I've tried to get out of the habit of saying things unless they are nice, but if JT's getting 10X the posts that a reflection on Jason Molina is, then I'm just going to have to say, "Fuck you for choosing this steaming pile of shit as AOTW."
I can't really knock anyone for preference, but describing this album as "AOTY", "complex", "great", or "fuck-it-I’ll-be-boring-now album, in a good way" are all ways of saying to the world, "Hey, I've given up on sharing any sort of genuine perspective with you; excuse me while I go and enjoy Anderson Cooper's daytime chat show."
I do not hate Justin Timberlake. I'll go so far as to say that he has a great knack for comic timing that the Adam Sandler's of the world could learn from. I also think that he does very well with small dramatic roles. He also seems like a pretty decent guy. However, there is no debate in terms of his artistry. He is not an artist by any reasonable definition, and there was more "art" in any five minute segment of the Mickey Mouse Club in which he appeared than during the entire seventy minute span of this trite, facile, flaccid cashgrab.
Excellent piece, Sam. Thanks for doing justice to one of the greatest songwriters of his generation. One mark of Jason Molina's artistry is the divergence of fan favorites. You can ask twenty people which song is their favorite, and twenty different songs will come up. I revisit his work almost everyday. While I haven't really ever considered the overarching theme of his music "sadness", there is certainly an element of privacy in his songs. His ability to write truly meaningful lyrics notwithstanding, Jason Molina's talent for arrangement may never be duplicated. I cannot think of any other songwriter who was able to utilize the potential of instrumentation (including his own voice) to the extent that he did. While it will be difficult to consider songs that I enjoy so deeply in a new way, just thinking about the level of self-abuse necessary to cause this kind of death at such a young age adds a level of profoundness to many of his lyrics. R.I.P.
I don't mean any disrespect to you, and I appreciate that I was critical toward your article, but I don't think that it was completely undeserved. Posters get to come on, hide behind anonymity, and make whatever cracks they want toward columnists, but I don't want my post to come across that way.
I'm not going to be the guy who tries to define "true fan" or "not a true fan" because that is a devolutionary conversation. My point is more that the inclusion and exclusion of EP's on the list was questionable. Also, an album like Sad, Sappy Sucker (which is not an album and probably wasn't intended to be released until a relatively large fan base was salivating for something "new" from the band) is an opportunity to see the early material that was to become the great albums. Though rough-hewn, the instrumentation and creativity far exceed the content of the later MM albums. I was also a little pissed about the Built to Spill knock (in case that didn't come through above). So, I thought of that as being snarky. Along with the description of Isaac's voice. You could definitely say that it reminds one of Cartman's voice, but that is kind of like Southpark comparing Stevie Nicks' voice to that of a goat. Not exactly reverent. And you don't have to be reverent, by any means. I would have preferred someone who was a bit more so to write the article.
As far as the "filler" deal, almost half of each of the newer MM albums are filler. Can't say that about the earlier ones. I won't disagree about your "Exit Does Not Exist" example, but I do take exception to "Long Distance Drunk", which I think is just a jammy, better-heard-live track, but not really filler. The Moon and Antarctica is clearly a "concept" album, and I think of "The Cold Part" as a placeholder in the "middle" third of the story. To each his own. So when you make a statement like, "Even their best. . .", then I assume you are referring to Lonesome Crowded West, and I would challenge you to qualify that album as "stacked with filler".
As a final explanatory note, describing the rhythm section as "loosey goosey" (drums) and "slinky" (bass) is inaccurate and trite, respectively. (See Also: Truckers Atlas, Teeth Like God's Shoeshine, It's All Nice. . .)
