This once again proves that everything I did in the past was gold, pure gold.
Showing posts with label favorite. Show all posts
Showing posts with label favorite. Show all posts
Friday, November 19, 2010
Friday Favorite: Thoughts from The Lineup
Categories:
culture kills comics,
favorite,
movies
0
Contributions
My somehow relevant comic about what people are thinking while waiting for Harry Potter in line. I put this together at StripGenerator back in July 2007.
This once again proves that everything I did in the past was gold, pure gold.
This once again proves that everything I did in the past was gold, pure gold.
Friday, October 15, 2010
Friday Favorite: A First-Person Shooter I'd like to see in another format
Categories:
favorite,
television,
video games
0
Contributions
From back in November of 2006. Some recent discussions about the possibility of a TimeSplitters 4 brought this up in my mind.
--
After reading about the shelving of the Halo movie and seeing the dreadful movie version of Doom over the weekend, I got to thinking about a certain FPS series that perhaps deserves a little bit more media exposure, though I don't think film is the ideal medium for its stories to be revealed.
I am, of course, talking about the TimeSplitters, a series of games based on the premise that aliens from outside of our time/dimension are attempting to destroy the human race at various periods of our modern history and it is up to a few heroes who are in the right place at the right time(literally of course), to stop them.
Why Timesplitters?
With the Timesplitters universe have a potentially interesting set of characters from various time periods, their adversaries and a larger evil to fight. I mean, I would love to see some more stories about the the swashbuckling explorer/archeologist Captain Ash in the early part of the 20th century, the hip 1970's groove of superspy Harry Tipper and the gunslinging prowess of Elijah Jones in the Wild West amongst others, not to mention seeing more about Sergeant Cortez and Corporal Hart trying to save our entire species from annihilation at the hands of the twisted and evil Timesplitters from the 2400's and other points in our future as well. There is a lot of ground to cover, a lot of places to explore and a lot of stories worth telling. Of course, I am not looking for a movie here, because frankly, that would be a waste of the breadth of available material. But I do think that an animated series could do the whole concept justice. I mean, you have aliens, robots, spies, zombies, serial killers, gunslingers, mutants... the whole gambit of science fiction and horror characters in one packages. Of course, you have to remember that of all the plot devices out there, time travel is my favorite, so I may be biased as well.
Why am I advocating this be presented in animated form?
The TimeSplitters story is sort of cartoonish to begin with, so it makes sense to continue in that style, and it would seem to be easier to maintain the overall look and style of the gaming experience and environments in an animated form. And since you can do a lot with a talented crew of voice actors, a few quality choices could fill the character rosters nicely. It would also permit those involved to take storylines in the directions they need to go without having to worry about the costs of special effects and the hassles of location shooting.
Now, I was never a huge fan of the Star Wars franchise, but I was impressed by the idea behind the Clone Wars cartoon series, and that is really the impetus behind this Timesplitters idea. I wouldn't want it to be like the action cartoons that were on when I was child, where the storylines don't all lead up to an ending (I'm looking right at you, G.I. Joe with that one).
How likely is this to happen. I really am not holding my breath, but I think this could really work.
--
After reading about the shelving of the Halo movie and seeing the dreadful movie version of Doom over the weekend, I got to thinking about a certain FPS series that perhaps deserves a little bit more media exposure, though I don't think film is the ideal medium for its stories to be revealed.
I am, of course, talking about the TimeSplitters, a series of games based on the premise that aliens from outside of our time/dimension are attempting to destroy the human race at various periods of our modern history and it is up to a few heroes who are in the right place at the right time(literally of course), to stop them.
Why Timesplitters?
With the Timesplitters universe have a potentially interesting set of characters from various time periods, their adversaries and a larger evil to fight. I mean, I would love to see some more stories about the the swashbuckling explorer/archeologist Captain Ash in the early part of the 20th century, the hip 1970's groove of superspy Harry Tipper and the gunslinging prowess of Elijah Jones in the Wild West amongst others, not to mention seeing more about Sergeant Cortez and Corporal Hart trying to save our entire species from annihilation at the hands of the twisted and evil Timesplitters from the 2400's and other points in our future as well. There is a lot of ground to cover, a lot of places to explore and a lot of stories worth telling. Of course, I am not looking for a movie here, because frankly, that would be a waste of the breadth of available material. But I do think that an animated series could do the whole concept justice. I mean, you have aliens, robots, spies, zombies, serial killers, gunslingers, mutants... the whole gambit of science fiction and horror characters in one packages. Of course, you have to remember that of all the plot devices out there, time travel is my favorite, so I may be biased as well.
