Showing posts with label things that make me want to hurt people. Show all posts
Showing posts with label things that make me want to hurt people. Show all posts

Friday, December 18, 2015

The 25 Weird Days of Christmas Day 18: "An Elf's Story"

Strap yourselves in, dear readers.  For this weekend, we are tackling the Elf on the Shelf Christmas special.  Here's the trailer:



(If that already made you want to roundhouse kick whoever came up with this s**t right in the nuts, here is Conan's delightful parody.  Fair warning, it's not okay for children or adults who act like children.)

* - As you may have already noticed from that trailer, this special isn't even pretending to not be a commercial for Elves on the Shelves.
* - Fun new thing I learned about the Elf on the Shelf from this special: If a child touches the adorable little elf doll, the Elf "loses his Christmas magic".  Which means that he gets very sick, and almost dies and has to be rescued by other elves and taken back to Santa to recover.  The kid now has to write an apology letter to Santa if the Elf is ever to return to spy on the kids and let Santa know if they are good enough to deserve presents.
You gotta be f***ing kidding me.  I was a really oversensitive little girl and would have hated being spied on by that damn elf anyway, but this is way too much.
* - You know what?  I'm getting real sick of the "Questioning things instead of just ~*~Believing~*~ in them is bad, always." theme that keeps popping up in these more recent Christmas specials...
* - Though in fairness, Santa does tell the Elf that you can't just make somebody believe.  That's downright wise for one of these specials.

-----

Art of the Day!
12.11.15 - It's the Elf on the Shelf!

Tuesday, October 23, 2012

"You cold-farted itch!" - Thoughts on "Food Fight!"

(NOTE: This isn't the "old friend" I said we'd be catching up with last week.  That was just delivered a few days ago, but a few other more immediate things popped up and I will get to it next week, I promise.)

It feels like ages ago when I found that lonely book-that-makes-sounds adaptation of the troubled animated film "Food Fight", doesn't it?  (And oh dear, the format of this blog during it's first year.)  Since then, it felt as though "Food Fight" was going to end up being one of those strange pieces of animation lost to history that I'd never get to see.  Then again, this was a film that was explicitly a feature-length commercial with various advertising mascots as the characters.  With visions of a movie-length version of the astonishing ill-conceived mall scene in "Eight Crazy Nights" in my head, I wasn't too heartbroken over missing out.

Well, turns out somebody out there in the vast seas of the internet acquired a copy of "Food Fight".  That kind soul decided, for reasons that are unclear, to stream the thing on an ongoing 24-hour loop.  And out of morbid curiosity, plus the fact that OCD is a hell of a psychological problem and I have to tie up loose ends whenever I can, I watched the whole damned thing from the beginning.

Welp.

I'm always kind of grudgingly impressed when I already know that a movie is going to be a worthless piece of crap just based off its reputation, but then that movie actually turns out to be even more horrible in every imaginable way.  Furthermore, "Food Fight" is horrible for many reasons that nobody could ever imagine.  Yes, we've got ourselves a fascinatingly bad movie here.  I'd go so far as to call it the "Manos: the Hands of Fate" of animation.  It's that inept and insane.  (And speaking of classic "Mystery Science Theater 3,000" episodes, nobody has learned from the "Overdrawn at the Memory Bank" episode never to allude to good movies in their terrible movies.  Hell, "Food Fight" goes ahead and makes a lot of weird references to "Casablanca".  Yeah.)

So first off, obviously the fact that there are real life advertising mascots in this movie that was probably going to itself be marketed towards young children (even though it is really not appropriate for anyone) is disgusting.  But the thing is, here are far fewer advertising mascots than I had been led to anticipate from all the reports of "Food Fight" over at Cartoon Brew (which also have some incredible war stories from people who worked on the film in the comments).  None of the mascots who do show up are the "stars" of the movie.  In fact, most of them only show up as very brief sight gags.  And furthermore, and most puzzling, they're all advertising mascots that were either already kind of obscure in 2005 (the California Raisins show up for Pete's sake), or who represent products that kids tend to not be all that emotionally invested in (ie, syrup and floor cleaner).  If this was meant to be the ultimate product placement movie, then it's remarkably bad at achieving even that dubious honor. 