First, I'm glad that the 'gum posted a Modest Mouse list. I'm a bit older than some of the other posters, so "This is a Long Drive. . ." was my entry point to the band. As a result, I really appreciate the song structure and especially the lyrics of the older albums (Building Something. . ., LCW, and This is a Long Drive.) Those stand alone (to me) as three of the strongest albums of the era. If those were the only three that the band put out, I feel like Modest Mouse would be thought of as fondly as NMH by indie fans. I think that The Moon & Antarctica really changed the trajectory of the songcraft. While there are plenty of stylistic similarities, it is the glaring moment of change for me. It is also a near-perfect album. They could've stopped there and been one of the best bands of the 90's-00's. As it happened, Isaac decided to keep making albums. I enjoy some of their later tracks, and Good News is a pretty decent album. If We Were Dead. . . was released by another band, it would be considered absolute trash. To my ears, it is just lazy and a sad testament to what happens when a voice that so many people want to hear feels compelled to speak when he really has nothing left to say. For me, I would place Sad, Sappy Sucker above Good News and We Were Dead, because I think that we could've used a few more "Built to Spill's" at the time. There are some real parallels in the trajectories of those two bands (Modest Mouse & Built to Spill). They are two of my favorite bands, fronted by two of the more innovative guitarists of our time. Unfortunately, the quality of their work has diminished over time. It would have been nice to a) have someone who understood and appreciated this trajectory make this list, b) have someone who actually liked the band and didn't feel the need to saturate the article with snarky comments, weak descriptors, and shitty lyrical references make this list.
a) What's the cop so worried about? Have you ever seen anyone with their pants in this state of affairs trying to run from the police? 1) comical 2) difficult
b) Who's letting the Black Mental Health Alliance group-of people-who-don't-actually-exist-thingy 1) interpret laws 2) waste grant money on commercials?
Hey, if you all ain't got nothin better to do than interpret laws and make commercials, and are all out of crazy black folk in Mass., some other areas of the country got some crazy people from a range of races and ethnicities that you might be able to work on.
Tom, exceptional article; one of the best I've read here in quite a while. I'll have to second the nod to the Wire/Treme analogy. I'm not sure that I agree with you regarding Chet White's role in the songcraft, but still a good point. I am definitely missing JR, though I agree that this is probably exactly the album that Mr. Owens wanted to make. It's a little hokey at times, but I also agree with some other posters that his songs tend to be "growers". I don't think that this album will have nearly the listening longevity with me that previous albums have had.
I have been a really big fan of Owens' music, but I almost wish that I had never heard or read any interviews with him. Or heard any background on songs. Or had to listen about his chaotic life. The more I learn about him, the less fascinated I am with his art. I still find him to be a very unique songwriter who is able to acknowledge his influences without being simply derivative. He has always seemed just at the cusp of falling victim to his own grandeur (exactly the way that Dan Bejar fell into the void with the last Destroyer album, though I know that a lot of people liked it). Hopefully this will be the farthest that Owens goes in the direction of the "70's romantic drama". For me this album, from cheesy sax to questionable length, is a reminder that, genius aside, Owens is still an addict who is really consumed with himself and probably cares very little what any of us thinks about his songs.
Donny-T, you just keep reinforcing my opinion that you are the best poster in the history of posting. Let me ask you this, what about those bears? Do they not make you feel very uncomfortable? Especially when the kid bear comes out from behind the tree with the bits of the "other brand" stuck to his ass-fur?
I, for one, "enjoy the go". I like to keep it regular. I go dry paper, no bidet, no baby wipes, no medicated pads (though I'm not opposed to any of these ideas, or any other innovations that might be around the corner as a result of this conversation). I might hit the shower afterwards if things got too real. But I'll tell you what, Donny, I don't like commercials about it. I don't like cartoons pitching rump ribbon. I don't like the insinuation that charmin has put in the work, when it is me who has put in the work. Having said this, I have done the market research, and those fuckers at charmin put out a hell of a square. I'm no stranger to boycotting a product based on how annoying a marketing campaign is, but if you're using Angel Soft, or Scott, or the store brand, just do yourself a little favor and give the charmin a try.
No, no, that's actually great. Much improved. You do have a screen name, and I apologize for having not used it. Not a fan of aardvarks, but that is not a good excuse.
As to not having actually addressed anything that I said, aside from arguing that my comments actually "strengthened" your argument, as opposed to addressing any of them; just let me add two things:
1.) I disagree that my comments strengthen your argument and that I said exactly what you said;
2.) when you qualify yourself as an expert, you hold yourself to a bit of a higher standard of commentary. I get that you were responding to a previous poster's hyperbole, but you shouldn't have to preface your opinion if you don't care what other people think about it. One who qualifies himself as an expert shouldn't need to (and usually doesn't) resort to simple insult to prove his point.
