Review: A Cigar Box

A container, re: box, whose intentions are to hold cigars for keeping. I would think a cigar vault, or cigar glass case would do the trick. But throughout history, we have, er someone has, trusted their cigars to a box. Nothing wrong with that, boxes are great and they can withstand some water. But the beauty of the cigar box is in its most simplest attribute. The name itself- cigar box- is wonderfully constructed. The soft c making an s sound followed resoundingly by a harsh G and R. ci-GAR. If you add the ette to it, it makes the whole package smaller and more dainty. But left alone we are left with a champion of a word- cigar, which we follow up with a mouth widening box sound. Two booms after a soft c opening. Cigar Box. Box as a word is very plain and drums up nary an emotion. When coupled with cigar it has a whole new meaning and a definitive shape. Cigar box. No weight of the world crashing down, no demonstrative clinging, just a cigar box. Ernie's friend Bert kept his paper clips in his, while Grandpa Simpson kept a gun in one. The range of the contents of a cigar box are boundless, but the outside, the first glance- you are cigar box. You are intrigue. You have cigar.

Review: Visioneers

A character that has to golf because that is what people do of your stature even though they are clearly horrible at at golf- played hilariously over the top for artistic merit. We are in the hey day of the special career of Zach Galifianakis. We love him, and now our middle American relatives also love him thanks to his heavy weight performance in existing movie- The Hangover. Zach has always been cool. Like Really Cool. I'm not joking. He still will remain cool even after we are disappointed with Saturday Night Live on March 6.

What makes him cool is the commitment of his persona. I can wax intellectual all day on this, but usually that persona is relegated to perverse use of his energetic comedy, which has brought us such classic characters as the two ferns host and Tairy Greene. This is about Visioneers, where Zach undertakes and executes brilliantly an expanding role- which starts out reveling in the mundane of his normal, crushed spirit every day living , and through self realization and the burden of suppression (very hard things to portray realisticly on screen especially stretched out in a comedy) we are taken to higher places where the audience can relate its own fears and regrets and be inspired. Maybe that's too much hype up for a movie where, I feel, the newer Zach fans won't get as much. Not to sell them short, but a non thinking audience will just see this movie as random things happening, and not look at the context at what makes Visioneers a special movie. There are 'quirky' (a much buzzed about it word in 2010 Hollywod) things in this movie, but played so seriously and not a note of overt cutenees. In this world, there exists a business in the fear of exploding, which gives us such gems as a fried chicken jingle, a dream helmet with attached model planets, and books that are simply lists. Each thing when listed down, sound random, but in the context of the movie are very sincere. Visioneers have a lot of literal jokes, the whole middle finger salutes, but these are played subtly enough to enjoy. And the story can be summed up by saying 'black futuristic comedy where the lead character breaks free' but within that context lies such crushed spirit and awful yet humourous looks at that future, that the movie leaves room for a heavier message of not to be too self centered, to listen to what we really want, and to really be happy we have to try and be happy (which they do explicitly say at a point, also the life sucking corporation is named Jeffers, after poet Robinson Jeffers who they also quote, very amicably though). OK, these are dumb reviews and I jump around a lot in me making these points, and there are a lot of points to make about a movie entrenched in the depthness of finding happiness and breaking free. But I think reviews are dumb, and don't really care about making sense or about you audience. I just like being impressed. And I love when people get a chance to expand their abilities. And I love the movie Brazil, which Visioneers does a great job in finding a new vein to pump blood out of these Orwellian futures. I was saving Orwellian.

The final point here is Zach Galifianakis can make your movie work. I really can't imagine anyone else who would be able to be so grounded in the world where pretty "kooky" or "zany" things happen and make those things also seem grounded, real, and consternating. Was saving that word too. Way better than Heart Beeps, and it took a lot for me to say that.

Reviewing: Taking my coat off while walking up the stairs

Sorry if you thought I could find a picture for this. But I really could but didn't want to spoil you because you look to comfortable. COMFORT - segue - the kind of comfort of accomplishment. Now I only recently started taking my coat off while walking up the 4 floors to my apartment. Before I would open the door and take my coat off. This time adds up as I have to deal with an excited to see me dog. Also the walking up plus the heaviness of the jacket leads to a winded patch of breathing. So, by taking my coat off while walking up the stairs I save time. I also have something to do while walking up the stairs. That does get boring. I usually notice garbage people leave (mostly cigarette butts mostly- one time a lot of mesh). So it makes going up the stairs seem faster. We are at win win. But the most satisfying aspect is feeling like I'm home. Like when Mr. Rogers would change his clothes as part of the routine of being home. The routine of being home sounds daunting and suburbanly crushing, but I happen to look forward to it because I love my family- HA! I also drape my coat over my arm like they do in Mad Men. So, yes, another great decision made by me, a great man. Thank you for your patience. Please contribute to my blog my digging a hole in an inappropriate place (ie baseball field) and burying something valuable wrapped in a condom and telling me about it in 6 years.

