![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Continuing with Boredom Week, here’s Destroy All Monsters, featuring Niagra Detroit, for whom boredom is an all-day thing.
Morning noon and night,
This is dF
Morning noon and night,
This is dF
Feb. 9th, 2010
I’VE COME FOR MY AWARD (2010 EDITION)
Feb. 9th, 2010 11:03 amAs a blogger, I have a responsibility to post my opinion on everything, regardless of its actual importance to humanity. Which is why I’ve been getting a lot of people asking why I’m late with my coverage of the Grammy Awards, which was like, over a week ago d00d.
I’m not late. I just don’t track the Grammys. I’m not even entirely sure who won this year, though I can tell from the Yahoo headlines that Taylor Swift won something like 80% of them, and Beyonce got at least one in case Kanye West showed up.
Something like that. I’m not sure about the details. The only thing I am sure of is that of all the people who won, I’ll bet I don’t own a copy of that album.
Which brings us to the Oscar nominations.
I feel the same way about the Oscars as I do about the Grammys – they’re basically Employee Of The Year awards with famous employees and a massive budget designed to serve mainly as a second-wind marketing tool. The chief difference is that while it’s a rare day that I will own any Grammy-nominated albums or songs that year, there’s always a chance I’ll have seen at least one of the Best Picture nominees and possibly even the film that wins. (No Country For Old Men is a recent example.)
This year, I’ve actually seen four (4) nominees – all of which made my Top Ten – and plan to see at least one more (A Serious Man – I’m still debating on The Hurt Locker, and incidentally neither of them have opened here in Hong Kong yet).
Granted, this may be because the Academy doubled the short list. If they hadn’t, Avatar would probably be there anyway. But for the others – Inglourious Basterds, Up and District 9 – maybe not.
Still, that’s got to be a personal record for me. And it says a lot that the only reason I’m bringing any of this up at all is that it’s also a landmark year for sci-fi movie fans, with two genre films in the Best Picture category. So that’s noteworthy in terms of film history.
On the other hand, does it really matter? Not really. Avatar and District 9 didn’t get nominated because they were SF films. District 9 got the nod because it had something to say and took risks in ways that plenty of blockbusters wouldn’t. And Avatar got nominated because in terms of overall visual spectacle, it raised the bar for the film industry. (And yes, because James Cameron directed it.)
Who will win? Don’t know and don’t really care. John Scazi has posted his bets, if yr interested. But for me, even if either of them win, sci-fi cinema will still be mostly be either the Big Loud Dumb Fun of Michael Bay, dependable franchise pieces like Star Trek or direct-to-video efforts for the niche fans.
Not that that’s a bad thing. Indeed, that’s kind of the point. Film quality is subjective – you like it or you don’t, regardless of genre and how many awards it does or doesn’t win. How many Oscars did Blade Runner win? Zero. I rest my case.
You can’t win if you don’t play,
This is dF
I’m not late. I just don’t track the Grammys. I’m not even entirely sure who won this year, though I can tell from the Yahoo headlines that Taylor Swift won something like 80% of them, and Beyonce got at least one in case Kanye West showed up.
Something like that. I’m not sure about the details. The only thing I am sure of is that of all the people who won, I’ll bet I don’t own a copy of that album.
Which brings us to the Oscar nominations.
I feel the same way about the Oscars as I do about the Grammys – they’re basically Employee Of The Year awards with famous employees and a massive budget designed to serve mainly as a second-wind marketing tool. The chief difference is that while it’s a rare day that I will own any Grammy-nominated albums or songs that year, there’s always a chance I’ll have seen at least one of the Best Picture nominees and possibly even the film that wins. (No Country For Old Men is a recent example.)
This year, I’ve actually seen four (4) nominees – all of which made my Top Ten – and plan to see at least one more (A Serious Man – I’m still debating on The Hurt Locker, and incidentally neither of them have opened here in Hong Kong yet).
