for 7 February 2000. Updated every WEEKDAY.
|
|
Out of Luck Herr Doktor Van Decimeter: If John McCain really wants to know which enlisted men and women are getting corporal in private, he should monitor their mail. He won't, however, be looking for copies of Out, The Advocate, or even Architectural Digest (all three of which, I believe, come in opaque packaging). No, all he has to look for is American Male and Undergear. With Calyx & Corolla running a close third, these fag mags are the biggest, brightest red lights to look for when you want to know if the guy next door is "friendly" or just really nice. Thank you for proving that gays and lesbians have no monopoly on style, tact, or business acumen. I'd rather see a lesbian acrylic painting of a headbanded Cherokee warrior-goddess with howling wolves in the background than suffer through another issue of The Advocate's back pages of nipply Nagel-esque panty boys and Keith Haring knockoffs. Oddly enough, yours, John Kusch Milwaukee, Wisconsin http://www.bluffmag.com PS PlanetOut's personals suck. Mon cher monsieur Kusch: Really, I'm surprised at you. Your advice to the military on how best to violate "don't-ask, don't-tell, don't-touch-me-there" smacks of a '50s Friends of Dorothy sensibility. Personally, Undergear doesn't do a thing for me. What the Pentagon really needs is more sophisticated detection techniques: a postgaydar, if you will. And Internet snooping will do the trick nicely. Is that lieutenant flipping back and forth between Ally McBeal pages on Fox.com and Bill Goldberg snapshots on WCW.com? Haul 'im in! But to your point, you're right in noting that Out also catered to the "openly closeted." Back when your scribe subscribed to Out, the options were plastic or paper: the former for out-and-proud types, the latter for don't-tellers in and out of the military. Yours quite predictably, Jonathan  Stultimatum Subject: Your poor grammar. There is no word "reiterate." The word you meant to use is "iterate," which means "to say again." "Reiterate" is redundant. Elijah Meeks <ElijahM@AdicomWireless.com>, Thanks, Elijah. But I think you'll find Webster's is more forgiving than you are. Perhaps you were thinking of "irregardless," an unconscionable and ridiculous nonword. By the way, you ought not to use a period in your subject line unless it's a complete sentence. Self-appointed grammarians, as you undoubtedly know, live in the most fragile of glass houses. Best regards, E. L. Skinner Skinner, We can't go relying on Webster or we'll be forced to accept the various dregs of the English language. The two arguments for this, that it is semantics or that acceptable words are based on populist approval, are both fallacious. The first ignores the fact that words are semantic by nature and to use an improper word, even if it is understood to hold the proper word's meaning, attacks the basic foundation of language. The second is a belief held only by nitwits, as language based on popular approval (e.g. slang) is more difficult to learn and less capable of conveying thought quickly and accurately. As these are the two basic tenants of language, to allow them is detrimental to language and, consequently, human society. So, if "iterate" means to say again. What would "re-iterate" mean? Elijah Meeks <ElijahM@AdicomWireless.com> Elijah: Thanks for your continued support. Somehow the language survived its Old, Middle, and King James versions (or should I say iterations?). On a related note, I doubt whether the grammarians were responsible for the obsolescence of the codpiece and the merkin. One should never underestimate the value of being popular, Elijah! To reiterate: "Iterate" is to say again. "Reiterate" is to say again and again and again. Surely you see the difference now? E. L. Skinner BORING! Thank you for playing — please try again. Bradley Messmer <messmeb@rockvax.rockefeller.edu> Well, Bradley, thanks for the encouragement. The beauty of the written word is that it is limited only by the imagination of the reader, and writing for Suck readers is, on that score, a constant challenge, which you so concisely assert. Keep up the fine work! Best regards, E. L. Skinner I really feel sorry for you and, although you do not believe in God, I will pray for you. Thank God I have wonderful cousins in Calgary, Edmonton, and St. Albert. You are sick ... Happy Day. <Inspm2@aol.com> I was sick, briefly, with the respiratory flu. Thank you. Much better now. Please keep the prayers coming. I had wonderful/awful fever dreams, saw Jesus/ Mohammed/Moroni, whoever. It was definitely a white, male God. Very reassuring. Wonderful cousins are a thing not to be underestimated. Mine are mostly in Wisconsin; some are in Colorado and Idaho. They are sinful and Godless but play the banjo. So it's a push, spiritually speaking. Tapping my toes for the Lord, E. L. Skinner Subject: SUV Nirvana Nice Web page on the SUV thing! You're definitely making a proud statement, which stands as proof of your intellect and unique insight on the subject. Such expression is an honest example of the positive influence one can have on society. Keep up the good work! Brent 1994 S10 Blazer 1998 Ford Expedition <bejara@televar.com> Uh, we wouldn't go that far. Faux Film Festival I love your Suck article on movie knockoffs so much that I thought I'd write you with a 'dote that might enhance your love for the non-Disney Mulan. I'm an animator for a kid's software company, and I went with some co-workers to the International Animation Celebration (the Nickelodeon portfolio frenzy is more like it) in LA a year or so ago. The three of us went to a seminar titled Animation on a Shoestring Budget to meet the Blue's Clues producer, who didn't get a word in edgewise because the guy responsible for the non-D Mulan and other atrocities wouldn't shut the hell up. He told us about hiring animators with low esteem because they work cheaper, renting a tiny office in the industrial part of town for the production team, and finding ways around the law to avoid paying benefits. He also told us how important it is to go to Korea for ink