I certainly did not "pointlessly" belittle nor degrade your comment. I stated several points which were, to my thinking, neither degrading nor belittling. As to the intelligence argument, I know enough to know that I disagree with most of the comments that you post. I didn't advertise myself as intelligent. You, in an unnecessary way (according to your own assertion that you don't care what people think of your opinions) advertised your own intelligence within this context. I'm waiting for the pudding. . .
Also, Aaron, I agree. And "sean sean" (whatever that is), would it be too much to ask for you to just repost the gif where you think it belongs? Honestly, the abject laziness of this generation is depressing.
Weirdface, I mainly disagree with most of what you post. Generally speaking, I keep quiet about it. However, when one chooses to just blow up on a "I've been listening to music for a really long time, and I've got the artifacts to prove it" rant, then I expect them to come with something a bit more nuanced.
Let's be honest. If you put the "Leaving" track on a continuum with "Skrillex" at one end and "Burial" at the other, this song would fall closer toward the "Burial" end. Now, I am completely neutral toward Skrillex. I don't hate his music, but would never choose to purchase or play it for myself. Objectively speaking, some percentage of people like his music. You seem to be confusing subjectivity and criticism (in the journalistic sense). If you have amassed thousands (or tens of thousands) of hours listening to "electronic" tracks, bring something to those of us who haven't. Your description of Skrillex's music as "generic, simple, and abrasive" is exactly the way that I would describe my attitude toward Kanye and AnCo. But, of course, millions of others love that shit.
Having listened to Skrillex, I would argue that you are confusing the "beat" element of his music with other elements (sample, time signatures, rhythm). I don't believe that he frequently reuses or recycles entire beats. There are many artists whose styles incorporate repetition, and with those we like we tend to embrace these tendencies as a part of their aesthetic. No artist is more "guilty" of this than the aforementioned Burial. But I thoroughly enjoy Burial. Another artist I love even more, who also incorporates an awful lot of similar elements within a given sequence of releases, is Four Tet.
Having said that "Leaving" as a track sounds more like releases by Burial than previous releases by Skrillex brings me to my next disagreement with your perspective. I don't believe that Skrillex intentionally "pushes" elements of his tracks to the front. It is clear that a growth area for him is the texture of tracks related to layering elements. His songs tend to sound quite "flat" to me, rather than overly "loud". The real contrast with an artist like Burial, which can really be heard when listening to a track like "Leaving" aside a track like "Kindred", is that Burial understands how to saturate a track with layer upon layer of sound elements that really build a depth of listening that rewards repeated listening.
One might argue that Skrillex is simply lazy, or that he just wants to cash in on the dub step movement. However, one might also argue that he is simply a novice in terms of building tracks, which betrays just how complex and nuanced song craft can be. Perhaps Skrillex is moving in a new direction with his music. Or, perhaps, he is saying (incorrectly), "See, I can do that Burial shit, too, but I choose to make dub step differently." At any rate, I wouldn't argue that Skrillex is anywhere near approximate to Burial in terms of song craft or even artistry in general, but I do believe that we can elevate the discourse a bit if we are going to actually talk about the fucker. I would agree with bedangldinskii that there is certainly a gang mentality when it comes to liking or disliking certain artists. The fact that you, weirdface, peppered your commentary with hyperbole and even the word "bro" betrays this tendency, which we all fall victim to from time to time.
I don't want to sound really old or anything, but all the fretting over progress (and piracy) is a bit tired. I'm old enough to have vinyl, 8-tracks, cassettes, CD's, downloads, etc. in my home. I have bought or "inherited" all of them, but not because of my age group. Many of my friends stole hundreds of CD's (and tapes), and who among us wasn't sneaking into shows at the age of 15?
We are grappling with a stark dichotomy, which is music as art v. music as product. There is really a problem separate from whether Grizzly Bear (or some fucking metal band) is getting paid. Many of us put on our big boy pants daily and saunter off to "work" in exchange for some level of compensation. In a similar way, artists have to meet the demands of their own craft (in other words, you get paid in any way that you can in order to keep doing something that moves you). How many shows a year is Grizzly Bear doing? Now go and check how many shows a year (or a day) the Beatles were doing before they "made it". Music as an artform is very different from music as an industry. The industry side of music is bemoaning the behavior of our youth because corporations have targeted that demographic. Kids are fickle as shit, and I have very little sympathy for record companies et al who have decided to sacrifice the artform (what happened to jazz?) in favor of a more broad, palatable product. They are receiving the natural consequences of their actions (as an industry).
