaps even most of the adventures we know this crew has already had can still happen - it may happen a little differently, but they'll still happen. Some of them have to happen - V'Ger is still on it's way, so is the whale probe; and Khan is out there...somewhere. The possiblities are almost endless. This gamble of theirs also allowed them to completely take some things that most superfans (and even those casually acquainted with Trek) take for granted and completely turn them on their heads - even one or two actual "Holy Fuck" moments.

I think one of the first of those was before production even began. It was that little moment (I think during San Diego Comic Con) almost two years ago or so when Abrahms walked out on stage with Zach Quinto and Leonard Nimoy and announced that the former would be portraying the younger version of the latter and both were going to be in the new Star Trek film (opening Christmas 2008 - yeah...that happened - fucking Paramount!). Generally speaking, I'd guess most of us were somewhere in the neighborhood of "Holy Shit...that's fucking BRILLIANT!!!". Otherwise, the film lay in a sort of "what is it?/good?/bad?" limbo until it was released last month - especially after Paramount announced it was moving the release by six months. Normally a move from winter to summer would indicate that they thought they had something good on their hands. But no one really knew, did they? I'd argue that they had something more than just 'good'...this is downright special. Abrahms has gone somewhere with Trek that even good ol' Gene Roddenberry couldn't seem to muster - he's made a Trek film for everyone.

Star Trek 2009 is a film that opens up the whole Trek universe to a new legion of fans and simultaneously engages and entertains most of the long-established fanbase. It would seem the only one's left feeling as though they just witnessed the rape and murder of their grandma by the family dog are the über-est of the über-Trekkies. Well...they can go back to fucking their blow-up Orion slave-girl love dolls in their mom's basements anytime they want. This Trek essentially took the layout and characters from a long-standing franchise, and cranked up the adrenaline by applying all the dazzle and pizazz of a slam-bang summer action blockbuster. And it works...for what ever reason, it works - gloriously. And it's ballsy. Getting back to those 'holy fuck' moments, what have we got: Obviously the biggest one - they fucking destroyed Vulcan...three words: GIANT BRASS COJONES. Then, let's see...how'sabout: They killed Spock's mom - Jebuth! Then: Spock's bangin' Uhura - Holy Jebuth! And then there's all the little in-jokes and references wallpapering the whole film - off the top of my head, a few of my favorites: Chekov's inability to pronounce V's; Kirk's complete inability to think with anything but his dick; Bones' space paranoia; the obligatory red-shirt demise; the Kobayashi Maru test (lamented by some - but I abso-fuckin'-lutely loved it); that slight "Shatner-esque" moment at the end when Kirk steps onto the bridge for the first time as the 'official' captain of the Enterprise; Captain Pike's seemingly predestined fate to end up in a wheelchair; the disappearance of Captain, er sorry...Admiral Archer's beagle. Some of it's in your face, some of it oh-so-subtle - but I loved so very much of it.

I thought generally, the casting was quite brilliant as well. I'd just like to say that Bruce Greenwood should be in every movie made from now on...ever. I didn't care for the look they gave Anton Yelchin's Chekov (he was brilliant in Terminator:Salvation btw), but the character and mannerisms were dead on. You can add Zoe Saldana to the list of women whom I'd like to suffocate beneath their buttocks...oh and her Uhura wasn't bad either. I found it odd that they cast a Korean to play an iconic Japanese man...but wtf, 'Harold' did a good job with what they gave him. I agree with Brad that it was a little bit of a bummer that we had to sit through half of the film before Simon Pegg's Scotty showed up - but it was well worth the wait (even if they did give him a weird little sidekick). Karl Urban's Bones was awesomely grouchy. If there was a fault to be had, it was that he was the only one who seemed to be trying to emulate their predecessor's performance of the character (that and the fact that he had the wrong eye-color...I know, details...). It was really geek-tastic (at least for me anyway) to see Lenny Nimoy play Spock one more time (even if the part was sort-of shoehorned in). He's been Spock for 43 years, there's a nuance, a sort of I dunno...comfort to seeing him. Like an old blanket your grandmother gave you. He is Spock, and he's always a welcome sight.

