Side Effects Include...

   What is this world coming to?  What have we allowed to happen?  How has it come to the point where our airwaves are ruled by big pharmaceuticals?  Why is pharmaceuticals such a hard word to spell?  Seriously though, you can't turn on the TV without seeing a commercial for some kind of new medication, which is supposed to treat something, but which also has side effect so serious that you'll need medication for THAT.  And thus, the cycle begins.  I swear this is worse than anything you'll find on a street corner... it's like once they get you sucked in on something, you're dependent on them for the rest of your life.  So, I'm going to start a new little segment here called "Medication of the week."  This week's winner is one of my favorites: "Restasis."  Restasis claims to treat chronic dry-eye (isn't there already a cure for that?), but it's actually more likely to kill you.
   The Commercial: The commercial couldn't be more bland.  They try to play it off like it's a friendly conversation with your doctor.  The main problem here is that the doctor's a bitch.  It's like they told her "be as condescending as possible."  And she acts like she could care less about her patient's needs.  She puts on that fake-friendly front that makes me want to throw her out a window.  Then this naive lady just takes what the doctor says and says "hey whatever, give me that crap!"  Addict.  Oh, and then she reads the side effects for the drug AWAY from the patient, like she's trying to hide them from her!  Nice!
   The Side Effects:  This drug shouldn't be used if you have an active eye infection, or if you have Herpes of the eye.  If you have herpes of the eye you've got bigger problems.  How the hell did you wind up getting herpes in your eye?  Nevermind, I don't want to know.  The most common side effect is a burning sensation.  Awesome, isn't that why I took this medicine?  To get rid of burning eyes?
   The End Result: My favorite part of this commercial is the end, when the (fake) doctor says she takes Restasis herself.  Wow!  That DEFINITELY makes me want to take it.  So Restasis turns you into a condescending, asshole doctor?  What's the message you're really sending out here people?  What I love most about Restasis is that it completely cancels itself out.  You take it to stop burning eyes, and the most common side effect is burning eyes.  They willingly admit that they're worthless.  That's advertising money well spent, and medication money even better spent!

I'm TOTALLY, Like, Spying on You...
   Hey Parents!  Are you tired of your teens sneaking around?  Are you sick of them taking your car, smoking out in it, and returning it with only half a tank?  Well worry no more!  With the new "Tiwi," you can now spy on your kids 24/7/365!  That means all day every day!  Privacy?  Who needs that when you can be a spy?
   This is a real device.  You plug it into your car somehow, and it monitors everything your kids do behind the wheel.  You can set a radius so that they can only drive so far... you can have it monitor their speed, and you can probably tell if they're making out with their boyfriend/girlfriend/football team in the back seat.  In other words, you're going to learn waaaaaayyyy more than you want about your kids with this lovely new gadget.
   On the one hand, I'm actually tempted to say that something like this is actually needed these days.  Kids are so stupid now it's ridiculous.  They've grown up in a world where NOTHING is more than a click away, and it shows.  Consider this: anytime someone aged, say, 20 or younger, is put into a position where they have to take some responsibility or initiative, the majority of them will fail.  They try to fight you, they try to say they want to be independent, but kids right now are more helpless than any I've ever seen.  So take these idiots and put them behind the wheel of a car... something that could actually hurt or kill someone.  Kind of scary, really.  I don't trust these kids to reheat a frozen hamburger at the fast-food joint... I sure as hell don't trust them to not screw around when they're driving.
   However, I also think this little device is an incredible invasion of privacy.  I don't give a damn about your kids privacy here, don't get me wrong... but I do think it will only lead to disappointment for you, the parent.  You're going to see first hand just how lame your kids are.  I guarantee if you put this into a car and don't tell the kid, you'll be sad when you see just how awkward they are with friends (forget girls)... or that they don't really have any friends.  Or, maybe even worse, that they think they're cool, when really what they need is to be backhanded by an angry gorilla.

iWaste of Time
   Yesterday was stupid.  The world sat on the brink of disaster, not waiting for the President's State of the Union Speech (who cares about that?)... no, they were waiting with baited breath for Apple's big announcement: the ipad.  Or maybe the better name is the "iUseless."
   Sadly, Useless is exactly what this turd is.  That article up there does a really good job of pointing out (a few) of the reasons why the ipad is a complete waste of your time and money... but the biggest gamebreaker for me is that this thing has no flash support whatsoever.  That means youtube, hulu, pretty much any sensible site streaming video out there won't work on it.  Now why would Apple leave out something so huge, something so important as Flash?  So that no one can design their own operating system and run it on an Apple computer (so I've been told).
   Think about that for a minute.  Are you a panty-twisting Apple lover, or do you know someone who never shuts up about how much he loves his Mac?  Well, tell those morons to consider this:  Apple is no different from Microsoft.  The only difference is, they're smaller.  Apple has done a great job of painting themselves as the underdog, the ones who may be smaller in the computer biz, but they actually care about their customers... unlike big old mean Microsoft.  That is absolute, 100% bullshit. 
   If Apple had played their cards right and gotten big, they would be EXACTLY like Microsoft, if not worse!  What are the biggest complaints against Microsoft?  They're a monopoly?  Apple is a Monopoly.  At least you can run other programs on Windows (like, ahem, Flash).  Sure Microsoft has done some shady things like developing Internet Explorer or (now with Windows 7) offering Native Quicktime support (which means you don't have to download it from Apple - which you should still do).  But Apple is the exact same.  Do they allow you to make your own apps?  No.  Do they allow other companies to make apps?  Nope.  In fact, they've banned quite a few apps that compete with their own software.  If that's no monopolizing, I don't know what is.  When Microsoft Undercuts Firefox, you call them assholes.  When Apple doesn't allow other companies to build their computers (which would drastically lower the price), you call it quality control.  And you're a hypocrite.
   But back to the tablet.  Apple is a master of coming up with new technology that you never knew you needed, but now for some reason you can't live without.  What is the iphone really, besides a glorified GPS device?  Oooo I can already feel some of you getting pissed off about that one... but what do you REALLY use your iphone for?  Updating Facebook?  Tweeting?  Checking email?  Finding your way somewhere?  I'm not even going to say anymore, if you don't realize how stupid you are then all hope is lost.  The ipad is just a bigger, heavier, stupider iphone.  For $600 dollars, you can read books, OR you can listen to music (can't do both), OR you can visit a website which probably won't function correctly because so many sites now integrate at least SOME flash into their interfaces.
   The worst part about this is that people are going to line up for this expensive paperweight.  How long is this going to go on?  How much longer will people throw their money at this company before they realize what they've done?  Is it going to take Apple getting as big as Microsoft before people come to the stunning realization that they're stupid?  I hope not, because that's not going to happen... not for a long, long time.  So enjoy your ipad, idiots, I'm sure it'll look nice on your shelf, or in your attic, which is where most of them will wind up when people realize how useless they are.  In the meantime, if you want real innovation, check out the "big bad" Surface, which has been out longer and does so much more.

