Showing posts with label Citizen Kane. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Citizen Kane. Show all posts

Thursday, October 09, 2014

Clive Barker's Nightbreed Director's cut

I was one of the first thousand to preorder it. I saw the movie back in 1990 and wasn't entirely pleased with it. Warners billed it as something like a slasher at the time, which is not. What Nightbreed was and now is again is the Citizen Kane of monster movies where the tables are turned--or that's what it was supposed to be, an epic tale, a metaphor for discrimination against LGBT people, and much more, a lost classic now found and restored to its former glory before the suits got their hands on it. 

A comparison is in order here: This is like the achievement of a full restoration of the first gay-positive movie ever made, Different from the Others (Anders als die Andern, 1919, starring Conrad Veidt, the somnambulist from The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari) or The Magnificent Ambersons (1942), it is historic.

I should receive the set by this weekend or early next week. A sprawling review and reflection on the new cut is coming. I'll also be doing a similar essay on Breaking Bad as a cultural and historical phenomenon in time now that the series has concluded and the dust has settled a bit. Expect the unexpected.
Postscript, 10.10.14: It's arrived! This is going to take some time to digest, but I should have my first observations up in about a week. The set is pretty amazing and the new artwork for the 3-BD set is better than the promotional art at the time. David Cronenberg should be pleased, he gets more screen time.

10.11.14: After watching the director's cut last night, I can say that we have a new classic.  What's most surprising is how what Barker intended most is a great, epic love story, a tale of universal love. Nightbreed has finally arrived to the audience it was intended for all along. There are so many things to say about it, and I will shortly. 

Audio and video quality are superb--it looks & sounds vastly better than its theatrical debut which is saying something. Yes, David Cronenberg has more screen time. I won't be printing any spoilers. 

Saturday, March 06, 2010

Karl Rove, a pussy? Who woulda thunk? Me.


Word has it that Karl Rove's new book has a stunning admission: that he got his ass kicked by a girl as a kid! I know, hard to imagine considering he already looks like a muppet disguised as Heinrich Himmler (fuck you and the "law" you rode in on, Mr. Godwin), wrapped in an enigma, smothered in danish.

But look...OK, don't look, especially if you've eaten already, fuck me.

Is Karl Rove not the poster child for the squirming pathology that is most Republicans and the worst-of-the-worst in the corporate world? Yes, yes, rumor has it that Karl is gay, but does it really matter in the final analysis (and let's remember that "anal" is part of the word)? We all know that most of the last 30 years of Republican domination of the national dialog is hate-based, but it also has a weird revanchist quality underlying it (note that "lying" is a part of the word, made flesh). It's also not especially sexy and reeks of the socially-retarded dork.

Can this piece have more digressions? Yes. So, Rove gets his ass kicked-in decades ago by a little girl. Do you think he had it coming? First, let's recall that this was a little girl, they were both nine, and it fifty years ago. Could he be more of a pussy? Sure. Why would a little girl want to kick his ass in? Keep in mind that he horse-laughingly titled his Book of Lies (fuck you Crowley!) Courage and Consequence, which considering this "revelation," makes it more bizarre and funnier than Mein Kampf.
"Revanchist"? Yes, he lost masculine territory to the liberal skirts, and so, he would "get even" with them and "liberal America" after that fated day in 1960 when she punched him in the nose, and rightly so. Yes, the die had been cast, the gauntlet thrown down, and life would never, and could ever, be the same. It was war. Never mind that he was dumb enough to support Nixon at nine, so we have to assume his parents did poor job rearing him...

New York Magazine writes:
At age 9--and already a political nerd--he became a spirited supporter of Richard Nixon in the 1960 presidential smackdown against John F. Kennedy. So intense was his devotion that he landed a coveted Nixon bumper sticker and displayed it proudly on his bicycle basket -- until a little girl in his neighborhood who favored JFK beat the stuffing out of him, bloodying his nose and ego. "I've never liked losing a political fight since," Rove writes. ("Karl Rove Was Once Beaten Up By a Girl," New York Magazine, Daily Intel, 03.06.2010)
You gotta be fucking kidding me. If you're that into politics at nine, you're not just a "geek," but violently retarded. OK, I love women, and I would never admit to this in a million years, seriously, that a little girl kicked my ass. Yet, Rove queerly thinks that this little anecdote of his is normal and jokingly wears it as some kind of badge of courage as though it were some epic moment in his life...uh, erm, point taken, but now we know when his and his supporters' emotional development stopped.