People have always lamented the behavior of youth, but the fact is that our society has grown ever more economical in it's consumerism. Art is an opiate for the society of its inception, and the way that we are choosing to ingest our medicine has changed. With the exception of some incredibly niche vendors, physical musical artifacts are without much monetary value. Good luck trying to get any cash for those old Marty Robbins records (even from old guys who like Marty Robbins). People just tend to "use" music differently as our timeline progresses. We are now actually able to soundtrack our own lives whether at home, school, work, commute, stores. In some ways an aging guy like me sees this as a violation of the social contract. It is disappointing to believe that something so important (artful music) is threatened by our consumption of it. But, unlike the actual physical space we inhabit, a few dying species of music will not diminish the overall tendency for humans to produce music. Treating music as what it actually is (art) is far superior to allowing an oligarchic bureaucracy to define the ethics of its consumption.
There is clearly a domino effect that means Macy's might stop paying Stereogum for advertising, which might mean that I will actually have to talk to a physical entity about music being played in a live setting we are both sharing. In essence, the problem of "stealing" music will take care of itself at the extreme margins, at which point we'll all be reduced to memories of sneaking into a bar to see Pavement because a) we weren't 21; b) we didn't have $11.
To echo the lamentations over the D-Tilla (aka "The Don", aka "Donny Bravo", aka "Donny Tuffnuts") snub, maybe this is an opportunity for us to reflect on the genius of donnytilla. Isn't it better for us to regard his contributions in light of omission rather than have him relegated to, say, 40th position on the list? We all love the D, so let's just remember our fave Tilla moments from '12.
Being the self-indulgent cunt that I am, my favorite was the "D-titties" thread.
And if no one else follows up because they're skiing in Vail or puking in Des Moines, Tilla, you're better than LDR tromping through pigshit any day.
I remember this one time that Joe Howse wanted to brag on a Stereogum post, but intentionally minimized his boast with the knowledge that fellow posters would not be able to restrain themselves from correcting him, thereby deflecting any negative karma and allowing at least one Stereogum poster to do what he loved the most.
Joe Howse = Ghandi? Yep.
Dude, you threaten to leave more than that drunken uncle who everyone wants to leave but never actually does. I don't hate you or anything; you've just become the underscore that cries wolf. Leave, stay, whichever, but your existential crises has become that beautiful cake that would be delicious if you would just eat the motherfucker already.
First, Louie, yes; this season of WD, yes. Girls, no. American Horror Story is an American horror story. Community and Parks & Rec are the same bad show. Game of Thrones is just another movie channel excuse for soft porn (really, get laid, monsters). Mad Men and Breaking Bad were once very good shows. They've jumped the shark. A couple of seasons ago. And Homeland? I can't even comment on any non-My So Called Life Claire Danes-related project except to comment that they are all terrible.
But the real atrocity here is that there is no Duck Dynasty. No excuse, no excuse.
I have to agree with costco. I was all ready to hate the sh** out of season 3 after the travesty that was season 2, but it is actually kinda compelling. Best season yet.
I hate to take a jab at either DOOM or Why?, but the common bond for those two releases (aside from them being disappointing) is that they just come across as lazy in comparison to previous releases. Mumps, etc. has its moments ('Strawberries' is pretty brilliant, as an example), but it is not what we was lookin' for.
Either: From your shitty "article" to your shitty list, this is trash from the top. DOOM is one of the best of a generation. While most "rappers" are spitting the same trite lines over increasingly forgettable tracks, DOOM has continued (until recently) to push forward. To place Born Like This at the bottom is to avoid the fact that it has one of the strongest tracks (of any genre) of the past decade. This list also sabotages the trajectory of this guy's career. By his nature, DOOM is an uneven and sometimes incomprehensible artist. With the exception of Madvilliany, there is not one DOOM-related album that is great front to back. However, the great moments have clearly gotten greater over the course of his career. There is only one album that lacks any great moments at all, and it certainly isn't Born Like This. I don't really want to belabor the point, but though I love DOOM above any other "rap" act going at this point, JJ DOOM is pretty much unlistenable and clearly the worst album of his career. Along with Why?'s forgettable p.o.s., it was the most disappointing release of the year.
The typical Stereogum list troll move with Madvilliany is too predictable.