I read a comment on a website somewhere (I don't recall where) where someone was griping that the Romulan's all had Australian accents. Well let's examine that for a minute - for one: only two Romulan's had speaking parts in the film; and two: of those - only one is actually Australian; and three: the one that is Australian never spoke with an Australian accent. Bana's Nero, if not for the fact that he was a genocidal bastard hell-bent on his quest for revenge, almost seemed charming. I love his "Hi Christopher...I'm Nero." response to Captain Pike - hilarious. Nero...while not quite on par in villainy as Khan (will there ever be?), was an adequate nemesis for this film, and Bana's performance of him was adequately menacing (maybe too strong of a word) in turn. Then there are the two leads: Kirk and (young) Spock - Chris Pine and Zach Quinto. Boy oh boy...you know, I can't remember the last time, or maybe anytime, that two actors took two pre-established roles, especially ones as iconic as Jim Kirk and Spock, and really made them their own; really without any hint of emulation, parroting, mocking, any of that. I honestly believe that this is the best (as characters) Kirk and Spock have been together since The Voyage Home, maybe (maybe) even Wrath of Khan. It was quite effortless really, I was sold on both of them the second they each (respectively) appeared on screen. Quinto perfectly embodied that long-established conflict between Spock's logic and human nature. And Pine absolutely nailed that smart-ass rebel with a wink-in-his-eye but still commanding presence of James Tiberius Kirk. I simply can not wait for summer of 2011, these folks (the whole ensemble that is) really need to get back on the screen again - they just fit together.

Brad said he took the slightest issue with the 'stopping a supernova/supernova that could destroy the galaxy' plot element. I only slightly agree with half of that. I agree that a little more exposition as to how/why a supernova of the Romulan star could have such an adverse effect on the galaxy could've/would've/should've been included. The other notion, finding fault that they were able to halt the star from going supernova, I dismiss completely. To me, taking issue with that would be to take issue with the entire Star Trek universe. There's a short series of 'prequel' comics released prior to the movie that offer a deal of background detail on the events leading up to the beginning of Star Trek. Amongst those details is that the time-period 'old' Spock came from was roughly 30 or more years after the events of Nemesis. Given where the people of the Federation were technologically in Nemesis, I don't think it's a leap, even a skip really, in logic to think that they would possess the ability to do what Spock was trying to do. Just my two cents on that. Another detail I would've liked to have seen (which would have explained both the Romulan shorn and tat'd heads, as well as Nemo's missing ear tip) would have been the deleted sequence involving Nemo's time in and subsequent escape from the Rura Penthe prison whilst waiting for Spock to arrive in the past (maybe an extended cut DVD in the future eh?).

Then there's Michael Giacchino's score. While it's not quite on par with the grandeur of Jerry's TMP, or even Horner's WOK, it's still quite good. Especially in the context of the film. This score I think had a job to fulfill unique from any of the prior 10. It's really the only one that had to first be an action score, then be a science fiction score. If you listen to the FSM podcast about the new Star Trek from a couple months ago, someone made a comment that Giacchino's main theme sounds more like a counter-line to a stronger 'main' theme. I don't believe I would've put that association together had it not been for that comment - unfortunately, it is a valid point. Still, this new main theme is one of the catchiest fucking things I've heard in a long time. And, I think it's his most solid work to date - perhaps the additional orchestrators (aside from Tim Simonec) had some influence on that. Is Giacchino a busy little fucker lately or what. He's got three big summer scores all within 5 fuckin' weeks of each other. Nobody does that anymore! Anyway, if you head out to jwfan.net and search around there's a discussion thread that lists where all the cues from the score CD fit into the movie, as well as what's missing (somebody's seen this thing waaaaaayyyy too many times already). Essentially, we got a little less than half the score on the CD. Several great bits are missing (about half the ending sequence - including that awesome choral variation of the theme as the Narada gets sucked into the singularity) and some of the cues we did get are incomplete. If you want that awesome main title bit, I think all you need to do is splice the first minute or so from "Enterprising Young Men" to the last 15 seconds from that same cue. Simple as most of it is, I'd still say that overall it's the highlight of my summer movie-going/score listening season so far (still waiting on a few things: Transformers II, Harry Potter, hell even Silvestri's G.I.Joe could be interesting - oh and let's not forget Maestro Goldenthal's return to mainstream film with Mike Mann's Public Enemies...yea!).

Ok, so...you wanted it, you got it ("mostly..."). That's most of my thoughts on Star Trek - to sum up...I need a throwrag. I say that's most of my thoughts because I'm certain I have enough for another paragraph (or five) but I don't want to drive you guys totally crazy (or is that crazier?). I'll be back in a bit with my thoughts on Up (which by the way will be Der Monkey's first trip to the movie theater, here in a couple of weeks...how cool is that!)...after I've had a chance to see it again - in 3D!

