ALIENS VS MARINES

Movie reviews. Hoo-rah.

Battle: Los Angeles

Also known (and released here) as World Invasion: Battle Los Angeles, although honestly the above title is more accurate, as far as the movie’s POV goes.

Anyway, the plot is pretty basic – aliens attack Earth, onoes! – and follows a platoon of Marines (led by a green lieutenant and a retiring Staff Sergeant with a rep for getting his soldiers killed, which is three clichés right there) on a rescue mission to pick up civilians stranded behind enemy lines in West Los Angeles before the Air Force bombs the entire area.

It’s basically a combat film not unlike Black Hawk Down, only with aliens and far worse Shakycam “documentary” cinematography. (Dear Hollywood directors: Real documentaries don’t look like they were filmed by a 15 year old with an iPhone and uploaded on YouTube. And just because YouTube videos look authentic doesn't make it watchable on a big screen.) It’s also a borderline love letter to the US Marines that’s not quite as blatant as (say) Heartbreak Ridge, but it’s hardly impartial.

For all that, I will say that it looks pretty convincing (though that’s not too hard when the camera’s shaking so much you can’t see what’s going on) and the fighting is pretty intense. Plus, you’ve got Michelle Rodriguez in full-combat mode. God knows why that makes a difference. But it does.

Anyway, for all its faults and clichés (to include both the motivations for the aliens attacking us and the key to defeating them – to say nothing of the fact that despite this being a “world” invasion, it’s really about America saving the planet with military force yet again), it actually manages to avoid much of the excess blockbuster cheese that you normally get with movies like this (I’m looking at you, Roland Emmerich). Battle: Los Angeles is actually all right if you like heavy-combat films – and if you can stand the Shakycam thing.

Mess with the best, you die like the rest,

This is dF

BIG OIL IS SEXY

This post is brought to you by the Continental Oil Company: working hard to make women all over America feel sexy by hosing them down with men in lab coats.



The girl can’t help it,

This is dF

TAX TIP: IF YOU GET AN ABORTION, MAKE SURE YOU KEEP THE RECEIPTS

I tend to stay out of the abortion debate, both in real life and on the Internets. I have opinions, sure – but I favor reason over emotion whenever possible, and abortion is one of those topics where both sides tend to overdo the emo, as it were.

Anyway, there’s been talk about H.R. 3, the bill John Boehner says is the biggest priority for the GOP, because if there’s one key issue that is central to deciding the fate of America as a country, it’s the economy unemployment the national debt terrorism Afghanistan Libya Planned Parenthood getting tax money.

And of course there was a lot of outrage over the “forcible rape” language. Which is understandable – there are still people who will argue with a straight face that an 11-year-old rape victim was asking for it, for fuck’s sake. But that’s hardly a new Republican meme (as is the whole general issue of tax money for abortion-related health services). Also, they’ve since supposedly changed the language of the bill (although the online version still says “forcible”).

But there’s a twist this time: Section 303, which makes it illegal for employers and self-insured people from using tax breaks to buy private health insurance that covers abortion.

Which means two things: (1) Republicans (and to be fair, at least ten Democrats) want to tell you what you can and can’t spend yr rebate on, and (2) the IRS will be auditing women for abortion details.

The bill doesn’t actually say that, of course. But you don’t need to the chief of staff of the Joint Tax Committee to tell you that the only way to enforce that provision is to give IRS agents the power to do so. And when you get audited by the IRS for anything, the burden of proof is on the taxpayer.

What fun.

And how ironic, given how the GOP won back the House with the help of Tea Party voters who favor smaller, non-intrusive govt – especially in the form of the jackbooted IRS.

Talk about plot twists. I mean, who would have seen that coming?

Anyway, the bill may never pass, of course. It’s possible it was never really intended to – it may very likely be one of those dream bills that pander to constituents and gives the opposition something to water down and defeat, so that you can always say during the re-election campaign, “See, Congressperson So-And-So vote in favor of taxing yr money away so they can kill yr babies and eat them.” Or whatever.

Still, when it comes to bills like this, intentions count for a lot. And it’s only fair for me to assume that the bill reflects the way Republicans (and ten Democrats) want things to be – which means I get to hold them accountable for it. So whether it actually passes or not is immaterial to me.

Conclusion: if this is the GOP’s (or the Tea Party’s) idea of small, non-intrusive govt, they can keep it. And they can shut up about it, as far as that goes. You don’t get to lecture me on government takeovers when you concoct dingbat bills like this.

And while we’re at it, you also don’t get to lecture me about banning tax money for abortion services whilst advocating spending federal tax money on abstinence-only sex ed.

Get yr story straight,

This is dF