Granted, this may be because the Academy doubled the short list. If they hadn’t, Avatar would probably be there anyway. But for the others – Inglourious Basterds, Up and District 9 – maybe not.
Still, that’s got to be a personal record for me. And it says a lot that the only reason I’m bringing any of this up at all is that it’s also a landmark year for sci-fi movie fans, with two genre films in the Best Picture category. So that’s noteworthy in terms of film history.
On the other hand, does it really matter? Not really. Avatar and District 9 didn’t get nominated because they were SF films. District 9 got the nod because it had something to say and took risks in ways that plenty of blockbusters wouldn’t. And Avatar got nominated because in terms of overall visual spectacle, it raised the bar for the film industry. (And yes, because James Cameron directed it.)
Who will win? Don’t know and don’t really care. John Scazi has posted his bets, if yr interested. But for me, even if either of them win, sci-fi cinema will still be mostly be either the Big Loud Dumb Fun of Michael Bay, dependable franchise pieces like Star Trek or direct-to-video efforts for the niche fans.
Not that that’s a bad thing. Indeed, that’s kind of the point. Film quality is subjective – you like it or you don’t, regardless of genre and how many awards it does or doesn’t win. How many Oscars did Blade Runner win? Zero. I rest my case.
You can’t win if you don’t play,
This is dF
GAY PARENTS ALL LOOK ALIKE
Feb. 9th, 2010 02:50 pmITEM [via ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
nebris ]: A Miami judge approves the adoption of a foster child by a lesbian couple, making it the third court-approved adoption by gay parents in Florida since 2008, despite a state ban on gay adoption still technically on the books (but currently in legal limbo).
Unsurprisingly, the Florida Family Policy Council of Orlando is unhappy about this judicial activism* and ran the story in its newsletter, complete with photo of the couple who won the case.
Just one problem, notes Scott Maxwell of the Orlando Sentinel:
See what they did there?
Also unsurprisingly, FFPC President John Stemberger is unhappy with Maxwell’s biased reporting, and claims the picture was a mistake that his own people discovered too late, and NOT an attempt to make Teh Gayz look scary.
He adds that the picture is from a different Florida gay adoption case from 2008, and that they got the photo from an article on that case here, so it’s still relevant.
Just one problem (aside from why the FFPC would use a photo from a different case in the first place): the case in that article was about Martin Gill, who actually looks like this.
So what am I to think, except that FFPC was less interested in running a pic of the actual couple and more in running a pic of a completely unrelated couple who not only LOOK gay/lesbian, but SCARY gay/lesbian, if only because it caters to the stereotypes that FFPC newsletter readers expect when they think of Teh Gayz.
Which is why I find Stemberger’s “apology” to Vanessa Alenier and Melanie Leon for running the wrong pic somewhat disingenuous – not least because he’s demanding that Scott Maxwell apologize to HIM for reporting it in the first place.
Obviously, who you believe is likely pre-determined by yr current opinion of gay adoption. All I can add is that if the strength of yr argument relies on using the “wrong” picture as a scare tactic, then you got no argument.
And for the record (and it says a lot that I actually have to say this), the ability of any couple to raise a kid in a loving environment has nothing to do with the way the parents look. Richard and Mayumi “Mr And Mrs Balloon Boy” Keene are the latest proof of that. For all we know, that SCARY GAY couple could be just as qualified to be parents as Vanessa and Melanie.
Once they lose the mullets, I mean. Because you do have to draw the line somewhere.
Mullets destroy the family,
This is dF
*DEFINITION: Judicial Activism = a term typically used by conservatives to describe any court ruling over a contentious sociopolitical issue in which the other side wins (because obviously if the judges were being fair and impartial, they'd rule in favor of conservatives every single time – I mean, what other explanation could there POSSIBLY be?).
nebris ]: A Miami judge approves the adoption of a foster child by a lesbian couple, making it the third court-approved adoption by gay parents in Florida since 2008, despite a state ban on gay adoption still technically on the books (but currently in legal limbo).Unsurprisingly, the Florida Family Policy Council of Orlando is unhappy about this judicial activism* and ran the story in its newsletter, complete with photo of the couple who won the case.