Yep...He's My Son!

So anyway, over the weekend my son made a rather peculiar announcement to the Missus and I. He came into the living room and proclaimed:

"Michael want pussy." (btw - to him cat is kitty, so...)

Now...I know parents shouldn't react overly positive or negative to things like that...but this time, we just couldn't help it. We broke out into complete and total hysterics. Ok, so I know...I'm a horny little fucker - but I know I've never said that in front of him...at least not in that context! The laughter didn't last long though...eventually we stopped and asked him to clarify what he was asking for. But, he just continued repeating:

"Michael want pussy."

"Michael want pussy."

"MICHAEL WANT PUSSY!!!"

Surely that can't be what it sounds like. Daddy want pussy too, but I can't believe for a second that we're talking about the same thing here. Whatever the hell it is he really wants it. We continued to quiz him on what it was he was after. Frustrated, he ran into the kitchen, opened the refridgerator, and returned with...

...a 2-liter of PEPSI!!!

So now that makes pussy, cock, and fag (he can't pronounce the "l's" in flag and clock yet - we're working on it) ...he goes to a Lutheran day care - he's gonna make someone fucking faint...or cry...or maybe both!

Of Fanboys and Film Critics (or: Just Shut Up and Enjoy the Fucking Movie Already)

So anyway, I caught a mid-day showing of Wolverine on Friday. I'll get to my thoughts on that in a minute - though that shouldn't imply any negative connotations, I actually enjoyed the hell out of it - but first I wanted to share my thoughts on a couple of things.

As my title would suggest, I've got a few words regarding a couple of very specific groups out there amongst the populous. But allow me to proceed to commence to start to begin by saying that I've always felt there was a distinguishable difference between the concepts of a 'film' and a 'movie'. I've never really tried to elaborate on those differences, mostly because I've never been certain that it was something I possessed the ability to explain thoroughly. But seeing Wolverine on Friday, combined with the lackluster reviewing it received has motivated me to at least try. I suppose as evidence, I submit to you the work of Steven Spielberg. Or more specifically - Steven Spielberg in 1993. That year we got both Jurassic Park, one of the top grossing films of all time, and also Schindler's List, considered by many to be the man's finest achievement behind the camera. Essentially yes, a film and a movie are the same thing - a series of images on celluloid film stock, run through a reel-to-reel projector at 24 frames per second, that present recorded action with sound. I believe both can be enjoyed as a source of entertainment equally, but in the end, one is more a representation of artistry and craft, where the other is based more on its aesthetic escapist entertainment value. In the prior example, I offer that Schindler's List is a 'film' at the concept's finest, whereas Jurassic Park is a 'movie' at its most enjoyable levels. For another example, I suggest that you consider the typical five Best Picture nominees from the Oscars each year. Going back as far as your memory will take you, how many "movies" can you recall receiving a nomination. Going back a mere decade, only two jump out in my mind: Chicago, and Gladiator (and even then, I think Gladiator treads the line a bit). Go back another decade and you average about one a year (many of those, again, treading the line between the two).

What does this have to do with my title? Well...you may or may not have noticed that Wolverine more or less got slaughtered by the critics (those lovely adamantium claws were no match for the wicked, printed tongue lashing - of death - provided by a majority of the critics out there). This got me thinking, or at least reaffirmed an already held belief that critics...don't like movies. That's it in a nutshell - film critics are precisely that - FILM critics. They don't like movies...they can't. Far too many "horrible" movies have made too much money at the box office, despite critical bashing, to suggest otherwise. This is why I hate critics. Yet, at the same time, I can't help but catch early reviews of flicks I've been really wanting to see to see what the "experts" think of them. It's an interesting dichotomy really: I hate critics and could care less what they think...but I have to know what they think prior to the film's/movie's release in theaters. What is a critic really? There's the old cliche that a critic is essentially a failed filmmaker. Someone who couldn't cut it making their own films, so they choose to tear apart everyone else's. Is that really so inaccurate? I don't know much about the biographies of any of the major critics out there, but I'd be willing to bet that at least 90% of them went to film school, and sucked ass at it!