Review: The Kingdom Chums in "The Original Top Ten"

Their eyes are penetrating your penis' soul's penis

That was a mean tag line under the picture. I should've been more playful and said "this is the best picture I could find." After all, I am in the presence of those who have been in the presence kind-of of Jesus. These are the Kingdom Chums who are quote "descendants of the animals who viewed the miracles of Jesus". Now anything that has these bright of colors and this cute usage of animals is going to win over most children. This broad net of blatant children's crap is being marketed by Christianity. I would make fun of anything that has this much usage of rainbows for no reason. There is a special feeling that comes out when watching a religious cartoon or anything religious for kids that just brings out the cynic in me. The Kingdom Chums is the height of that special adaptation of christian morals because here they don't even bother with any bearded men or long exchanges of dialogue, here they simply made a children's program based on several key elements in children's marketing: fuzziness, warmth, rainbows, being happy, singing, a clear lesson to learn, and the idea that love is an actual thing and it can make everything ok.

The Kingdom Chums were so popular a hit of christianity thru homevideo that it was even shown on ABC on Saturday afternoons. This was so blatantly about making money that even Children's Programming Executives wanted to make some of that money, God be damned. Let's say some facts: The ten commandments are shown by soft creatures (animals resembling lions, foxes, raccoons, teddy bears- but walk on their legs and have huge eyes) through catchy songs that replace key plot points. The lion looks like Michael McDonald crossed with Simba and sings on a cliff that waves crash into while wind blows in his hair (this is how they show that this particular song should be taken seriously). The wackier commandment song are sun by the happy black guy voice tiger who tells us to STOP STOP STOP before we steal, Don't be jealous (can't you see) there's no place for jealousy, and IDOLS (beat) IDOLS, blah blah blah BLAH IDOLS. There are 3 more annoying talking, dressed animals. 2 are girls for the girls and one is a baby raccoon who is cute for the sexually confused. They all bring us catchy choruses that say certain words loud as to remember the 10 commandments (personal fave: MURDER, because the setting is an ice mountain for some reason).

Now we are taken on this journey by these kids. These 10 commandants to be learned kids, which there are 3 of. A nerdier red headed boy named Petey who loves collecting rock n roll records because that's what kids do. His catch phrase is 'Un-be-leivable". He has a little sister who provides the gateway into Kindom Chum land because she is pure of heart because she is a little girl who believes. She is like 5 years old, and doesn't realize she has to grow up. She carries around an ugly green (really ugly) heart-shaped bag the whole time that serves to keep score of the 10 commandment competition between Petey and the Antagonist, Osbourne. Oh, the antagonist. At first he plays the realist, questioning the legitimacy of being carried by a rainbow, abut after about 5 commandments he finally gets that being mean is making him lose the competition. Osbourn's relationship to the other kids is never explained in the beginning, actually. He is just shown as someone who was mean. Then, after realizing that he shouldn't murder he does the ol' 180.

You can view this by typing Kingdom Chums Top Ten into youtube or google video. And please do, because this was shown to kids at small ages where they can believe any god damn thing. And sure, the bible has moral value, but HOLY SHIT when a child realizes what he was exposed to as a kid- this kind of stuff breeds resentment. This video, from its theme song called 'Following the Love Light" to the recognizable names cashing a pay check (Billy Preston- Tony Orlando- Marilyn Mcoo- Debbie Boone- Frankie Valli- Mayim Balik (Blossum- duh) whose playing a young boy!!, and the child actress providing the voice over for the little girl voice is Marnette Patterson, who followed those christian beliefs and went on to do this in a movie). I said all their names, because they all have blood on their hands. So- This is a fluffy, non threatening tape to show to kids, no question. But how safe can the filmmakers actually make something before they completely compromise their message? How can anyone water down everything so much and then still have the gall to say you have an intent to preach to me? How can they prey on innocent kids this easily? How can you promote Christian beliefs AND the belief rainbows are a solid actual thing you can touch?

