Hey Bill, I generally love all your work and watch your show religiously (haha sorry :P). Now, we both hold opinions that rather closely allign with one another on average, I've noted... And when we do disagree, I often still can respect your opinions as they'll typically be well informed, grounded and they typically will have a point behind them, where I can at least somewhat see where you are coming from, some educated point you are trying to make. On Fridays show however, with your SOPA comments, I certainly could not. I'm sure I'm not the first to call you on this, but I really have to do my part in hopefully making you see the error of your ways.
Right off the bat, you conceded you had not read this bill, and made it very clear you supported it simply because you're "against piracy". Congrats, you just did the equivilant of supporting the Patriot Act because you were "feeling patriotic". You knew nothing about this bill's content, yet you supported it... Come on, Maher, you're smarter than that!
I'm writing this message (on the off chance you read your FB wall) because I'm unsure if you realize just who your fanbase is, and just how much you put at risk in stating so ill-informed an opinion. Your primary demographic would seem to be the one I fit into - Males in their 20s. There's one thing MANY 20-something year old males love, and invest much of our time in: The internet. I fear that Friday night, you risked alienating a LARGE chunk of your (really quite geeky) fan base. You don't wanna piss off the internet, nor do you wanna piss off Anonymous (which goes hand in hand with the web and any threats to web freedom), as many of your fans are "from the internet", as it were....
In showing ignorance (ignorance at best... indifference at worst) to this bill's contents and possible reprecussions, you honestly risk complely discrediting yourself - This bill was, as is obvious from even a cursorary glance, written by old white men who know absolutely nothing about the intenet, how it works or its infrastructure. These old white men have nooo idea how horrible an idea this bill is, they only know how sweet that free lobbiest candy tastes.
It's horrifying just how little the mainstream media has covered the topic of SOPA - It's a topic your show made the horrible decision to ignore until now - And then to fumble after picking up the ball so horribly - To make comments supporting the bill while not even knowing what it entails - It just seems so unlike what you claim to stand for, I must say it almost seems rather suspicious. It's no secret that Time Warner, the parent company of HBO is in full support of SOPA - Hmmmm... I can only hope this was done "at gunpoint", as it were...
I suppose I'll finally get a bit into INSANE proposals contianed within this act... Under SOPA, any site that so much as LINKS (even if said link is posted by a third party, say as a comment) to another site that contains links to copyrighted material (however small an amount, even a single song) - This website could be reported, and INSTANTLY taken down - with no trial, no warrant, no form of recourse....
Lets illustrate this even better for the layman (a group im forced to presume you fall under). Lets talk for a second about YOUR blog - I'm certain you never post nay copyrighted material onto it. This does not matter. Lets pretend for a moment I wasn't a fan Of Bill Maher, but rather, Bill Maher really pissed me off and I didn't think he should be on the internet anymore - I happen to be a musician, and have a many recordings that I own the copyrights for... It'd be as easy as uploading one of my songs to a file hosting site, posting a link to said song in the comments section of your blog, and then reporting your website as hosting my copyrighted material, demanding it be shut down. Your blog could be taken swiftly offline with no trial, no form of recourse, no anything. Can you really claim full ownership and responsibility for the content of every single comment posted to your blog? Of course not. Does this illustrate the chilling effect this bill can have?
This isn't even taking into consideration just how unenforcable this is. Look at a site like Youtube, it has tons of copywritten material - Thus, going by the letter of this bill, freaking YOUTUBE could be completely pulled from the web - Youtube not big enough for you, how about Google? Google has something called "Google Cache" - Basically, as Google goes around mining information from the millions of sites it catelogues - It also saves a "snap shot" of that site into it's "cache" - This feature allows you to do things like view a site after it's been taken down by viewing the google cache snapshot (sorry for the extreme laymans terms, Maher's statements just make me feel he kinda needs this) - Now by design, this means Google takes tons of snapshots of copyrighted material (people are always focusing on music and video, but news articles, pictures etc. can all just as easily have copyrights) - Google has massive (in a way, "pirated") databases of pretty much every news article on the internet (not to mention their cache inevitibly has some trulyyy illegal things on it, like child pornography and the like) - Are you going to be the one to lead the charge twoards tearing google down off the internet? I doubt this, and I doubt that would ever happen, as Google is huge. Bigger than many governments. This bill would mostly be used to target smaller websites that don't employ a massive team of laywers. This also calls into question it's ethics.
I mean, you did your enough research on your own to learn about the NDAA act, and the horrifying can of worms it opened - And yet you failed yourself and your viewers on SOPA - Both acts share certain similarities, the conspiculous blackout by mainstream media when it came to covering them (until protest and resistance to both acts made this impossible), an innocuous name along with the claim that each's purpose is something rather difficult to argue against - Be it terrorism or piracy...
