Tuesday, June 28, 2011

California Violent Video Game Retraction

 U.S. Supreme Court puts the cabash on 
California Violent Game Law

I love Arnold Schwarzenegger. Not like a lost lover, stalker kind of licking his sliding glass door, exclaiming that I'm a cookie, in dire need of his attention to eat me kind of love here, so get your minds out of whatever nasty sauce pan of mouse shit flambe you happen to be cooking up here... christ-almighty people...

I'm talking about early 80s... I'm in my mid 20s and so full of testosterone the overflowing Mississippi looks like a pissing toddler about now... Me, my brother and any number of my buddies can't wait for the next Arnie movie to come out. Do we give a shit if it's any good? Fuck No!

From “Conan the Barbarian” on, I was hooked. Even when he did a cameo for the “The Expendables” I was waiting in line [something I don't really do anymore]. But then there are jobs an individual just isn't meant to do.

Now am I saying that Arnold shouldn't have gone into politics? Not exactly, but I'm sure the greatest bulk of folks in California would being telling me otherwise. Total financial collapse, joblessness at a level that rivals the Great Depression and judicial upheaval that may take a decade or more to straiten out, much less repair to a point of reform... WTF happened to my action hero? Politicians went after his ass (and his co-actor's) for their body count, now there really is a body count!

Which is what leads me into Arnold's six year fiasco which I believe was San Francisco's Bill AB 1179. Basically, what the law did was penalize anyone renting or selling a video game to a minor that the ESRB rated as M (for Mature, NOT minor...). If you do, you get hit with a $1000 fine.  This tasty bit of syrupy sweet, honey dipped giraffe shit was brought before Arnold and sold to the California congress by Tem Leland Yee, a child psychologist  [and apparently their senator as well] who says that violent video games serve as learning tools that have a dramatic impact on children. [quote obtained from Here]

Well folks, here's where the rant begins.

As of 27June2011 the U.S. Supreme Court over turned AB 1179 as now video games are considered a protected form of free speech. Now the article and case issue that I am basing my initial information on is primarily with “Violent” video games. So does this include “all” video games? Some could argue 'no', but then how many are going to argue that “My Little Pony” sent their kid over the edge and caused their 10 year old to cry anarchy, take up arms against the government or gun down their school?

Despite, a kid that's within the reach of 18 (the age they seem to think “M” games are to be properly purchased) can usually handle most of the garbage that's thrown on the screen anyway. Besides, the rating system on the box is not there as a sales warning anyway. It's not there to warn the retailer, it's for the PARENT!!! After 18 the little letters emboldened on the box become immaterial until you start buying this crap for YOUR kid. Hell, when I see an “E” on the box (a game for me) I usually put it back on the shelf. Respectively, morals & religious zealousness aside, denying a sale by the store solely because of the material & the age is still censorship; no matter how you say it.

Example: women want to go all gooey about babies being born & they'll bring small children into a crowded room around a poor women at her most vulnerable as she's trying to bring another life into the world; get all nice and torridly graphic about getting that child (or animal) onto this earth, but won't do hot buttered skons of boot knocking, titty fucking shit about explaining how the baby got there. She'll fight tooth & fucking nail to hide everything concerning the female form and it's involvement in fornication. She'd rather connive, lie and mystify rather than explain that "man behind the curtain".

I know that's a cruel example. Men are not even remotely better. And I realize the example is based on eons of cultural & religious mystification and conditioning. Not something that a simple flipping of a switch can cure, but that's not the basis of this rant.

Getting back... Tem Leland Yee, child psychologist, proclaimed violent video games were a learning tool for violence. Um, no. Other than the possibility of him viewing his kids playing the Atari (the same thing and age I was as a kid) and his assumptions concluded from that, there is still no conclusive evidence that what Tem is saying is even remotely true. Not even slightly.

I've even gone through the studies myself. Yup, your's truly. Yet I can hear you folks now... “Are you a Doctor?” No, I worked with them. He wasn't a soldier either, but he has come into contact with them I'll bet. “What experience do you have with the human mind that rivals his?” Good question. The exact same as you and then some. I can do research. I can ask experts and I can see the results of experiments done in the field that would turn your fucking stomachs that Tem wouldn't have even thought of looking up, much less put into his report supporting Arnie's money making law.

Here's how I know Tem is rhino charging balls off wrong. 

Without excepting ANY RESPONCIBILITY WHATSOEVER--- I WON”T - - You folks can even do this at home. All of us have an ignorant assed little nephew/brother/kid next door/whatever. Get the one that's pig fucking stupid, otherwise this isn't going to prove my point. Now catch the roach eater after he's watched a Roadrunner episode on tv. Preferably one where the coyote falls off the cliff into the canyon and at the bottom becomes an accordion and walks off.  You know the one, bouncing up & down; wonky-wonky...

Remember, I don't except a bit of responsibility for your dumbass cousin (or whomever) if he's actually the 1% that actually does this --- Now in this experiment, take Franklin outside & ask him to climb up on the roof of the house and chase the Roadrunner of of it and crash to the ground like the coyote. Without having to actually do the experiment, most of you folks know the kid won't do it because they understand the concept of being hurt when they hit the ground. They KNOW what a cartoon is.  Even if you try to convince them they'll turn into an accordion.

Still don't believe me? OK, about summer 1993, CBS investigative news went racing out with their assholes completely raging with a four alarm fire ready to incinerate the Mighty Morphing Power Piss Ants (actually Rangers, I called them that when my kids were younger to aggravate the shit out of them) for inciting violent behavior in children!!!!!!!!! Oh the witch hunt was on!!! The oil was boiling, the priests were assembled, water blessed, stakes and hammers at the ready.

So they set a whole gaggle of these little turd herders into a pile and let them watch a couple of the most decadent of the shows that they could find. Once the shows were over they immediately turned them loose to go play outside in the playground. Cameras rolling, producers salivating like a lioness atop a fallen gazelle’s fold the children start their dance of the defecate demon. Shit kick here, piss swish there. Dick dart to the left, ram ass to the right.

Yet, to the dismay of the production staff, where the fuck is the broken teeth? The scrapes and squalling of “Joey hit me!” and “Tommy kicked me!” What the hell happened to the hurtling bodies from the swing sets of these little bastards thinking they could fly? The broken necks from failed quadruple back flips from a stiff legged stand still? What The Fuck!!!

So the producer chases the lead repoter out into the playground to get some well deserved answers from these dumbass kids. Announcer: “Hey, dumbass, why aren't you dead. You should be kicking the shit out of your friend like the Pissants do in their show. Don't you want to be a Power Pissant too?” Kid: “That's a TV show moron! We don't want to “really” get hurt! We're just playing. Now leave me alone...”