My review: I know they can't help it but- children are idiots. They do, however, learn easily. There are little controllable people that can be taught whatever you want to teach them. This is a real thing that happened. This is what we thought of kids in a point of history. I am going to post the links so you can watch: SO WATCH IT.

Review: Not wanting to write a review aka LIST

The 10 best musical moments from The Office

(apologies to Scrantonicity):

10) CPR Training

9) Chair Model Lady -

8) Dunder Mifflin, Paper People -

7) Andy’s Ringtone -

6) Happy Birthday -

5) Lovefool -

4) Scranton, The Electric City -

3) Country Road

2) Andy asks Angela out -

1) Subtle Sexuality

And

Better than any of these or anything else ever) Sir David of Brent -

Reviewing: Red

To review a color. That's the end of that sentence. Sorry. A fun form of rhetoric I have come to know well. Now, Red is a great color. One of the top colors ever. It can symbolize love, rage, anger, another variant of strong passion type feeling, or anything an artist says it symbolizes. Red is the first color of a rainbow and kids associate it with apples and wagons. Apples and Wagons! Sign someone up... for that... for those apples and wagons. Now the strength of red is that it is a primary color- which means it gives birth to orange and purple. And oranges and purples. I can go on divulging about the off shoots of red (personal favorite: maroon), but red is what it simply is- not blue and not yellow. Sure it looks menacing when paired with black-- but what doesn't. The unerlying theme here is that it is a color, and with color everything is personal. Except skin color. So I'm not changing anyone's opinions about colors here. But I will say this- we can all do better than just red.

Boxer Brief Interviews with Hideous Mentions

A lesson on how to add credibility to your romantic sitcom demeanor

Movies based on books is a great idea. However, the idea totally outweighs the execution. Usually, the movie ends up being a validating point to a book's longevity. "Well, they made a movie out of it, so it must be good, right?" I can't answer that for you. Now I was fortunate (aka cool and hip) to read this book before the project went underway (not that cool- this is a very popular book, and deservedly so, deservedly so to his death), so I enter the viewing of this movie with nothing but trepidation in my heart. Why? Because the book is off the bonkers in structure and is mainly long section after section of story. And it has what Michael Scott called Big Bird directing. Thats not fair to John Krasinski, sorry. Johnny Krass (what he'll be called from now until it gets old) decided to attach director to his name and craft a seemingly impossible movie out of a book of interviews. So the money question--- was it worth it? I got to say- not bad, Johnny Krass, not bad. JK gets it across fairly quickly that this isn't the book at all, but more a homage to the book, as you can tell he really dug his source material. How can you tell? Well, one he made a movie about it (but that telling was based on relief of the hope he dug his source material) and more importantly, the actors and their detail and pathos they show with each interview. Great casting choices, and great directing. I don't know how much Johnny Krass got into each actor, but fuck if I care because there was some sheer hilarity and moments of honesty that made me wish that JK didn't even have to connect the story and rather just do a shoddy job jumping from interview to interview. No, but he tried. It works though. Julianne Nicholson comes off as, I wanna say, teasing... but that works out in the end. I should say some of the better acting in the movie, but there really was a lot so I'll let my bias show here: Will Forte can just show up and its magic, Bobby Cannavale has never disappointed me, Chris Meloni probably hurt somebody he was so on his game, Josh Charles got his chameleon on, and round of applause for Joey Slotnick and Dominic Cooper. But Johnny Krass saves himself for last, and really can't shake the stigma of Halpert. Even saying the word rape and bitch just felt... boogaloo. Also Ben Gibbard is in the movie because it seemed cool I guess. 'Brief Interviews..' is a challenging movie at points, what with time lapse techniques these days, but when I got lost at least I had 2 threads to go off on: my own experiences of degradation, and a source material that clearly is the star of this movie.

Taking President's Day Off

Whatever you are supposed to do on President's Day- say the word President, watch for a special scroll at the bottom of CNN, buy a commemorative Disney pin with either Abe Lincoln Goofy or Franklin Pierce Mickey, actually be a president if you are one- most of America knows it as a three day weekend and are therefore thankful America comes up with stupid enough holidays to take the day off. Taking a day off, in America, means actually taking a day and exploiting others who aren't as fortunate to close work on bank holidays and hopefully seeing your mailman in jeans. But with time off comes guilt and with that guilt comes the burden of going back to work and within that going back to work is a thankfulness to get a day off. So there is a circle created that makes everything seem less important, which I think hurts the president's the most. But what do I know? I smoked pot the entire day, which actually turned into future blog entries, current blog entry, and remembering that I should be working. And I think that's what taking a day off in the midst of a busy January right after Martin Luther King Jr day during NBA all star weekend and Valentines and a start of an Olympiad while other struggles in my life abound is all about--- remembering that I should be doing something. You got me again, America.