Or my other comment option: "I know! Let's make a list of DOOM albums by pulling them randomly out of my ass after having inserted them randomly into my ass. Then let's smear the rest across the page and call it 'music journalism.'"
And That's That
Not really sure about yours, but, "Part of the meaning of life is to bitch on music blogs." would be my answer. Judging from the number of "I hate Mumford & Sons" comments and "This is all NMH's fault" comments, then I would say many others have also co-opted that take. Not to say that the majority of people are right. Just saying that like-minded people normally congregate in the same place (though I most certainly do not share Stereogum's overt love of a) Radiohead; b) Animal Collective; c) Lists written by trolls), and I think that we can congregate around some more stimulating topics than some of the ones posted recently. I thought that the Sufjan piece was well-written, but shit, I thought that guy died like two years ago.
And I know that you were just being a bitch with your comment, spenny, so you also enjoy bitching on music blogs.
I wish I could upvote your post several more times.
And, as much as I hate agreeing w/underscore, I agree with underscore. If we want artists paid, we have to pay them.
I use pandora as a service. As a result, I have purchased several songs that I would not have otherwise. It is not a perfect model, but I'm too old to drive three hours and pay $30 (plus the cost of drinking to eliminate the awkwardness of being an old guy at a show) to see a band that I kind of like. I'm much happier buying the couple of songs that I prefer, and leaving the concert hopping to the teeners. I also have trouble buying "CD's" in record stores, because there aren't any fucking record stores anymore.
I'm not sure why the marketing opportunities provided by vendors like pandora are not mentioned more often in these sorts of articles. I rarely read comments on pandora, but most of the ones that I have read are a) people who hadn't heard of the band before (and are seemingly now likely to purchase some music); b) people who "love this band" (and presumably have paid for the music); c) trolls.
And there is another ugly, but very simple, fact. Markets simply don't support thousands of mediocre competitors. It would be fantastic if everyone could be in a band and "make a living". However, being in a band does not mean that "being an artist" is one's job or career. If artists make art to make money before they make art to make art, then there is a serious disconnect somewhere.
Uh, ima just go ahead and say this: I'm looking around steroegum about once a week to see what there is to be crotchety about, and low and behold we got Mumford & Sons, Big Boi, Sufjan Stevens, Dismemberment Plan, bad advertisements, The Predator, and all I can really think about aside from how slow of a independent news cycle this must be is,
"Shit, guys, this is a sad testament to what a pretty cool site used to be. I mean, come on, here we all are with hands, brains, and dicks and all we can do is complain about Mumford & Sons and some jackass from American Idol happening carelessly onto Top 40 radio?"
If you are finding yourself more in the "Fuck these guys" than "Who gives a fuck about these guys?" camp, then you are in serious need of some perspective on what the fuck the meaning of life is. Let's go, Sterogum.
As a disclaimer: I'm not Ween fan numero uno, I didn't listen to them for three hours last night while masturbating, I didn't mail them a vial of my horse's blood one time after listening to Guava, I don't own a t-shirt, didn't see them live when they were just Wee (before they were Ween), don't really respect them that much as artists, could live the rest of my life without hearing another song, but. . .
Any list not having Chocolate and Cheese #1 is questionable; any list having 12 CGG last is questionable, and any attempt at a "canon" of Ween hits not including Voodoo Lady reeks of Stereogum-esque pretense.
You had to know, dear readers, had to know that whoever wrote the list was going to leave out one of the greats (I was guessing Waiting for the Man before reading, but hey, why not leave out the undeniably best song from the catalogue?) I would put Rock n' Roll at the top and Heroin would be second, only because of the sheer brilliance of post-VU Lou Reed's remaining of those tracks. Whatevs. The real shit thing here is that everyone keeps talking about all the great great songs that all of these "top 10" list bands put out. "Every song this band ever made could be on the top 10 list"-type hyperbole is grating. Just like 70% of the VU catalog. What makes VU great (and Leonard Cohen, for that matter) isn't really that every song is great. It's that the audience gets to hear truly monumental pieces right up against pieces of shit. Great artists are artists of moments, not every piece has to be a masterpiece. This is certainly true of the Velvets. '27 Yankees they were not, if only because of the drugs. They did, however, produce some pretty great songs. To not include the best is just another example of the limp-wristed pretense that passes for editorial perspective around this joint.