Now Look Uh...
   Alright let's get serious just for a minute.  I'm sure most of you missed the State of the Union speech last night.  You probably had better things to do, like file your nails or jump out of a fast-moving vehicle.  But I actually sat through the whole thing, and for being over an hour long it actually wasn't too bad.  Say what you will about Obama, no one can argue that he's helped make politics more mainstream.  Watching his speech last night was like watching wrestling.  You know the part where the first guy runs out and starts talking all kinds of shit about the guy he's about to fight, and then suddenly the lights go dark, the music kicks up, and the other guy comes barrelling down the ramp to kick some ass?  That's what it was like.  I kept waiting for a huge music hit, and then the doors kick open and here comes Palin in bondage, ready to fight Obama to the death.  Well, politics isn't that awesome (yet), but believe it or not, this speech was important.
   First off, let me just say (again) that I don't support Obama.  I don't hate the guy either, though.  I think all things considered, he's done about as well as anyone else could have over the past year.  He's made some tough choices, which whether you like them or not you have to admit is more than previous presidents were willing to do.  He's also a very charismatic guy, which is what the President really should be.  The president is pretty useless when you think about it... the guy can't take a dump without permission from Congress... but what he can do is inspire the American people to push Congress to move on certain topics.  I would argue that Obama does a better job of that than any predecessor I can think of.  And last night's speech was a good example of that.
   The main things that stood out to me: Barack wants to make the banks pay back their stimulus money.  This is a great idea in theory, but I'll be interested to see whether he can actually pull it off.  He also wants to make all earmarks public, so that we can see what the lobbyists are forcing into the new bills that get passed.  My thinking here is, what are lobbyists doing in Washington anyway?  What part of democracy allows huge companies to pay people to sit there and nag senators and representatives until they cave into their needs?  Or even worse, how does it work where those companies can funnel money to those same politicians, in exchange for said earmarks?  The whole idea of lobbyists is terrible.  This is a government for the people, not for the giant companies... right?  I guess not.
   What I took away from this speech is that we might be out of the worst of this whole recession thing, but we're still in some pretty deep shit.  There's going to be a lot of fighting over the next year over things like budget, healthcare, etc.  But I would honestly rather have a year of fighting than have a year where everyone agrees on something just for the sake of agreeing (screw what the people want!).  And I like that he called out media for dumbing down everything and influencing the people who watch.  I don't know if many people in media remember this, but that's not our job.  And I'm speaking to everyone my age here: you really need to watch this speech.  I'm sure you can find the highlights on youtube somewhere (just don't go to a blogger because you know you're only going to get his side).  The world is reaching the point where the baton is going to be handed over to our generation, and we need to go in there with at least some idea of the things that are going on.  That is all.

Avatar
   James Cameron returns with another MONSTER-budget movie, this time centered around a marine (with nothing to lose) who agrees to join up on a science mission to a new planet.  This planet is full of an incredibly valuable mineral called unobtainium(!) and is also populated with a race of giant blue creatures who don't want their planet ravaged.  The marine joins the "Avatar" program, which allows him to take on the persona of one of these blue creatures, with the goal of infiltrating and controlling them.  Of course, once he gets with the people, nothing is as clear as that.
   The story of "Avatar" is, unfortunately, it's most unforgettable part.  It's pretty much your run-of-the-mill "Pocahontas," "Dances with Wolves," "Last Samurai" type story, with one twist: the main character is just another asshole.  He's nothing special like Dunbar (Dances with Wolves) or Algrin (Last Samurai).  He's not philosophical, he doesn't hate his race, he's just a marine who happens to be paralyzed and wants some money and something to do.  I liked that.  What I didn't like was the "unobtainium" that they're going after.  Seriously?  Unobtanium?  That's like the name someone put in a rough draft of the script and said "we'll come up with something later..." only to have it wind up in the final version and on the big screen.  Big mistake Captain Obvious.  The story isn't BAD, really, it's just kinda predictable and meh.
   The story is also the ONLY thing I had ANY problem with in this movie.  Let's get this out of the way right now: "Avatar" is an absolute feast for the eyes.  This is by far the best use of 3-D I've ever seen.  Most times when you hear 3-d, you expect gimmicky movements that put things in your face (like a huge man holding a boat propellor before he kills piranhas - yes that movie is coming out).  But I don't know if Cameron invented this new camera or if he helped or what... whatever he did, it creates some of the most stunning images I've ever seen.  The 3-D is nuance, and that makes all the difference.  All the scenes have so much depth, like looking through a spaceship or over a cliff.  It just adds dimension to the screen, which makes the whole experience about a million times more immersive.  That's the basis for what makes this movie so great.
   Tack on top of that the spectacular visual effects, and you've got magic.  This is going to be one of those movies where the "making of" feature is just as entertaining as the movie itself.  I don't know numbers, but I can already tell you there was so much motion capturing, so much CGI in this movie that it's going to blow you away.  But what will blow you away even more is the incredible work done by those clowns at WETA.  They did Lord of the Rings and Chronicles of Narnia, both great special effects movies... but NOTHING compared to "Avatar."  You will literally forget that you're not watching people in costumes.  The lighting, the texturing, everything is so incredibly "real" that this movie is sure to take away a nice number of Academy Awards for visual effects alone.
   The soundtrack was done by Cameron's buddy, James Horner.  Luckily, it sounds nothing like the shitfest that was "Titanic."  By the way, I still haven't seen that movie, and I never will.  The only thing I like about it is that it gave Cameron enough money to redeem himself with "Avatar."  The sounds of this movie go very well with the images.  You can tell this is inspired work by Horner, like he's been waiting for something like this to come along.  The main theme is great, and the little effects he puts on the underlying music only add to the stunning visuals for a complete experience that you have to see/hear to believe.
   And that's what I think you should do: See Avatar.  See it as soon as possible, and see it in 3-D.  You have to see it in 3-d.  That makes all the difference.  This is not one you want to wait for at home, even on Blu-Ray.  The experience just won't be the same.  Say what you will about Avatar's story... you need to see this if for nothing else than for the amazing visuals.  These visuals will revolutionize the industry, and (hopefully) create a whole new world of non-cheesy, 100%-believable 3-D on the big screen.  Give James Cameron your money, I promise you it's worth it, and here's to hoping he won't disappoint with future movies now that he's sitting on the best technology since color film.