From the mouths of babes... So what about “what's being said” in these games? Shocked they'll learn foul language?  One, growing up in my house would be hypocritical so the "Fuck off is strong in this one...".  Secondly, I say, “Have you been through the hallways of a high school recently?” Let me let you in on something, I went through one back in the 70s!!! So between then and last May 2011, literally ain't shit changed. Prudes need not respond.

The 50s through the 80s blamed rock music for every deviancy youth could muster in rebellion against their parents and society. When those kids got old enough and educated to disprove their accusers, the accusations turned to violence depicted in the mid 70s, unregulated, unbridled restraint being depicted in theaters to a much their more educated audience. Once that became thwarted, onto 80s music videos. Then onto the last frontier, turn of the century video games.

The research I helped uncover that never seems to make public light was this:

Kids from the ages of approximately 10 to 16 years of age are inherently the most dangerous when confronted with acts of violence.

What does this mean? Give an adult a weapon (say a pistol) and put them in a situation that calls for them to defend themselves, they will hesitate before committing an act of violence on another human being. The age group above? WON'T!!! They WILL pull the trigger without hesitation, remorse or thought. Combatants will back me up on this one, mark my words. It is a recorded fact that armed 'kids' in the combat arena are the most dangerous. Why would they act any different in an urban setting?

Adults have life's experiences behind them that govern their actions before pulling a trigger. Religious convictions, morality, compassion, guilt of consequence, even the pressure of the target being friend or foe; all being factors of hesitation before firing. The juvenile has the capacity for all these factors, just not the EXPERIENCE; thus, they resort to a simple internal command... shoot – no shoot. A video game has absolutely NO correlation to this function.

Don't believe me? Ask a ball-less, butt fucking, boy love, Taliban why they will start 'brain washing' their bombers young, or why the nut licking, dick skinning Vietcong used children as grenade bait. Not a one of those kids used a video game to teach them how to hate a man in a certain uniform or how to pull that trigger when he/she came around the corner. Some could use the excuse that they were used as weapons against our own weakness for children, but then there is that one word there... “use”...

If I had to put this blog to bed much quicker? Viewed violence is NEVER the same as experienced violence. To believe otherwise is simply homogenized bullshit. If you don't think so, ask a veteran. Ask a victim of a violent crime. "The devil made me do it" bullshit doesn't work anymore and the devil this time isn't video games. So stop looking in the closets and under the beds for what should have been in the mirror for what's causing America's ailments.

Tuesday, June 21, 2011

Microsoft Under EFF Suit Rant

Yeah I know, but I've got to rant... Microsoft has their butt in a sling as far as I'm concerned.

Here about 20June2011, I was putzing around, leaving slanderous remarks at my favorite forums when I took notice of an article that Microsoft (M$) was being sued by the Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) over a case that is pending between M$ & Datel Holdings.

Datel Holdings is a British company that makes memory cards for all kinds of gaming consoles and the likes. Chances are you've bought one of these memory cards for yourself or your kids & didn't even know it. Here's how I know, one, they're pretty good quality. They're packaged well, they look good, fit well, perform great, taste great, have that new car smell and (HOLY SHIT) they work. Best of all, they damn near cost a third of what the manufacturer is trying to bilk you for.

What M$ is suing Datel for is that they usurped their Digital Rights Managements (DRM) equipment, put in place to keep people from stealing their shit. Now, because Datel has the bucks to prove they have no concern or reason to steal anything software related to M$, M$ has no other recourse but to legally go after YOU (the gamer, consumer, Parent) as the one violating what's called the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA).

In a REALLY bastardized definition, the DMCA is this, take 2 Copyrighted acts drummed up by corporations from 1996 & 1998 and despised by scientists, librarians and academics; then signed into law on 12Oct1998 that basically states “you can't steal “anything” remotely related to software” or your ass will be in a sling; then you can bullshit your way as saying you have an understanding of the DMCA. Otherwise, the legitimate printing of the law is located here, LINK.

Having learned what M$'s intentions were that's when the EFF jumped in. Don't get excited though. They ain't all hot nutted for your best interests at all. They're all hot & ball twisted on fire about M$ turning into a monopoly. Yup. It turns out that if M$ gets done burning Datel (which won't happen) they'll go after John Q Puplic once he/she buys one of the memory cards that happens to fit the Xbox 360 (that's the device under question at the moment).

Here's how the bullshit landslide works... Datel tells M$ to fuck themselves. M$ cowers off because they really will lose their asses in international courts due to the loss in translation and literal loss in foothold 'legally' in other countries. So what does M$ do? They wait for the product to come over here and like everything in the US, shit is legal to buy but fuck you in the ass if you go to use it.

Yeah, I know, it's not 100% that way, just play along a little bit for me to get this story out.

So, you as a consumer, now own a device legally purchased that has the capabilities to apparently usurp the DRM of M$'s “intellectual property”.

What the hell is “intellectual property”? Oh, that... that could be shit they simply thought up if they wanted it to be. You see, that's such a new and broad territory right now that “high” (take that 'any' way you'd like) thinkers have come up with that our judicial system hasn't even figured out how the fuck to regulate it.

Basically think of intellectual property as something you invented, but haven't quite got the invention into a working product yet. So to cover your ass, the DRM sees this invention as your 'intellectual property'. Even though you might not even remotely have it patented yet. This is what the old copyright laws used to do for writers, logo artists, painters and the likes. But you see, those are completely different mediums. A drawing takes ONE person to do (most of the time). A computer takes, well, a bunch of engineers to conceive. Thus, intellectual property. BUT WHOSE!?! That's why scientists and those other folks hate this damned law/act.

So, M$ can only go after one thing, YOU. You don't have any money. Not what it takes to fend off these assholes you don't and they'll win. The kicker will be that they'll probably only sue you for a modest amount, take away your Xbox and a couple grand at the most.

What the hell are you talking about Russ!?!”

They want the ruling of the courts on the books for the world to see!!!  The article clued me in when they mentioned that the EFF's only concern was that M$ would use this onslaught of judicial action to basically change the laws and make it where they have 'complete' control; period. Meaning, they don't have to share shit! And if you come into contact with any aspect of their “intellectual property” you'll pay dearly. Literally, one way or the other.

From a consumer standpoint. We've all seen this & anyone one of you that's read my rants before know this from my Sony & Apple blogs. Proprietary manufacturers want you roped to their products and only theirs so that they can set the price and gouge you for the maximum dollar for the minimum quality they can muster for the product. It puts the most money in their pocket while hopefully putting something in your hand and keeping your mouth shut.