Anyhow, this rant is already getting kinda laughably huge - Something we internet people like to call "TL;DR" - I still love you Bill Maher, and still love "Real Time" - I just eally hope in the future you try keep informed about things like this - Especially when theyre things that matter so much to your young, savvy fanbase. I posted this as help/a warning - I don't wanna see you lose viewership over what could have been mere oversight.
Sunday, January 22, 2012
Wednesday, April 27, 2011
The Young Canadian Left And The Internet Vote
I was just reading an article that was pretty ridiculous and hostile towards Jack Layton, seemingly butthurt over the NDP's massive surge in the polls. At one point the author, some prick named Tim Powers said “ Will and when will those who have recently turned to the NDP in pre-vote polls end their joyride with Jack Layton? “ ... I don't think the NDP is gaining ground because people are converting so much as because young people are reaching voting age - and thanks to web 2.0 and social networking sites, they're mobilizing and becoming more politically active - Slowly leaving behind the stereotype of apathetic youth - This is slow, but it's happening.
Not to be morbid or anything, but older generations eventually passing on (along with their prejudices and antiquated ideas) of course will always bring on a lot of change too. And the fact is, Canadian youth are very left wing - A growing number of people I know in my age group would even consider themselves socialists, myself included. Once the baby boomers - a generation that outnumbers us nearly two to one - finally begin to go away, I can see this country undergoing a lot of change. I really hope so, at least.
The internet is also revolutionizing the way we digest or cover events through journalism - as well as all varieties of information - including the dirty laundry we never were aware of before. While one product of this is whacky conspiracy theories are soaring in popularity these days, there is an equally nonsensical, corroding, but real government we're becoming more and more educated about - fractional reserve banking, drug prohibition (a huge driver of profits for murderous drug cartels, politicians and cops), the delegitimizing and then curtailing of legitimate protest during G20, and the many abuses that occurred there - The list goes on...
If it weren't for the fact the left in Canada is fractured into four major parties, while the right has only one, the Conservatives would almost never win elections here. I think the fact we have this lopsided number of parties results in an undermining of democracy. Perhaps political parties themselves undermine democracy. Why can't we just elect individuals? Seriously.
Why do political parties exist? To provide the necessary publicity and exposure to get donations and then get votes? We have the goddamned internet now. If fucking Rebecca Black can become famous, why can't a politician can get enough exposure too?
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Tuesday, March 9, 2010
Monday, August 3, 2009
Day Of The Dead (2008 Remake) Review
This film offended me as a Romero fan, this film offended me a zombie movie fan and this film offended me as a human being. This film was so terrible, in fact, that it inspired me to write my first ever IMDB review.
I will start off by saying that I'm not even sure how this can be called a "remake" of the original Dawn Of The Dead. I don't see how this could be called a "re-imagining" of the film either, for that matter....
The original film starts off in a post-apocalyptic world. The dead have been rising from their graves to eat the flesh of the living for some time now for an unknown reason. In an almost "Omega Man" theme, the characters of the film fear they are the last humans alive on earth. They live together in an underground military bunker as three distinct groups of people in general disharmony with each other - the scientists who wish to understand the problem, the soldiers, who wish to destroy the problem and the civilians who simply wish to enjoy whatever bit of their life is left to enjoy.
Much of the conflict in the film, in fact, involves the characters interactions with each other rather than their interaction with the zombies. The original Dawn Of The Dead had a very bleak, claustrophobic atmosphere to it that is responsible for it being my favourite of Romero's "Dead" films. The vast majority of the film takes place in the military bunker, as it is the only refuge from the carnage surrounding them. They leave only to gather the dead as "specimens" for scientific study and to look for survivors.
This "remake" has none of this. None. The film starts at the beginning of the outbreak, for one. Also, a reason for this outbreak is later given in the film. The outbreak is also contained to one city for the duration of the film, it is not world-wide. While they do end up in an underground military bunker, it is only toward the end of the film. The rest of it they are running all over the place and there are people all over the city, completely missing the themes and indeed, the entire basis of the original. There are scientists, zombies and soldiers - but their function in the plot is completely changed. The true enemies are not the other people in this one, it's definitely the zombies.
They did bring back the idea of the "sympathetic" zombie, Bub, however he is not been "tamed" like in the original - Instead he is docile and non-threatening because, get this: he was a vegetarian during his life. They then explain that he kept this trait through becoming one of the undead. Hearing this made me feel like I was going to cry. It was THE most terrible concept I have ever witnessed unfold in cinema. - And I'm a huge fan "so bad it's good" B grade horror.