   Whew, that's a lot of ground covered.  Hey guess what?  I'm going to be in the Superbowl commercial this year.  Since CBS is hosting the superbowl, our station gets to have a couple of commercials, and I get to be in it.  So keep your eyes peeled on gameday, and I'll post it online once it's aired as well.  Until next time...

Don't. Just don't.

   Kinda weird week this week, I've been pretty busy at work and haven't had much of a chance to lift my head above water.  In other words, I don't have much to talk about... so here's a list of "celebrities" who definitely should not be famous:
   David Blaine: This guy has douche written all over him.  I remember the first time I saw a video of his street magic, I was actually impressed.  I thought the guy was possessed or something because of the way he acted.  Now I realize he's just and idiot.  Really a magician is the worst type of non-celeb, because their job description is basically crying for attention.
   Paris Hilton: Well of course she makes this list, but it's YOUR fault she's famous so don't look at me.  She's not smart.  She's not hot.  I don't get it... what is the fascination with this woman?  It's like a desperate cry for help from guys everywhere, a startling admission that no matter how stupid or ugly a person you are (inside and out), as long as you'll spread your legs and get freaky, you'll be popular.
   Flava Flav: At least this guy's funny.  Funny as in psychopathic.  Still, if the world has come to a point where the more ridiculous you act, the more famous you get... then we're in big trouble.  I blame VH1 for Flava Flav (and several others on this list), because even though their "celebreality" stuff is supposed to make fun of everything, it has the opposite effect when these people actually become famous.
   Lindsay Lohan: I can understand why this girl might have been famous at one point... at least she was in a couple of almost-decent movies.  But she went rapidly downhill to a point where I get an STD just looking at her.  Why is she famous?  I don't know.
   Jessica Simpson: Another case that should have ended long ago.  Jessica Simpson is hot, she was a popular singer, she was in a terrible movie or two, and she dated Tony Romo.  Big deal.  What has she done since then?  No reason to care.
   Tony Romo:  Here's a picture-perfect "shouldn't be famous" person.  A sub-par or par (at best) quarterback who's only claim to fame that I can think of is that he dated Jessica Simpson.  Wow.  And yet people bow at his feet.  Announcers talk about him like he's the next Brett Favre.  That's an insult if you ask me, but skill level aside, this guy has absolutely no reason to be in the spotlight.
   I could continue with this list forever, but I won't because I'm bored and my eyes/soul are hurting from having TMZ's website open.  Anyone you want to add to this list?  Leave  a comment...

Get Outta There
   Did you see that another earthquake hit Haiti?  I didn't even know there were earthquakes in that part of the world, and now two!  I haven't really talked much about Haiti because I know what I have to say will most likely make you think I'm an asshole... but chances are you probably think that anyway, so here goes:  I do feel sorry for Haiti, but not any more than I would feel bad for England, or India, or South Carolina if an earthquake hit there.  The way I see it, these are all people, and a lot of them died in this earthquake, which is tragic... but are the people of Haiti more worthy of your pity than anyone else in the world?  I say no.
   And you will most likely disagree with me.  You'll say "well Haiti is such an impoverished Nation," or "those poor people get the worst luck," or "you don't get it because you've lived in the United States your whole life so go punch yourself."  I will give you all of those points.  Haiti is extremely poor, and heavily populated, and their infrastructure just isn't up for taking an earthquake.  Haiti does get terrible luck, they're almost always in the path of any hurricane that sweeps through, and now top it off with earthquakes... awful.  And maybe I don't get it (though I absolutely refuse to punch myself, that's just silly)... but hear me out. 
   Haiti is impoverished, but is that my fault?  Is it yours?  You could say it's the Haitian government's fault for oppressing its people, but I argue that it's the PEOPLE's fault for not standing up to their oppressive government.  We had an oppressive government here in the US at one point, and what did we do?  Kicked their asses back across the Atlantic.  I think blaming an oppressive government for a country's woes is a cop-out, because the only ones who can fix that are the people who live in that same country.   If we went over there and stood up a new, democratic government, Haiti would depend on us forever.  Just look at Iraq.  Democracy may or may not be what Haiti needs, but no matter what government they wind up with, the responsibility has to fall with the people, otherwise it will never become as strong and solid a country as it should be.
   Haiti does have terrible luck.  They're right in the path of it seems like every hurricane, and now I guess they're on a fault line too.  So... get out of there.  Move.  Go to another country.  "Well they can't."  Why not?  Okay, so even if they can't, then DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT.  Go back up there to step one and create a government who builds with a better infrastructure.  Make your buildings hurricane proof and earthquake resistant.  It will take time and it won't be easy, but it's something that again, has to start within the country itself.
   So maybe I don't get it.  Maybe I'm a heartless bastard for saying this stuff.  I just think that while it's nice for America to come to the rescue down there (once again), it's not something we can get tied up in doing.  Look at what's going on around the rest of the world.  We've stopped so many conflicts, so many murderous leaders... we've brought peace to the world, and the world hates us for it.  Thanks France.  MAN I hate France.  Anyway, here's another example.  Americans, with our own country in turmoil and struggling thanks to the recession, is still expected to take care of the problems in Haiti.  Where's France?  Where's China?  Where's anyone else?  Our soldiers are over there distributing food, our doctors are over there giving them medicine, and here in the States there's been a flood of parents trying to adopt the Haitian kids who lost their families in this terrible tragedy.  I think it's wonderful that we're over there, and I think it is our duty as the most powerful and wealthy country in the world to help those in need... but I don't like that it's expected of us, and I don't think we should stay over there a second longer than we're absolutely needed.  Otherwise, we risk putting Haiti into a position where they can't stand up without our help.
   Incidentally, if you do want to help with Haiti, you should check out http://www.khou.com/.  We've got some great and easy ways for you to help those in need down there.

