hi, you have nice blog.. u can view also mine..http://akoniwares.blogspot.com
I empathize with your complaint about people's outlook on music. Like many other forms of entertainment, people always gotta be looking back at the good old days.It was so disturbing when you played a clip of that radio station. So cringe worthy. God, I hate radio.So does that mean because of his size, Howard can only do it in the ass.I really really like that you compare lame jokes to Mel Brooks. Monty Python is completely lost on me. Your rant during the letters page was pretty damn funny. Unrational, fickle fans are the worse. Howard's reasoning that the girl was a midget reminds me of JD's rationalization that young actresses are older than they look.I never thought of it but you're absolutely right about writers reading but not responding to fan mail. That almost guarantees that they haven't read the letter and the editor is full of shit. On a completely random note, how fucking shocked were you when Keith and Chemda revealed they weren't a couple anymore. That reveal was way better than the finale of Lost, which made the series absolute bullshit.
Muskrat love, meh. Try Hamster Love. "The Wreck of the Edmund Fitzgerald" was a song commemorating a disaster that just happened, probably what made it top the charts. People are so morbid. So what the lyrics were vulgar in Rod Stewart's song, it's a song about him taking a girl's virginity. Imagine how vulgar/inspiring it would be if TCM made such a song.What's wrong with Beverley being in a rishathra relationship. She has the fun with no pregnancy risk. Guess she like the feel of his duck penis. Women will try anything.Hicks like to cosplay, too.Maybe the daughter told Beverley about her mother before?And yes, you do hate Steve Gerber, you hate him like he kicked your puppy, otherwise why the Howard hate segments? If you wanted to legitimately discuss Howard this would be a PCX/Thoom joint venture and not just a rage on the Duck.Monty Python.What was wrong with the Lost ending? I thought it worked.
The episode itself, which seemed a lot like glorified fan fiction, had it's moments but as a series ender it was really disappointing. I wanted a revelation that would give the past episodes some new meaning and make me want to go back and watch the series all over again. To me, it was clear the writers had no idea where they were going and made up shit along the way.
Lost Spoilers-How is it being glorified fan fiction gonna make it bad. I think this was the ending they were trying for in the first place. It made sense, tied up plenty but didn't reveal all. I think they are trying for a sequel or prequel. What is the pool of light. What did Hurley and Benjamin do after most had left or died. What were all their powers.
I got the impression that the one clear thing they knew about the end was the scene with Jack closing his eyes but that's it. It's just frustrating that the majority of the series put a lot of focus on the mystery and in the end they disregard a lot of that aspect.
I myself didn't remember before until I read it online that it started with Jack opening his eyes. Taken it that concept, I think what it means overall is it was Jack's story. Sure it showed detours and side stories but all of it pertain to how it would affect Jack.Now that Jack's story is over, I hope for a new series that would show another person's story, someone's whose life dwell more into the superpowered and gods aspects of that world.
Lost was an ensemble series from the get-go. Sure they played favorites but I do not buy that Lost as a whole is Jack's story. There are loads of moments in the entire show that aren't relevant to Jack. For example, Whidmore and Ben's whole relationship and their discussion in the office about killing each other's daughters.
Obviously it does, Whidmore and Ben fight leads to Ben's daughter being killed, to Ben killing Jacob, to Jack being the replacement.
With that reasoning, you can spin almost everything to be related to Jack. It's seems like a stretch. Why show Ben and Whidmore's relationship and discussion. If Lost is Jack's story, why not just show that Whidmore was the cause of Alex' death. Why go that further back. I'll tell you why. Because Lost is an ensemble series, with heavy emphasis on mystery and cliffhangers(stringing the audience along), featuring characters with interconnecting stories and relations. With your reasoning, I could just as well say Lost is Hurley's story or Locke's story.
Because you asked how Ben and Whidmore's relationship touches on Jack. And sure it could be Hurley or James, but I think because of the eyes opening and closing it's suppose to show that Jack was the main focus of Lost. Whether he lived or died on the island doesn't matter, the telling of his story is over. That's why there are still unexplained events. If the network had been smarter they would have ended it when the writers had first scheduled it to end and then worked on the spinoff series.
Okay, it's clear we're just gonna go in circles regarding this topic but I'll try to get my point across one more time.If Lost was truly Jack's story than it wouldn't be necessary to delve deep into relationships like Whidmore/Ben. How many steps removed does it take before it's not related to Jack? If they showed how Whidmore and Ben met, would it still be related to Jack? Going even further back, if they showed how Whidmore was born, would it still be related to Jack?If I'm coming off as an asshole, that's not my intention. I'm just trying to explain why Lost is such a frustrating show (to me) and why ultimately, it's bullshit that the writers were making up stuff along the way to keep the viewers interest.
It was the writers' choice how far from Jack they would do it, whether it was just the stuff immediate to Jack or an associate's life history or somewhere in between. The writers, to me seemed to give enough other's story to move it along.Like I said, I don't think it's over. If everything was revealed the story might get boring and be somewhat "unrealistic". Not everything in life is revealed to you. Like, "I have to go buy a penguin." That's the last thing a co-worker said to me before he walked out of his job and later I found out never went home nor to college again. He did go to his gf's house to pick up some shoes, called his mother to say he was going to her house on the weekend and then noone seen him since that I know of. Never picked up his final check. He was a hard worker, a good student, planned on marrying his gf, a fun person and good to his mom. And then one day, he left to buy as penguin.So in my story I may never find out why he went to buy a penguin, but in his story it may be the main theme. Just like in Jack's story we don't know why women couldn't have babies on the island and survive, what the light was, who the smoke monster really was, why did people seem to have powers, etc, because that's someone else's story.
At that time the writers edited their own books; Gerber handled the letter columns himself.
At that time the writers edited their own books; Gerber handled the letter columns himself.Then why is he referring to himself in third person? If Gerber was the guy responding to the letters, and writing shit like "Steve is glad you liked issue #3 Tommy", then he IS a fucking nutball, and no wonder Marvel fired his ass. You can't work with nutballs.
Goddamn, do you hate Gerber. Actually, he didn't get to self-edit HTD until #10 or so. He continued to do so until Jim "Hitler was an amateur" Shooter took over Marvel way later and did away with the writer-editor position entirely, presumably jealous since he himself was so laughably bad at both writing and editng. Gerber was actually better off having been forced off the book by that talentless egomaniac since as you pointed out, you can't work with nutballs.
Now I know you are talking out of your butt.Jim Shooter is a pretty good writer.
You think so? Read Secret Wars II and get back to me on that.
Post a Comment