Why am I advocating this be presented in animated form?
The TimeSplitters story is sort of cartoonish to begin with, so it makes sense to continue in that style, and it would seem to be easier to maintain the overall look and style of the gaming experience and environments in an animated form. And since you can do a lot with a talented crew of voice actors, a few quality choices could fill the character rosters nicely. It would also permit those involved to take storylines in the directions they need to go without having to worry about the costs of special effects and the hassles of location shooting.
Now, I was never a huge fan of the Star Wars franchise, but I was impressed by the idea behind the Clone Wars cartoon series, and that is really the impetus behind this Timesplitters idea. I wouldn't want it to be like the action cartoons that were on when I was child, where the storylines don't all lead up to an ending (I'm looking right at you, G.I. Joe with that one).
How likely is this to happen. I really am not holding my breath, but I think this could really work.
Tags:
Friday, July 23, 2010
Friday Favorite: What is Hollywood Ugly?
Categories:
favorite,
movies,
television
1 Contributions
I totally remember when I wrote this. I had just seen previews for a show that was coming for the fall of 2006 called Betty the Ugly and I was absolutely outraged.
We all know what happened that fall after I watched that very same program. Yeah, I ate a lot of crow about that one.
But this was short and sweet, and for the most part, it still applies today. (And I think this may have been the only time Celeste in the City has ever been publicly mentioned)
--
You know there is something wrong in Hollywood when this is "ugly".
This was an entry that was a long time in coming, but what was the last straw was the previews for Betty the Ugly I've been seeing lately. I know that the point of the show, much like The Devil Wears Prada(I know that picture is from the Princess Diaries) and Celeste in the City is about women who are overcoming the rigors of a publishing world that is aligned against them, but I still saddens me that a certain look has been deemed by Hollywood as their conception of ugly, especially since the characters they play are all genuinely kind and lovable people. I mean those are qualities we generally want in people we want to be around.
There is just something that rubs me the wrong way about this whole beauty standard. I mean, the actress playing the title role in Betty the Ugly also starred in the critically acclaimed film Real Women have Curves. I am trying to think of young women in the movies who were referred to as "ugly" that were in fact ugly, and I am having a hard time doing it. I even think independent movies get in on this act too.
But it seems that satirically minded people have picked up on this trend too. For example, I remember an episode of the Simpsons where Moe Sylak was auditioning for for a soap opera and he is rejected because the director wanted someone who was Hollywood ugly, not "ugly ugly".
I am just wondering if there will ever be a day in Hollywood where more normal looking people are part of the mix once again. Of course, that day will be right after allreality shows pick totally normal looking casts as well, because we all know that the people they select for those are totally representative of the population at large. *rolleyes*
We all know what happened that fall after I watched that very same program. Yeah, I ate a lot of crow about that one.
But this was short and sweet, and for the most part, it still applies today. (And I think this may have been the only time Celeste in the City has ever been publicly mentioned)
--
You know there is something wrong in Hollywood when this is "ugly".
This was an entry that was a long time in coming, but what was the last straw was the previews for Betty the Ugly I've been seeing lately. I know that the point of the show, much like The Devil Wears Prada(I know that picture is from the Princess Diaries) and Celeste in the City is about women who are overcoming the rigors of a publishing world that is aligned against them, but I still saddens me that a certain look has been deemed by Hollywood as their conception of ugly, especially since the characters they play are all genuinely kind and lovable people. I mean those are qualities we generally want in people we want to be around.
There is just something that rubs me the wrong way about this whole beauty standard. I mean, the actress playing the title role in Betty the Ugly also starred in the critically acclaimed film Real Women have Curves. I am trying to think of young women in the movies who were referred to as "ugly" that were in fact ugly, and I am having a hard time doing it. I even think independent movies get in on this act too.
