TOYS THAT SHOULD NOT BE
New Leaguers may not be familiar with what was once a staple of The League, and that's Toys That Should Not Be. TTSNB relies strongly on the adult collector market for toys, and is usually much more prevalent during Comic Convention Season as the toys are unveiled.
Now the problem I've had with TTSNB is that pretty much anything MacFarlane TOys puts out these days falls into this category. MacFarlane went from creating action toys of the popular Image Comics characters such as Spawn and... uh... I'm sure they've had other popular characters. But then they started this licensing jazz where they did very nice sculpts of movie properties, such as Hellraiser. And then they got bored as too few licenses were available or something, and they've moved into either public domain territory (ie: their horrific Wizard of Oz figures), and now into actual horror stories. Oh, and sports stars. They have a cool Yao figure I saw, but you have to assemble him as he's literally too tall for the packaging.
Which brings us to the curious case of the Elizabeth Bathory action figure. For those of you not in the know, Elizabeth Bathory was an Eastern European aristocrat who decided the best way to preserve her beauty was by bathing in a bathtub of the blood of young women (I'm not sure if they had to be virgins or not). At any rate, it is, in fact, a true story. And I kind of want to barf just thinking about it.
But MacFarlane toys not only thinks this is a neat story, they think you need this on the shelf next to your Chewbacca.
TTSNB proudly presents (oh, this is rated R, so scram out of here, you hooligans) the Elizabeth Bathory Action Figure and play set.
You can also see more real life horrors turned to action figures here. Note the "accessory pack". And the "Billy the Kid" action figure, while looking NOTHING like photos of the real deal, is one hell of a cool looking figure.
Monday, June 14, 2004
Sunday, June 13, 2004
Jim D., quite rightly, accuses me of relishing in schadenfreude in his un-review of Garfield: The Movie.
It's not that I like to see bad things happen to good people. It's that I enjoy seeing unfortunate things happen to people I like, especially when all that's at stake is cost of a ticket and the loss of two hours. It reminds me that it isn't just me.
Anyway, regarding Garfield...
I welcome Loyal Leaguers to read past my inane ramblings on pop-phraseology and get to the meat as Randy Reviews Garfield: The Movie. From what I hear, despite some bleeding from her tear ducts during the viewing of Garfield: The Movie, Emily is in stable condition and able to take visitors.
It's not that I like to see bad things happen to good people. It's that I enjoy seeing unfortunate things happen to people I like, especially when all that's at stake is cost of a ticket and the loss of two hours. It reminds me that it isn't just me.
Anyway, regarding Garfield...
I welcome Loyal Leaguers to read past my inane ramblings on pop-phraseology and get to the meat as Randy Reviews Garfield: The Movie. From what I hear, despite some bleeding from her tear ducts during the viewing of Garfield: The Movie, Emily is in stable condition and able to take visitors.
I humble myself before Maxwell who has more than fulfilled her end of the bargain and finally filled us all in as to what the big mystery was, but also because of mud pies and art.
God bless us, everyone.
I heard a bastardization somewhere today of the bling-bling. It was referred to as "the ching-ching." The vultures are already making off with the rancid parts, and I never saw the hyenas.
God bless us, everyone.
I heard a bastardization somewhere today of the bling-bling. It was referred to as "the ching-ching." The vultures are already making off with the rancid parts, and I never saw the hyenas.
Saturday, June 12, 2004
sound the bells and hang the flags at half-staff...
a catch-phrase is dead.
The bling is dead. Long live the bling.
Today, at 2:20pm PT, the phrase "bling-bling", AKA "blingbling", AKA "BlingBling", died a horrible and miserable death as used, somewhat properly, by one of the stars of USA Network's Before & After'noon Movies. This marked the last time anyone will ever look good or not sound like an idiot using the phrase "bling-bling."
I first heard the phrase "bling-bling" around 2000. I had no idea what it meant, and let the phrase slide, assuming it would go as soon as it had come (as phrases do more when you're in college and around college). I had previously misinterpreted "'da bomb" as meaning something was bad, as in, it was a bomb. I was, clearly, very wrong. And I had already paid dearly for misinterpreting that one while working at a record store.