CES
   Does everyone know what CES is?  The Consumer Electronics Show?  Sounds nerdy if you spell it out, but CES really does have some of the coolest stuff you'll see all year.  It's kind of like a grown-ups version of E3 with less nerds and (sadly) less chicks dancing around in skimpy videogame character outfits.  CES is the place to watch if you're interested in technology, because you'll see some of the craziest stuff come out of there.  I was going to sit here and name you my favorite and least favorite things about this year's show, but C-Net does a much better job of that than I ever could.  So check them out for that... but stay here because I'm going to tell you what you should be caring about and what you should stay away from, and why.
   The big thing at this year's CES was 3-D television.  "Avatar's" success has definitely opened people's eyes to the brilliance that 3-d tv can offer, but this is definitely something you should stay away from.  3-d is cool, but it's in its infancy.  The first tvs and blu-ray players are going to come out in the next few months, but they will be EXTREMELY expensive, and probably not work very well.  I do believe this technology is the next step in entertainment, but I also believe it's at least 3 years away.  Buying a 3-d TV right now would be like trying to buy an HDTV in 1995... ridiculous.  There's not enough to take advantage of it, and there will definitely be mistakes in the technology on the way.  Wait a few years and I guarantee you won't have to wear glasses, your TV won't cost you an arm and a leg (and maybe a couple of other appendages), and you'll be happier for it.
   While we're talking about TVs, I think for all of you who have been holding out, this will be the year to buy big.  2010 will be the year when LED technology goes mainstream, making LCD and Plasma TVs "obsolete."  The problem with LED is that it's barely even out in the market and it's ALREADY obsolete!  That's right folks.  Just wait until O-LED TVs ("O" for "Organic") hit the market.  They're even slimmer, and they use even less electricity than their LED brothers.  But let's get back to the LCD and Plasma stuff.  LEDs get fantastic pictures, but a comparable (240hz) LCD can definitely hold its own in that same department.  Sure it's harder to hang (who does that anyway?), but the more mainstream LEDs go, the less expensive LCDs will get.  So that's where you should be looking this year.  Or if you can hold out even longer, wait until next Superbowl.  By then LCDs will be on clearance, making them a steal.
   The thing I'm most excited about this year is all the wireless technology being thrown around.  Wireless HDMI?  Awesome.  Wireless electricity?  Kind of scary, but also awesome.  It's all coming, and soon you won't have to have a home theatre set up with your tv 6 inches away from the wall so you can hide all the cables behind it.  Plus think about how much money you'll save if you're not having to stock up on HDMI and Optical cables.  It may wind up giving us all cancer, but if you ask me, wireless can't come soon enough.
   Finally, the touch screen thing is coming, whether we like it or not.  I know the iphone is fancy, but people I'm still not sold.  Do you have an iphone?  Do you know someone who does?  Go ahead and pull it out of your/their pocket and look at it.  Greasy as shit, right?  People are greasy, and I know even my flip-phone needs a wipe down at least a few times a day.  The more glass touch stuff we get, the more disgusting we're going to feel.  Top that off with the fact that almost no one has been able to master the touch screen.  Apple's is good, Microsoft's are good (on their Surface products anyway)... but so far I haven't seen anyone else who can touch that kind of interactivity and smoothness.  I think before we go touch screen, we need to explore voice-recognition... that will make everyone happy (even people without fingers).
   Regardless of what interests you, or even if you're not into technology at all... 2010 is going to be nuts.  Look at how far we came in 2009... the TV I bought went from 1400 bucks down to less than 800.  Crazy!  And sort of annoying.  But my point is, things are getting faster, cheaper, and easier by the day... and I can't wait to see where we go from here.

The Rocker
   Dwight Schrute was a master drummer, until his bandmates turned their backs on him and left him in the dust.  Now he's a washed up has-been, desperately trying to relive his dream of becoming a famous drummer.  He finds a bunch of kids who are struggling to make it big, and he vows to help them.  Throw in a cast made up mostly of NBC's Thursday Night lineup (actors from "The Office," "30 Rock," etc), and you've got yourself a sure-win scenario, right?  Wrong.  The first three sentences of this paragraph are more exciting and funnier than the entirety of this sad, waste of a movie.
   Surely that's a harsh assessment, right?  I mean there had to be SOMETHING good about this movie.  There were so many funny people in it, the concept was great (kind of a "School of Rock" meets "Mighty Ducks").  Well, there was that one part where... uh... and then there was that other part when... oh.  Yeah this movie just sucked.  It could have been an over-the-top Ben Stiller style movie full of wacky characters and ridiculous situations.  It could have been an inspirational, more children-oriented movie about perservering and overcoming the odds.  Instead, it tries to awkwardly straddle the line, and the end result is a movie that will make adults AND children uncomfortable.
   The ONLY thing this movie had going for it was Christina Applegate.  She's smokin' hot, and usually she's funny (Anchorman, anyone?)... but in this movie she's much more down to earth... which is fine, except that you have to watch her kiss Dwight Schrute.  I don't even care to know that guy's real name.  He's Dwight.  Period.  And unless they're making "The Office: The Movie," he really has no place on the big screen.  The kids in the movie were PAINFULLY bad, which is odd because two of them have been really good in other movies.  The third douche, I don't know where they found that guy.  Even the music they play is pussy rock at best... absolutely terrible.
   No, this is a sad case of too many different ideas trying to come together, and in the end none of them working.  It was a good try, but there are way more, better movies out there with similar concepts (except they are actually executed correctly).  Don't waste your time on this one.

Elegy
   On pretty much the complete other side of the spectrum from "The Rocker," is "Elegy."  A story about a college professor-slash-sex maniac, running his typical course of trying to bang his students, when he meets a challenge that he can barely keep up with: the smokin' hot Penelope Cruz.
   Alright, I have to be honest.  I don't get what people see in Penelope Cruz.  She's pretty, but she's now "wow" pretty.  She has a nice body, and I guess you could argue that, unless most other beauties on the big screen, she actually can act.  I'll give you that, but still, I'm not floored by her, and I wasn't in this movie either.  Ben Kingsley was, though, and he of course turned in a brilliant performance.  I was surprised to see Dennis Hopper in such a serious and intelligent role (whenever I think of him, it's either as the crazy reporter in "Apocolypse now" or as King Koopa in the "Mario Bros" movie).  So good acting all around then.
   The only thing that topped the acting was the beautiful writing.  I'm not sure how much of this movie was scripted, and how much of it was ad-libbed.  I'm also not sure how much I can blame the writing for being so good, or if it was Ben Kingsley and crew who really made it sing.  I can definitely see where in some cases it might feel a little over-the-top.  It's like watching a high school literature class novel played out on the screen (lots of big words and overly-dramatic scenarios)... and yet it works.  Maybe because everyone in this movie is an intellectual, I don't know.  Whatever it is, it's rare magic on the screen.
   So now comes the part where I tell you "Great acting.  Great writing.  Even a good soundtrack."  DON'T watch this movie.  That's right, I want you to stay away from it... or at least, stay away from it based on my recommendation.  Watch a preview or read a summary before you decide to pop this one into your DVD player, and if you don't like it, don't come crying to me.  This is one of those movies that I enjoyed, but I don't know if you're going to even remotely like.  Sort of like "Lost in Translation," except not as good (and Lost in Translation is good, I don't care what you say).  So yes, I do recommend this movie, but only on those conditions.  Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.