But it seems that satirically minded people have picked up on this trend too. For example, I remember an episode of the Simpsons where Moe Sylak was auditioning for for a soap opera and he is rejected because the director wanted someone who was Hollywood ugly, not "ugly ugly".
I am just wondering if there will ever be a day in Hollywood where more normal looking people are part of the mix once again. Of course, that day will be right after allreality shows pick totally normal looking casts as well, because we all know that the people they select for those are totally representative of the population at large. *rolleyes*
Tags:
Friday, June 18, 2010
Friday Favorite: A List Without Controversy? Is it Possible?
Categories:
favorite,
music
2
Contributions
The answer is no.
You see, I was looking through this book called 1001 Albums You Must Hear Before You Die, and I love lists and such, so I thought it was a great concept. And then I saw something so horrible that it made me question the merit of the entire book.
How would this have happened you ask? Well, I flipped to page 864 and found out that one of the albums I must hear before I die turned out to be Chocolate Starfish and the Hotdog Flavored Water by Limp Bizkit.
Allow me this Sheila Broflovski moment: wha Wha-WHAT?
Now, truth be told, yes, nu-metal is not my thing, and personally I think Fred Durst is about as appealing as an entertainer as a bowl full of septic tank runoff is as a meal. No, this wasn't about the fact that I don't like the band. It is the fact that they picked a horrible album by them, one that was largely panned. I mean, if they had taken one of their earlier albums, then I wouldn't have blinked an eye at it.
Now, I know the argument can be made that lists like these are a subjective kind of thing, and in all honesty, I agree with that. However, on some level, there is some concensus on what is and is not a good album, and I would have thought that a panel would have sifted through this process. I mean, there are always albums on these lists that I disagree with, and others that I think belong there, but never before have I been so stunned by an inclusion where money or services didn't change hands.
Maybe there is some critical gap between North America and Britain that caused this to happen. I mean, there has to be some explanation aside from the fact that Interscope records was underwriting the book, which is a tactic they've used in the past.
The proof is in the pudding really.
I mean, does this picture lie? Or does it represent too small a sample? How about this rating amalgamation then?
So I'll put it this way. I would rather die than listen to that album in this lifetime.
---
I am a little bummed because last week I noticed that most of the posts from my first 6 months of blogging are now without comments (they've seemed to have disappeared sometime over the last month). I've written Google about it, but I haven't heard anything. I hope they come back soon.
You see, I was looking through this book called 1001 Albums You Must Hear Before You Die, and I love lists and such, so I thought it was a great concept. And then I saw something so horrible that it made me question the merit of the entire book.
How would this have happened you ask? Well, I flipped to page 864 and found out that one of the albums I must hear before I die turned out to be Chocolate Starfish and the Hotdog Flavored Water by Limp Bizkit.
Allow me this Sheila Broflovski moment: wha Wha-WHAT?
Now, truth be told, yes, nu-metal is not my thing, and personally I think Fred Durst is about as appealing as an entertainer as a bowl full of septic tank runoff is as a meal. No, this wasn't about the fact that I don't like the band. It is the fact that they picked a horrible album by them, one that was largely panned. I mean, if they had taken one of their earlier albums, then I wouldn't have blinked an eye at it.
Now, I know the argument can be made that lists like these are a subjective kind of thing, and in all honesty, I agree with that. However, on some level, there is some concensus on what is and is not a good album, and I would have thought that a panel would have sifted through this process. I mean, there are always albums on these lists that I disagree with, and others that I think belong there, but never before have I been so stunned by an inclusion where money or services didn't change hands.
Maybe there is some critical gap between North America and Britain that caused this to happen. I mean, there has to be some explanation aside from the fact that Interscope records was underwriting the book, which is a tactic they've used in the past.
The proof is in the pudding really.
I mean, does this picture lie? Or does it represent too small a sample? How about this rating amalgamation then?
So I'll put it this way. I would rather die than listen to that album in this lifetime.