Obviously it didn't used to be this way. The Hippocratic oath used to be an honored tradition, ethics in law used to practiced to it's fullest extent and manufacturer actually 'wanted' to build something that wanted to last a lifetime; then the late 70s rolled around and the “fuck it, you bought it” generation rolled its eyes into existence.

Am I saying a quality item can't be had anymore? No, but you certainly can't afford it.

Take a luxury car for instance. One, the damn thing almost costs the price of a house, but if you can haggle it down to a more manageable price then there is the emasculating taxation & extras that the idiot across the desk starts belittling you over. You know, bullshit protective sprays on the seats & carpeting, dealer prep (a bullshit charge, they pull the car around & hand you the keys... that's the prep), Town & Country package (a fucking sticker), some BuFu sound system (a bullshit stock head unit with a sicker on the front of it)... You get the idea.

Then there are Federal & State taxes including this thing called a “luxury” tax that get added on. Yeah, you actually get charged for appearing to have money. Just because you don't want to feel like your driving a log wagon anymore, you have to pay additional money. Lovely world ain't it?

Now I can speculate till the cows come home as to why this came about & the idiots that made it up will pontificate till the sun rises for why it's a good idea. It's mute for me to go much further as I am one voice & little power to change it. All I can say is that given the current state of affairs, our society is making it so our entire way of doing things has made it to where we have to violate our own laws in order to survive.

Sound impossible? Not as improbable as you might think.

I had a small business at one time. Literally did everything by the book. Paid my taxes on time & by the tables provided by the governing bodies. My employee got paid & all taxes withheld like he was supposed to. All the deductions were tallied at the end of the the year (first year in business) & not making any money, I expected to have reported a loss, so I didn't expect to owe anything. Instead owed the damn government $4,000!!!

I didn't MAKE anything! Literally. I barely broke even. I was still on unemployment from my last job, so I didn't even pull a salary from this job yet, so theoretically, I could have reported the business as losing money if I wanted to. Yet, playing by the rules, I got fucked.

In contrast:  This year, General Electric, multi-billion dollar corporation, paid NOTHING in federal taxes this year. Explain that shit to me. Literally, the laws are set up in a fashion that if you beak them, you will survive, but you will have to deal with the consequences if caught. Which leaves one to wonder; what the hell are we teaching our kids and just how the hell are we to survive? Not all of us 'know' how to fuck the system.

I was raised to not fuck with the system, so being behind the curve ball it has taken me a while to learn, but I'm not a grand master at it. So 'we' have to hire professionals. Their called lawyers. Last time I attended a church or read an ethics book or was skimming a book on logic, Bullshit wasn't supposed to be doctorate study at Harvard.

Spin has now become a synonym for lying, but it has also literally morphed into another organism. Its original intent was for what a top does for a child's toy.  Now it's what six figure a year con men do on the floor of congress or on the court room floors to get murderers back onto our streets to rape our wives & children. It's what is used to force both parents into multiple jobs to maintain a roof over our family's heads & two meals into our stomachs a day while elitists dogmatize over money & policies that aren't theirs.

So does all this shit mean M$ shouldn't tell the EFF to pound sand... It's their technology, they can do with it as they please. Seeing as the DRM really is theirs the EFF can't tell them shit. Frankly, if M$ want's to take a page out of the Sony playbook & charge people out the ass for their electronics; go right ahead. I don't buy their stuff. Even their operating system.  At $150+, are you fucking high?

Back when the earth was cooling & it was around $40/50 sure. For shit's sake, keep things reasonable. But like all good things, the shit kid's got a taste of the sugar pie & thought they could keep riding the high... I'm simply not paying it folks. I have 5 computers in this house... even to update, kiss my ass. Economics; don't pay more than what's coming in. Not to mention, I'm not “paying” to be their beta tester either. Now with less than 2 years in after the release of 7, version 8 is on the horizon? Enough...

Look, I've mentioned it in the past & maybe someone else will see it here in passing that didn't see it in one of the last blogs & pass it on... A man much older & much wiser than I said it the best in this example...

When times get bad, businesses always want to fire the very thing that keeps them alive thinking that it will save them money. They're fucking stupid. They still have to pay health insurance, unemployment and partial union fees for a certain amount of time dependent on how long the laborers are out of work. It really is cheaper to keep them there working. Even if it's just to shut down the lines and do nothing but clean & organize the shops.

Now, everybody out in town, like the assholes that they are, scream that times are bad & nobody has any money, start raising their prices when they should be lowering them too. I guess cause they think that the richer people are the ones that have the money, they think those dicks will make up the difference. That's fine, but the problem is richer people don't eat or shop at your place and if they did... they ain't gonna use “their” money.

That's what those bean counting assholes that fired all the laborers don't take into consideration when they start letting their fingers fly all over their calculators. So what they need to do is lower them hamburgers from $3 to $1. That way not only can the guy that never even bought a hamburger does, is he can now come in and get one, but the asshole that never bought one with his own money may actually spring for one once in his life as well too.

Coming out of that story; it's only taken, what, 4/5 years, but a few restaurants out there have figured this out & it might actually be working. Oh, it won't for long. Mark my words, their dumb asses will get greedy again & the shit will go up, but for now we can only HOPE the retail market will dislodge their heads from their asses and take notice.

As for the "Major" players in corporate Fortune 500?  They're too set in their ways.  Other than the possibility of a disease that killed off the dodos... then out of desperation, new blood to save the company scrambles in from the mail room, ignorant, fresh, naive ideas that truly look to make several people happy instead of just 3 suits... there could be some hope.

Otherwise...  I only see Satan pouting over his portfolio here in a few more years.

Sunday, June 12, 2011

Straw Dogs - 2011 - Pre-Review

And he's off ladies and gentlemen...

For this treat I'm going to tackle the remake of Sam Peckinpah's “Straw Dog's”.

Having studied all of Sam's films there's a whole mixed bag of fighting cats going on here that I could comment on as to why or why not the new release will or won't work, why or not I'll agree with the production. So getting to it, let's just say I'll try to be concise & stick to the point.

For one, Hollywood is full of wannabe production assholes that just want to make money, so the value of the remake is completely lost on them, thus to comment much further would be a loss. Only other than to say, 25+ years after Sam's death & actually having the film sporting the weight of "a Sam Peckinpah Film”, that actually carried some weight at one time. Which now apparently that the copyrights have lapsed from the original holders, this merits a remake “and” a remake of “The Killer Elite” (I'll be pre-reviewing that one too a little later); who's to say 'what' at this point in time or “who” actually earned the credit of this reprise.