Reviewin': a review about a review about a review about a review

The picture by now! Get it? I do. The review yesterday came from the heart. So did the day before that which that addressed in the review yesterday. But there are different ends to different hearts. There is a space between those two ends where you should slide yourself into and hammer your shoes in with comical nails and sound effects. A review is what you think about something in a voice your comfortable saying something in. That is what we were trying to achieve here. To learn something about yourself. While part of you can be proud, part of you can be disappointed and other parts can think what they will what those parts think. There is no rule on how to think, therefore there is really no rule on how to review, other than to simply review. You went over this- it wasn't deep, you went over that- it tried to be deep. That's what it was then. I can say that because I can review that. It's simple and it shed's its meta-coat. The balance of voice can do that. If you would like to know my personal struggle, it was within being nice, being reasonable, wanting to be mean, and not caring. There is something to take out of each of those. I'm just writing it down so to not forget to take something from each of those. I am capable of experiencing more than one emotion at a time. Because not allowing myself to grow into other feelings and thoughts, isn't growing up. And goodness knows I have some growing up to do. And Gladys knows I have some throwing up to poo. It's called diarrhea and I've been taking Kirkland Signature's Loperamide Hydrochloride which is really a name I wish I made up. To find such stagnant nature in medical terminology as to create a fake name believed to be real is a goal considered set. But I digress. Reviewing a review about a review about etc. for however long I did it was an exercise in where can I go with something that challenging, the result wasn't that far. The high road taken would've been dissecting each review line by line, and then doing that again so that the review you are dissecting line by line is a review you dissected line by line. But you're not as good as Fire Joe Morgan. At least you know you want to be as good as them. At least you know when to stop? Eh sure.

Reviewing: Yesterday's Post on the review of the other day's post which in turn was a review of that post itself

The purpose of meaning or Meaning of the purpose. That line and what it divides should never be clear to me. Because that's just a fluffy way of starting my review to being able to get away with saying things are fluffy when that doesn't describe anything. Is this a parody of myself? Is that a rhetorical question? In reviewing the reviews of the reviews, I say I am lacking a voice. To find that voice and to make it consistent seems to be a strategy to make the whole process of these, mind the intention, dumb reviews work. But no, it is myself. Don't back down from yourself, myself. You're great, me. I'm proud of I. You just needed to say that. Sure it was a ploy, but hey you got a day's worth of entry out of it. And even though you seemed worried- it was a job well done review! You actually reviewed something there and you didn't even have to re-read it which you should always do to check for errors in continuity in continuity and grammar. Faking being professional will take you a lot of places, and sure addressing the issue of confidence doesn't make it go away, it just doesn't make it pretend anymore. So now that you have real issues, welcome to the real world. There is a lot more uses for towels and you should be thankful they come in so many sizes. Except beach towels. Those are gimmicks. The trick there is to find a worthwhile beach. Which those don't exist. It's all sand and making sure the person you're staring at doesn't know you're staring at them and references to TV Show episodes where they themselves go to the beach (rugrats HOLLA). Now, be a sport, go fetch me some 'life worth living', I got a good feeling about you yet, me.

Review: The State of the "Black" Sitcom

Timeline: The Cosby's was and is a great show. Just a classic family with classic characters that will live on forever. Oh before that, we had some of the more groundbreaking shows, not just for employing black actors, but in script and hilarious characters. The Jeffersons. Good Times. What's Happening. OK- then in the 90s, when the culture clearly stated that, hey- its the 90s, we were given some strong shows with great commercial appeal- Fresh Prince of Bel Air, In Living Color, Living Single, Other Cosby Incarnations. Fresh Prince was on NBC, and sadly was the last big black (Albini) show on the network. Fox also used the niche black show to garner a new audience. Today they basically have American Idol, House, and other shows starring white people that I don't really like (save for Simpsons). The 90s and 2000s also had the WB and UPN, which had The Wayans Brothers Show, Parenthood, Girlfriends, Moesha, and a fuck ton others. Hopefully some of these show are still on the CW, but I don't watch the CW. The WB and UPN also stayed afloat basically on the strength of their heavy rotation based on the black niche. Now what? The Tyler Perry Shows on TBS? Sorry but I think those suck. What the fuck is up network TV? Byron Allen is on late nights, and what else? Nothing of the top of my mind. I'm doing research right now, hold up... our president is black... Brothers got canceled because it was stupid and employed Michael Strahan... families are black on Extreme Makeover sometimes... Tracy Morgan on 30 Rock and Donald Glover on Community... the black people on CSI, Criminal Minds, and the Law and Orders more than hold their own... holy shit- the Cleveland Show!?!? Our leading black network sitcom is a cartoon where the lead voice is a white guy?? OK- not every black person likes Tyler Perry, or not everyone even has cable. I don't have cable. Is there a strong divide between what constitutes a black sitcom and a regular sitcom? No. and there never was. Good Times is still a relevant show that I find hilarious. Is there a struggle to promote black shows out there? Is middle america worse off than I thought? Not just blacks, but have asians ever had a chance? American Girl starring Margaret Cho and the other guy on City Guys? How about the handicapped? The homeless? Rabbits? Neckties? Intake? OK, I don't know what my point is here. I just want to think about it and think about what it says about our country. There are a million talented people there who are capable. Those people are white, those people are black, those people are brown, those people are people. So what am I saying here?