---
I am a little bummed because last week I noticed that most of the posts from my first 6 months of blogging are now without comments (they've seemed to have disappeared sometime over the last month). I've written Google about it, but I haven't heard anything. I hope they come back soon.
Tags:
Friday, February 26, 2010
Friday Favorite: A note to the Film Distributors and Theatre owners out there
Categories:
advertising,
favorite,
movies
0
Contributions
I think it is sort of cute that I actually mention VHS near the start of this entry, posted in November 2006. It is so quaint.
The message is one which I still believe in however.
--
I know there is one issue that most people agree on: they are sick of seeing straight-up advertising before movies. I am not talking about the previews here; I am addressing the placement of television ads for products and services before feature films at the theatre and on DVD/VHS recordings.
If the theatres, studios and advertisers insist on showing the movie-going and renting/buying public ads before features, they should at least compromise with us all and not show the same ads they do on television, because we all know they can do better.
I mean, look at the BMW Films series of branded content. You are telling me that the audience wouldn't respond to seeing well-crafted narrative short films featuring A and B-list celebrities and directed by accomplished directors? I am paying for that experience for an engaging narrative, and the BMW films ads do have that quality to them. Ads of this nature would be a welcome change from most of the drek we are subjected to before a movie. Considering the quality of those short films, they are probably better than most of features they would be the vignettes to.
Or how about some more of that old-time spectacle like that Honda ad... something that could be water cooler/web forum talk, ads which would be perpetually on Youtube and take on a life of their own, and while these ads may be expensive, they could probably yield better results than the ads that are currently being used and it would probably do a lot to clean up that black eye the industry is getting for how ubiquitous advertising is.
So I implore people at all levels of this problem to demand better. What's the worse that could happen?
--
In looking back at that Honda ad again, the company could totally play dirty and start playing that ad again just to stick it to Toyota.
The message is one which I still believe in however.
--
I know there is one issue that most people agree on: they are sick of seeing straight-up advertising before movies. I am not talking about the previews here; I am addressing the placement of television ads for products and services before feature films at the theatre and on DVD/VHS recordings.
If the theatres, studios and advertisers insist on showing the movie-going and renting/buying public ads before features, they should at least compromise with us all and not show the same ads they do on television, because we all know they can do better.
I mean, look at the BMW Films series of branded content. You are telling me that the audience wouldn't respond to seeing well-crafted narrative short films featuring A and B-list celebrities and directed by accomplished directors? I am paying for that experience for an engaging narrative, and the BMW films ads do have that quality to them. Ads of this nature would be a welcome change from most of the drek we are subjected to before a movie. Considering the quality of those short films, they are probably better than most of features they would be the vignettes to.
Or how about some more of that old-time spectacle like that Honda ad... something that could be water cooler/web forum talk, ads which would be perpetually on Youtube and take on a life of their own, and while these ads may be expensive, they could probably yield better results than the ads that are currently being used and it would probably do a lot to clean up that black eye the industry is getting for how ubiquitous advertising is.
So I implore people at all levels of this problem to demand better. What's the worse that could happen?
--
In looking back at that Honda ad again, the company could totally play dirty and start playing that ad again just to stick it to Toyota.
Tags:
Friday, February 19, 2010
Friday Favorite: Loving your City: A prerequisite for art?
Categories:
favorite,
music
3
Contributions
From back in August 2006.
--
I'm feeling a little philosophical tonight, so bear with me.
Recently I heard the Beastie Boys' An Open Letter to NYC, and it has just stuck with me the past few weeks. I know it is a post-911 song and all, but there is still a lot of love doled out to the individuality and character of the city and I realized that I've never lived someplace that I enjoyed enough and was so interesting to immortalized in an love song to the seemingly inanimate yet breathing entity that is a city. I sort of envy that feeling.
Perhaps it is my own fault, as I may be closed off to some of the things that make my mildly cosmopolitan place of residence interesting, but love is probably the one thing that I don't feel. Or it could be that I indeed live someplace that has some problems. I mean, for a few years we had our art gallery at the mall to make way for a casino, which is weird in a sad way.