The name-brand products in "Food Fight" are therefore mostly fictional.  At any rate, they're at war with their nefarious off-brand generic equivalents.  The vilification of generic brands is genuinely despicable and, honestly, making it through this film made me want to support every strange generic off-brand product I see.

So already the movie is morally repugnant, but I kind of figured that already.  What I never could have anticipated was how incredibly incompetent and ugly "Food Fight" is, given all the companies that were supposedly supporting it and all the stars in the cast.  As far as the latter is concerned, I would not dare spoil the fun by naming anyone here.  But your brain will probably crap itself during the voice cast list.  And I'm guessing that the reason why certain mascots who were supposed to show up in the movie didn't is because their owners sat down, watched the movie, and bailed as soon as possible.

"Food Fight" is easily the worst-looking CGI animated feature I've ever seen.  The whole thing looks like the dirt-cheap dollar-bin cash-in of itself.  It's hard to even describe it, because I have never seen anything this inept before.  It looks like it's only the second or maybe third pass after the wireframe stage.  The more I think about it, the more I'm trying to convince myself that there is no way in hell that the version of the movie I watched was the final version.  Nobody in their right mind would sign off on a feature-length piece of animation where everything looks very literally like sh*t.

The animation is so terrible, it's actually hard to tell what the hell is supposed to be happening at any given moment.  Nothing moves -nothing even looks- like anything anyone has ever observed in this universe.  It's unreal how the most basic principles of sequential art and animated art are ignored or even violated in every scene.  I'm talking about things you'd learn the first week of drawing class, like how drapery looks and how it works, or the fact that different substances look different and move in different ways, or how gravity affects objects in a space, or how people have skeletons with joints in specific places and muscles that visibly change shape when they move.  There is one character in particular -an annoying comedy relief weasel-thing- who does not move or behave like any healthy living thing in the history of ever.

And that brings us to the characters.  Now, we've seen a lot of movies with eye-bleeding character designs before (what's up, "We're Back"?), but somehow the herky-jerk nature of cheap CGI makes everything look even more terrible than it already is.  The character's faces are so stiff and expressionless, they end up having to flay their arms around to express whatever is on their minds.  Imagine Ralph Bakshi's "Lord of the Rings" and you have the idea, except everyone looks unflexible, mechanical, and totally unaffected by normal physics.

A couple of things make the characters more awkward and awful than they already are.  First off, do you miss all those uncomfortable stereotypes from the early 80's?  Because if you do, you will find some here.  The "jokes" in the movie on a whole would make Piers Anthony proud as they are a discordant mix of childish puns and inappropriate sleazy gross humor anyway, but the mind-blowing sight of old offensive stereotypes stood out (WTF forever at the gay panic vampire bat thing) and I don't even want to know what they're doing in a feature film made in Twenty-Anything.  I also don't ever want to meet the person who approved of that horrifying Catgirl thing who never even looks at anyone she's supposed to be interacting with. She's named Sunshine Goodness, by the way, because this is the kind of movie that is stupid enough to name a character something as impossibly awkward as Sunshine Goodness.  I am guessing that the only reason she is even a Catgirl is because she was originally a human but they figured it'd be weird to have her marry Dogtective (and this is the kind of movie that is stupid enough to name a character something like Dogtective), so they stuck cat ears on her and called it a day.

I do have one positive thing to say about "Food Fight": it is, like so many of the very worst animated films, mercifully short.  And it's kind of heartwarming that a film so shameless and soulless in concept got as far as it did and never got a theatrical release; hell most people have never even heard of it.  You may be lucky (if that's even the word) enough to still catch it as its pretty easy to search for.  Meanwhile, everyone involved in the movie should take a moment and just sit and think about what they've brought into this world.

-----

Sketch of the Day!

10.3.12 - Sketchbook Page

Thursday, March 3, 2011

Let's read some Eye-Searingly bad Dinosaur Books for Children!

I'm going to impulsively discuss the world of discount dinosaur books for children, just in time for *next* month's Boneyard. (Edit: YAAAAY!!! Yes, people discovering me through S.O.S., I'm a bit of a dweeb. But hopefully a funny and informative one.)

Now, dinosaur books at least aren't as bad as cheap toy makers (if only the situation in this book was real). But they likewise tend to be a mine field of too little fact-checking, too much "aw, we'll just base everything on the most famous depiction of the animal in question." It takes a very long time for the new dinosaur finds that change out perspectives and shatter our very expectations of what these wonderful animals were like to filter into the public consciousness (if you don't believe me, ask your friends what a Tianyulong is and why everyone sh*t themselves when it was published).