Finally the use of "bling-bling" used a critical mass in usage on television, in casual conversation, and finally I heard one of our student workers use it, and I had to ask.
"You don't know?"
"No."
"HA HA HA"
"Why the &*#$ would I know what it means?"
"Don't you watch MTV?"
"I'm not twelve," I explained.
"Oh. Well," the student worker spoke very slowly, to explain to me, who was so unfortunate and so obviously un-hip. "It means, like, lots of flashy jewelry and stuff."
"What?"
"Like... lots of gold."
"How the hell did anyone get 'bling-bling' out of that?"
"'Cause it's the sound that too much gold makes when it slaps together."
"That," I concluded, "Is the dumbest thing I ever heard."
"You're so not cool."
"Tell me about it."
But the phrase stuck around. Like a stray cat you thoughtlessly fed tuna the one time, it just hung around at the door.
As a non-extreme, non-hip, non-hiphop, nor Gen Y sort of person, I did my best suburbanite Gen Xer routine, and only used the phrase when I was being silly and poking fun at the phrase. But to no avail. Bling-bling was now part of the lexicon, and I was powerless against the forces of the hip. Talk show hosts used it. Guests on talk shows talked about their bling-bling (or blaeng-blaeng, as it is so often pronounced). I half-expected Diane Sawyer to toss out something about her bling-bling. I imagine Oprah was using the phrase, but, hell... all of a sudden, everyone was talking about their bling-bling.
It's a Gen Y thing, I think. Or a shift in the pop culture psyche. I've never been sure which. Pop stars in the 60's and 70's might show off a neat car, or wear a nice dress, but it wasn't something you talked about. And folks emulated maybe a little, but it wasn't something you ever thought about as adopting as your own lifestyle. But the publicists downplayed that aspect. In the 80's everyone was so high on cocaine, they allowed Robin Leach into their homes, and made America wonder what they had to do to get a gold-toilet seat, too. But for the most part, everyone was too drunk and high to even notice they owned much of anything.
But the J-Lo's, and Mariah Carey's and 50-Cent's and P-Diddy's TALKED about it. They TALKED about the stuff they bought, and what they owned, and it was a hell of a thing. They had the bling-bling, and who the hell were you if you didn't have some, too?
The new notion was this:
All of America is already famous. All of America is on the verge of being a star tomorrow. We can all sing well enough, dance well enough, and we all look good in those pants we got at the Abercrombie & Fitch. All of America is going to wake up tomorrow, and the TV cameras will be upon them, and, by GOD... we will be ready. We'll have on our bling-bling like our royal jewels and say "Jesus... what took you so long to figure it out?"
And so I was reading an article not too long ago, and they were using "bling-bling", but, as hip writers will do, they had co-opted and transmorgified the meaning. The writer had used "The bling" as something along the lines of the perfectly usable word "cachet". Something like "Senator Boring has the credentials and the bling-bling to be noticed." Hell, I don't remember exactly what was said, but I knew it wasn't good...
"They're using it out of the original context..." I pondered. But, you know... it was going to happen, and that's the way hip, young writers work and our language works.
But today...
Today I was watching USA's Before & After'noon Movie (which happened to be Burton's version of Batman), and at the commercial breaks, some genius decided we'd like to see some privileged high school girl get ready for prom. It was Before & After'noon, so we get a movie before noon and a movie after noon, and over 6 hours we get to see an already perfectly pretty girl get her hair done, so it's like before and after(get it????). And here's the good part: the girl is on the show because, tee hee, her first two trips to prom were SUCH A DISASTER, but this time, Mom wanted to make sure this evening would be the kind of night dreams and memories were made of...
Okay, NOTE TO PROM GIRL'S MOM: If your daughter's gone to prom with three different guys over three different years, she may already have that memory you're praying to God she doesn't already have.
So, anyway, the totally scary middle-aged lady who has made her life getting teen-age girls ready for cotillions and stuff has our Barbie dressed up and staring at the camera like Bambi in headlights, and declares she now needs her "bling-bling" (ie: her expensive looking rented jewelry provided by USA).