Now a lot of people love New York (if they didn't, they wouldn't buy the t-shirts, would they?*), Chicago (oh how I want thee), Boston, Los Angeles, Seattle... the list goes on and on, and of course a lot of laudatory work has been produced about most of them along with a fair share of derogatory works of verse, fiction and non-fiction. So I guess the more general question is this: can great art be derived from a locale that the creator is apathetic towards or outright loathes?
* I know they are for tourists. Really, I do.
--
I'm feeling a little philosophical tonight, so bear with me.
Recently I heard the Beastie Boys' An Open Letter to NYC, and it has just stuck with me the past few weeks. I know it is a post-911 song and all, but there is still a lot of love doled out to the individuality and character of the city and I realized that I've never lived someplace that I enjoyed enough and was so interesting to immortalized in an love song to the seemingly inanimate yet breathing entity that is a city. I sort of envy that feeling.
Perhaps it is my own fault, as I may be closed off to some of the things that make my mildly cosmopolitan place of residence interesting, but love is probably the one thing that I don't feel. Or it could be that I indeed live someplace that has some problems. I mean, for a few years we had our art gallery at the mall to make way for a casino, which is weird in a sad way.
Now a lot of people love New York (if they didn't, they wouldn't buy the t-shirts, would they?*), Chicago (oh how I want thee), Boston, Los Angeles, Seattle... the list goes on and on, and of course a lot of laudatory work has been produced about most of them along with a fair share of derogatory works of verse, fiction and non-fiction. So I guess the more general question is this: can great art be derived from a locale that the creator is apathetic towards or outright loathes?
* I know they are for tourists. Really, I do.
Tags:
Friday, January 29, 2010
Friday Favorite: The Joy of Coffee: A Culture Kills Comic
Categories:
culture kills comics,
favorite
0
Contributions
At one time I had a weekly comic. I miss doing it. I don't know if I will start doing it again however.
Here is one of my classics.
--
Created with the flash-enabled madness of Strip Generator
Bad dirty mind. Bad dirty mind.
Here is one of my classics.
--
Created with the flash-enabled madness of Strip Generator
Bad dirty mind. Bad dirty mind.
Tags:
Friday, January 22, 2010
Friday Favorite: My Vote for Late Night 2009? Patton Oswalt
Categories:
favorite,
television
4
Contributions
For my final word on this whole NBC late night debacle, I thought I would go back to February 2007 to refresh an entry I wrote regarding who I felt was the best choice to replace Conan O'Brien on Late Night after he moved onto The Tonight Show.
I admit that sometimes I get things very wrong. This was one of those posts that given what we know now, was an awful idea. But I still have to live with it and sometimes their is humor in folly.
I am glad what I wrote didn't come to pass.
I also swear this is the last time I am going to discuss this topic on Culture Kills for a long time. That is unless one of three things happen:
a) Conan's final show ratings tonight surpass Leno's final Tonight Show ratings.
b) Leno shows a remarkable lack of class on an upcoming Oprah appearance and he grossly slanders Conan O'Brien, who cannot defend himself because of the nature of his settlement with NBC (there would be monetary penalties and he is not allowed to be interviewed on another talk show for a while).
c) I got a really really bad comment on one of my previous posts about this subject and I single that person out for scorn and humiliation. (I am not talking about well-thought out responses to what I've written... you know the kind of thing I mean)
Other than that, I will likely be silent about this issue for a long time.
Anyway, here is that previous piece of poor prognostication. ;)
--
While I am happy that Conan O'Brien is going to be behind the big desk of the Tonight Show starting in 2009, I am worried about what is going to happen over at Late Night.
You see, there are two names currently floating around for this empty slot: Carson Daly and Jimmy Fallon.
Carson Daly currently has a show following Late Night called Last Call... and much like a bar at Last Call, there is little mirth there left as all the entertainment has left the building. And there is the fact that he isn't a comedian and really, not much of a personality either.
And well Jimmy Fallon... you know, that guy who starred in Taxi with Queen Latifah and is rumored to star as Major Nelson in the remake of I Dream of Jeannie, the guy who couldn't keep a straight face during sketches on Saturday Night Live? Yeah, that guy. I'll admit that the fact that he played Carson Daly on SNL gives him an edge over the former host of TRL, but really, even I have an edge over him. I don't think he has the stuff to fill that chair particularly well either.
