Tag Archives: grab-ass

Chaos and Anarchy on the WWW (“fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa fa better.”)

29 Jan

Scribble

Dear Internet,

I’ve been listing alot to one song of Talking Heads called Psycho Killer. Now, I am not going to go into an in-depth analyse of why I like that song (i.e base line, subject and catchyness) but instead note a certain part of the lyrics.

You start a conversation you can’t even finish it.
You’re talkin’ a lot, but you’re not sayin’ anything.
When I have nothing to say, my lips are sealed.
Say something once, why say it again?

What I think about those lines is that they could fit very well with the state of much of the bloging going on the internet right now. I have read articles (or blogs if they are in the on-line edition of a newspaper) that states that twitter is pasê and bloging is back! Something like “everybody is bloging”. Okay, so everybody is writing blogs, but does anyone read them?

I have to be honest. As a rule, I don’t read anyone’s blog. I tend to scan blogs of people who comment on my blog (to know who I am dealing with) and I have sometimes scanned blogs that have similar tags than mine (to investigate the competition) and of course “En kopp kaffe ved midnatt” (as that is the best blog on the web except mine). I have also read some blog entries that are related to news events that are linked under the articles from on-line newspapers.

This is what I have noticed when doing so.

  • Few blogs are of any real interests
  • Few readers (if any) comment*
  • Something, something
  • Lot’s of blogs get deleted. (Even when I have posted one of my sazy comments)
  • There are way to many blogs out in cyberland
  • Now I will not attack other blogs for being dull, unimportant, unfunny while trying (the saddest blogs of all), or that we shouldn’t have blogs. Nor will I defend my own blogs right to live and claim that it is better than most (although it is). What I do want is to comment on the consequence of all this.

    People claim that the internet is the most important way for people to express themselves. That some historical events (i.e revolutions in [some God forsaken place]) are changed do to activity on the nett.

    It’s all hype.

    I will probably write an entry later about the dangers of remembering things (as you may go crazy or become very angry) but if we remember how something was hyped one day and completely forgotten the next (“Y2K, what?”, “Sars, who?”, “The Hampster Dance, where?”) you may notice and perhaps learn something.

    The point is that to me internet is a vortex of opinions (“Whooo, someone has been to college (!)”) that you may drown in, but most likely you won’t as that would demand that you actually read any of the opinions that were there. That although things may seem to have changed, everything is really just the same. It’s the same dark men (or as Michael Moore would call them “stupid white men”) that controls everything. We just got new smoke and mirrors to distract us. That although your opinion may be heard now, so does everybody else’s, and that since we all scream “rable rable rable” nothing new will come.

    So as a conclusion I would say, “blog OKAY, but the printed paper is the only way” (I’m not a slogan writer) or else there is little hope for [enter positive word here].

    My work station (where the magic happens).

    (*Of course with the exceptions of blogs that have been linked to larger sites, with lots of tags for easy reference about something recent that appeals to the masses as either fascinating, frighting or aggravating.)

    What’s up with the movies from this decade? (Bang, bang! You shot me down (for 3 hours))

    4 Oct

    I don’t know, but it seems that since Lord of the Rings (some say Titanic) movies have gotten steadily longer. And why is that? It’s not that the movies have such great stories to tell that they need an hour more to tell it. Not only that but the directors have gotten lazy. The editing is a complete chaos and the dynamics of the average Hollywood blockbuster have become very strange.

    Perhaps I just have become old (as I write this I am 26, the new 173) , and don’t understand the new and “EXTREME” youth culture. That might be true, I didn’t even understand my own “extreme” youth culture. I remember Jackass. My god! The only thing funny about that show (and later films) was that many sub-par kids got killed from imitating (now, that’s funny!). Those jackasses have more blood on their hands than any HIM song could scream, dream and dramatize about. (Even their album “Deep Shadows”. I have never heard it, but it probably sounds just the same as any other emo crap they spyued out. The only thing those guy could brag about is that “they were emoes before it became popular, and stayed it long after the last kid committed suicide”). But I digress.

    The point is, although blockbuster movies from Hollywood has always been seen as a low form of art (if it even could be called art) it was at least an entertaining experience. Now, it’s all nonsense. Here are my three reasons for hating the “new generation” movies.

    Time vs Fun

    This graph illustrates the fun (entertainment value) of a film according the movies length. The Data is taken with permission from my ass.

    1) The editing.
    The editing is EXTREME! If we can band smokers from bars because of lunge disease we SHOULD BAND the new generation movies in consideration to people with epilepsy. Oh, and people with migraine. There has to be a cut every three seconds at least. (Close-up: man, cut to: close-up woman, cut to: wide-shot). That’s not all. Yes, every three seconds there is a cut, but in those three seconds the camera is still moving. Never static constantly jumping around. I think it was Gene Kelly who said something like “when I am not dancing, the camera should” and that’s all good. But what we are served are not dancing but seizures (“hand-held and shakey too enhance realness”, my fanny. It’s just lazy!).

    2) Stories
    The stories are horrible, we all know that, but the editing makes them even worse. Hand-held cameras to enhance the “realness” of teenagers fighting for their right to be teenagers. AND THEY LAST FOR THREE HOURS! And then there are all those f*cking remakes!!! Has Hollywood completely dried out? Or is it just the marijuana smoking liberal douche artist that just think “Wow, I had this great idea. What if we… if we like make this [enter successful movie title here] but we just make it darker. So it can relate to our time.” Hey! The world hasn’t gotten darker, it’s just your eyesight who has gotten bad because you are wanking too much! (FACE!)

