Amoeblog

The Perfect Match

Posted by phil blankenship, December 21, 2007 09:33pm | Post a Comment
 



Forum Home Video FH79004

afternoon playlist

Posted by The Bay Area Crew, December 21, 2007 03:29pm | Post a Comment



5 Disc Player (fancy!):

1. Lena Willemark and Ale Moller - Nordan

2. Radiohead - OK COMPUTER

3. Mastodon - LEVIATHAN

4. earth - hibernaculum





lastly:


5. cocteau twins - blue bell knoll              

You?

                                        -The Insomniac


christmas records and christmas cheer

Posted by Whitmore, December 21, 2007 02:57pm | Post a Comment


Lorne Green
’s greatest claim to fame is starring in the long running western Bonanza, playing the role of the family patriarch Ben Cartwright and being the first man most people ever saw in color on television. But Green’s oddest credit is that he had a number one single in the middle of the English Invasion in 1964: his talking ballad “Ringo”, (which ironically is not about the Beatle, but a Western gunslinger: Johnny Ringo).

This 7 inch record, “Must be Santa,” is his contribution to the subgenre of “annoying kids singing Christmas songs”, (of which I have somehow become a leading collector!?!), featuring some fine shrill warbling of the Jimmy Joyce Children’s Choir. Oddly enough the flip side, “One Solitary Life”, is the polar opposite; a morose, bleak, 2000 year old tale of loneliness, social deprivation and the ultimate execution of a doomed unnamed man (hint, hint) which is probably a more telling song of Christmas than we’d like to acknowledge. Loren Green really plays the fate card well.  Then again, years before Bonanza, Lorne Green was known to his fellow Canadian citizens as "The Voice of Doom", a nickname he earned as a radio announcer for CBC radio from 1939 to 1942, where his distinctive baritone painted the grim news of World War II in deep somber tones. Listening to such a desolate voice, especially on a Christmas record, is just a plain and simple holiday cheer killer …  that miserable tingling in your soul, its not unlike that vacant stare when you’re trying to find parking at the Glendale Galleria the weekend before Christmas, and you have an exhausted, yet frantic, raging, sugar-doped child in the back seat screaming that he wants to see Santa -NOW!- meanwhile babbling on a badly deteriorating cell phone connection is your employer going on about something trivial and asinine, and while looking at that pink parking ticket still stuck under the windshield wiper blades from the last failed attempt at shopping, you rear-end a new Lexus ...  

DON'T QUOTE ME BOY. I AIN'T SAID.......

Posted by Billyjam, December 21, 2007 07:45am | Post a Comment

It would make sense that as time progresses, use of the language we share would likewise progress. But not so. The opposite, in fact, appears to be the case in our current culture. As time marches on, despite all of the new technologies directly linked to the language, the use (nay, abuse) of simple English, especially in the written form, seems to be regressing at a rapid rate. 

Quiz any English high school teacher on the general current state of students' penmanship, spelling, grammar, etc. and odds are they will squeeze their face into a painful look and tug on their hair as they proceed to launch into a list of the many ills of today's abuse of the English language. And it is the written word, especially the typed or texted word, that tends to be the biggest victim of this current decline of the language.

These days, with typos and overuse of CAPS being the norm in the majority of Emails, IMs, and text messages, it is as if we are all granted a poetic license to type and spell however we feel fit. And of course this is all fine so long as the person on the other end of the two way communication can understand what the hell is been said or written. And this is where the problems and fun begin. In fact, many amused bloggers have dedicated websites to the numerous abuses of the English language.

One of my favorites is one that focuses on the misuse of quotation marks. The blog of unnecessary quotation marks is a fun site to visit to check out sent-in photos of signs that have been printed up with quotation marks used when they did not need to be used such as the "live" reindeer in the poster above. But take a moment to check out the blog of unnecessary quotation marks for many more abuses of the quotation mark and feel free to add to COMMENTS below your pet peeve when it comes to the current abuse of the English language -- be it spelling errors or overused terms like LOL.       

The Dangers of Swordplay: Cruising (1980)

Posted by Charles Reece, December 20, 2007 11:59pm | Post a Comment
A quick Google search reveals (well, confirms) that the snooty de rigueur critical terms ‘lyrical’ and ‘poetic’, which let you know that a film is serious art, rather than déclassé entertainment, pop up frequently with discussions of Claire Denis’ BEAU TRAVAIL, but only accidentally, if at all, with William Friedkin’s CRUISING.  (‘Poetic’ even shows up as a plot keyword in the former’s IMDB listing, whereas the latter gets words like ‘perversion’, ‘evil’ and ‘stabbed in the back’.)  Yet both films feature extended sequences of men with beautiful bodies, clustered together and moving in rhythm to music; both are concerned with men of uniform in their habitus, either diurnal or nocturnal, performing a ritual; and both argue for a certain degree of fluidity in male sexuality – however, degree is implicated by using highly different narrative styles.  The “poetic” homophilia of BEAU TRAVAIL is more a suggestion through the recognition of the beauty of male movement, so any of its purported gayness has plausible deniability (like obsessive wrestling fans rewatching old matches of Jimmy ‘Superfly’ Snuka), whereas CRUISING quite literally and graphically depicts the lure of homosexuality for even the most macho of men, NYC cops.  If the object of audience identification, a straight cop, Steve Burns (Al Pacino), can catch it by breathing in the salty air of late 70s S&M clubs and dirty rags drenched in amyl nitrate, then you might, too.  I guess lyricism and poesis don’t spring to mind when our hero is starting to get turned on by a greasy depiction of fisting.

That homosexuality might be taught, or that it could lure someone in, remains a controversial idea among gay rights advocates.  Essentialism qua naturalism tends to be a more comforting thought, and not without some good reason.  Religious demagogues work up the fear of right-wing parents by suggesting that their children might catch the immoral queer “meme.”  Thus, the possibility that homosexuality is as natural as heterosexuality becomes a way of assuaging these bigoted fears, or at least as a scientistic defense.  But this has always been a fallacious debate.  Just because something’s natural doesn’t give it moral propriety.   If a murder-gene were found, society wouldn’t suddenly start calling murder moral.   And so it goes with homosexuality: regardless of whether Steve Burns starts off as latently gay, or begins to become more gay as he goes undercover in the gay S&M outre-mer to investigate a string of murders is unimportant, the moral questions raised by the film shouldn’t be any different.  Homosexuality is no more nor less moral for being biologically natural than heterosexuality.

Continue reading...
BACK  <<  1499  1500  1501  1502  1503  1504  1505  1506  1507  1508  1509  1510  >>  NEXT