Not knowing anything of the current director of the remake, I make no comment of their intentions on the story. Anything is simply unkind, unjust and simply mean. Comedians make a living at snap judgments and glossed over facts, I make mine after having been attacked.

Even though Sam's dead and I've had nothing to go on but a bunch of probably bad press and conjecture of a bunch of his equally drunken buddies, I figure what the hell, here's what I got from his films and the history of the US at that period of time.

“Straw Dogs” is the story about a young, professional couple starting out their lives together in a less than tolerant township. Things are quiet enough at first, but simple confrontations of sexual harassment with the wife (originally played by Susan George) soon escalate into escapades out of control. After several attempts by the affluent husband (originally played by Dustin Hoffman) to passive-aggressively assert his authority into the community; he & his wife are attacked by several members of the young toughs of the township. No one including law enforcement is willing to help the couple which causes the once honest and passive husband to become an unholy nightmare that Satan himself couldn't conceive in order to protect he & his wife.

Now as with my last pre-reviews some of you folks may think this is another romp through why I hate remakes. Not exactly. And I might also take a moment to ask that you nuzzle up to my nut sack too, but that would be unkind as well... No, what I wanted to do here & probably as a hint for the “The Killer Elite” pre-review is give some “hints and hurts” at what Hollywood's doing to remakes and how they might be killing some good movies of old.

Will “Straw Dogs” do good? With me, I'm going to have to give it a ball-less neutral. I've seen the trailer... it was done well... I was sold and will definitely see it.

Pitting it against the original movie... I won't do THAT. I refuse to “pit” one against the other. As I stated in the “Fright Night” blog each movie is made to their own order. Just like your steak.

Such is the emotion, history, ethics and mind frame in which the whole project was being conceived and produced. Sam Peckinpah's “Straw Dogs” was being done while we were smack dab in the middle of Vietnam. College aged students were titty & asshole fucking in the streets, smoking dope, questioning everything (even when there wasn't time to, despite safety issues), disobeying the law even when it was protecting them and EVERYONE on his crew had been in the military.

It wasn't “everyone's” attitude at the time, so don't get your collective panties in a bind. It was just one of many attitudes that some folks had. You'll either have to remember (or understand), the draft was still going on, most folks were still under a collective thought or 'conditioning' and what that does to your mental faculties. So our society was still trying to break free of 'thinking inside a box'. Sam & some of his guys “may” have been of a mind set that you needed to 'earn the right' to even get out of the box, much less think.  It was simply the time period.

Sam was also one of the first directors to depict violence in films as being a very despicable thing. Not only did he have grotesque bullet wounds depicted on his actors, but he also had their deaths slowed in a “dance macabre” to allow it to linger in the viewer's head. Basically as if to say, “This shit isn't fun and games.” Or as Tom Savini would later go on to say in his book the “Grand Illusion” that death is not glamorous & how he got tired of it being portrayed that way in Hollywood as a kid. Nothing was more true as when he got to Vietnam & served as a combat photographer (my job as well). When he got back to the US he became a make-up FX artist & did his best to do effects that depicted similar horrors as those he saw in the combat theater.

This is also to say I don't think Sam Peckinpah was trying to bring war home to the US. His generation already knew what that was & he didn't think we needed reminding. I think he saw men within society that knew more about war & violence than the men that said they were there. It's these guys that wanted to be left alone and make their way & try to regain what was left of their life & humanity before it too is gone.  

These were the stories he was interested in.  So Sam tells a story using society and it's ugly motifs as the catalysts for bringing these poor guys back into their primal animal instincts and prove once again that 'yes', they indeed tried to leave the ugliness behind.  To bring you up to their level; but you didn't want to rise to that occasion. So instead you not only celebrated his ability to lower himself to your level, but wailed to all the deities that won't have you for the monster you have created when he reached out to destroy you.

A lot of Sam's movies were also of a theme that people simply “weren't going to take it any more”. Not that he was the only one doing it. Clint Eastwood left the western productions in lieu of the Dirty Harry films. Charles Bronson's “Death Wish”, “The Magnificent Seven” and a few other westerns also shared in a popular 'populace downtrodden' feel of the time. But I'm kind of hinting more toward a singular or 'couples' approach to the ostracized group. An 'evil many' against the 'righteous few'. Not a Rambo or Cobra Ki here, none of that shit, but I think you're getting the picture.

Now I told you all of that to tell you all of this:

Remakes of this type run dangerously close of turning what was almost a work of art (and yeah, get over it, back then they really were one step from being that) into being an action packed torture porn.

I like a good revenge flick, don't get me wrong. Make the bad guys bad. Just don't make the bad guys so bad that you want them gutted so fast as to REALLY want them out of your sight!!! Kind of like being so hyper balls excited, striped assed ape shit wigged about this bug floating around your head that you think it's going to bite you that you swing a ball bat wildly around the house hitting everything it lands on in hopes of killing the damn thing, JUST so you hope you get rid of the damn thing? You know, That kind of bad guy? It makes the movie impossible to sit through. Then when the hero gets hold of the bad guy & goes to torture his ass likes he deserves it you don't want to see his come-up-ance. You're like, “just kill his ass...” He's such a sick-ass, just do him in... It's bad movie karma.

However, I'm all for bitch-karma. After several judicial sodomization trips myself I'm frankly in the mood for Hollywood to treat me to a visual massage that would best reflect my mental state of being right now. But will they do it? Like in Sam's time, is Hollywood reflecting a mind frame reminiscent of the popular consensus or are we being spoon fed again?  Are we going to see lawyers actually run down the street with their testicles set on fire?  I don't want to see them, hands cuffed, with their heads bowed down like a limp prick with the idea of vindication.  No no, I want the judge seated at his damn desk liquored up at trial, then we see smoke, smell bacon & shit burning and 'then' realize it's his asshole burning.   I want Hollywood to start delivering its audiences up true vindication again like it used to.

Will "Straw Dogs" - 2011 actually deliver?

James Marsden will play the male lead in place of Dustin Hoffman this time as will Kate Bosworth for Susan George. Other than the original being set and filmed in England, this version will be set here in the US southern states region. Always a wonderful place to stir up contempt don't you think Hollywood? Anyway, as best as I can tell, only a slight bit of character change will be put in place. A bit of metro-sexual will be introduced to James' character, while a bit more ball-breaking “I guess I don't care for the double-standard anymore” treatment gets added to Kate's character as apposed to the tired old damsel in distress.