Dinosaurs

As a shocking demonstration, I have for you two cheap dinosaur books I found in a surplus and salvage store. The first is creatively entitled
Dinosaurs and if you must, it may be purchased at Amazon here. Or not, because the thing is mercifully out of print, but at least we know who to blame now.

Dinosaurs

Now, I should really let images like this one speak for themselves, but the print may get hard to read once I resize them (you should hopefully be able to click for big). For it's first trick, the book confuses Mei Long and Psittacosaurus (if you don't know from dinosaurs, I'm in no position to help you in understanding the rest of this post, but in this case the mammalian equivalent would be identifying a small, fluffy cat as a big, bristly boar). As an added bonus, the text refers to dinosaur eggs. Yeah.

Dinosaurs

The text in this one's a little fuzzy, but it's the most epic failure in the book. Here we have all of our favorite Ornithischians or "bird hipped" dinosaurs! You know, like Torosaurus and Psittacosaurus and Microraptor and Caudipteryx and Ara and...

...

...

Wut?

To be fair, I can see why that'd be confusing. But it's also the kind of thing that makes it clear you have no business writing a book about dinosaurs.

Dinosaurs

Dinosaurs

I can't tell if these are sad or hilarious in hindsight. (And yes, the top one does say "Torsaurus".)

All About Drawing Dinosaurs & Reptiles

Our next book is this thing, which I am very sad to see is published by Walter Foster, the famous art instruction book publishers. I was going to go ballistic over that title, but it turn out they're all like that (
All About Drawing Sea Creatures and Animals! All About Drawing Horses and Pets! All About Drawing Vehicles and Trees!) It starts out with this handy scale guide for typical animals in the book:

All About Drawing Dinosaurs & Reptiles

Oh... wow...

Then gives us some handy -er- "Dinosaur Extremes". Again the text is fuzzy, but we get the good old "Troodon is the smartest dinosaur" trope again:


All About Drawing Dinosaurs & Reptiles

And finally, a selection of the dinosaur drawings themselves, with some text. LOOK AT THAT TRICERATOPS!!! Also, the fun fact about Baryonx is just strange and that cute Bearded Dragon has no idea why he's here:

All About Drawing Dinosaurs & Reptiles

(And guys... hey guys... guys...
Oshawatt or Snivy?

EDIT: Oshawott. Oshawoot always.)

Monday, January 17, 2011

Scientist does something cool, internet blows it way the f*** out of proportion. As usual.

First off, Astrology is a load of bologna. Let's just make that clear. Yeah, people born around the same time of year *maybe* have similar personality traits, and it's useful for extreme shortcuts in literary symbolism, but that's about as much credence I give this stuff. Also, if the PG-13 rated title didn't warn you enough, this post will have vitriol in it. Hide the kiddies until Wednesday, when I will either talk about Batman or Pokemon.

So last Thursday, your Facebook page probably exploded in an orgy of "OMG why am I a Gemini now?" or "What the hell is an Ophiuchus?" This is all thanks to the mainstream media catching wind of Parke Kunkle, board member of the Minnesota Planetarium Society. Earth's relation to the sun has changed slightly since the Babylonians created the first western zodiac, but according to Kunkle, the zodiac dates were never updated to reflect this. Since zodiac constellations are so helpful to astronomers in determining the position of the sun, he came up with a more accurate timeline for them. It includes thirteen constellations, simply because astronomers have counted Ophiuchus as a zodiac constellation for years, and anyway the Babylonians had entirely different zodiac signs. (You would think that the astrologers would have caught this earlier, but never mind that now.)

Got all that? Good. Because here is an example of how this has all been reported (and the comments, holy sh*t). Note that OK! hasn't changed it's horoscope page. How rebellious of them.

So basically, an astronomer did something cool to help his fellow astronomers, and unless you study space yourself, this really doesn't affect you at all. But the internet, in a fine demonstration of why I love and hate it, misunderstood what actually happened and lost it's sh*t over it. I find the ways people have been reacting to this story *fascinating*. It's a little more fun than Tricera-Fail because the subject matter is, as has already been stated, baloney. That said, I never knew, until this week, how many people I know took astrology this seriously. It's... unsettling.