Listen, you really can't just throw in a bullshit paragraph to excuse yourself for the pretentious posturing. Yeah, so Mr. Cohen didn't actually perform the better versions of his two most famous songs. Not including what are clearly two of the better songs written in the past fifty years because they are good is certainly in keeping with Stereogum lists, so there is not really any surprise there. But the fact that you had to add a paragraph in anticipation of the reader's "balk" demonstrates a lack of confidence in your own perspective and serves to acknowledge your insincerity. If we can say anything about Cohen, he is at least sincere. I hope he read this and said, "Fuck that guy for not including 'Take This Longing'."
Whatever, Norm was the best Weekend Update correspondent ever. Yeah, go ahead an make an argument for Seth, then head over to your One Direction concert (Though it was better when Amy was on. Man, you still can't believe they got a divorce [She and Will, not Seth]). Or argue for Jimmy and put your toddler (whose name is so clever, but to be honest you just copied your wife's cousin's kid's name, but really you guys had considered that name already, but family get togethers are still a little awkward) to bed. Or argue for Dennis and wish that you weren't balding because then that hot blond at the bar would actually acknowledge your presence, I mean, Jesus, she didn't even thank you for the drink.
Oh, you again, how original. But monkeys with eyes do things that they see other monkeys (with or without big eyes) doing. First order troll, though, Steve.
Re: "Not getting it" as an actual response to a post and not a troll of a troll of a troll:
First, you are imposing a logical fallacy on this thread by correlating states (collectively) which contribute less tax revenue to individuals who contribute no federal income tax revenue. Mitt himself was imposing a logical fallacy on his audience by misrepresenting a statistic. Both of you are perfectly "legit" (to use a monkey-word) because, Steve, you are an unapologetic troll and Mitt is an unapologetic politician. So, perfectly forgivable for you two peas to butcher statistics in favor of proving some vague point (I guess in your case, Stevie, to troll for up votes by saying something that you knew would resonate with your audience. . .Hey, wait a minute, Steve! Or should I say, Mitt!?). What I "don't get" is a) how it has become socially acceptable to just manipulate statistics for one's own purposes, b) how unevenly people can interpret an event. But still, Steve, good trolling. And, monkeyface, you're cute.
I'm gonna do this, only because you provided a thoughtful comment. Normally, I would just leave my attempt to troll (requested above, btw) alone as it stands. I am not legit angry (or legitimately angry). I won't take exception to your knock on my trolling, because that is the standard response. However, I think that I made it plainly obvious that I am not a Mitt supporter (or advocate or fan or follower or Republican or teapartier or confused elderly person). Though I may be reading your response incorrectly, you seem to imply that I accused Mr. Romney of being honest. I did no such thing. In fact, I believe that I did just the opposite, albeit in an indirect way. I'm not even sure that I used the word "truth". I was attempting (perhaps ineffectively) to insult both videogum posters (they asked for it, in more ways than one) and Romney. Here's the real rub, monkey, I do feel like there are some really clever folks on here (way beyond my ability to deliver succinct, appropriate, and comedic quips). But some topics are just cliche in themselves and it really devalues the level of collective intelligence when we all just make obvious comments about easy targets (That Romney is a REAL asshole!, Kim Kardashian shore is stoopid!) So in that there is some honesty in my post, but the rest is pure fakery in the vein of a band actually playing Freebird when some asshole yells out "Play Freebird!" at a concert. Somehow I feel like there are several of those folks among us (been to any concerts lately, bingo?)
I think he means the people (47%) who would be offended if they saw the video of him talking shit about 47% of people. If you are confused, don't worry, because Mr. Obama is also confused. He apparently thought that Mr. Romney was talking about the 47% of people who voted for Mr. McCain back in '08. But he wasn't. He was talking about the 47% of people who would be offended if they saw the video of him talking shit about 47% of people. Apparently, that 47% includes every person who visits this site and posts comments except for this one guy. But he probably isn't voting for Mr. Romney, either. But I'll tell you one thing, this whole video fiasco is going to be like stuffy white guy Woodstock. There were probably like 1,000 people at that dinner, but something like 100,000 stuffy white guys are going to claim to have been there. And about eighteen years from now, some douchy fraternity rusher is going to claim to have been born in the ladies pisser at that dinner. Good times, man, good times.