From what I've already gathered, individuals who chose to take a more Rhodes Scholar approach to writing than I have (and also seem to have much more access to the film), for the meantime indicate that the rest/bulk of the film is leaning toward honoring the original in as much of it's glory as humanly possible. But then seeing as Battleplan Productions is a subsidiary of Sony Pictures Distribution, I'll allow you to draw whatever positive or negative conclusions you wish from there.

Grinding this nut further into dust, does it mean this film will be a success? Hell, I really don't know. Most films coming from an established market are always a tough sell and then to come from what was an artistic market on top of that? I consider this playing with fire. Sam Peckinpah was not a commercial director. His name was not one you put next to Spielberg or Lucas. So if I were to say remaking one of his films is blasphemous some people would initially take my words the wrong way too (like I'm a different kind of fucking weirdo).

Personally? Sure, redo the movie. Give it another name and lather it up a bit more. “Straw Dogs” and it's director are synonymous with another time and convention. One that was done behind a line I'm not exactly comfortable crossing and one that Hollywood should have been kicked in the balls repeatedly for having knowingly crossed. I mean some folks would say it's garbage to redo a Hitchcock film, but none of those movies were defining a people or society either.

And until I/we get some interviews (some real ones, not some studio induced bullshit) with production folks and earlier works as well, we're never going to know what the motivation behind this movie is. Which begs the line, “They don't make them like they used to...”

Yet, I'm still very eager to see this rendition.

Tuesday, June 7, 2011

"The Smurfs" - Pre-Review for 29July2011

Oddly enough it seems I get a bit more traffic doing movie pre-reviews than I do on some of my rants and observations over social injustice. So between what appears to be drunken outrages of blood lust and total anarchy I suppose I could throw in a few lighthearted insights as to what I “think” is going to happen with a few of Hollywood's hopeful prospects for upcoming opening weekends in the coming months.

Up for grabs in the my cross hairs is a seminal fluid favorite for kids called “The Smurfs”. It's due out 29July2011. The date alone should be a flag alone as to what may be up with this movie. If your not accustomed to what I'm talking about take a quick look at my last blog, it'll give you a quick history about what summer movie date jockeying and your wallet have in common.

The movie stars Neil Patrick Harris as Patrick Winslow, Jayma Mays as Grace Winslow and Hank Azaria as Gargamel the looser warlock enemy of the Smurfs who is on the constant constipated hunt to make a Smurf pie out of the little blue bastards in hopes of living forever.

Riding out the rest of the cats is a cavalcade of stars doing the voice-overs for the characters of each individual Smurf. Such as Jeff Foxworthy for Handy Smurf, George Lopez for Grouchy Smurf and the hottest Katy Perry for the coveted roll of Smurfette; to name just a few. [and 'no', I'm not Russell Brandt... that lucky fuck... he's young, rich & skinny. I'm old & broke down]

The Story in a Nutshell as I got it from the trailer: Apparently the fully animated realm just wasn't a good enough chasm for this group of gnomes to disappear into from the hate fest of Tipper Gore's “kill everything good & fun about animation” days of the 80s. You know, the dark ages of animation where everything stood and blinked for 30 minutes between over modulated commercials of toys & breakfast cereal of the exact same cartoon you were watching? Where NO ONE got hurt, god fucking forbid the mere mention of impending death be a subtle undertone much less an outright mention. Yeah, that part of the 80s... So, anyway, Gargamel fucks up, opens a portal into downtown Manhattan (Central Park actually) sucking his ass and a handful of Smurfs into our time & space, then the hilarious hijinks ensue!

Give me a moment while I clean the hurl out of my keyboard... fuck it... I keep spares...

Well, apparently some dumb ass kid from that generation thought that running around uttering “Smurf” as a hidden adjective or replacement for an action verb was better than the lack of intelligence for not learning his/her vocabulary lessons during grade school.  Hence,  idiot grew up, knew his dad had a barn out back and thought it would be a great idea for doing a comeback film for the new millennium starring these dead festering polyps.

This is going to shock the shit out of a few of you folks (the ones that have been reading my stuff), but with the proper amount of Dilaudid, a liberal (OH, so liberal) PG rating, damned as I will probably be... This movie “MIGHT”... and now “I'm” the one who's being liberal with the “might” here.. the movie “MIGHT” make something of itself.

Here's why I think it “MIGHT” work: As I have indicated from my other pre-review, I only have the trailer to go from. I'm not a Hollywood insider. I don't get the big bucks (any actually) & only but a few of you folks give two shits as to what I think, for the moment. But from the storyline alone, the movie already indicates that it has a propensity to make fun of its roots already.

One... the little blue bastards are annoying. I mean it. They would be cute if they'd help someone and then leave it the fuck alone, but they don't. Do you really want someone's help if they are going to be annoying about it? That would be like the doctor cleaning out an abscessed boil and then telling you all about the procedure while singing the most syrupy cute children's song as he's doing it. You don't fucking need the play by play! Smurfs.

So annoying in fact are these little bastards that when they do become victims, do we really care?  I didn't.  Hell I was thinking up much better shit to destroy the little blue abominations than Gargamel could have done passing through "The Lawnmower Man" years at a whack.

Two... the redundant use of the word “Smurf” as any form of exclamation. A colonoscopy and endoscopy exam without anesthesia & having it telivised is almost preferable to more than 10 minutes of this fucking “smurf the smurfing smurf head...”

How it comes back to me... the news reports of outraged parents & teachers groups wanting to smack the shit out of their kids and the fecal producers of the original cartoon that managed to coax said children into repeatedly substituting “smurf” as though it an acceptable part of the English language. 

"Smurf", as part of the inbred, love fest, comunal colony name, fine, I'll allow it. As a smarmy little 'shoe in' like they did with “frack” for the “Battlestar Galactica” series? 

Sure, we all know what they were doing. It was cute. Another, “How do we say it without saying it”, tee hee giggle. Or even allow “smurf” one use, as a holiday special; for the entire season. BOOM!!! DONE!!! 

Smurfs Family Reunion Show, they use "Smurf" instead of "Fuck", the kids celebrate in a hands across the world union. Teething rings, underpants, sippy cups & hotel keys flying through the air; the damn show is a success, but no... it has to get vomotinous. Some asshole (once again) “thinks” it's cute and shit kids want to wear it out till it's no longer fun for anybody to ride.  Like all shit kid drugs, the joke or game is over... but they just keep trying to ride that damned dead horse to get the same laugh or "feel good" out of the experience.  It's a shitty part of life & whoever did the original cartoon couldn't let go of the fucking gag either. Dennis Leary already did a beautiful stand up routine with regards to this so there's no reason for me to redo it, but if you're not familiar I HIGHLY recommend looking that up as well.