Seems to me film critics, I dunno, lack the gene necessary to just sit down and lap up 120 minutes worth (or less) of mindless entertainment. They can't do it...they CAN'T FUCKING DO IT!!! They see a film like Wolverine, who's sole purpose is to pack in crowds of movie-goers, elicit 2-hours worth of 'ooh's' and 'ah's', rake in oodles and oodles of cash for the production studio, and just basically entertain the masses - and they don't fucking get it! Movies, generally speaking, aren't meant to elicit any deep or philosophical thought from audiences - so stop trying! The deepest thought anyone should get out of your typical summer blockbuster is, "Gee, I wonder how the FX guys got the giant lizard robot's cock to morph into the death ray that destroyed Düsseldorf so realistically?! That was fucking AWESOME!!!" THAT'S IT...that's all the deeper anyone needs to get!!! It's like trying to make Nietzche out of fucking Sesame Street!!! STOP IT! BAD MONKEY! No banana for you. So, my theory...film critics don't know how to like movies - that's my story and I'm sticking to it. Now I just have to figure out how to stop caring.

Then there's the other subject...fanboys. As geeked out as I and the rest of you (all three of you) are about music and movies and such, I would offer that none of us really qualifies as...a fanboy! Sure, we collectively know just about all there is to know about the worlds of Star Wars, Star Trek, general Sci Fi, comics, movies, music, and what not, but I feel safe in asserting that none of us is truly what one might call - Hardcore! Have any of us showed up at a midnight premiere of a Star Wars prequel in full Jedi get-up (with homemade lightsabers)? Have any of us gone to a Comic Con or Trek Con in full Klingon garb, fluent in the language? I doubt it. We like these things, we love these things, we live these things, but they don't own us. Then...there are the fanboys. The basement troll dweebs that can relate to anyone the entire history of every major X-men character since 19-dickety two. The WoW mongers who know the schematic details of every iteration of the Starship Enterprise better than any chief engineer who's ever served on one. You've seen them...you've mocked them...you've maybe even envied them ever so slightly...but, you are not one of them! I don't want to be a fanboy. They're, in a word...scary! Just check out a talkback board on a fansite like Ain't It Cool News. These are a group of people that essentially collectively comprise (I would guess) 1/1000 of the movie going/tv viewing population - yet, every little detail about Comic Movie X, or SciFi T.V. Show Beta: The Next Penetration that doesn't conform to their particular vision of how it should have been made meets with thrashing after thrashing of criticism and general disgust. It would be absolutely hilarious how insane some of the folks are...if it weren't so pathetic. Opinions...are like assholes. Everyone has them - and they're usually full of shit! Fanboys aren't that indifferent from film critics - they all think they know exactly how things should be. Trouble is, they wouldn't really know a good thing if it was sitting on their faces! And you would think after reading comments from your average talkbacker that they believe their particular opinion on any given subject ranks somewhere on par with God. So really, just shut up and enjoy the fucking movie already - or quit yer bitchin' and go find another fucking hobby!

Generally speaking, I hate the suits in Hollywood as much as the next guy. But I also know that for the most part they are good at putting the money where it belongs (just don't let them make any actual creative decisions; I'm looking at you Weinstein's - that's how clusterfucks like Battlefield Earth and Pearl Harbor get made). I love that we live in a society where anyone can publicly voice their opinion on anything. I just wish there were some way to make certain people understand when it's a good time to speak, and when they need to shut the fuck up! In the end it's simple - if you can make it better...go fucking do it!!! Learn to quit analyzing, or quit fucking watching it! If Anus M. Critic or fucky_mclumphead_talkbacker REALLY knew anything...they'd be the one's cashing in on my movie-going dollar. But they don't...which brings me back to Wolverine. I don't know enough about the history of X-men to call it out on all its flaws and problems. I like to think I know just enough about movies and film making to know that I, nor anyone else for that matter, has any business judging this on 'film' terms. It's a movie, and a really entertaining one. I can't help but be a little gay for Hugh Jackman in this role...he was really born for it. I'm so glad Dougray Scott walked from the first X-men, so that Jackman could step into the role. Really, I can't think of anyone that could pull it off so awesomely well. Firstly, let me say that, yes, it's obvious that the production values of the earlier films (particularly the first two) aren't as present in this newest installment. But...who gives a shit. I can't think of any moment in particular that pulled me out of the film and distracted from my enjoyment of it. I think the resolution of the movie could've been a touch tighter. But it's a prequel of sorts - and there was continuity to consider. A lesson that everyone in Hollywood should have burned into their long-term memory as a result of the Star Wars prequels.