and paint because of the cheap labor. This is standard practice with just about ALL animation, but he had an edge: "What you do is go over there with key chains and shit for the Ko-reans. You know, little toys and crap; they love that shit!" Apparently he had learned all he knows about business from the guys who bought Manhattan from the Indians. He talked about the need to avoid Disney lawsuits. "OK, the REAL Mulan is a Japanese girl (she is Chinese, Mr. Bunker) who cross-dresses and saves her people. So we gotta change it around. Let's say she's ... oh, I dunno ... a beautiful butterfly! And the ants are invading...." At that point, we all got up and left. Tom Verre <fleabite@seanet.com> It's a great story, although I have to admit: I think it adds to the experience of watching movies like Legend of Mulan when the people flogging them come across as the seedy profiteers we know they are. 40th St. Black Visit Thailand for knockoffs done right. It's unbelievable. Itz Me <omytisis@loxinfo.co.th> I bet it is. Although, when something is exploited for consumption in a non-American market, it sort of loses the straight-faced, cheery irony of a Wal-Mart offering whose primary aim seems to be to fool the consumer. 40th St. Black Dear 40th et al., While reading your outstanding piece on cinematic knockoffs (bravo), I was surprised to see a glaring omission: Concurrent Knockoffs. These are movies that are knockoffs of each other, released simultaneously by competing studios. And our winners? Those lame excuses for cinema that are (drum roll) Touchstone's Armageddon and Paramount Pictures' Deep Impact. Deep Impact, despite its not-so-subtly pornographic title, was a major cosmic letdown that preceded its better-FX-and-bigger- stars-yet-still- equally-shitty cousin Armageddon by a whole two months. The similarities in these movies ensured that either you didn't have to see one because you had already seen the other, or you had to go see both to make sure they weren't actually the same movie (they were). Consider: • They shared a plot (We're all toast because of renegade space debris). • They shared a release season (summer 1998). • They shared hyperbolic tag lines ("It's Closer Than You Think"). • They shared an affinity for second-rate acting by pseudo-babes (Téa Leoni and Neve Campbell). Their only real differentiating factor, other than the actual flavor of their respective space threats, is the general stupidity of Armageddon's characters. Yeah, right — a comet the size of freaking Texas is coming at us and we don't see it until 18 days before it hits? As if the Aerosmith soundtrack weren't torture enough. Eddie Hoover Director of Central Intelligence <ehoover@ BSMG.com> Eddie, you bring up an interesting point. I'm certainly aware of what you call concurrent knockoffs. Other examples are the dueling pig movies Gordy and Babe, the spate of Freaky Friday rip-offs that culminated in Big, and the animated insect movies of 1998, Antz and A Bug's Life. Honestly, I really don't consider these to be knockoffs as much as a symptom of Hollywood's desperate competitiveness and lack of original thought. There are two key differences between these movies and knockoffs. First, such movies are close enough in terms of overall quality that one is not a clear, inferior copy of the other. Second, unlike a knockoff, the producer of a like-minded big-budget film knows that the success of the competing work can actually damage the box office for his or her project. In knockoffs, the bigger business done by the original, the better; because they count on the popularity of the original, they are wholly subservient. I agree with you that the big rock movies were stupid, and I think it bears pointing out that one of them could have been made for one-twentieth of the price, starring Justine Bateman and Jared Leto and presented on Fox's Sunday Night Movie to killer ratings. 40th St. Black Speaking of Disney knockoffs, have you seen the X-rated version of Snow White, produced during off hours by Disney animators? I've attached a GIF. Jim Cook <jimcook@panix.com> One occasionally hears those kinds of stories, but other than things like a few frames of Jessica Rabbit nudity in Roger Rabbit, I'm not sure how much hard evidence there is that these kinds of movies actually exist. In fact, Jim, the GIF you sent looks less like a still from an animated film than a copy of detail from Wally Wood's famous Disneyland Orgy drawing that originally appeared in The Realist. And I probably don't need to remind Suck readers that "Disney porn" is sort of redundant. 40th St. Black In your knockoffs column, you mentioned how an "enraged parent" complained of the swearing in the Mulan knockoff. The review actually seems to be by a sibling: "But to my very great surprise, Mulan SWORE; yes she SWORE while my little brother was watching it. This is not right." To me, this seems to be an example of big brother or sister attempting to protect the tender ears of other kids, though it's too late for the writer's own little brother. This is all right. Thanks for an enjoyable column, nevertheless. Brian McCarthy <brian.mccarthy@click2learn.com> You're right! Change that to "irate adult." Unless, of course, you're willing to grant me a really loose meaning of parent to include those fulfilling the parental role in supervising or raising children. In other words, don't blame me. Where are this kid's mother and father? And why are they letting him watch shoddy knockoff videos? 40th St. Black |
|
||||||||||||||||||
 |
||||||||||||||||||||
   |
||||||||||||||||||||
 |  |
|||||||||||||||||||
 |   | |||||||||||||||||||
![[Tim Cavanaugh]](/fish/staff/images/tim.gif)
![[Copy Edit]](/fish/staff/images/copyeditors.gif){kind=small}
![[Phillip Bailey]](/fish/staff/images/phil.gif){kind=small}
![[yes, it's
a plunger. i'll l
eave the rest up to your imagination ... ]](/fish/staff/images/erin.gif){kind=small}
![[Brian
Forsyth, " we're just spanning time "]](/fish/staff/images/brian.gif)
![[the fixin'
pixie... ]](/fish/staff/images/emily.gif)
![[Ian
Connelly]](/fish/staff/images/ian.gif){kind=small}