Getting back to the movie that will be...  My hopes are that the movie script calls for a REAL quick kick to the balls on Killing off of the "Smurf"-itis for this one! If they go into one of those “join us” love fest Smurf-up special, shit deals I feel an uncontrollable case of Sony Pictures entertainment imposed anorexia thrown on me. There's nothing I hate more than, “It's a shit kid heaven” ending to a movie. Happy endings are fine... “shit kid saves the world”? As Jack Nicholson said, “I'd rather stick needles in my eyes...”  Although, the repeated "Smurf"-out shit most likely will kill the movie for me - that doesn't mean it's a killer for the movie.  I just REALLY had to bitch about the "Smurfing" thing (& NO, I wasn't making a funny there either).

Neil Patrick Harris will do a fine job selling it as a facetious, initially unwilling aid the Smurf's plight to get back to their blue fuckvilla & other than his desire to getting back into the movie circuit, the possibly huge pay check or a combination of the both, I'm not exactly sure what the draw to this script for him was.

That also plays as discerning factor into why I feel that this movie may actually work. Hank Azaria has been a great character actor for eons, so pulling down a part like this was possibly a no brainer for him, but for Neil, there in lies the mystery. Being that his physical comedy is not his strongest selling point, it is his subtly that brings his current audiences running.

Will this movie be box office gold? Probably not. I'm not the slightest bit excited to see this movie and thank god my kids are old enough to see their own shit on their own nickel. As far as I'm concerned, Hollywierd won't see this as a semi-golden shower either (good, I got a dick joke in there), but it definitely isn't going to leave them with blue balls either (AND 2 for 2).

Hows that for short & sweet?

Well... it is for me anyway...

Sunday, June 5, 2011

Justice from Concentrate

Just when you think the legal system had completely broken down and backed into your living room carpet... people are eating one another in the streets. The earth is a barren wasteland and gas is worth more than gold.

OK, I'm full of shit again... But "how much" is going to be left to definition. Here's why...

About a week to a week & half ago a fellow by the name of Joshua Kaufman got national attention here in the US by actually practicing some vigilantism. You heard it right and yeah, that's what I'm calling it, “vigilantism”, but in a good way.

Now most of you folks that just want to catch the story about Mr. Kaufman's plight can Google the shit out the story or hit one of your favorite news sites and get a pretty good rundown on the five “W's” & “H” of his story. I'm just going to burn it up in about one or two paragraphs to get down to the real pissing and grinning.

Nuts & Bolts story: Joshua Kaufman basically had his apartment broken into and his laptop stolen. Luckily, Joshua had put software onto his computer that would alert him with all kinds of information with regards as to what's going on. [I'm not going to give out the software vendor because of the “whore clause” in my contract... you know, pay to play] In trying to keep this short, Joshua takes this information to the cops with the basic statement that this motherfucker has my property, now go collect it and throw his ass in the slammer.

Wouldn't you know it... the cops stick their collective jelly doughnuts in their pie holes and thumbs up their asses & tell Joshua to hit the bricks; they're “not” going to do their appointed jobs because of a bullshit reason called “resource restrictions “.  Something along the lines that they "couldn't" comply.

It wasn't until after Joshua invoked a massive social network & news media blitzkrieg, blasting the 'thief's' image and the story of the police's incompetency all over the international media did someone finally do something.  So come 31May2011 Joshua Kaufman finally got his justice, but it was only AFTER HE took the law into his own hands and demanded what was right.  Thus, my little 'vigilante' comment...  Remember though, I call this GOOD.

Which now leads into my nasty little bag of tricks... Once again the fine folks over here LINK have been "oh so good" enough to put up with my little bits & pieces of whinage for quite some time. The link above will lend itself to a bit more of the story than I was willing to go into, as well as other folks that want to know more. I'm not trying to hide anything here.

No, what I have already hinted toward was also reflected partially in the forum that I frequent. That being the lack of justice being served out by those we appoint, hire, trust.  Those folks who also demand that we sit and maintain our composure as they supposedly have our best interests in mind as they take the reigns, supposedly round up these assholes and see that punishment fit the crime.  Then if that's the case, what the fuck do you call the display of justice shown Joshua (prior to his deeper involvement folks, let's not have to explain everything)?

Now Joshua didn't have to drop six into his revolver and call the thief out into the street to reap justice. I'm not spouting that kind of shit... but I am saying, what other acts of slightly higher criminal activity have occurred in the past and have then just been “let go” by the police or our legal system for reasons I'm about to cover here in a moment. Then you tell me... vigilante? Yeah, the “Punisher” might have had a good idea.

“Absolute power corrupts absolutely”, chopped up, but not plagiarized and grandly bastardized by yours truly from a British historian who originally coined the phrase somewhere between the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries. Actually it was in a letter to Bishop Mandell Creighton in 1887: "Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. Great men are almost always bad men."

I put all that elegance in here to what ends? So I could deflate it with this shit for what? I'm not going to start spouting 'corporate this' or 'greed that'. We've been down that road and we'll probably visit it again soon enough... It is the corruption underneath that I'm going to ride like a toilet seat that has everything to do with this blog and the proposed vigilantism theme though.

Hollywood even knows the formula for criminals screwing the common man, law enforcement turning a blind eye (fill in any blank motivation you want for not investigating) and then the victim goes out to render justice under their own hands only to find that 'they' have to fight with every fiber of their being to stay ahead of the law-dogs because NOW all of the sudden there's a reason to serve justice. And they say Hollywood's fake...

What this reflection says to me is this... as a whole (large pieces here, not the complete) both law enforcement & lawyers don't give a shit about those who hire or appoint them to their respective positions (tax payers and city folks, not city elitists or appointees).

Now before the hate canon goes off or your outstretched arms, palsied with dead fingers onto the red buttons of your nuclear FUCK detonators, show me a bit of patience. Obviously this is not a blanket statement thrown on all individuals of law enforcement.  Unquestionably , nor is everyone in the practice of law subjected to the evils of society that jades them into both victim & victimizer. And some people actually are comfortable with their standard of living, so no, not “everyone” can be bought. So re-grease your size 18 butt plug, put it back in and have a seat.

Now that "that" little “disclaimer” is out of the way, I'll continue with the cussy hate campaign of angst & hurt till everyone's uterus falls out. Whether you were born with one or not.