But overall...a solid, and highly entertaining flick! The casting was spot-on, the effects were good to excellent throughout. From a character standpoint it may have been a little over-crowded, but again, it wasn't anything that hindered my entertainment. I was...well...underwhelmed I guess by Harry Gregson-Williams' score. I don't know, I guess I was just expecting something a little more bold, grandiose, and honestly, a little more thematic. I really enjoy HGW, so I'm hoping and praying that he didn't blow his compositional load on Kingdom of Heaven. But overall, the music was good, or at the very least, serviceable. I'd say it's a great start to the summer movie season...pulled in a respectable haul at the box office over the weekend. It's almost a shame really that it's going to get absolutely crushed by Star Trek this weekend. But it's a defeat I'll gladly (or is that giddily) contribute to - goddamn Friday can't get here fast enough!!! Still, putting what I've been ranting about into context - X-men, sort of walks that line between film and movie; I'd easily classify X-men 2 as a film - a highly entertaining film, but still a film. X-men 3 - a movie, and clearly a lesser endeavor than it's predecessors. But consider this - X-men 3, most critically and fanboy...um, -ly(?) despised (why do people hate on Brett Ratner so much? Say what you will of the guy, but generally he does know how to make an entertaining picture) of the trio...

...and also the highest grossing of them as well...

Hrmmm...

...And Don't Call Me 'Shirley'

So anyway, if you follow the film music world much at all, particularly the licensing of said music for CD production, you'll know that Paramount Pictures (a Viacom company) is and has been the stingiest bunch of fuckers this side of a Hasidic fund raiser for the German arts. Or at least, that was the case...until yesterday.

Apparently, LaLa Land Records has broken through Paramount's steel chastity belt (of death - see, sounds scarier, eh?) and come to some sort of arrangement. The details of said arrangement are known only to the fine folks at LaLa Land and Paramount, but the long and short of it is that "the wall" is coming down - and it's beginning with a real doozy!

Beginning May 12th, at 2:00 p.m. local time, orders will be taken for one complete score to what is perhaps the greatest comedy of all time - Airplane!, composed by none other then the late, great Elmer Bernstein. This, near as I can figure, is the comedy score that defined how to really compose for comedy - that is to say that the music plays completely straight against the absurdity on the screen.

Even if you aren't particularly familiar with the score, or of Paramount's steadfast inability to budge on letting their music out, you should be rejoicing at this news...a literal vault of amazing film music is about to be loosed upon the world. Think about it, complete scores from the likes of say: All of the Star Trek films, Johnny's Black Sunday, a reissue of Chinatown, Basil's Hunt for Red October, the list goes on and on...

May is going to be so fucking AWESOME!!!

On the Subject of One Trick Ponies

So anyway, VareseSarabande recently released their tri-annual crop of "club" CD's. If anyone isn't familiar with what this entails...allow me to explain. Three times a year, VareseSarabande, considered by most to be the premier soundtrack record label, release what they call 'Soundtrack Club" CD's. These usually consist of four, sometimes five soundtracks that come either from their vast archive of out-of-print LP's, or music that is new to soundtrack album altogether. In both cases, most if not the complete score is represented in some fashion - and they're available in limited quantities...so they sell out...

...fucking fast!!!

The usual pattern includes one album with 3,000 copies, one or two with either 1,500 or 2,000 copies, and one with a mere 1,000 copies. Any guesses as to which ones go first (regardless of quality of music)?! Thus far, they've released 99 club albums. Of those, 53 are sold out, never to be made available again (thanks to licensing and re-use fees). They include such gems as the "Jerry Goldsmith at 20th Century Fox" 6-disc box set, and Alan Silvestri's Predator (arguably one of the most sought after film scores ever) amongst others too numerous to list here - let's just say I've spent a tidy sum at Varese over the last few years...and that there are a few I missed that I'm royally fucking pissed about. At any rate Varese has a penchant for releasing rare items from the filmographies of Bill Conti, Elmer Bernstein, Jerry Goldsmith, Alex North, Franz Waxman, and even occasionally John Williams.

With this last batch, I picked up three of the four (opting to skip the vintage Waxman score). One was a funky little synth-score to the 1987 film Russkies from James Newton Howard, starring a young Joaquin Phoenix (when he was still going by 'Leaf'). The second was Henry Mancini's Nightwing (a pseudo-horror film from the early 80's about vampire bats and Native Americans - odd combination, but not a terrible film). The third brings us to the title of my post...John Barry's score for the 1979 WWII drama, Hanover Street, starring Harrison Ford. So I suppose my question is thus:

Why the hell are people so goddamned ape-shit crazy for John Fucking Barry?!!!