As far as I'm concerned, this film is a remake in title only. Nothing else has any more in common with Day Of The Dead than it does with any other zombie film. In my honest opinion, naming the film this was a shameless, almost criminal attempt at a cash-grab. They were hoping to sucker in poor die-hard horror fans like myself, who would feel almost "obliged" to see such a remake if it were made.
Wow. I can't believe I've made it this far into my criticism of this being called a remake without mentioning "running zombies". Believe me, that really hurt too - But the Dawn Of The Dead remake was guilty of this crime, too... And as much as I hate to admit it, that remake wasn't all that bad. So I'll leave my zombie elitism out of this.
If this film was not marketed as a remake of Day Of The Dead, it would have fared considerably better among critics and fans alike.... However, that's not to say that this movie wasn't terrible as yet another 28 Days Later clone, either...
The acting was god-awful with the exception of (maybe) Mena Suvari. Stale lines, even more stale delivery.
Nick Cannon's role as Salazar was tasteless. He provided a "token black character" for the film in that he was given such stereotypical one-liners that they verged on outright racism... How many times do we need to hear a black character say the "Man, that's some (fill-in-the-blank) shit, right there!" line in a film until it's not funny anymore?
My personal favourite was when, in response to someone saying they were a doctor, Salazar said "Maan.. Ain't nobody here wanna hear that CSI bullshit!".
I was honestly speechless.
I find such a stereotypical portrayal of an African-American character kind of ironic in this film, being that Romero's Night Of The Living Dead was one of the first mainstream films to give the lead "hero" role to a black man.
The film overall, while extremely fast-paced, somehow managed to loose my attention consistently throughout. I found myself struggling to pay attention just so I could write this review to warn you people.
In the world of zombie films, this one honestly makes "Children Of The Living Dead" look like "Zombi 2".
Saturday, July 25, 2009
The Future Of Language
I fear the English language is slowly deteriorating due to text messaging and social networking sites like Twitter or Facebook.
I am calling this now: Within 100 years, our language will have degenerated into an ugly hodgepodge of acronyms, shorthand and netspeak.
You see, people often forget that language is a rather fluid thing. It's constantly evolving. It wasn't until about the 18th century that the spelling of individual words even became standardized. New words and new definitions for words are constantly being added to our vernacular.
As words and their spellings become more widespread, they are often added to our dictionary. Our language follows us and not vice versa. Here are some examples:
As a wannabe poet, I've always attached a certain romanticism to language. I feel in it's proper written form, English is almost as beautiful as tits. This is why I make it a point to painstakingly enter every last apostrophe in every text message I send via cell phone. This takes me forever and people call me ridiculous for it, but I call them the cancer that is eating away at our language.
~Kyle
I am calling this now: Within 100 years, our language will have degenerated into an ugly hodgepodge of acronyms, shorthand and netspeak.
You see, people often forget that language is a rather fluid thing. It's constantly evolving. It wasn't until about the 18th century that the spelling of individual words even became standardized. New words and new definitions for words are constantly being added to our vernacular.
As words and their spellings become more widespread, they are often added to our dictionary. Our language follows us and not vice versa. Here are some examples:
- "Amuse" comes from the Latin root "muser", meaning "to stare stupidly". At one time to "amuse" someone meant not to entertain them, but to stupefy them.
- "Nice" comes from the Latin root "nescius" and originally meant something akin to "ignorant"
- "Artificial" originally meant "full of artistic or technical skill"
- (More examples)
As a wannabe poet, I've always attached a certain romanticism to language. I feel in it's proper written form, English is almost as beautiful as tits. This is why I make it a point to painstakingly enter every last apostrophe in every text message I send via cell phone. This takes me forever and people call me ridiculous for it, but I call them the cancer that is eating away at our language.
~Kyle
My Blog's Cherry Popped
Hello there!
I have decided that my desperate need for a hobby should be satiated by starting my very own blog. Is there any money in this shit? I certainly hope so.
Regardless of possible monetary gain, I intend to (assuming my attention span allows this):
~Kyle
I have decided that my desperate need for a hobby should be satiated by starting my very own blog. Is there any money in this shit? I certainly hope so.
Regardless of possible monetary gain, I intend to (assuming my attention span allows this):
- Bombard you with my rants about politics, drugs, conspiracies, philosophy, social ills, deep fried food etc.
- Write film reviews (probably mostly relating to Italian giallo, cannibal and zombie films)
- Show off my poetry
- Post semi-regular updates about the music I write
- Perhaps upload *cough* non-copyrighted (lol) music and video, giving you a reason to actually come here.
- Provide you with many lulz
~Kyle
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