Is it just me, or does the Aquaman look a bit like a youthful Norm MacDonald? The culprit behind this optical illusion? You guessed it: Frank Stallone.
Re: Hoping someone will troll this thread. . .
Most of these posts have all of the intelligence and thoughtfulness of a bag of marbles into which someone has strategically trapped a fart so that the next person who wants to play him some marbles gets the remnants of some leftover fart. . .
Hey guys, most of us watch the liberal media's version of the news, so how's about an original thought oncst in awhile? Huh? Would that kill the shit out of anyone? The thing that you have to respect about that cyborg or android or robot or alien or Mormon (all synonymous, give or take, right?) is that he really just lets you know via leaked video that is several months old how he really sees the world. It's refreshing, and not at all like opening up a bag of marbles with stale fart in it. So, in summation, in order to properly troll this thread (though admittedly way too late for all of you fickle turds with the attention spans of inbred thoroughbred poodle/wiener mixes) you guys are derivative, shallow, and barely worth the trouble of insulting, which is why Mitt does it in private only on rare occasions. You know, like when you turds say something intelligent.
Nice, grandpa, an opportunity to jab a Kardashian when there is not even really a Kardashian involved. Another link in the chain of your shackle of Kardashian tyranny. I'm gonna tell you right now, grandpa, this is going to come back on you tenfold. Yeah, tenfold of the misdirected hatred of a bitchy weblogger! Whatever that would mean. I'm sure it's pretty unbearable. I also don't want to defend a Kardashian (or certainly be all serious), but Gabe has led me to create the KDFfKOTK (Kardashian Defense Fund for Kardashians Other Than Khloe [because she's a man and she can take care of herself, that's why!]) I will accept donations, 10% of which will go toward defending these poor innocents from the likes of grandpas Gabe & Donald. 10% will go to that weird pants charity (like leopard-print spandex isn't expensive. Maybe you ladies shouldn't have spent all your skrilla on those leopard print spandex pants. Also, shop at H&M like the rest of us poor people who want to look appropriate for work.) The rest will go toward compensating eldave for his troubles.
I love the unnecessary edits that the producers are using here, like when Mrs. Lohan asks if the cameras are rolling. Really, you had to use that footage to drum up interest? Because there were not enough scenes of her acting like herself? Also, Mr. Lohan asking if Mrs. Lohan had been drinking prior to the interview. That does not seem like an honest question. He had been drinking, she had been drinking, "Dr." Phil had been drinking. It was probably a requirement of the producers. I would imagine that they ("talent" & crew) were playing several rounds of "asshole" before the cameras even rolled. I thought Dina seemed very pleasant "flitting" around. So what her daughter's been arrested all those times. Lindsay's an adult. Why doesn't the doctor have other parents of felons (hello, Matthew Fox's folks [assuming they're not dead because I'm too lazy to look]) on to criticize them? Where is Chris Brown's dad? What, oh, he doesn't know? My bad. Well, they could at least have on one of his older relatives to berate them extensively.
I'm just gonna throw out that this site and its purveyors are a bit anti-Kardash. I don't know what happened along the way to start the one-sided feud and why so many of you venerable contributors have decided to join in, but the past few anti-Kardashian posts here have been pretty weak. Feeble, really. I, for one, want to judge people cynically based on their treatment of old, dancing people or explanations for unpopular movie scenes.
Let's face it, moments of silence are really manipulative and shallow. It's all a "group-think" ploy to get you to focus on the wrong thing. Let me see, should I be worried more about an event that occurred eleven years ago that most eleven year olds are not even aware of, or should I be worried that those evil Kardashians are infecting our eleven year olds with whatever kind of secret chemical they use to convince people that they are relevant and worthy of publicity (positive or negative)? Seriously, guys, let's get back to making fun of kids and the elderly, if not white rappers and black actors who used to be rappers.
I didn't read the comments from the actual site that broke this breaking news, but the best Cameron can come up with is "buoyancy"? I know that he's Mr. Oceanexpertpersonguy, but I'm just not buying into that particular explanation. I would have been a lot better off with, "It's a fucking movie guys, I mean, come on. Geez."
Jack Black & one of the Wayans brothers (actually, just let both of the Wayans brothers in there and just have them "tag" in indiscriminately. No one will notice/care). Also, Eddie Murphy & Martin Lawrence should play the mothers (Heathers).
Comments