godthedog

i think you're an idiot and i don't find you that entertaining at all.

enduring love - overall, quite good with the creepiness & existential angst & what not. could've been REALLY good, but it lost its place a couple times in the drama and thematics. ray - eh. i truly do not get the verbal fellatio this movie is getting, as aside from foxx's performance it's an absolutely standard, cut-and-dry, formula biopic. it was pretty good, but i'm already having a hard time remembering it and i just saw it an hour & a half ago.

don't think you could find a way to possibly stretch that one hundred million dollars to three movies?

haven't listened to it all the way through. my expectations are very high.

somebody give me a working definition of "ambient music."

watch it again. then watch 'vertigo' and marvel at the fact that one man played both those parts. then watch 'mr smith goes to washington' and 'the philadelphia story'.

incidentally, i just turned sigs back on this morning and yours terrifies me.

congratulations. you've ousted kierkegaard and become my new sig.

Tool - Aenima 1. Stinkfist - 7 2. Eulogy - 6.7 3. H. - 7.5 4. Useful Idiot - 3 5. Forty-Six & 2 - 7.5 6. Message To Harry Manback - 2.5 7. Hokker With A Penis - 8 8. Intermission - 6 9. Jimmy - 6 10. Die Eier Von Satan - 3.5 11. Pushit - 6.5 12. Cesaro Summability - 1 13. Enema - 6 14. Ions - 1 15. Third Eye - 8.5

if you read this, then look at his avatar, the effect is pretty funny.

there IS a sizable difference between wishing death on someone and a death threat. "i hope you die" doesn't have quite the same effect as "i will kill you."

i'm kind of offended by that, as both of those directors are notoriously terrible in working with actors, polanski for torturing them & kubrick for just not having a clue. i'm sure polanski has a better understanding of the craft, being an actor himself, and there might be some method to his madness, but kubrick was famous for caring more about the lighting and the lens he was using, and just making his actors do the take over & over. when i think of kubrick directing, i can't picture him getting a great performance out of anybody, and i sure as hell can't picture him sitting down with jack to help him work on his character.

5-disc wong kar-wai box set, containing: 'as tears go by' (fantastic balance between HK action and WK-W's idiosyncracies) 'days of being wild' (only one of the set i hadn't seen--uneven & disappointing, despite the presence of Your Godess of Crying Onscreen Maggie Cheung) 'chunking express' (was always kind of lukewarm on it till i saw it again tonight--astonishingly good, probably his most consistent film before 'in the mood for love') 'fallen angels' (basically the same as 'chunking' but not quite as compelling, but still really good) 'happy together' (inconsistent and meandering at points, but it's got a good human core) now if only i could find a copy of 'ashes of time'.

i woke my roommate up i was laughing so hard at this. god bless the hyperbole. anyway... nicholson oozes charisma in a way that almost no one else does (except maybe jimmy stewart and, of course, brando), & he's a ton of fun to watch. great voice, great face, great control over his body. yes, hell no, and yes, in that order. grant got by on star power a lot, & is way stiffer than even the worst nicholson performance. he's got the magnetism, just doesn't have that fluid control over his movements & such. no, no, and no, in that order.

UGA, where i went to school, seems to be mainly republican, at least in the student body. there's basically 2 groups competing for control there: the artfuck hippies who inhabit the coffee shops & record stores (dem.), and the redneck frat brothers who go barhopping every weekend (rep.). i was with the former, but we were WAY outnumbered by the latter. there were always protestors under the arch downtown with signs like "axis of weasels" and so forth, but it was always the same 4 or 5 people, most of them middle-aged townies. the faculty seems pretty straight-up liberal, but that's to be expected since they aren't predominantly southern, like the students are. so anyway, i never really heard about any of the, "you're not a liberal? EAT SHIT AND DIE, MOTHERFUCKER!!" stuff. coming to NYC for grad school was a whole different story. the week i moved in there were protests all over town that were all "don't you DARE hold the republican national convention in my town!" i never understood that logic at all.

can somebody give some REASON why hunter s. thompson is or is not a good writer? reading things like and makes my brain hurt.

used copy of clapton unplugged for six dollars.