   In closing, I just want to say briefly that I saw a commercial for Oxy-Clean tonight, and it didn't have Billy Mays fronting it.  When it ended, I was left with a hollow, empty feeling... a void in my life that only the great Billy Mays could ever fill.  So here's to you, Billy... now I guess the world will just have to settle for this guy.

Oh That Fox...

   The Quick Brown Fox Jumps Over the Lazy Dog.  You've probably seen that sentence a thousand times.  It's used all over the place as the quintessential test sentence for fonts in programs like Microsoft Word.  But do you know why it's such a widely-used sentence?  Do you understand the deep, dark secrets of what this sentence really brings to the table?  Did you know that that simple, understated sentence actually contains every single letter of the freakin' alphabet?
   Well shut up, because I didn't.
   Until recently, that is.  I was in the shower, kinda like in that Windows 7 commercial, when I ran through the painstaking process of making sure every letter was accounted for.  Sure enough, they're all there, in glorious fashion.
   So my question is, what genius came up with that sentence?  Did they task one lowly dude with that incredibly dauting challenge: come up with a simple, easy to read sentence... THAT CONTAINS EVERY LETTER IN THE ALPHABET.  Oh snap.  Well, whoever it is, the guy deserves a metal, because that's brilliant.  Seriously, I made this realization last weekend and I'm still freakin' out about it!
   And just for good measure, here's a video of a quick brown fox jumping over a lazy ass dog.

Le-Noooooooooooooooooo!
   Besides that terrible, awful disaster in Haiti, we all know the big news this week: Conan O'Brien may be leaving NBC and "The Tonight Show," after NBC announced they were going to cram Leno's flop primetime show back into late-night.  It seems that NBC took a gamble by moving Leno to the 9pm slot (all times CST), a gamble they lost big time... and now the entire Late-Night lineup might change.  I care a lot about this, mostly because I'm in the business and I'm fascinated with this kind of stuff... but I think it's a significant thing for all of us to keep an eye on, because for decades "The Tonight Show" was THE go-to late-night program.  It started the whole trend, and it made famous some of the funniest people out there on TV right now.
   So what happened?  Well, to put it mildly, NBC fucked up up.  This article really puts things in perspective, and though it is opinion, the author clearly did more research than I'm willing to do.  We could sit here and argue all day about who messed up what and how they should have done it, but instead I'm just going to tell you how it is and you're going to take it.
   NBC made their first mistake by signing a contract that let Conan O'Brien (or anyone, for that matter) take over "The Tonight Show" in June.  They drew up that contract a long time ago, and they clearly didn't have the foresight to think that maybe, just maybe, that was too soon to make such a big change.  Sure enough, when June rolled around, Leno was still going strong, putting up a good fight against Letterman... but NBC was now obligated to move Conan into that spot.  And they did.
   But they didn't want to lose Leno, because the dude was a goldmine at night.  So, in what I'm guessing was a very eloquent and convincing speech to the board, they decided to move Jay Leno to the 9pm slot, leading into the late local news.  I'm sure this sounded like a good idea on paper: NBC would be saving a TON of money by not having to pay for primetime programming every night (which gets pretty expensive).  Leno's a popular dude, surely his audience will follow - hell they might even be happier that he's on earlier so they don't have to stay up as late.  In the meantime, young people love Conan!  They'll be so happy to see him get what he deserves ("The Tonight Show"), everybody wins!  It was a big gamble.  One that could kill the entire network.
   Here's the problem: young people do love Conan, but the older people most certainly don't.  Conan is a completely different breed of comedy.  I'm sitting here trying to think of someone to compare him to, but I can't... sort of a mix between Tim and Eric, and Jon Stewart.  Old people don't know what to make of Conan, and contrary to what NBC somehow believed, old people are still watching that late night show.  Leno didn't work because people aren't looking for comedy at 9pm.  I don't know if it was a study done somewhere or what, but I think one of those articles up there says something about how people prefer crme or drama at 9pm, something about getting them ready for real-life bad news at 10pm.  Then they need the late night guys to make them laugh and shake it off.  Makes sense to me.  Whatever the case, Leno flopped harder than a fat lady off a diving board.
   So now NBC's in a pickle.  Conan's ratings suck... partly because the world isn't ready for him, partly because he's still pretty new and people are getting used to him.  They know Leno should still be on that show, but they had to honor the contract.  They don't want to lose Leno, so they figure "hey we'll just take a dump on both of them, cram Leno back into his old timeslot, and move Conan back a little bit.  No big deal, right?"  Wrong. 
   Now we've basically gone back to the way things were, only NBC's trying to cheat.  They're pushing Conan back, but it's still called "The Tonight Show" so he can't complain... right?  And Leno's back where he should be, only it's just a half hour now, but that's okay... right?  Wrong again, NBC.  Now you've pissed Conan off because he's not dumb and he knows it's not "The Tonight Show" anymore.  I imagine you've pissed Leno off because you've played him like a cheap hooker (moving him around and stuff), plus he looks like a jerk for pushing Conan out of his timeslot.  Not to mention, you've ruined the brand that took decades to build up.  "The Tonight Show" can't go on at midnight... that's not tonight anymore.  I know you've heard that before but dammit, it's true.
   What I think NBC has failed to realize - and this is something all networks should take to heart - is that we (media) are no longer in control.  Used to be we'd say "you're going to watch this show at this time and complain all you want 'cause that's the way it is."  No more.  Now we're at the mercy of our viewers, who can easily go online and see anything we put out, or who can always DVR us and watch us at their convenience.  It's not about us anymore, it's all about them.
   NBC should never have signed that contract so many years ago.  They should have kept Leno where he was and told Conan to hold tight until the world was ready (if this move happened 5 years from now, when our generation was older, I think it would have gone a lot more smoothly).  More recently, NBC should have told Conan "look, we screwed up, we want Leno back on the Tonight Show.  We're willing to give you your old show back and we'll fire that hack Jimmy Falon."  If Conan said no, then NBC should have said "Well then we're going to have to let you go, because Leno is getting the Tonight Show back."  That would have been the honest, straightforward thing to do.  They would have probably lost Conan, but they would have saved face and had the proper people in the proper places.  Instead, they've pussy-footed around and now nobody's happy.  Leno's once great Tonight Show has been reduced to 30 minutes of what?  Standup and headlines?  Conan's Tonight Show is tarnished because it's on tomorrow (and cut short).  And Falon is still a giant douchebag.  Nobody wins.
   The real sad thing here is that Conan is in a risky position.  If he leaves NBC (which he should), his career may never get to where it should have.  If ABC were smart, they'd drop that Nightline bullshit and pick up Conan to compete against Leno and Letterman (where, eventually, he would win as our generation grows up and into latenight television).  But if Conan goes to Fox, he will die there.  Sure his loyal followers will go with him, but Conan doesn't draw a big enough mainstream audience to keep things going, and we all know how Fox likes to kill shows before their time (Family Guy, anyone?)... Conan will become another Arsenio Hall, or Chevy Chase.  It's sad, really.
   So where does it go from here?  I don't know, but I can't wait to find out.  I was wanting to write about this all week, but I figured I'd hold off until Thursday when stuff died down a little bit... I had no idea that come today things would be even crazier than they were at the beginning of the week.  Keep watching this stuff folks, it's history in the making... and it's only gonna get better from here.