Review: The State of the "Black" Sitcom

Timeline: The Cosby's was and is a great show. Just a classic family with classic characters that will live on forever. Oh before that, we had some of the more groundbreaking shows, not just for employing black actors, but in script and hilarious characters. The Jeffersons. Good Times. What's Happening. OK- then in the 90s, when the culture clearly stated that, hey- its the 90s, we were given some strong shows with great commercial appeal- Fresh Prince of Bel Air, In Living Color, Living Single, Other Cosby Incarnations. Fresh Prince was on NBC, and sadly was the last big black (Albini) show on the network. Fox also used the niche black show to garner a new audience. Today they basically have American Idol, House, and other shows starring white people that I don't really like (save for Simpsons). The 90s and 2000s also had the WB and UPN, which had The Wayans Brothers Show, Parenthood, Girlfriends, Moesha, and a fuck ton others. Hopefully some of these show are still on the CW, but I don't watch the CW. The WB and UPN also stayed afloat basically on the strength of their heavy rotation based on the black niche. Now what? The Tyler Perry Shows on TBS? Sorry but I think those suck. What the fuck is up network TV? Byron Allen is on late nights, and what else? Nothing of the top of my mind. I'm doing research right now, hold up... our president is black... Brothers got canceled because it was stupid and employed Michael Strahan... families are black on Extreme Makeover sometimes... Tracy Morgan on 30 Rock and Donald Glover on Community... the black people on CSI, Criminal Minds, and the Law and Orders more than hold their own... holy shit- the Cleveland Show!?!? Our leading black network sitcom is a cartoon where the lead voice is a white guy?? OK- not every black person likes Tyler Perry, or not everyone even has cable. I don't have cable. Is there a strong divide between what constitutes a black sitcom and a regular sitcom? No. and there never was. Good Times is still a relevant show that I find hilarious. Is there a struggle to promote black shows out there? Is middle america worse off than I thought? Not just blacks, but have asians ever had a chance? American Girl starring Margaret Cho and the other guy on City Guys? How about the handicapped? The homeless? Rabbits? Neckties? Intake? OK, I don't know what my point is here. I just want to think about it and think about what it says about our country. There are a million talented people there who are capable. Those people are white, those people are black, those people are brown, those people are people. So what am I saying here?

Reviewing: Yesterday's review of the review of the day before that

We must understand that through these reviews, we can see how the author thinks of his audience. A short entry? C'mon I'vebeen better than that and it makes it seem like I don't enjoying talking/blogging. The real issue here is commitment. The more real issue hiding behind that mask of commitment is my own stuggles on how to talk to others. What do I want the reader to care about? I don't care. See! That's the problem. Sure, I am writing this for myself but to what extent? I already made this more reader friendly-- didn't I? The struggle is to look at yourself and truly allow yourself to be honest. You are kind of doing that. But that is still a kind of. Choose a side. No one needs to know anything about your long term goals, or anything about yourself. They just are here to read a blog entry. And this one isn't doing it as much as you would hope. But then again, it might be more than you hoped- sure it's a concept, and damned if you're struggling with it. Just keep pushing through. Spinning the wheel is what makes it mostly a wheel. Just don't too wrapped up in yourself. Yesterday's review was a slow ride, take it easy. There was no passion and no concern for yourself. Just an entry to be done. And that's a cop out. Don't pussy foot around, take things seriously. There are ways to be happy and it starts with me being serious about these entrys that aren't supposed to be serious. I'll enjoy it more. And quit confusing yourself and everyone else by changing tenses. That is really annoying. I know you were doing it on purpose to us. It's just that this is a review of another review about a review. You're going to lose your place. Now go out there, this entry is a stepping stone. Use it as light and the path shall be shown unto you. Hurry! This is the day.