Just one problem, notes Scott Maxwell of the Orlando Sentinel:
See what they did there?
Also unsurprisingly, FFPC President John Stemberger is unhappy with Maxwell’s biased reporting, and claims the picture was a mistake that his own people discovered too late, and NOT an attempt to make Teh Gayz look scary.
He adds that the picture is from a different Florida gay adoption case from 2008, and that they got the photo from an article on that case here, so it’s still relevant.
Just one problem (aside from why the FFPC would use a photo from a different case in the first place): the case in that article was about Martin Gill, who actually looks like this.
So what am I to think, except that FFPC was less interested in running a pic of the actual couple and more in running a pic of a completely unrelated couple who not only LOOK gay/lesbian, but SCARY gay/lesbian, if only because it caters to the stereotypes that FFPC newsletter readers expect when they think of Teh Gayz.
Which is why I find Stemberger’s “apology” to Vanessa Alenier and Melanie Leon for running the wrong pic somewhat disingenuous – not least because he’s demanding that Scott Maxwell apologize to HIM for reporting it in the first place.
Obviously, who you believe is likely pre-determined by yr current opinion of gay adoption. All I can add is that if the strength of yr argument relies on using the “wrong” picture as a scare tactic, then you got no argument.
And for the record (and it says a lot that I actually have to say this), the ability of any couple to raise a kid in a loving environment has nothing to do with the way the parents look. Richard and Mayumi “Mr And Mrs Balloon Boy” Keene are the latest proof of that. For all we know, that SCARY GAY couple could be just as qualified to be parents as Vanessa and Melanie.
Once they lose the mullets, I mean. Because you do have to draw the line somewhere.
Mullets destroy the family,
This is dF
*DEFINITION: Judicial Activism = a term typically used by conservatives to describe any court ruling over a contentious sociopolitical issue in which the other side wins (because obviously if the judges were being fair and impartial, they'd rule in favor of conservatives every single time – I mean, what other explanation could there POSSIBLY be?).
SARAH PALIN IS LAW, YOU ARE CRIME
Feb. 9th, 2010 11:56 pm[NOTE: This is one of those posts that will be the equivalent of yr smart but drunk uncle shouting at the TV again, so feel free to skip this.]
And now, a special commentary from Team Def’s Head of Legal Affairs, Lou Heineken:
As a champion attorney, I get asked for legal advice a lot. Sometimes it’s more to do with the day’s headlines rather than personal cases. For example, here’s a question I’ve been fielding since Christmas:
“Why is the Obama admin handling the Mr SizzlePants Christmas Bomber case as though he were some common criminal by reading him his Miranda rights?”
It’s a question almost too idiotic to answer, but now that Sarah Palin has been rocking that meme – most recently at a Tea Party smoker in Nashville – I thought I’d better address this before she gets elected president.
( Bloggety bloggety oh who the f*** cares ... )
DISCLAIMER: The views expressed here are that of Lou Heineken and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Team Frog International or its subsidiaries (though honestly, they might as well).
Know yr rights,
This is dF
And now, a special commentary from Team Def’s Head of Legal Affairs, Lou Heineken:
As a champion attorney, I get asked for legal advice a lot. Sometimes it’s more to do with the day’s headlines rather than personal cases. For example, here’s a question I’ve been fielding since Christmas:
“Why is the Obama admin handling the Mr SizzlePants Christmas Bomber case as though he were some common criminal by reading him his Miranda rights?”
It’s a question almost too idiotic to answer, but now that Sarah Palin has been rocking that meme – most recently at a Tea Party smoker in Nashville – I thought I’d better address this before she gets elected president.
( Bloggety bloggety oh who the f*** cares ... )
DISCLAIMER: The views expressed here are that of Lou Heineken and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Team Frog International or its subsidiaries (though honestly, they might as well).
Know yr rights,
This is dF