Don't get me wrong...I like John Barry, at least some of his music anyway. I always liked the music to Hanover Street, which is why I picked it up. But Barry is, well...he's limited, at least to my ears anyway. Lovely as Hanover Street is, you could easily remove the melodic content from the theme(s) and substitute Out of Africa or Dances With Wolves and not get off by more that a beat or two. I mentioned in my last post that Brad and I have a bit of a running joke that John Barry (much like Maurice Jarre) only has three, maybe four scores. There's James Bond - I'll admit, I'm not particularly intimate with the various Bond films he scored, but to my ears they're all kinda "1000 variations on a theme". Then there's big, epic drama Barry - with the likes of The Lion in Winter, Out of Africa, Dances With Wolves, etc. In the end, these all sound relatively identical as well. Different themes and motifs to be sure, but not much variation on harmonic progressions (in fact, Barry seems to be the king of common practice chord progressions - I can't recall the last time I even heard him write something in an inversion). I suppose calling the rest "everything else" seems a bit too all-encompassing (and maybe a little lazy) but I don't want to dig that deep into his repertoire to be more specific.

Much like our dear friend James Horner, Barry seems to have an established bag-o-tricks that he falls back on regularly. I suppose one might argue that what makes him a better composer though is that he hides them better. Like Horner, Barry has a "danger" motif. Well more of an orchestral stab than an actual motif. It usually consists of very shrill, triadic brass stabs, moving this way and that diatonically - I need to be sitting at a piano to analyze them better, as it is, I'm more or less doing this off the top of my head. Anyway, you can hear it plainly in sections of Hanover Street (when ze Germans are coming). There's a lot of it in his older Bond scores, particularly when the bad guy has just done something nefarious. And almost the entire score to Disney's The Black Hole is comprised of those moments (except when it's being all jaunty and British). Still, the man seems to have his admirers amongst the younger generation of Hollywood film composers - just compare the main theme from Hanover sometime to the love theme from Pearl Harbor, ahem...

There are people out there (lots of 'em apparently) that are far more intimately familiar with Barry's musical library than I ever could be with John Williams, or Brad with Jerry Goldsmith. Maybe that's where my lack of understanding comes from - I just haven't heard enough. But then again, if he's been using the same ideas and language for his entire career, then what is it about that language that kept his fandom coming back time and again. Again, I don't know a great deal of Barry's music, but I'd be willing to wager I'd be able to pick him out 9 times out of 10, regardless of what you put on for me to hear. So what is it?! What is it that causes such unwavering adoration? I frankly just don't hear it...some of it's interesting, some quite lovely - but some is just downright boring, and more repetitive than Jim Horner could ever dream of being! If I were to post any of this on a message board, say over a FilmScoreMonthly or Intrada, I'd be strung up faster than an 1890's cattle rustler (I figured that was more PC than some allusion to a black man in the south)!

But for the love of God, don't tell a John Barry nut that he's boring...they'll find you...

...and cut your balls off! (John Barry is GOD, after all!)

Au Revoir, Monsieur - or - ...And Then There Were Three

So anyway, I know it's been a while since I posted a celebrity obit...but since this one falls into a category most of my esteemed readership - all three of you - can relate to, it seemed prudent to write it up. Monsieur Maurice Jarre (again...pronounce zhar-AY) passed away yesterday at the age of 84. As the alternate title of my post suggests, that leaves three of the "old school" of Hollywood film composers remaining - John Williams, John Barry, and Ennio Morricone. Barry has been in retirement for upwards of a decade. Big John is retired for pretty much all but Spielberg's films (though I've still got my fingers, toes, legs, arms and nuts crossed that he'll finish off Harry Potter). As for Signor Morricone, he's as busy as ever...not bad for an 81 year old guy (though after over 500 scores, one has to wonder how much new music the man has left in him). Still, his last American film score was 2000's Mission to Mars (still one of the oddest scores in recent memory) - and he's supposedly scoring (if you can believe it) Quentin Tarantino's Inglorious Basterds...it should be notable if for no other reason than it's Tarantino's first scored film!