Reviewing: Yesterday's Post

The thought process was there, but there weren't as many wheels turning as one would like. It was of the moment, sure- but didn't discuss much. This entry should discuss much more simply because it has that much more retrospect. 'A day more of retrospect' sounds like a decent high school band that won't ever materialize to anything. So basically- that entry tried. Which is what I got from re-reading it, you re-retard. Still, there needs to be more time with it. There is a point to make that if the posts continue like this- that first entry becomes the center of the onion behind the layers- but this isn't about the future of the entries (it actually is), but about yesterday's entry- which depends on the future (see?). So do I end this entry quick? It's not about this entry. Yesterday- yesterday's entry didn't review as much as I wanted it too, but it was as dumb as I wanted it to be. And if you can't one word in your title working, make sure the other one is. And that should be quick enough

Reviewing: This Post

Alright. What do we say to something when we're saying it already? We say it normal. Not louder. No, never louder. Well this post is about this post and how much this post will effect the following: future posts, current posts, and arguably, past posts (right in there, right in that context). This post is a way for me to express feelings about what I am writing right now. Which, to me, isn't half bad. Pretty good so far. In time, maybe I'll grow to love this post, maybe put it in a best of collection. But they don't have those. In reviewing this post, I have to look at the circumstances of the day and usually, my feelings on any post coincide with my feelings of that day. So maybe this is a worser post than I thought because I am having a good day? Maybe this is a great post, full of bemusement. But I didn't do any word play or say anything ridiculous or silly or even fun... but this post isn't about what I come to expect of myself or hypothesizing what this post is. This post is about this post. And I'll let it stand on its leg. Post legs. Christopher Reeves. Ha. Anyway, I, right now, am amused by this post. Only because it was easy enough to write. Stream the conscious, don't you know? Humbling itself is the only way to humble myself. Humble probably isn't the best word to use here, but you didn't write it, and you don't have to deal with me.

The Legacy of Tim and Eric

This, right here, is the only sentence to remind you about the just as amazing Tom Goes to the Mayor.

Tim and Eric's 5th and final season of Awesome Show, Great Job! debuts this Sunday night. It's not official, it's the final- just assumed. Assumed because I hope it is. Listen, I love Tim and Eric, and Awesome Show, Great Job! is a crowning achievement of the thought process. It ushered in a new era of comedy. One of concentrating on detail and reveling in parody. I am simply ecstatic at the prospect of their future. 50 episodes of Awesome Show are more than enough. Each season darker than the next. Tim and Eric don't fit into being described as weird, as that word doesn't begin to encapsulate the choices Tim and Eric have made. These 2 men were given a show where the could do anything they wanted, and with it, they chose to make polarizing humor based around public access parody, and subtle word play. I actually am tired of describing this. So example-fy: Eric takes too much wait mate, a drug designed to eliminate waiting, and is in a catatonic state of drugged up haze. Zan, the wait mate cure, is here to help Eric remember his life. Zan takes Eric to Tim's party, the reason why Eric took wait mate. Now here is the genius. That plot, hilarious enough with Jeff Goldblum parodying prescription drug commercials and Zan's remembering song and Eric's pleas of not being able to wait, is added depth by detail. For when Zan meets Tim, Zan's little moment of being caught off guard by shaking hands and saying , "yea ok" gives the audience such an in-depth look at Zan. Isn't he used to meeting people or is shaking hands simply just that weird to him? The answer to that question is: That's hilarious. Another great example is the run of guest stars they get. If you were famous enough and wanted to really push your comedic ability, you were on Tim and Eric's Awesome Show. Forte, Bamford, John Mayer- all bring their A game. The shining example, and the solidifying factor that he is king of 'man-child' acting, is Dr. Steve Brule played by John C. Reilly. This is so funny and the laughs come from some many aspects, that I refer to exemplary characters in movies as that actor's Steve Brule. For example- Julianne Moore's Steve Brule was Maude Lebowski. This is a title reserved for only the most important performances. Tim and Eric Awesome Show Great Job really offers such a depth of creativity, one liners, and visual jokes- that I just had to end this sentence this way. I feel talking about Tim and Eric only serves as not doing them justice.