nirvana portishead

i have seen: 39 STEPS WOMAN IS A WOMAN, A WOMAN UNDER THE INFLUENCE, A ALEXANDER NEVSKY ALL THAT HEAVEN ALLOWS ALPHAVILLE ARMAGEDDON BAND OF OUTSIDERS BOB LE FLAMBEUR BRAZIL CHASING AMY CLEO FROM 5 TO 7 CONTEMPT CRIES AND WHISPERS DIARY OF A CHAMBERMAID DISCREET CHARM OF THE BOURGEOISIE, THE DO THE RIGHT THING EIGHT & 1/2 FEAR AND LOATHING IN LAS VEGAS; FIEND WITHOUT A FACE GENERAL IDI AMIN DADA GEORGE WASHINGTON GIMME SHELTER GOOD MORNING GREY GARDENS HEARTS AND MINDS HIDDEN FORTRESS HIGH AND LOW HIROSHIMA MON AMOUR IN THE MOOD FOR LOVE IVAN THE TERRIBLE I KNIFE IN THE WATER KWAIDAN LAST TEMPTATION OF CHRIST, THE L'AVVENTURA LE CERCLE ROUGE LE CORBEAU M. HULOT'S HOLIDAY MAN BITES DOG MONTY PYTHON'S LIFE OF BRIAN NAKED KISS NIGHT AND FOG NIGHT PORTER PASSION OF JOAN OF ARC PEPE LE MOKO RASHOMON RED BEARD RIFIFI ROCK, THE RULES OF THE GAME RUSHMORE SALESMAN SCENES FROM A MARRIAGE SEVEN SAMURAI SEVENTH SEAL SHADOWS SHOCK CORRIDOR STOLEN KISSES TASTE OF CHERRY 400 BLOWS, THE ROYAL TENENBAUMS, THE THIRD MAN THRONE OF BLOOD THROUGH A GLASS DARKLY TIME BANDITS TOKYO DRIFTER TOKYO STORY TRAFFIC UMBERTO D VAGABOND YOJIMBO and i would not buy this collection. too much information.

so many things wrong with this. 1) the quality of the reference itself is bad. everybody knows it, and it's ridiculously overused. 2) you brought attention to the fact that it was a reference. never ever ever do this; the whole point is for those "in the know" to get it, and for it to fly over the heads of everyone else. when you say "that was a reference," it leaves the former saying "no shit, sherlock" and the latter saying "so what?" 3) you basically congratulated yourself on the reference. even if it WAS a good reference, the self-congratulation makes you look significantly less cool. since this was not a good reference in the first place, it makes you look like eddie deezen, squinting through your coke bottle glasses while you say "hey everybody, look how cool i am" through your nose. Just one thing wrong with this. 1. My not-serious post deserved about one second of analysis. You gave it 50,000 times that. several things wrong with this: 1. if you only have one thing to say, don't list it as a numbered bullet point. the whole idea of numbering points is to put multiple points together in some order, and having only one point defeats the purpose. it's literally like saying, "i have one and only one thing to say: 1. _____________" see? doesn't quite work. 2. the point itself is faulty, in that your only criticism is the amount of analysis i devoted to the post, not in anything i actually said. so even judging by your criticism, the content of my post is still correct and you still come off like a dork. 3. your entire "you're devoting too much time to this" defense can be applied to each and every comment ever made on an internet wrestling message board. the fact that we devote too much time to any of this at all is a given, and you can't single anyone out for it. i'm reminded of an episode of 'jerry springer' wherein two transvestites got in an argument and started calling each other raving queens: it made no sense at all to do so, since they were both raving queens. you're a good kid and you've got a lot of potential, and i only wish to help you out like this because i like you. however, if you don't start addressing these helpful criticisms as such, choosing instead to brashly swat them away, i will give up on you and start making fun of you. and nobody wants that.

about an hour ago i saw a young woman squat down between two cars, pull down her pantyhose and take a piss in the street. all from my balcony.

the view from my balcony overlooking the street, always fascinating stuff going on. just last night i got to see a couple making out and an indian girl having a huge fight with someone over the phone.

so many things wrong with this. 1) the quality of the reference itself is bad. everybody knows it, and it's ridiculously overused. 2) you brought attention to the fact that it was a reference. never ever ever do this; the whole point is for those "in the know" to get it, and for it to fly over the heads of everyone else. when you say "that was a reference," it leaves the former saying "no shit, sherlock" and the latter saying "so what?" 3) you basically congratulated yourself on the reference. even if it WAS a good reference, the self-congratulation makes you look significantly less cool. since this was not a good reference in the first place, it makes you look like eddie deezen, squinting through your coke bottle glasses while you say "hey everybody, look how cool i am" through your nose.

tori amos - 'under the pink' i can't even remember if i've done this one before. pretty good year - 7.5 god - 7.5 bells for her - 7.7 past the mission - 3 baker baker - 4.5 the wrong band - 7 the waitress - 7 cornflake girl - 8 icicle, icicle - 7.5 cloud on my tongue - 7.5 space dog - 7.75 yes, anastasia - 9.5 that kind of consistency is rare.

how much was this? and i can't remember the last time i put miles on, i might be overdue. maybe that's the reason i've been so apathetic lately. derek and the dominos - 'layla and other assorted love songs'. already owned it on vinyl, but my turntable is back in georgia so i bought the cd. a tad overrated and not exactly tight, but it rocks & it's compulsively listenable.