She. Needs. Her. "Bling-bling."
Bling-bling.
Yes, a phrase which began in the heart of the hip-hop community is now being bantied about by a 50ish lady owning nothing but Josh Groban and Anne Murray records. Bling-bling, from the mouth of this goober, in a suburban backyard, on a Saturday afternoon movie show. Bling-bling, which this jewelry really didn't qualify as anyway... bling-bling, which, may appear at some proms, but was most certainly NOT going to fit into this poor, deluded mother's vision of what was going to be a Disney-esque evening with magical chariots and coachmen (but was probably going to end with some puking and a lot of tears).
Bling-bling.
And as it slipped from the weird make-up/ ward-robe ladies' lips, there was a sound like glass breaking as a small part of America died.
Bling-bling, they're still going to invoke you. You're still a popular phrase. Maybe too popular? For the most part, they may even use you with the original meaning, but you will never be the same. They're going to drag you kicking and screaming into routine usage. You're going to be watered down like the original usage of "rock n' roll", or "juke." You were kind of silly to begin with, and maybe you were too cute for your own good. Maybe that was the source of your ultimate demise.
I'm not sure I can even miss you, bling-bling. How can I miss you if you won't go away?
I invite all Leaguers to share their memories of the bling...
a catch-phrase is dead.
The bling is dead. Long live the bling.
Today, at 2:20pm PT, the phrase "bling-bling", AKA "blingbling", AKA "BlingBling", died a horrible and miserable death as used, somewhat properly, by one of the stars of USA Network's Before & After'noon Movies. This marked the last time anyone will ever look good or not sound like an idiot using the phrase "bling-bling."
I first heard the phrase "bling-bling" around 2000. I had no idea what it meant, and let the phrase slide, assuming it would go as soon as it had come (as phrases do more when you're in college and around college). I had previously misinterpreted "'da bomb" as meaning something was bad, as in, it was a bomb. I was, clearly, very wrong. And I had already paid dearly for misinterpreting that one while working at a record store.
Finally the use of "bling-bling" used a critical mass in usage on television, in casual conversation, and finally I heard one of our student workers use it, and I had to ask.
"You don't know?"
"No."
"HA HA HA"
"Why the &*#$ would I know what it means?"
"Don't you watch MTV?"
"I'm not twelve," I explained.
"Oh. Well," the student worker spoke very slowly, to explain to me, who was so unfortunate and so obviously un-hip. "It means, like, lots of flashy jewelry and stuff."
"What?"
"Like... lots of gold."
"How the hell did anyone get 'bling-bling' out of that?"
"'Cause it's the sound that too much gold makes when it slaps together."
"That," I concluded, "Is the dumbest thing I ever heard."
"You're so not cool."
"Tell me about it."
But the phrase stuck around. Like a stray cat you thoughtlessly fed tuna the one time, it just hung around at the door.
As a non-extreme, non-hip, non-hiphop, nor Gen Y sort of person, I did my best suburbanite Gen Xer routine, and only used the phrase when I was being silly and poking fun at the phrase. But to no avail. Bling-bling was now part of the lexicon, and I was powerless against the forces of the hip. Talk show hosts used it. Guests on talk shows talked about their bling-bling (or blaeng-blaeng, as it is so often pronounced). I half-expected Diane Sawyer to toss out something about her bling-bling. I imagine Oprah was using the phrase, but, hell... all of a sudden, everyone was talking about their bling-bling.
It's a Gen Y thing, I think. Or a shift in the pop culture psyche. I've never been sure which. Pop stars in the 60's and 70's might show off a neat car, or wear a nice dress, but it wasn't something you talked about. And folks emulated maybe a little, but it wasn't something you ever thought about as adopting as your own lifestyle. But the publicists downplayed that aspect. In the 80's everyone was so high on cocaine, they allowed Robin Leach into their homes, and made America wonder what they had to do to get a gold-toilet seat, too. But for the most part, everyone was too drunk and high to even notice they owned much of anything.