I keep telling my friends this over and over again and have written the same here many times: scoundrels are perverse and they'll tell you everything lame, pathetic, and damning about themselves if you give it time and just watch and listen with the right eyes and ears. This is why monsters like Rove hide from the public eye so much and only appear groundhog-stylee at "friendly" venues with hand-picked audiences brimming with their allies. Fine, but the shoehorn fits. All that said, why in the hell would anyone outside of the acquisitions department of a library buy this worthless piece-of-crap book that's very little more than self-serving lies? What the hell is the point or reading it when it's almost nothing but bullshit?

I would imagine, though, that this one part of the book is its truest part, Karl Rove's "rosebud," the crowning rosette of his pathetic political epitaph. What a clown. He's just given historians the final blow, and he's already roundly hated by them and the rest of the world. Being forgotten would be a far better fate.


Thursday, January 18, 2007

CNN: "KUM-BI-YAH" FACTOR


CNNOSPHERE
--No, that image isn't Truman Capote, it's Anderson Cooper, and he's not a journalist, he is the moron-baby of Gloria Vanderbilt. Cooper is a joke, a male bimbo. Read this transcript excerpt to understand why. The event was the Nazi Pope's intrusion into-Turkey (a country with a 1% of 1% Christian-slice of a population of 70 million):

Cooper: For someone expecting sort of a -- a Pope John Paul II kind of visit, with -- with hundreds of thousands of people, this is not that kind of trip. It's almost more of a diplomatic trip.
Aslan: It's not really that -- this pope's M.O., really. Look, you know, yesterday, we were talking about the fact that, let's not -- let's not think that this pope's message is going to change, but perhaps what will change is the way he delivers that message. Today was a perfect example of that. I think that he's going to continue to push for a very robust dialogue with the Muslim world. He's going to continue to push for a resurgence and revival of -- of -- of Christianity throughout Europe. But I think, now that he recognizes how important it is for him to watch how he says things, you're going to see a much more conciliatory, much more measured response from him. [Ed.-Pope Benedict was the head of the Office of the Inquisition for over 20 years. It now has a friendlier-name.]
...Cooper: But, you know, I mean, dialogue, that's one of those diplomatic words. What does it actually mean? This pope has very strong beliefs about -- about Christianity, about Islam, about violence within Islam. What does a dialogue really look like?
Gallagher: It's a big point for the pope. In fact, he's talked about it before, that he thinks dialogue has to include straight talk, the hard questions.
Cooper: This is not everyone holding hands, singing kumbaya [my emphasis].
Gallagher: That's right. ...
Exactly what does any of this have to do with journalism? I don't care what they "think" or were handed by their boss, that isn't journalism. "Just the facts" is journalism, not this blurring of commentary and coverage pioneered by...CNN, not Fox News.

This is analysis, fine, but why go there at all? It's misleading, and suggests these talking-necks are actually doing investigative journalism. All a journalist is supposed to be doing is reporting the facts, not editorializing. But, far-worse than this, CNN took-up Cooper's "kumbiyah" aside--they're running-with-it as a catchphrase now!


Today, they were talking-about whether Iraqi Prime Minister Al-Maliki was "singing Kumbiyah (the proper spelling)" with the Bush administration, or the "Kumbiyah factor." Right, is Al-Maliki singing the same song? Instead, we get these stupid catchphrases. CNN can shove it. And thanks-again, Anderson, for reporting rumors and hearsay amidst the misery of the people who were stuck at the Superdome in New Orleans. It helped the Bush administration demonize the victims of our neglect. Fuck you CNN, and fuck you Anderson Cooper.

While I'm at it: fuck you Ted Turner, you dumb asshole. You are Charles Foster Kane, you moron. Give one billion to the UN, goddammit, that's what you promised. Idiot.

The Original Irritant:http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0611/28/acd.01.html