Anyway, back to Jarre - I don't imagine that amongst our little group there's a great deal of heartbreak over this news - but still, it is kind of sad. For one, it's one step closer to the end of an era in Hollywood. And also, despite some possibly perceived short-comings as a composer, he did leave a substantial mark in film music - granted, most of it a decade before I was born. Brad and I often joke that Jarre, like Barry, only has three (maybe four) scores. There's the electronic fluff Jarre, then there's the electronic Euro-Jazz-fluff Jarre; there's also the giant David Lean epic Jarre (my favorite), then as for the rest - I suppose it could arguably be lumped into one all-encompassing mish-mash category (though what anyone would begin to call it I'm really not sure...maybe just call it...French!).

I for one have always loved Lawrence of Arabia - if ever there was a score in desperate need of a complete re-recording... Dr. Zhivago also has a beautiful main theme and generally a good score overall. I've always enjoyed Enemy Mine for some unfathomable reason - an oft forgotten Wolfgang Petersen sci-fi film from back in the day when he was a serious filmmaker . It's typical Jarre, but for some reason...it always struck a chord with me (no pun intended). One of his truly great scores, which I posted about a couple years ago, was for Top Secret!. It was perfect scoring for one of the great screwball comedies of all time - and like any great self-respecting film composer, Jarre composed the music complete straight against the absurdity that was happening on screen.

Other recent notables include Ghost, with which one could practically define the concept of tragically romantic; and another personal favorite is A Walk in the Clouds (an interesting little movie from the mid-90's which coincidentally, proves that Keanu Reeves can act). Jarre did romance well - maybe it's all the wine (did I mention he was French). Looking at his filmography, I'd forgotten that he'd scored some pretty serious films over the last couple decades, including Dead Poets Society and Jacob's Ladder (the latter of which I wouldn't mind revisiting just to hear what he did with it). Also of note, Film Score Monthly released a CD of some of his concert work recently which, when I get the opportunity, I'm definitely going to pick up.

At any rate, adieu Msr. Jarre...au revoir and all that! Say hello to Jerry, Basil, Elmer, Michael, and everyone else when you see them.

So, umm...yeah, the Pope is...well...he's retarded.

So anyway, I'm still typing this, so the lightning hasn't smote me yet. I'm sorry, I can't help it...I read this article on CNN.com and I stand fully behind my post title. So the Pope is in Cameroon...or to put it into perspective, he's on the single most AIDS-riddled continent in the world...and he's standing firm that people shouldn't, or rather can't use condoms (them's just big 'ol brass balls there man).

Riiiiiiiggggghhhhhttt!

I can't help but wonder what his stance would be if a gang of natives took turns ass-raping him for a solid 36 hours. Yes, I just made a statement containing references to both the Pontiff, and the butt sex (of the forced variety) - oh yeah, I went there. I'm still waiting for the smiting to begin...wait for it... At any rate, the article does go on to say that his Holiness is considering the holy ramifications of allowing married couples to use condoms should one of them have HIV. So, let me get this straight - it's ok, or at least might be if married couples (and let's be honest for a minute - he's referring to those in the civilized western world) to use a Jimmy hat to not give HIV to each other, but ze darkies (remember, the man is one of ze Germans) - who believe the myth throughout most of the continent that raping virgins will get rid of their AIDS - need to find an alternative to contraception and safe sex because God doesn't want all those precious spermy-men going to waste! Oh for Christ's sake!

See...this is why I don't have a religion. I have faith - I believe there's a bigger picture, I believe there's a higher existence and a higher power. But I can't stand religions. I especially don't like the leaders of religions imposing their ridiculous, ill-informed, and totally archaic beliefs on my life and the way I live it. So...fuck religion!!! I wish I knew where my old man would stand on my beliefs and opinions. He was raised Catholic, but lived life as a twice-a-year Catholic - you know, only went to mass on Christmas and Easter. I have to believe that he'd feel generally the same way I do about things like this. My problem is that there are quite literally over a billion people on the planet that live by this man's word as law!!! WHY?!?! He's just a man - and a man of questionable morality and judgement on top of that (Nazi ties anyone?!). Why, as the world moves ever onward into the 21st century, do the major religions of the world insist on keeping their faithful locked in the beliefs of the dark ages.