But the J-Lo's, and Mariah Carey's and 50-Cent's and P-Diddy's TALKED about it. They TALKED about the stuff they bought, and what they owned, and it was a hell of a thing. They had the bling-bling, and who the hell were you if you didn't have some, too?
The new notion was this:
All of America is already famous. All of America is on the verge of being a star tomorrow. We can all sing well enough, dance well enough, and we all look good in those pants we got at the Abercrombie & Fitch. All of America is going to wake up tomorrow, and the TV cameras will be upon them, and, by GOD... we will be ready. We'll have on our bling-bling like our royal jewels and say "Jesus... what took you so long to figure it out?"
And so I was reading an article not too long ago, and they were using "bling-bling", but, as hip writers will do, they had co-opted and transmorgified the meaning. The writer had used "The bling" as something along the lines of the perfectly usable word "cachet". Something like "Senator Boring has the credentials and the bling-bling to be noticed." Hell, I don't remember exactly what was said, but I knew it wasn't good...
"They're using it out of the original context..." I pondered. But, you know... it was going to happen, and that's the way hip, young writers work and our language works.
But today...
Today I was watching USA's Before & After'noon Movie (which happened to be Burton's version of Batman), and at the commercial breaks, some genius decided we'd like to see some privileged high school girl get ready for prom. It was Before & After'noon, so we get a movie before noon and a movie after noon, and over 6 hours we get to see an already perfectly pretty girl get her hair done, so it's like before and after(get it????). And here's the good part: the girl is on the show because, tee hee, her first two trips to prom were SUCH A DISASTER, but this time, Mom wanted to make sure this evening would be the kind of night dreams and memories were made of...
Okay, NOTE TO PROM GIRL'S MOM: If your daughter's gone to prom with three different guys over three different years, she may already have that memory you're praying to God she doesn't already have.
So, anyway, the totally scary middle-aged lady who has made her life getting teen-age girls ready for cotillions and stuff has our Barbie dressed up and staring at the camera like Bambi in headlights, and declares she now needs her "bling-bling" (ie: her expensive looking rented jewelry provided by USA).
She. Needs. Her. "Bling-bling."
Bling-bling.
Yes, a phrase which began in the heart of the hip-hop community is now being bantied about by a 50ish lady owning nothing but Josh Groban and Anne Murray records. Bling-bling, from the mouth of this goober, in a suburban backyard, on a Saturday afternoon movie show. Bling-bling, which this jewelry really didn't qualify as anyway... bling-bling, which, may appear at some proms, but was most certainly NOT going to fit into this poor, deluded mother's vision of what was going to be a Disney-esque evening with magical chariots and coachmen (but was probably going to end with some puking and a lot of tears).
Bling-bling.
And as it slipped from the weird make-up/ ward-robe ladies' lips, there was a sound like glass breaking as a small part of America died.
Bling-bling, they're still going to invoke you. You're still a popular phrase. Maybe too popular? For the most part, they may even use you with the original meaning, but you will never be the same. They're going to drag you kicking and screaming into routine usage. You're going to be watered down like the original usage of "rock n' roll", or "juke." You were kind of silly to begin with, and maybe you were too cute for your own good. Maybe that was the source of your ultimate demise.
I'm not sure I can even miss you, bling-bling. How can I miss you if you won't go away?
I invite all Leaguers to share their memories of the bling...
RANDY REVIEWS GARFIELD: THE MOVIE
Greeting, Leaguers!
A few months ago I threw down the gauntlet and challenged Jim D. and Randy to not only go see the new feature, Garfield: The Movie, but to write a review.
Well, Jim got a bit weak in the knees at the idea and went running back to his Bergman films. Randy, however, downed a bottle of Maalox and headed down to his local cinema.
I now owe Randy the ticket price and a debt of gratitude. He's saved us all a lot of trouble.
Garfield peers into the depths of Randy's beleaguered soul...
BEGIN RANDY REVIEW:
A few months ago, The League challenged Counselor and me to watch and review Garfield: The Movie. Counselor was unable to lower his standards long enough to view the film, but I have no such qualms. So yesterday, Emily and I trekked to our local mega-multiplex and viewed the movie. Per The League, I present my 500+-word review.