Home Sweet Home
   Sarah Palin is stupid.  She's not a good politician, her voice sounds like icicles stabbing my eyeballs, and she's not even that hot.  They made a porno movie about her and I can honestly say I don't even want to see it.  That's how not-hot she is.  But, I'm happy to say that I think her most recent career move might have been the best one she'll ever make.  Sarah Palin is now employed by Fox News.
   Forget the preconceptions concerning Fox News.  Set aside that people say it's a conservatively-slanted news organization (just like, I would argue, CNN is a liberally-slanted news organization).  That's an argument no one's going to win, because it's not about getting the news anymore... it's about believing who YOU wish to believe, whether that's Cooper, Blitzer, King, O'reilly, Hannity, or now, Palin.  What I'm saying here is that I think Palin will be great for TV.
   Look at it like this: every time Palin opens her mouth, she makes an ass out of herself.  She has said some of the dumbest shit I've ever heard in my entire life, and my favorite part is that she's proud to be saying it!  She's happy to admit that she's a simple person, like that's going to give her credibility.  Ever heard of irony?  BAM!  So Palin looks like an ass every time she talks... but that talking also creates controversy, and THAT is what news organizations are looking for.  Controversy sells, so kudos to you, Fox News, you've created a controversy factory unlike anything the world has ever seen.
   The only down side here is that Fox News is not helping their cause.  They're already seen by millions as "the conservative" or the "over the top" news organization... so hiring a bimbo who can hardly even spell her own name isn't going to improve opinion on either of those fronts.  But if I've noticed anything about Fox News over the years, it's that they're content to blow off the naysayers and instead cater to their core audience.  And it works... they have a huge audience.
   So get ready america... just when you thought it wasn't possible, your television is about to get even dumber.

Blood Diamond
   Speaking of dumb, let's talk diamonds.  Now I'm a single dude, not in love with anyone, but I'd like to think that even if I were head-over-heels for somebody my opinion on this wouldn't change: diamonds are a complete waste of money, and they're stupid.  And the fact that women will kill to wear the biggest diamond possible on their finger is, in my opinion, even more stupid.  And that was before I knew that so many diamonds out there come as a result of slave labor, and one of the most viciously violent industries in the world.  Luckily, Edward Zwick got it in his head to direct "Blood Diamond," which makes entertainment out of a very serious message (sometimes the only way to get it into stupid people's heads).
   When the opening credits rolled for Blood Diamond, I was like "meh."  But by the time the end credits rolled, I was like "meh plus" at least.  It's a fine line, making a movie like this... you want to get your point across without sounding preachy.  Blood Diamond does a pretty good job with this for the most part, though it does have some pretty glaring flaws.
   Namely, Leonardo DiCaprio.  He was the absolute worst part of this entire movie.  His acting was painful, his accent was awful, and his character was fantastic (which made his acting and accent even worse to deal with).  He should have been plaid by Brad Pitt, or Clive Owen, or someone, anyone who could act worth a damn.  Jennifer Connoly also wasn't fantastic, but she wasn't given so much to work with, and for some reason I find her impossibly gorgeous so I'm much more forgiving.  The real winner here, and the person who made this move great, was Djimon Hounsou.  He was the African Native in the movie, and his acting was unbelievable.  It was good to see at least one person cared about making this movie sing.  He was great, as were most of the smaller-acted parts (were they performed by actual Africans?  I don't know, but it was amazing to see the amount of emotion they were able to convey).
   Technically speaking, this movie was easy on the eyes and ears, which helped too.  There were a lot of cool scenes, some grisly, some incredible, lots of realistic explosions and awesome weapons, and the soundtrack was top notch.   I also really liked the story, and while the script got a little preachy at times ("You might see a minute of this on CNN... somewhere between sports and the weather."  Lame)... it was overall well-told and got an interesting point across.  It definitely changed my opinion of diamonds (as in, from dumb to completely pointless) and opened my eyes to what it takes to get a diamond into our country.  It also did a good job of pointing that even though the whole dirty diamond trade could be traced to the civilized world, the movie also didn't shy away from the fact that the African people are doing this to themselves, and until they can rise up to defend themselves, it won't stop.  Deep stuff, but it worked.
   So should you see this movie?  Tough to say.  It was good, yes, but it's not gonna leave you feeling good.  Here's who I think should see this:  guys whose girlfriends won't stop bugging them about buying them a stupid, overly-expensive diamond ring.  Show it to your girlfriend, maybe it'll shut her up.  If it doesn't, break up with her immediately.  It's probably for your own good.

   Okay one last thing before I go... I'm usually not big on plugging stuff, but I need to tell everyone I can about this incredible site.  When you have a minute (and 10 bucks), check out http://www.yourfonts.com/.  The site is incredible.  You download letter charts (pdf format) that have every character imagineable on them.  You fill out the chart (I recommend using Photoshop to make sure everything is positioned correctly and the right size), then upload it back to them.  30 seconds later they send you a font, made out of your handwriting, that you can use on your computer (in programs like Microsoft Word).  If you like it, send them 10 bucks (15 for the full deal including weird characters you'll probly never need), and tada... a real-deal font.  This is definitely a cool site to check out.  It's quick, relatively easy, and cheap.  And with that, I'm out.