So with that, I say that Tim and Eric will be around for awhile. They are respected comedians with such artistic integrity that working with them already validates an actor. They will have movies to much cult success. They will do other projects of cult success. That cult will only grow. It already is huge enough, but once modern humor shifts to a path blazed by Awesome Show, Tim and Eric will already be ahead of them. Ladies and gentlemen, this is like Monty Python in 1970. (I know I just dropped the Python bomb, but what other genre breaking, get away with anything show exists that came out of nowhere). We are in the midst of a renaissance of humor. One that capitalizes on what we think to ourselves, one that doesn't sell out from what it can achieve, one that when copied- isn't funnier- but still funnier if it weren't done the way that steals from Tim and Eric. I can't express how sad I am to see a show where James Quall is mined for every aspect of gold he offers. And yes, there is already a sadness in that, Tim and Eric have become such high figures of absurdist thinking. But then we have to remember: they have never disappointed us. They are still young men. They still can do whatever it is they want to do. The prospects are reason enough to get up in the morning. Tim and Eric, you have given me everything I want of current comedy- a goal to achieve. Your confidence in your abilities is legendary. Thank you and welcome to living eternally.

Recognition Hall of Fame: Matt Walsh

Character acting is a redundant term. People love to remember actors, so they give the name character actor to someone who does the same thing in every movie, so now the general public can say: "oh it's that guy. I love that guy." And that's a tricky business. You shouldn't love that guy, you should learn his name and love the person. Now people have made careers of being character actors, and that is nothing against them, because there is a beauty to one's personal stamp. To leave your own imprint on a film much bigger than your part, to add your subtle facial expression or witty commentary, to remembered as a force within your time. I lost my train of thought: Simply I am saying- sometimes these actors are more amazing than the lead actors, and their body of work more than shows for it. I simply want to pay a respect to ones people call that guy.

For the first time ever doing this, there is really only one choice: Matt Walsh.

Where do you know him from?: Well you should know him as a founder and resident genius of the Upright Citizens Brigade, but that was on cable. You'd recognize his doughy demeanor and dim, but lovable characters from: Conan circa '96-2002, Todd Phillips movies, a stretch of commercial in the mid '00s, the Daily Show, the referee in Semi-Pro, or Davith of Glencracken in Role Models. Sometimes he tends to play a straight-er charcter with rough Chicago edges that make hi vulnerable (see Be Kind Rewind or Father Pat in Semi Pro) which he ably does knowing the meat of the comedy is coming in part from his seriousness. That is because Matt Walsh is a comedic genius. Now anyone who knows anything about improv, I shouldn't have to tell you how deep his genius goes or what Matt Walsh is capable of doing. For those less familiar with Walsh, I turn your attention to the funniest, yet overlooked scene, from Elf. At the end where Charlotte the TV reporter interviews people outside of Central Park. Vintage Walsh. (note: 10 minutes of youtube searching- nada gulp). So, I hope everyone knows who Matt Walsh is, not for the betterment of his career or anything. But for me. If I have people who read my blog not know who Matt Walsh is, what hope should I have for my blog? Respect, Recognize.

A Call to Rise Up against Jokes made at the expense of Schindler's List

Not trying to offend any one here

There is a type of person who exists. That person, out of safety, refuses to expand their repertoire. They have found a gold goose, and yes they do use it sparingly, but deep down they know. They know they are cheating themselves. They know they can do better. I was once one of these people. This is my story.

This isn't actually a story, that line is just great for transitions. The type of person in question is: People Who Use Schindler's List for an easy laugh. A quick joke, nothing too elaborate. Easy laugh stuff. Like:

"Let's watch something fun, and light hearted"

"How about Schindler's List?"

Haha Haha Ha.

"What is that one movie where Julia Roberts can't seem to find the right guy?"

"Schindler's List"

Haha Ha Haha.

Two examples. Yes, that joke can be funny because it is funny to say something out of context and catch someone off guard with it. But c'mon. That's too easy. Schindler's List? Just because you grew up in the 90s doesn't mean you have to limit yourself. I get it, I get it. I was there. It's not that you can't think of any other depressing movies, it's that you're afraid people won't get the reference if you choose another movie. Schindler's List is classically depressing because even if you haven't seen it, you were told it was. I'm concerned about the joker's health. To have such a gut reaction joke in your hands is always disconcerting ground, especially if you use it more than once. But to have that joke based on something so easy as Schindler's List? That's right- it's an easy movie to reference. And you know what- its earned that right. Titanic, Star Wars, Godfather, hell- we are currently in the golden age of Avatar jokes. And all these jokes have been done to death, but you think- surely not Schindler's List. No one makes fun of that because of its sensitive matter. No- no one parodies it because holocaust parodies are done before. You are making FUN of it by applying it to your slick sense of humor. Make FUN, don't continue previous fun. In those 2 examples, the high road to take would be to attack the words of what the person is saying. "Fun and Light Hearted- you just described literally half the movies in the world." "I don't know, I only saw the Julia Roberts movie where she gets fist fucked." See? This isn't just a plea specifically not to make Schindler's List jokes, but to not repeat them. You know who you are. The best part of making fun of something is the actually making. The fun comes naturally to it.