Like many children of the 80s, I grew up with Garfield. I recalled having dozens of Garfield books and watching his cartoons. I even received a Garfield phone for my Christmas one year. However, I was not excited about Garfield: The Movie when I heard about it. Instead, disappointment overcame me. It did not help matters that the Garfield in the movie is computer generated. I was used to the cartoon, 2D, Garfield. My inner child rejected the new-fangled 3D Garfield.
It was with this mindset I viewed the movie.
Garfield: The Movie does not compare to Garfield and Friends. No, Garfield and Friends is much better. Unlike other CGI characters such as Shrek, Nemo, Woody, and Buzz Lightyear, this Garfield is not very lovable. The cat is neither particularly cute nor adorable. In fact, the movie Garfield is rather irritating. Even Bill Murray – who voices Garfield – cannot save the character or the film. In fact, the human actors in the film – the two principles being Breckin Meyer as Jon Arbuckle and Jennifer Love Hewitt as Liz the Vet – are horrible. They, and the rest of the cast, look embarrassed to be in the movie. While most of the actors in the movie are B-List stars at best, it is surprising to see Hewitt here. It seems like only yesterday when she was an up and coming star in Hollywood. Now, she is relegated to mediocre roles and films such as this. The real star of the film is Odie. Unlike the CGI Garfield, Odie was cute, heart-warming, and lovable.
It goes without saying that the plot was simplistic and mawkish. It involves Garfield despising the newly adopted Odie then learning a lesson about friendship and sharing. There is also an evil villain, his dopey sidekick, and an army of cute animals. In the end, everyone is happy and the guy gets the girl. There were a few funny moments and zingers, but it was few and far between.
Unlike the Scooby-Doo movies, where there the CGI Scooby only serves as a foil to the other four human and primary characters, the decision to mix a CGI character with real cats and dogs makes for an odd combination. It would have served better to make the movie with 100% real animals ala Cats and Dogs or 100% CGI ala Toy Story, Finding Nemo, Shrek, et al.
Perhaps I am being too hard on Garfield: The Movie. I grew up with one idea and image of Garfield, and the movie presents a completely different view of the character. Of course, my reaction is rejection and spite. However, the movie targets a younger generation, one who did not spend Saturday mornings watching Garfield and Friends, and Sunday mornings reading the Garfield Sunday strip. Indeed, many of the children in the theater laughed at all the jokes and found the movie endearing. So in that sense, Garfield: The Movie succeeds, but if you are a child of the 80s looking for the Garfield of your youth, avoid this movie and instead buy (or rent) the soon to be released Garfield and Friends Vol. 1.
Nevertheless, if you happen to be stuck watching this film (say with a child), entertain yourself by attempting to spot Jim Davis, who – according to IMDB – makes an un-credited cameo as a "Drunken Conventioner".
END RANDY REVIEW
So there you have it, Leaguers!
Thanks to Randy for going through this for the rest of us. I'm going to have to call into question the notion that Jennifer Love Hewitt ever had anything to offer anybody, let alone a sustainable career, but that's just me being snarky.
You can see what Randy is up to on a regular basis at his site: RHPT.com
Greeting, Leaguers!
A few months ago I threw down the gauntlet and challenged Jim D. and Randy to not only go see the new feature, Garfield: The Movie, but to write a review.
Well, Jim got a bit weak in the knees at the idea and went running back to his Bergman films. Randy, however, downed a bottle of Maalox and headed down to his local cinema.
I now owe Randy the ticket price and a debt of gratitude. He's saved us all a lot of trouble.
Garfield peers into the depths of Randy's beleaguered soul...
BEGIN RANDY REVIEW:
A few months ago, The League challenged Counselor and me to watch and review Garfield: The Movie. Counselor was unable to lower his standards long enough to view the film, but I have no such qualms. So yesterday, Emily and I trekked to our local mega-multiplex and viewed the movie. Per The League, I present my 500+-word review.