Corporations can afford to pay and forcibly “make” law enforcement officials arrest civilians (or whomever really) on whatever charges they want for a minimum holding time so as to find additional charges to dump on that individual for whatever infringement they deem necessary. This has been grandly displayed in the RIAA/MPAA Nazi techniques shown in recent history with regards to file sharing.  Why mention this?  Just to give you an example of how lawyers use "their" abuse of power.  We already know how police do it, thus making an explanation of that redundant.

Side-stepping slightly; when it comes to corrupt finances & splitting cunt hairs, it's actually the consumer that payed for most of the brouhaha due to the fact we support the music industry through purchases & such and then because the victims being sued can't afford legal council (which you just “know” those folks got the cream of the crop when it went to trial) our taxes have to pay for their counsel too.

So with this in mind and taking my lastblog into consideration, when do the police get to make an ethical call on the matter. Fuck morals. Morals can't come into the picture, as morals are like politics & religion, they will always lead to emotional responses, thus bullshit fall out arguments (like the one with my brother over the Stupidity Repeal) ensue which lead to brutal emotionally driven fisticuffs reserved for the gods.  Then somebody really could get killed and for what (that's why I don't allow it here)?

Anyway, just like a Hollywood script, unless it turns into a public outcry the cops won't do shit. This can work in your favor in one of two ways.  Your vigilante act is civil and public enough that it literally forces the hand of law enforcement to finally do their fucking job, just like that in Joshua's case or... You push the boundaries of ethics and friendships in the exact same fashion as those who treated you unfairly (i.e., steal from the thief, sodomize the rapist, etc...). 

Now it sounds like the whole thing turned into a case of vengeance and not vigilantism. Does that I mean you or I are then corrupted/corruptible? I'll have to get back to you on that one for a more definitive answer, but at first glance I might have to say “yes”.

Lawyers on the other hand, with the rare exception of “oh so very few”, are all worthless. They might have had your best interests in mind back in junior college when they were taking “intro to criminal justice 101”, but if they went at it with much fervor after that, and told you they did it for the sanctity law & order... B U L L S H I T.

There are only 2 motivating factors for a lawyer to continue flagellating themselves within the hallowed halls of law and that would be their personal ever present narcissistic “win to loss ratio” or the Money (both actually being a mutated baby of one). It really is that fucking simple folks.

Pro Bono work is only done as it keeps the politics in “good standing” in the court room. That's when it comes time for your “guiltier than steaming dog shit”client to get a reduced sentence because he dogged out another inmate for something more heinous. I don't know about you, but when I fucked up as a kid my ass got busted just as much for admitting it as it did for Watergating the damn thing.  Simply put; his lawyer doesn't care that 148 hours of incriminating video and 148 thousand close-up photos of his client doing the "thumbs-up" while sodomizing 215 children from 17 states exist or not; does he get a deal or not?

What may be even more worse than a lawyer is a police officer that “thinks” they know the law and constantly quotes to you their ignorance of that fact. Don't think so?  Watch “DEA” if you don't believe me. Those Type “A” motherfuckers want to go from a crack whore on Monday to busting a fucking Guatemalan cartel lord before lunch on Wednesday... and for what!!! Just What The Fuck is their motivation!?! Don't give me this “they love their job shit either”.

There is a hidden agenda somewhere in there that we as the public aren't made aware of.  Something (non sinister, none of that conspiracy shit) simply within the DEA that has these guys jacked up like they're sniffing the shit they're supposed to be confiscating; ready to lie their asses off & make deals to these assholes that will never see the court room (like, “we'll let you walk if you'll just turn over your supplier” & shit like that). [just to prove my point on 'hidden agendas', in the military, if you save them $100,000, as a reward, you get 10% as an incentive to keep finding ways to keep saving them more money. Most guys don't know this. So share the knowledge!!!]

Is this rambling all disjointed and confusing?  Probably.  I'm probably not the only one who would like a more simple "common sense" system to just about everything.  I've even been victim of the legal system, albeit low level and by its double speak language, but a victim none the less...  I still want a change.  But like my blog blasting legalized stupidity (probably didn't touch it in there either) attempted to say, people want to fuck the system.  Personal responsibility...  or the lack there of...

I'm sure I have said this before, somewhere, and probably less eloquently then I'm about to attempt here... which is going to be chopped & pressed as McNuggets as it is... so (to some - in desperate closing) here goes... 

If you have to hire someone to represent you legally... because you simply can't speak “that” language... which in turns means, you can't keep tabs on the individual you hired? How the fuck do you even know you were represented, much less properly?

I don't claim to have the answers. Certainly not inside three pages, but within the smattering of one sentence and morals aside, a zombie apocalypse might be a good start.

Friday, June 3, 2011

Perspective on Piracy

It pisses me off to think that I feel the need to finally write a blog airing my opinion on whether to validate or vindicate piracy of music, movies, or software.

Keeping it in the confines of these three genres I'm hoping to not drop the US governments alphabet soup into my front room and cuff my fat ass while a bunch of other snot nosed elitists try their hand at psychoanalyzing my demeanor or true patriotism to god & country.

I've tapped on this subject amongst friends & co-workers before with varied levels of success, but basically gave it up due to what I call my “Religious Divide” syndrome. Basically the same situation where you get individuals so wrapped up in their 'belief' over the subject that they draw a line in the sand, lash their ass to the mizzenmast or whatever and are prepared to die with that stance. I mean they'll make shit up to prove their point, shit themselves, commit seppuku, chew through a hyena's ass while it's the process of defecating; simply asinine acts of self deprecation in order to force your hand to walk out of the debate in order claim victory (defeatist or not).

What brought this on was a news story featured at on of my favorite sites LINK. The story basically centers around an independent record label going from school to school in England teaching kids the errors of pirating music.

Now instead of pulling the media frenzy Lars Ulrich & the Senate Judiciary Committee back in April of 2000, the Record Label (BPI) visits the school kids with recording equipment and artists. Then with what I assume is a lengthy demonstration, shows the kids what work goes into producing just one song.

I doubt it's a completed product, as experience knows this takes days if not weeks sometimes, but it's great working knowledge for the kids to understand that it isn't “just” the “x” members of the band and a recording device that make up your listening pleasure. This in itself is fine. Kids throughout time have thrived & dined on the dying corpses of “don't give a shit how it got here” so the education is good for them. The message, however overtly or covertly it's being delivered, is what has the potential of twisting my nuts to the 'fight' position.

Reading deeper into the article left me (and the few commentators in the forum) with the impression that the folks of BPI want the kids to think that pirating music would leave these hard working sound guys and engineers (not necessarily NASA-like mathematicians here) without pay or compensation. Well, I'm here to say that's just an overloaded, rolling down the sides, tanker truck of shit.