No, your birthdate has not changed. Ophiuchus isn't something scientists just made up, it's just usually left out of the zodiac constellations probably because there's twelve months and so it's just easier to have twelve signs (trust me, I'm just learning about this constellation myself). The night sky has not changed either, and frankly it doesn't care what we humans think about it. And finally (this is the one that astonishes me), just because your new astrological sign doesn't match up to your old astronomical sign, doesn't mean that your personality has changed in any way.

Unless...

Unless you read up on your "new" sign and what it represents. And you vehemently disagreed with it. And yet, somewhere deep down inside, the personality traits of your astronomical sign... stuck.

BWAAAAAAAAAAAHHHM!!!

For the record, I... remain... myself... Dr. Mung-Mung... I mean, a Pisces. Woot. I rather like these proposed new signs suggested by Geek Mom, if only because I get to trade in my fishies for a dragon (wut up, Ness).

Other reassuring things for people affected by the mainstream media misunderstanding and losing their sh*t over a mildly interesting science story. In fact, please copy and paste this into your status if you know someone, or have yourself been affected by the mainstream media misunderstanding and losing their sh*t over a mildly interesting science story. The mainstream media misunderstanding and losing their sh*t over a mildly interesting science story affects the lives of many. There is still no known cure for mainstream media misunderstanding and losing their sh*t over a mildly interesting science story, except for the media getting off their collective fat asses and doing some damn fact-checking. 93% of people won't repost this... Why? Because they probably think reposting this will cause autism or something, which it won't, as determined by science.


1) Pluto is a Trans-Neptunian Object and there are a LOT of them. So rather than have a "My Very Excellent Mother..." mimetic that goes on for twenty minutes, it was time to reevaluate how to define the word "planet". If you're not talking to an astronomer, you can call Pluto whatever you want. Call it a gerbil for all the cold unfeeling objects in space care.

2) Paleontologist Jack Horner started kicking around the idea that maybe the dinosaur we call Torosaurus was really a very old and cranky Triceratops. I have never seen the mainstream press blow a science story so out of proportion as I did when this one got out. Almost no Very few other paleontologists take this theory seriously, and most are just like, "well, that's... interesting, but let's see if we can find more evidence of that first". Point is, Triceratops isn't going anywhere.

I need a hot drink.

Addendum: Oh, I love you, The Onion.

Further Addendum-ing: I love you too, Clever Girl.

----

Sketch of the Day!

I think you could make an excellent argument that the rise in scientific misunderstanding directly correlates to the lack of a good current "Star Trek" TV series...

1.9.11 Sketchbook Page

Further, further Addendum-ing: I love you too, VG Cats!

Wednesday, September 15, 2010

Costumes (already?) and some more trailers

It may still technically be summer, but there's a cold chill in the air at night, the pumpkin beers are out, and the Big Party (I refuse to call it iParty because, come on) is stocking it's shelves with Halloween Costumes! Hooray!

I haven't decided on who/what/where I want to be this year. I briefly entertained the idea of somehow assembling a Neytiri costume and... that plan still seems reasonable. Because the officially licensed "Avatar" costumes, to my astonishment and self-kicking lack of camera on hand, look like crap.

I'd like to say that this is some kind of cash-in. That somebody took a generic bodysuit, sewed whatever leftover tails they had lying around to it, and spray-painted the whole thing blue. But no, this thing right here is apparently the official Neytiri costume,and it retails for $72.00.

It's not the most upsetting women's costume available, however. That award would have gone to this little number here.  What you are looking at is called the "Sexy Cookie Monster Costume". It is real and I have seen it for myself. It reminded me why this old, old, old Infographic from The Onion is getting less and less funny and more and more horribly prescient every year.


However, it isn't the worst. Because in searching for a picture of the Sexy Cookie Monster, I found the worst ever Halloween costume for women. And it is the worst ever, because somebody went ahead and stole The Onion's idea.  Ignoring the brain-breaking reality of an actual non-satire real life Sexy Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtle costume for now, here are a few new animated film trailers that... broke my mind for other reasons. (You can read previous trailer reviews here.)