Salvation Jerk Faces

   There are a lot of things in this world that piss me off;  The CBS Early Show; Kobe Bryant; Tight Jeans, just to name a few.  But I can't think of anything in recent memory that's made me angrier than the good old Salvation Army.  That's right, while you may look at that nice person ringing the bell outside in the cold and say "poor them," I say "serves them right."  While you're giving them directions to your house to pick up the things you want to give away to little Timmy and Little Sarah... I'm giving them directions OFF THE NEAREST CLIFF.  Alright that was harsh.  But not uncalled for.  Allow me to present two examples of why the Salvation Army is a bunch of asswipes.
   The year was 2001-ish.  Everyone was living it up in the new millenium, and I was tasked with getting rid of a giant pile of old crap from my dad's house.  We were going to the nines, I'm talking everything from clothes to a matress to a couple bikes to a computer.  Remember the computer, that's important.  So the Salvation Army guy calls me and asks me to list off all the stuff we're going to be giving them, and when I got to the computer, he stops me.  He says "what kind of computer?"  I say "It's an old Compaq 486," which for those of you who don't know, wasn't a BAD computer at that time, but it definitely wasn't top of the line.  The Salvation Army guy says "well we're not going to take that."  I say "why not?" and he says "because it's not a good enough computer."  "Hold on a minute, not good enough for who?" I ask, and then we proceed to get into a 15 minute argument about it.  He claims that no one in their right mind would want a piece of shit 486 when there are better computers out there.  My argument is, if the Salvation Army is really out there to help the poor and disadvantaged, and if these people they're "helping" really are poor and disadvantaged, they'd be happy to have a computer of any kind.  Sure it's a 486, but it'll still run Windows and it still runs programs like Word and Excel.  Does the Salvation Army typically get gaming rigs for these people?  Would someone who's really in dire straights actually tell them "oh that's not top of the line enough for me to run my extensive web server?"  No.  But Mr. Jackass Salvation Army guy disagrees.  Finally after talking to two of his superiors, they agreed to take the computer... though I'm sure once they got it they just threw it away.
   Case number 2: it's now 2007.  I'm about to move out of Sacramento and back to Houston, and I'm trying to get rid of stuff to lighten the load on the moving truck (so they'll charge me less).  I remembered the horrible experience with the Salvation Army, but at the time I assumed it was just a big deal because the guy I was talking to had a stick in his ass.  Different state, different Salvation Army, and California is full of homeless people who need stuff.  So the truck arrives and they start to remove things from my apartment, when they stop in their tracks.  The delivery guy tells me "we can't take your computer desk."  "Why not?" I ask.  "Because it doesn't have the drawer for the keyboard" he says.  "So what?" I ask.  Let the argument begin.  He claims that they're not allowed to take anything that doesn't have all of his parts.  I argue that if the Salvation Army is really trying to help the poor and needy, they won't care if something as non-essential as a keyboard drawer is included or not.  And if the people they're helping are truly in dire straights, they'll deal with putting the keyboard on top of the desk, instead of in the (arguably) more convenient drawer.  This argument I lost, because his supervisor told me that they wouldn't take it, and he wouldn't allow me to speak to anyone else.  So the Salvation Army guys, while they were loading their truck, got to watch me break my perfectly good desk into a million pieces and throw it in the dumpster, all the while bitching and moaning about how the Salvation Army was too good for my desk and for my donations.
   NOW how do you feel about the Salvation Army?  Changes your perspective a little bit, doesn't it?  So the next time you see on the news how the Salvation Army is hurting for donations, and how the poor and disadvantaged won't have enough because we're all to mean to donate stuff... think twice.  Understand that if the Salvation Army is picky enough to turn away perfectly good items, they can't - or shouldn't - be hurting all that bad after all.

Let it Die
   Did I just hear that Barack Obama wants to start up another stimulus package for American Businesses?  Or did I imagine that?  I certainly hope I imagined it, because another stimulus is about the worst idea I've ever heard of in my entire freakin' life.  Another stimulus means more of our hard-earned money going to help failing businesses, instead of helping us (like it should).  And don't give me this bullshit "helping businesses helps you" rigamarole... I hope we're all too smart to fall for that.  By instigating another stimulus, you're basically taking money from those of us who know how to manage it, and giving it to people who have proven that they don't know how to manage it.
   Take, for example, the "American" car companies, who claim they need more money to stay afloat.  Why?  Why in the hell should we give them a single cent?  Do you think for a second that they would give US money when we buy their cars?  No. 
   I've heard all the excuses I want to hear.  "Oh it's because so many workers will lose their jobs if the car companies go under."  So?  You know who's fault that is?  Those very same workers.  That's right, their little union has caused the ruin of the car companies that they depend on.  Did you know a union worker making cars for GM makes more than twice the money a non-union worker does doing the same thing for Hyundai?  And guess who's making the money they deserve?  Hyundai.  A guy who stands on an assembly line and watches a machine build a car does NOT deserve 80k a year.  Especially when you consider how cheaply and horribly made that car is to begin with.  These unions have milked the car companies clean, to a point where they can no longer function.  They can't strip out any more quality items from their cars without them becoming unsafe, so they have no choice but to bleed money until they die.  Now why should WE have to pay for that?  The worker who's enjoyed being overpaid for 20 years can just suck it up, as far as I care.  They're the reason the car companies can't survive, now THEY can pick up the slack.
   "Oh, but killing the car companies kills the American Spirit."  Bullshit.  These "American" car companies like GM build the bulk of their vehicles in countries like Mexico.  Real American guys.  The "foreign" automakers like Toyota and Hyundai build most of their cars in America.  Hell Toyota Trucks are made right here in Texas!  So I ask you, who is the real american car company?  What makes it american?  Where their offices are, or where the cars are made?  You want to know why a Toyota holds together so much better than a Chevy?  Because it's American made, not slapped together in some third world country that just got electricity.  But the "American" car companies can't really be blamed, I guess... they had to go to these countries to avoid paying the huge salaries their union workers demand.
   Now, I might sound like I'm taking the side of big business here, but believe me, I'm not.  I'd be perfectly satisfied to watch GM go under.  Or to see these big financial institutions fail.  Or to see their fat-cat CEOs behind bars.  What I don't like seeing is our money going to fight a losing cause.  If Obama took the money he's dumped into the stimulus, and instead spread it out equally to all the American people, we'd be millionaires!  You want to get the economy going, do that!  Give it to the people who spend the money, and let us make the choices on what we want to buy.  Don't milk a system that is dying whether you help it or not.  And another message to government: don't meddle in something that you weren't ever supposed to meddle in to begin with (the economy).  It'll do just fine, if not better, without you sticking your nose in there.  People, don't be fooled by this whole "we're just trying to keep America alive" crap you're being fed.  That's either pure ignorance from them, or a much more sinister and less free ideal that they have in mind.