Like many children of the 80s, I grew up with Garfield. I recalled having dozens of Garfield books and watching his cartoons. I even received a Garfield phone for my Christmas one year. However, I was not excited about Garfield: The Movie when I heard about it. Instead, disappointment overcame me. It did not help matters that the Garfield in the movie is computer generated. I was used to the cartoon, 2D, Garfield. My inner child rejected the new-fangled 3D Garfield.
It was with this mindset I viewed the movie.
Garfield: The Movie does not compare to Garfield and Friends. No, Garfield and Friends is much better. Unlike other CGI characters such as Shrek, Nemo, Woody, and Buzz Lightyear, this Garfield is not very lovable. The cat is neither particularly cute nor adorable. In fact, the movie Garfield is rather irritating. Even Bill Murray – who voices Garfield – cannot save the character or the film. In fact, the human actors in the film – the two principles being Breckin Meyer as Jon Arbuckle and Jennifer Love Hewitt as Liz the Vet – are horrible. They, and the rest of the cast, look embarrassed to be in the movie. While most of the actors in the movie are B-List stars at best, it is surprising to see Hewitt here. It seems like only yesterday when she was an up and coming star in Hollywood. Now, she is relegated to mediocre roles and films such as this. The real star of the film is Odie. Unlike the CGI Garfield, Odie was cute, heart-warming, and lovable.
It goes without saying that the plot was simplistic and mawkish. It involves Garfield despising the newly adopted Odie then learning a lesson about friendship and sharing. There is also an evil villain, his dopey sidekick, and an army of cute animals. In the end, everyone is happy and the guy gets the girl. There were a few funny moments and zingers, but it was few and far between.
Unlike the Scooby-Doo movies, where there the CGI Scooby only serves as a foil to the other four human and primary characters, the decision to mix a CGI character with real cats and dogs makes for an odd combination. It would have served better to make the movie with 100% real animals ala Cats and Dogs or 100% CGI ala Toy Story, Finding Nemo, Shrek, et al.
Perhaps I am being too hard on Garfield: The Movie. I grew up with one idea and image of Garfield, and the movie presents a completely different view of the character. Of course, my reaction is rejection and spite. However, the movie targets a younger generation, one who did not spend Saturday mornings watching Garfield and Friends, and Sunday mornings reading the Garfield Sunday strip. Indeed, many of the children in the theater laughed at all the jokes and found the movie endearing. So in that sense, Garfield: The Movie succeeds, but if you are a child of the 80s looking for the Garfield of your youth, avoid this movie and instead buy (or rent) the soon to be released Garfield and Friends Vol. 1.
Nevertheless, if you happen to be stuck watching this film (say with a child), entertain yourself by attempting to spot Jim Davis, who – according to IMDB – makes an un-credited cameo as a "Drunken Conventioner".
END RANDY REVIEW
So there you have it, Leaguers!
Thanks to Randy for going through this for the rest of us. I'm going to have to call into question the notion that Jennifer Love Hewitt ever had anything to offer anybody, let alone a sustainable career, but that's just me being snarky.
You can see what Randy is up to on a regular basis at his site: RHPT.com
Friday, June 11, 2004
More on Brad Meltzer's Identity Crisis limited series for DC Comics
Houston Chronicle
New York Daily News
St. Louis Dispatch
I also need to mention Steven Seagle's (not Seagal as I previously misspelled it in a fit of madness...) "It's a Bird..." This is an excellent graphic novel, but it's only out in hardback. I get deep discounts from my retailer as the lone Superman geek of his store on anything Superman related which he's overstocked.
Anyway, Seagle was recently interviewed about the graphic novel on NPR.
Houston Chronicle
New York Daily News
St. Louis Dispatch
I also need to mention Steven Seagle's (not Seagal as I previously misspelled it in a fit of madness...) "It's a Bird..." This is an excellent graphic novel, but it's only out in hardback. I get deep discounts from my retailer as the lone Superman geek of his store on anything Superman related which he's overstocked.
Anyway, Seagle was recently interviewed about the graphic novel on NPR.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)