    3) The length
    I think it was Aki Olavi Kaurismäki who said that no film should last more than 1 1/2 hours. I remember seeing the first Pirates of the Caribbean and I thought “Wow, lovely pictures, funny ships, funny story, funny… hey, didn’t they visit that cave 10 minutes ago. IS IT JUST ME OR IS THIS MOVIE LOOONG!” And then we are back at the editing again and story. If the story was good and the editing with a point then the last half hour wouldn’t seem like 2 hours, but no.

    Take that Hollywoood! Now you can cry on your piles and piles of money! After, of course, you have cried yourself dry from all the European pirate downloading. NEXT: Why pirate downloading of Hollywood movies can save the European cinema (from a Film historical perspective. I will perhaps even quote Bordwell and Thompson. No, just Bordwell.)

    Let’s talk about the truth. (Wear sunscreen)

    20 Sep

    What is the truth? «The world is round». «Social-democratic society are the closest thing to utopia we can ever come». «If you are a racist then you are evil». «Smoking marijuana is not dangerous and should be legal». «Prostitution is a problem that comes from a patriarchal society, and it should be illgal to buy, to keep the male psycho-sexual drifts in check». «Stig Larson is one of our times greatest authors and died because he told us the truth». «An apple a day, keeps the doctor a way». «The attack on the world tradecentre was staged by the US government to be allowed to go to war for oil». «Jews are greedy people who will manipulate to get what they want». «Smoking kills more people than all the wars put together.»

    All of this saying have been claimed to be the truth. THE TRUTH! Now what is the truth? If we talk about specific truth we are going to have a hard time, but if we talk about truth in general there might be some definitions we all can agree on.

    When I was a teenager, I started to think a lot, since I didn’t have any hobbies or girlfriends. To think is the road to madness, but I sort of kept my feet on the ground. And when it came to truth I thought that there were two kinds of truths. I called them objective and subjective truths. When I started to tell people about this, I also started to get a lot of woman attention. Woman seemed just to go crazy by this thought. It was a real Spanish fly, a great aphrodisiac.  What I said in a soft voice in their ears was that «you have a subjective truth, how the world seems to the individual and a objective truth, how the world is without our perceptions of it. The last one is the real truth, but it is really hard to get insight to it and therefore subjective truth under questioning should be good enough».

    Sweet memories!

    Well, as any kid, I thought I was original. I knew something nobody else knew. I withhold some kind of great knowledge no teacher, or politician or anyone else could understand. I was a genius. Like any teenager I knew. I knew! I was certain. The defining power was mine. So…

    So it turned out I wasn’t as original as I once thought. I started to study at (in, on?) college where we had mandatory philosophy studies and as it turned out a guy called Kant (1724-1804) had said just about the same thing. He called my «subjective truth» as «Ding für mich» (Things for me) and my «objective truth» as «Ding an sich» (Things of them self). Of course his thoughts were more elaborate then mine. He had even written a book about it, “Critique of Practical Reason“, while I had just used it as a pick-up-line for woman who like the vagina monologes..

    Now, what’s the point of all this? The point is that all of truths that I started this text with, are opinions, not facts, and I am getting quite tired of people always laying there truth upon my head as a «matter of fact». Just because everybody else believes it does not make it true! We have to have a cleansing ritual were we all say «all I know is that I know nothing» (I came up with that you know).

    And what’s the point of this point? Well, all I want to say is that there are too many people claiming to know the truth, and they may be right, but we have to ask our self the most important question of all; What does it help this «truth»?

    For example take this «truth», that so many young whipper-snappers tell, «Smoking marijuana is not dangerous and should be legal». So what? In what way would legalizing another drug make anything better? Doesn’t the use of this drug stimulate a person culturally to believe that he or she is a very fascinating person and a rebel? And if so, if this drug is illegal, doesn’t it work as a buffer for people with a need to rebel to not start using harder drugs? My opinion (and its only my opinion) is that it’s better that a angry teen smokes marijuana illegally when they have the need to rebel than smoking crack. And that if we legalize this particular drug, then the need to be an individual will still be strong in many teens and they will then start to use harder drugs to get the same satisfaction.

    Another example is: «The attack on the world trade centre was staged by the US government to be allowed to go to war for oil». Now, this might be the truth too, but what prof have we seen? Strange explosion pattern as the plane enters the building, media seems to know what happened strangely fast, some Jew conspiracy that says there weren’t any Jew inn the building (or something like that) and lots more. Yes, all of those theories might be true, but what does it help to believe it? Where does healthy scepticism go to become sickly paranoia? How constructive is it to go around believing that the government (or an unknown shadow government) wants to get you? Sometimes we have to believe a lot of small lies, to believe one big truth (or something like that).

    Now, what’s the point too the point of the point? I don’t know, and that’s the point, and neither do you. But if we should know something, it should be constructive and helpful. I am not a sceptic or a true believer. I don’t question everything or claim to know something completely. I wonder, think, feel and have opinions. That’s all.

    Someone said somthing like «Teenagers think adults are stupid, adults know that teenagers are.» I couldn’t agree more. If you are under the age of 20 you should keep your mouth shout and listen instead. You really don’t know anything, at least that’s my opinon.

    It's pretty, ain't it?

    It's pretty, ain't it?