The Skunk in Bambi; The Skunk in us all?

His eyes are bigger than his hands.

We all can recognize a famous skunk when we see it. There really is only three or four- Pepe Le Pew, the purple one from Tiny Toons (Fifi LaFume? someone check that), Faizura Balk, and this little mother fucker right here. His name is Flower. And that should be point number one in a statement I'm about to make. Flower, the skunk from Bambi, is a civil rights leader for non-gay effeminate men. Effeminate men are often classified as gay, but that's just not true. A man can be anything he wants to be. He can hang out with other men with gay names like Bambi. He can teach butterflies to land on his nose. He can even learn from an owl that he isn't gay, that love will find him, and then rebuff that owl, only to go fuck someone nary 5 minutes afterward. I think I just gave you his whole role in the movie. (Research: in Bambi 2, Flower had a fear of skunks and yes, her name was Fifi La Fume). But lets think here. Disney totally told us this was a male character, then made it seem nothing but a girl. Big blue eyes! You know who else has those? Ariel the mermaid (and everyone). Men aren't supposed to be this shy, or wave like that. But Disney say something more in its audience. They saw they were ready for a non-gay effeminate character, because they weren't ready for a gay effeminate character, or even a gay butch character. Should we applaud Disney for making such a brave choice or simply stop and think about it even further? Further: Flower was just a relief character to distract us from mother's dying. He was a skunk- so already we're in for some laughs (coincidentally, he didn't make me laugh), and his effeminate nature surely was there for little girls to have something to do while Mother's die. Maybe this skunk isn't worthy of any 'exasperating upon' and is just another character lost in the sea of Disney buffoonary (along with the hummingbird in Pochahontas, Happy the Dwarf, Zazu from Lion King). But what is this we find? Animation gold- (quit watching after about one minute ten seconds):

That kiss, that kiss. It not only lets us know he is not gay, it let's us know he's a guy. And man, did he go stiff. You can read into that because you're older than 10 and perverted, but it's just a tremendous effort of imagination in animation. And that's why flower exists- that one of joke was good enough to validate an existence.

Milk, just like Doug Martsch

Talk about white on white violence! Seriously it is something we should talk about.

Not the metaphor. The actual tears created by the realness of having milk and then having that milk ruined by touching something other than a container through an accident and becoming unusable. Crying Over Spilled Milk. Waaah! Like that. Like that waah. Crying over spilled milk shouldn't be advice giving out or a lesson learned. It should be an excuse to cry. Why? Because then simply add some almond pulp to your tears and now you've got a replacement milk! Don't be dumb- think outside a box. I would never go inside a box to think. I don't think this even applies to me because I don't like milk. Hmm. It is used a lot in cooking, and we buy soy or rice milk which is more expensive. But that's adding words to a saying I don't already say. "don't go crying over soy or rice milk". Nothing doing. It's a good choice of words- over. Over the spilled milk. I imagine a house wife, about 6'1" 130 pounds, standing on top of a fresh pile of floor milk, while wielding an expensive knife she bought off the TV, flailing it wildly as she cries and screams, "You were right, Mother! I never had it in me to hold milk! To hold milk the way you did! Are you happy?!" and then her mother's ghost would appear in the milk and say "why are you wearing a skirt when you are home alone? I can see your knickers, Deirdre." Then the housewife stabs the floor repeatedly. Her husband then comes home, drunk off his ass. "Honey" he'd call her, "I need some milk based food." What will she do? Will she take her anger out on him? Will he cry and relate to her on a spilled milk level? Will they go to Dairy Queen? I thought you said this wasn't about the saying? In closing, there is some use in crying over spilled milk- if I saw someone crying over spilled milk I would totally forget about the milk being spilled and make fun of that person's fragile state because there is no use in crying over spilled milk. Or we can all use a milk vacuum and only drink spilled milk. The Milk Vacuum: for people who want to eat their lesson! That should hold you.