I know that when Letterman left that slot in 1993 and Conan O'Brien ascended to those relatively lofty heights, there were a lot of naysayers then claiming that he had no business helming a talk show, and this may seem like more of the same, but there is a big diffence in these situations. Conan was truly an untested commodity, while the limitations of Jimmy Fallon and Carson Daly are clear today.
But rather than merely kvetch about the people who are in line for that throne, I thought it would be better to suggest an alternative.
Patton Oswalt.
When you look back at the almost three decades of Late Night, you will notice something profound... the comics who hosted it were sort of geeky and that worked for them and Patton Oswalt with his pop cultural sensibilities would fit well with that aesthetic.
He is also willing to take a joke to its natural conclusion, even if it makes him look foolish to get the laugh. His delivery is very natural and conversational, and I think he would probably be very adept at the art of interviewing.
He has experience working within a writer's room from his stint at MadTV and managing a show from putting together the Comedians of Comedy tour. And because he was a featured player on The King of Queens, he has some additional face recognition with Middle America and experience working on a show week in and week out while at the same time, Oswalt also has quite a lot of cache because of the edgy nature of his comedy. He is the best of both worlds: an affable, genial personality with quite a lot to say.
Now I don't even know if he would consider such a position, but I think if he was interested, NBC should at least give him a shot, as he is far and away a much better choice than either of the personalities they are currently rumored to be after.
So, given the choices out there, who would you hire for that position?
--
Patton Oswalt naturally went on to greater things, including a starring role in a Pixar movie and numerous comedy specials, so clearly, he didn't need that gig, even if it was offered to him. Let's just say, I stand corrected.
I admit that sometimes I get things very wrong. This was one of those posts that given what we know now, was an awful idea. But I still have to live with it and sometimes their is humor in folly.
I am glad what I wrote didn't come to pass.
I also swear this is the last time I am going to discuss this topic on Culture Kills for a long time. That is unless one of three things happen:
a) Conan's final show ratings tonight surpass Leno's final Tonight Show ratings.
b) Leno shows a remarkable lack of class on an upcoming Oprah appearance and he grossly slanders Conan O'Brien, who cannot defend himself because of the nature of his settlement with NBC (there would be monetary penalties and he is not allowed to be interviewed on another talk show for a while).
c) I got a really really bad comment on one of my previous posts about this subject and I single that person out for scorn and humiliation. (I am not talking about well-thought out responses to what I've written... you know the kind of thing I mean)
Other than that, I will likely be silent about this issue for a long time.
Anyway, here is that previous piece of poor prognostication. ;)
--
While I am happy that Conan O'Brien is going to be behind the big desk of the Tonight Show starting in 2009, I am worried about what is going to happen over at Late Night.
You see, there are two names currently floating around for this empty slot: Carson Daly and Jimmy Fallon.
Carson Daly currently has a show following Late Night called Last Call... and much like a bar at Last Call, there is little mirth there left as all the entertainment has left the building. And there is the fact that he isn't a comedian and really, not much of a personality either.
And well Jimmy Fallon... you know, that guy who starred in Taxi with Queen Latifah and is rumored to star as Major Nelson in the remake of I Dream of Jeannie, the guy who couldn't keep a straight face during sketches on Saturday Night Live? Yeah, that guy. I'll admit that the fact that he played Carson Daly on SNL gives him an edge over the former host of TRL, but really, even I have an edge over him. I don't think he has the stuff to fill that chair particularly well either.
I know that when Letterman left that slot in 1993 and Conan O'Brien ascended to those relatively lofty heights, there were a lot of naysayers then claiming that he had no business helming a talk show, and this may seem like more of the same, but there is a big diffence in these situations. Conan was truly an untested commodity, while the limitations of Jimmy Fallon and Carson Daly are clear today.
But rather than merely kvetch about the people who are in line for that throne, I thought it would be better to suggest an alternative.