First off, here's a link to Cartoon Brew's reaction to the infamous "Double Tower" trailer for "Tangled". *Sigh...*

And here is the new trailer for Dreamwork's "Megamind", which is, of course, in three-effin'-dee. I wasn't all that excited about and looks... well, it looks like the very definition of "m'eh":



This thing is called "Alpha and Omega", from a brandy-new studio called Crest Animation, and it is -of course- also in three-effin'-dee. I am going to go ahead and pretend that this is, in actuality, "The DeviantArt Movie" (to go along with "The Social Network" "The Facebook Movie":



But really, the only bad things I can say about "Megamind" and "Alpha and Omega" is that they suffer from lack of imagination. Uninspired animation, boring music choices (it says a lot that the music cue at the 1:50 minute mark of the "A&O" clip made me groan instead of cheer), and generally reminding me of older, better films.
And I say that because this next trailer is for "Quantum Quest". It is "a sci-fi action film set in a scientifically accurate rendering of our solar system in 3-D stereoscopic (that) blends computer animation with billions of dollars of fantastic images captured during recent NASA space explorations". While I hate celebrity voices as a selling point in an animated film, it is worth noting that the promotional material proudly boasts that the cast includes "two Captain Kirks, two Darth Vaders, two Jedi Knights, and Neil Armstrong" OMG WTF LOLers!!!
So with all this in mind, it's kind of a tragedy that "Quantum Quest" looks like this:



Oh... oh God...

----

Art of the Day!

Speaking of people in costumes:

9.7.10 - I read the first _Essential Fantastic Four_ collection and then I drew these.

Wednesday, September 8, 2010

Triceratops lives! -or- Why the mainstream press makes me cry.

WARNING: Uncharacteristic vitriol and some naughty language ahead.

Consider this another episode of Things I Need to Catch Up On Because They Happened During Don Bluth Month.

7.1.10 - Sketchbook page

So around the middle of July, my wonderful regular reader/commenter Zach Miller posted this article on his blog: Toroceratops. I suggest you read it and his other two posts on the subject before we go on.

My reaction was, essentially, "Huh. So John "T. rex was an obligate scavenger" Horner proposed that Torosaurus is actually just a really, really old Triceratops and therefore all Torosaur fossils should be renamed Triceratops? That's... interesting, I guess. I, like most of the commenters, will buy it if we ever find an unmistakable transitional 'Toroceratops' skull."

And then I pretty much forgot about it.

Until I was well into the Don Bluth reviews and learned, via FARK.com, that the mainstream press had got a hold on this story. Ladies and gentlemen, the poor former (maybe) Torosaurus is unwittingly at the center of a fine demonstration of every single thing I cannot f***ing stand about the way the mainstream press reports on science, animals, nature, and... f*** it,
everything.

Choice headlines:

"The Triceratops Never Existed!" - Yes it did. It's Torosaurus who would be getting the name change. Please learn how scientific nomenclature works. Also, changing an animal's name doesn't magically make it disappear. Seriously, WTF?

"Triceratops 'never really existed but was just a young version of another dinosaur'" - Same points as above, and just who the hell are they quoting? Honestly, this might be my favorite of the reports because you've got that headline and then, buried deep within the body text of the report itself: "All torosaurus specimens will now be reclassified as triceratops, the scientists said."

"Morph-osaurs: How shape-shifting dinosaurs deceived us" -
1) Christ in a hot rod, I didn't pass five MTELs to see an affix used as a verb in a newspaper.
2) I don't know if this offends me more as an armchair paleontologist or as a sci-fi fantasy fan (by those "physically changing as you age" standards, aren't we all shapeshifting?) But at least it prompted this stupid thing which is hopefully funny:

7.4.10 Sketchbook page

Rest assured, dear readers, that the "nonexistence" and "shapeshifting" (I seriously couldn't type that without cringing) of dear old Triceratops has been highly exaggerated. But you wouldn't know from these articles. They have utterly failed to understand how scientific nomenclature works, have happily reported this theory -which many have called into question- as a universally accepted fact, and seem to be of the opinion that Triceratops (who doesn't give a sh*t what name us puny humans call it by anyway) has somehow vanished from the fossil record altogether.

I need a cold drink. 


Edit: See also this.


-----

Art of the Day: On a much, much happier note, joy and rapture! The Art Evolved Pop Culture Gallery is up!

Other Person's Art of the Day: Also, Gregory S. Paul's Dinosaur Coffee Table Book on Blurb Want... so... much... (Cries at lack of money.)