I usually like to smack my righteous indignation in the face of Islam at times like these, thinking that maaaaayyyyybe Christianity is getting it's collective shit together. Let's face it, you can almost time to the second when a news piece will come along relaying the tale of some 102-year-old Muslim woman who's being given 1,001 lashes, 60 days in a gulag, and having her tits sawed off because she was in the vicinity of a neighbor's male goat - my total disgust with modern interpretation and practice of Islam is another post altogether. Then a story like this thing with El Sombrero Gigante comes along and (*cue slide whistle playing down*) like a bad case of karmic, guilt-laden erectile dysfunction, the Catholics once again swap our Viagra for a Tylenol with a healthy dose of morality, circa 1452 A.D. on the side.

It's probably a safe assumption that most of us guys have, as the Catholic church would have you believe, committed a holocaust of galactic proportions with all the spermy-men we've wasted in our lifetimes. But remember, the priest with his pecker up the alter boy's ass is fine...so long as he doesn't slap on a Ramses, or pull out! Would it be in bad taste to send the Vatican a Trojan Condom Christmas Tree as a gift this year? I can't help but find it both tragic and simultaneously hilarious that the Church can justify being one of the world's leaders in HIV care and treatment, but won't have fucking anything to do with HIV prevention. Get sick and die in agony - that's cool, but don't you dare do anything to avoid getting sick in the first place - YOU'LL GO STRAIGHT TO HELL MISTER!!! It's interesting the mentality that the Vatican, and American Insurance companies share:

Big Blue Boner Pill - GOOD!!!

Itsy Bitsy No-Make-A-Baby Pill - BAAAAAAAAAAADDDDDDD!!!

One-Fingered Rubber Glove - FUGGEDABOUDIT!!!

I dunno - maybe they share board members or something...I better stop before I get really mad - and really get the Big Guy's attention.

"I am a man...in search of a vision!"

So anyway, I'm not really doing any soul searching or anything like that, but I do have a question/problem that I'd like a bit of input on. Allow me a moment to bring everyone that's not Brad (because he already knows most of it) up to speed. My thesis piece was a tone poem for orchestra with optional chorus and electronics called Solar Flare. It was a musical interpretation of a hypothetical stellar event...duh. In addition to wanting to revisit the piece and tighten a few things up, I've decided to make a trilogy of it. I know, I know...why do things always have to be in three's? What can I say, even I'm not immune to Hollywood corporate influences.

At any rate, Solar Flare will comprise the second of the three movements. As a movement it will focus on musical motion, action, and drama. As I said, I want to revisit it - among other things I want to remove the electronic element from it and find a way to suit my needs with the percussion section. I also want to give the violas more to do as I've learned quite a bit about orchestration in the years following my graduate study (shame I didn't learn much during my graduate study!). I also want to put the clarinets back into the piece (for one, it will simplify and justify their inclusion in the other two movements, and also, in retrospect, I think I made an error in judgement leaving them out to begin with). The first movement will be more about sound and texture, and will revolve around the creation of the universe (I was listening to a lot of Close Encounters when the ideas started flowing in). The third movement will be a conceptual combination of the first two and will be called Supernova. I actually had ideas for this immediately after I finished Solar Flare, I just never got very far with it. In a way, the three will represent the beginning, middle, and end of...well...everything!

...and now for my problem...

It's not much of a problem, but it is a problem. I don't know what in the hell to call the first movement. I absolutely refuse to call the first movement The Big Bang. I'm sorry, there's just waaaaaaaayyyyyyyy too many allusions to porno music with that - not to mention that generally speaking, it just sounds kinda gay and tacky! I thought about Genesis, but that might have too much of a religious context for my tastes. It might also bring with it this expectation of liturgical text for the chorus, which is something I really don't want. The chorus in all three movements is optional; their parts will be doubled somewhere in the orchestra (at least to some degree), and they're really only there to add to the aural palette - so, you know...basically just lots of "ah's" and "ooh's". All in all, I'm hoping for somewhere around a combined 30 minutes of music from the whole thing. So, I put it to you (Brad included)...what should I call my first movement? Silly as it sounds, I'm having a hard time moving on with it until I know what to call the fucker! So any and all help will be appreciated.

Oh...and I know my audience/readership/whatever. So I fully expect a deluge of dipshit, bogus, goofball ideas in the comments. Just try, okay, at least try to throw out a legitimate idea or two amongst all the ridicule. Sorry...no prizes for the winner, just a fair amount of genuine gratitude.

Ready...

...GO!!!

p.s. listening to Sneakers whilst typing all this up...I forgot how much Arvo Pärt was in there - and I mean a LOT!!! Sounds like he lifted it directly - not sure he even bothered to change keys (?). I mean seriously, it's like listening to Brad score a slasher film... ;)