Patton Oswalt.When you look back at the almost three decades of Late Night, you will notice something profound... the comics who hosted it were sort of geeky and that worked for them and Patton Oswalt with his pop cultural sensibilities would fit well with that aesthetic.
He is also willing to take a joke to its natural conclusion, even if it makes him look foolish to get the laugh. His delivery is very natural and conversational, and I think he would probably be very adept at the art of interviewing.
He has experience working within a writer's room from his stint at MadTV and managing a show from putting together the Comedians of Comedy tour. And because he was a featured player on The King of Queens, he has some additional face recognition with Middle America and experience working on a show week in and week out while at the same time, Oswalt also has quite a lot of cache because of the edgy nature of his comedy. He is the best of both worlds: an affable, genial personality with quite a lot to say.
Now I don't even know if he would consider such a position, but I think if he was interested, NBC should at least give him a shot, as he is far and away a much better choice than either of the personalities they are currently rumored to be after.
So, given the choices out there, who would you hire for that position?
--
Patton Oswalt naturally went on to greater things, including a starring role in a Pixar movie and numerous comedy specials, so clearly, he didn't need that gig, even if it was offered to him. Let's just say, I stand corrected.
Tags:
Friday, October 09, 2009
Friday Favorite: The World's Shittiest Mixtape.... NOT!
Categories:
favorite,
music,
videos
1 Contributions
I almost posted this last week for the Friday Favorite, but knowing that I was going to ask people about the most depressing songs they've heard, reposting today seemed like a more ideal solution.
--
College Humor once again gave me something to ponder. Two guys made a bet about who could make, and I quote "the world's shittiest mixtape", with the loser having to carry a boombox blasting out the entire contents of the contest.
And while I do admire the fact that the loser did go out of the street with a big boombox for the afternoon after losing, I think that both contestants could have done so much more with the challenge.
I mean, in actuality, I would call what they ended up making at best, a lame mixtape, because really, the barrel has so much more crap at the bottom of it and neither party got even close to scraping said bottom.
Paula Cole? Sixpence None the richer? Gloria Estefan? Really... this is the best they could come up with? The whole point of the exercise was not only did the songs have to be bad, but they had to be really embarrassing to be associated with.
Get some polka on that thing... some Tiny Tim, or some really weird found music. There was a lot of ways they could have made a horrifyingly shitty mixtape, and I just think they copped out.
When I started watching the video, I thought something like YMCA by the Village People would pop up or anything disco really. Or what about this. It looked like late summer/early autumn... why not Jingle Bells as performed by dogs. And the world of covers alone could have won that contest. The possibilities seem endless, but the execution was weak.
So, what would you have put on the world's shittiest mixtape?
--
And in thinking about this post, I can think of so many more warped things that could have been on that tape. I mean, if you went to a dollar store and bought discount cds there, you could probably fill many such tapes with ease.
--
College Humor once again gave me something to ponder. Two guys made a bet about who could make, and I quote "the world's shittiest mixtape", with the loser having to carry a boombox blasting out the entire contents of the contest.
And while I do admire the fact that the loser did go out of the street with a big boombox for the afternoon after losing, I think that both contestants could have done so much more with the challenge.
I mean, in actuality, I would call what they ended up making at best, a lame mixtape, because really, the barrel has so much more crap at the bottom of it and neither party got even close to scraping said bottom.
Paula Cole? Sixpence None the richer? Gloria Estefan? Really... this is the best they could come up with? The whole point of the exercise was not only did the songs have to be bad, but they had to be really embarrassing to be associated with.
Get some polka on that thing... some Tiny Tim, or some really weird found music. There was a lot of ways they could have made a horrifyingly shitty mixtape, and I just think they copped out.
When I started watching the video, I thought something like YMCA by the Village People would pop up or anything disco really. Or what about this. It looked like late summer/early autumn... why not Jingle Bells as performed by dogs. And the world of covers alone could have won that contest. The possibilities seem endless, but the execution was weak.
So, what would you have put on the world's shittiest mixtape?
--
And in thinking about this post, I can think of so many more warped things that could have been on that tape. I mean, if you went to a dollar store and bought discount cds there, you could probably fill many such tapes with ease.
Tags:
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)