Iranna Protest (like I Wanna protest, get it?  No?)
   I saw a really interesting article the other day called "Three Days in Iran."  In it, this dude took a shitload of pictures from Iran, where all kinds of people are protesting against the radical Islamic government.  Now being in media, it seems like every day I hear something about "what's the US going to do about Iran..." and my question is, why do we have to do anything?  These pictures, and this article say it all: Iran is fixing its own problems.
   Clearly there are a lot of people who are unhappy over there.  And yes, it's tough to watch the Iran police beat the shit out of women and children just because they disagree with their government... but what right do we have to go in and do anything?  We, the average americans, who are so distanced from war and violence, have a hard time comprehending that any government could be so hateful and violent to do something like this.  Oh sure, there are plenty Americans who sit around bitching about how oppressive and intolerant our government is, but when you think about it, we really have it pretty good compared to most of the world. 
   Iran is where America was, right before the big revolution.  That revolution, while violent (and by today's standards, probably considered way over-the-top), was what made the United States such a great and powerful country.  Our genuine hatred of the Brits and their government control is what brought us together, and allowed us to come up with such a resolute, and revolutionary set of laws.  Now imagine if France had come in and tried to "help us" more than they did.  If they said "oh sure we'll help you, but we get to open all kinds of military bases on your land, and you have to charge us less for whatever want to buy, and any natural resources you find, we get a piece of, etc etc etc..." we'd tell them to fuck off.  Maybe we should have anyway.  I hate France.  But the point is, we have no right to step in to Iran, especially if we go in there with all kinds of fine print attached (which we would, believe me... we'd have no reason to go in there if there wasn't anything in it for us... think about it).
   Iran is doing what Iraq never did.  You could make the argument that during Desert Storm we should have finished the job in Iraq and helped those people out.  You could make all kinds of arguments about Iraq.  But Iran is a different story.  Iran is full of people who are sick of their current lifestyle, and they're effecting change.  If we are going to offer these people any help, it should be in the form of sympathy (which we're already kind of doing thanks to articles like the one above), and monetarily (helping the protestors get organized and be more effective). 
   What we should NOT do is offer anything with strings attached.  Why would we do that?  That does nothing but push our bad image of "what's in it for us" attitude, and it makes us into the big world bully who takes advantage of the little people any chance we get.  We don't need that.  We can pay for the goods Iran exports just like everyone else.  We CAN'T afford to have another country angry enough with us to start training terrorists.  You want to fight terrorism?  Here's a good place to start.

Boy we're covering some pretty heavy stuff this week.  Well, if you survived that, here's some stuff that's a little lighter...

District 9
   Neil Blomkamp has one of the most fun names to say ever.  Lucky for him, he also makes some pretty interesting movie shorts.  If you search "Blomkamp" in youtube, you'll find a lot of them, including some sweet live-action Halo clips.  In fact, the first time I saw "District 9," it was as one of these shorts.  It was grouped with another one about a robot who was invented to patrol third world ghettos, but during that time it developed emotions.  At the time, I thought that short was better than the District 9 one, but in hindsight I can't see how you would turn that little story into a feature-length film.  "District 9," however, has plenty of legs to run on.
   I have to say I'm impressed with the Special Effects this movie offers.  While it's no "Transformers," it also operated on a tiny budget compared to that monster of a film.  The effects were used creatively, and with emotion, in a way that you just don't see a lot in movies today.  For example, instead of just gratuitous computer-animated explosions, you see the main character forced to make a very difficult choice, much of which involves CGI work.  You'll see what I mean when you watch this movie.
   Which I do recommend you do.  There are a few spots where District 9 falls short, but I think most all of them are overlook-able.  Namely, there's almost no back-story on these aliens.  Sure that's more realistic, but it would have been nice to know, and interesting to see why they were the way they were.  Also, its never explained how the people have learned their language.  I can forgive them knowing ours, since they're aliens, but how did we figure theirs out, when we can't even pronounce most of the sounds they made?  It was a little confusing, because I couldn't tell for half the movie if the people understood, or were just correctly guessing what the aliens were trying to say.
   I think you should give this movie a shot.  It's sci-fi, yes.  And yes it has a pretty typical "Avatar/Pocahontas/Dances With Wolves/Last Samurai" story, the difference is that the main character is a complete wimp.  Putting an anti-hero in a story like that is a nice twist, and I think it's what makes the difference in this movie.  It's not super-long, it makes a great use of natural effects, and it has a pretty deep underlying story, if you're willing to take it there.  Definitely different, and in my opinion at least as if not more entertaining than a lot of the other stuff that came out this year.

   Now I know I promised at the beginning of football season that I wouldn't talk about the Texans this year, but I feel like I have to give them credit for the way they closed things out.  Their last game was against the Patriots, which is no slouch of a team... and despite the fact that the Pats had a solid entry into the playoffs, they didn't sit their starters.  Maybe they should have (poor Wes Welker), but they didn't, and we showed up and beat them fair and square.  It was a classic game, fighting back in the fourth quarter for the win, but what's more is that it really shut a lot of people up.  Before this game, a lot of people (including myself) were calling for Gary Kubiak's head, Matt Schaub's head, and Chris Brown's head.  Now Chris Brown is still on the hot seat, but you don't hear anyone bitching about Kubiak or Schaub or anyone else on that team.  And I think that's for the best... these guys are finding a rhythm, let's keep them another year and see what they can put together.  Chris Brown, on the other hand, may need to find a new job.  I like the guy, but we can't afford to have a kicker who misses extra points... that's just a no-no in this game.  They should at least bring in another kicker to put some pressure on Brown, maybe it'll shake his game back.
   I also watched the Texas/Alabama game last night, which was just full of surprises.  I've never been a big fan of Texas, and I honestly figured Alabama would roll over them, but watching those two teams duke it out, I had a (slight) change of heart.  I wasn't too sad to see Colt McCoy get hurt (never really liked that guy), but I was sad to see his freshman replacement have such a bad game.  That kid fought hard, and he had some moments of glory, but because Texas lost, he'll always be remembered as the "kid who lost that BCS Championship for Texas."  It's a shame, too... because when he was good, he was awesome.  Maybe he'll perservere and become a great player... I hope for his sake he does.
   And so, it's out with football season, and in with... what?  Basketball?  Please.  Baseball?  Maybe, but I don't even get the Astros on my shitty cable service.  I guess I'll just have to make the playoffs count, and then find something else to do (like maybe go outside once in a while) until next September.  And on that note, you'll have to find something else to do until next week...