It ain't called “MUSIC ART” now is it folks? To continue with the hate sentences... dumb asses, it's the fucking music “BUSINESS”. These assholes (labels) are in it for the MONEY. And I don't mean the guys that MAKE the music.

Don't get me wrong, your favorite band likes to eat too. I'm sure they like their limousines and caviar like the rest of us. OK, I'm being facetious (smart ass for those too lazy to look the word up), but you get the idea. When I worked for bands as an engineer I wasn't exactly in it for the money either. I loved the “show” too. As an “artist” (yes, I even hold a degree as an “artist”) I appreciate it when someone admires my work & have no problem just giving the shit away, just for the admiration. But I can't “EAT” admiration. Nor can I recreate the exact same drawing time and time again either. So each work is definitely one of a kind.

Assholes that sit behind a desk and place a piece of paper from one side of that desk to other... how much do you want to bet that motherfucker can do that repeatedly, time and again, exactly the same? Not to mention the fact, say yes or no to a myriad of decisions that anyone else could probably make who are in their... say, late to mid 30s. I did it all the time and still got paid shit to do it. Yet a suit got my check and credit.

So what I'm going to try and do is invalidate BPI's attempt to validate their piracy claims while validate my theory why some people download. I say download because Pirating is something I attribute to back in the 70s called 'bootlegging'. That was when folks either sat in on bar sets or closed concerts and illegally recording them, then turned around and made records of those recordings... you get the idea. Another process along those lines was different assholes, taking albums and transferring them to cheap cassettes to sell them relatively cheap on the street and completely cut everybody out of the money loop.

So for starters let's take a 70s band, fresh out of the garage and put them in the meat grinder. The record label gets a firm grip on their ass and signs them to what looks to be a premiere deal for 3 albums at “x” million. Sounds great right? Hope they had a lawyer (not really, cause he's gonna sodomize them too) cause they got fucked from “Hello boys”...

Most bands, including today, lose the rights to their songs when they sign with a recording label. This means if even ONE (1) song becomes a hit, that label will have other bands re-make that song repeatedly until other generations can't stand it anymore and kill it like so much rat poison to a cheating husband. Or they'll sell it instantly to a fucking chewing gum commercial at the drop of a hat for the residual check that goes into “their” pocket NOT the band's. Remember, they signed away the rights to their music in order to get that payday.

Now that they have a contract, do you really think the band has any control over anything? Fuck NO. It's like gambling in Vegas, everything is stacked toward the house, in this case; the label. They have such a bullshit line waiting for you in regards as to when you'll get paid for your album you might as well put in for social security now. Between photographers, stagehands, lighting, packaging, delivery, stocking, taxes, makeup, models, fuck me running up hill both ways till Sunday, we didn't even get in the studio to lay down music tracks before  the band is getting whine stories about not getting paid... starting to get a picture?

Want to know something? All those folks I just mentioned? They fucking got paid for their jobs. The showed up for work, clocked in, did their job, clocked out and got handed their check with a 1099 tax stub attached to it cause entertainment accounting fucks will hide every imaginable IRS tracks you can think of when it comes to finances. Remember, I have worked these scenes before.

What about the band? They can't work for nothing forever...  So long as they keep showing up to whatever the label says they need to show up to, on a day by day basis, these poor bastards get a per diem allowance. I'm guessing that's about $200 a day now. And I do mean daily. They don't pay by the week or bi-weekly. Because after some of the hoops they make you jump, frankly, you get tired of that shit and you just might think about telling them to go fuck themselves for a couple of days.  Not if you want to get paid you won't.

Is that descent money? For most times 80+ hours a week, seldom a day off, weeks on end. You tell me. It only gets worse. In the mean time, you're constantly on the move, you're being hounded by the label to already start producing your next album and there's a good chance you don't even have the tracks for the first one finished yet. Not to mention, you're also still pulling night gigs at your shit hole dive bar clubs, but at least this time you're the headliner and you get a meat tray in the green room and slightly better pay when you leave the club.

Are we in the money yet? Not on your fucking life. This kind of “in & out” (both figuratively and literally) could go on for up to 9 months before the finished album starts your tour date. That's taking into account that a combination of clubs, radio stations and word of mouth get enough airplay of your music out there to merit any kind of tour dates to get your band "out there".

So lets say you guys 'do' get some live gigs. What have you got to offer the crowd? Most shows last around 2 hours. Do you even have 2 hours worth of shit? Remember that comment I made about the label “making” you redo a song(s) by other groups? Yeah, that's where this shit comes in folks. Where your album stuff may only cover about an hour and 15 minutes worth of shit, they'll make you shake your ass to the tune of another 30 minutes of artists they've fucked in the past to fill the gap. Don't believe me? Sign on the line... chances are it'll be fill material on your sophomore album.

NOW you'll start to see some serious cash, because only once you hit the road does the band start to see any money. The label “CAN'T” own a live performance. They'll try to own the recording of it, but the actual performance... can't be done. So this is the only time that the band can actually clean up and make a really good living. THAT'S why you see these poor bastards on the road all the time. THAT'S why you NEED to try and go see them when you can, because you are really, truly, actually supporting the artist in the most profound way possible.

So, that album that you finally bought? Wanna take a guess at how much your 'artist' got for busting his ass and waiting up to almost 18 months for his/her part of the bargain? What's an album go for at Wally World these days? As of this writing; newest, hot, pop artist, #3 release, $17.88. Not taking into consideration THAT particular artist, we're talking about a first time band here, remember; how much do you think these guys got?

Half? Nope. $5? Not even remotely close. Let's not even cut the hair off your nuts, let's take part of the skin off as well and say a buck an album; and you'd still be balls on WRONG! Hell, I'll just cut your sack and scare the shit right out of you now and lay it out there for you... Most new bands, unprotected, first time signed, at best make .12 cent US an album. Given inflation, they MIGHT (and this is really liberal) MIGHT make .17 cents an album. FOLKS, that's for the BAND, NOT EACH. They split that shit.

So when you go to Wally World some two or three years later and see that album on sale for $3 in the bargain bin, ask yourself one thing; do you REALLY think Wally World is going to sell you that record and NOT have made 'some' kind of money off of it? Remember now, the label has ALREADY BEEN PAID for the records to even be in the store. Wally doesn't just return the unused portions for a full refund.

Now just who the fuck didn't “get paid”?

If the “artist” ramrodded most of all that mess to get an album out to me like what goes into putting on a concert (I worked those for a living folks & got payed well too), then giving he/she that $15 is just fine. But if all they're getting is .01% of the take? Kiss my ass!!! 

Now who the fuck is stealing from the artists!?!