Norm Macdonald was a Comedy Titan

 By using his intelligence more than charisma, by not giving a fuck about money or fame, and by continuing to be a scathing, yet well-rounded and genuinely, naturally giggle-inducing comic, Norm Macdonald, after losing his 10-year-long, privately-held boxing match with cancer by technical knock-out,  leaves us with a comedy presence that looms large. And he leaves me with tears in my eyes and a sadness in my heart. 

All of a sudden, I'm reading in random places on the internet, "RIP Norm Macdonald," and I've been more and more gut-wrenched about it since. I decided to compile some thoughts and a few of my fave Norm moments here on my old-ass, dinosaur-format, TV-focused, blog. I know. A blog post, right? This is what you can expect from Glenn Smith, eternal student of Norm Macdonald, the fucking hack (as I hold back sniffles). Miss you, buddy.

https://www.avclub.com/r-i-p-norm-macdonald-1847674704 -- A.V. Club provides a great retrospective of his career here.

It's looking like Quentin Tarantino is gonna make an R-rated Star Trek movie & Simon Pegg annoys him

As always, thank you, A.V. Club.

https://news.avclub.com/quentin-tarantino-says-that-actually-pulp-fiction-in-1836508070?utm_medium=sharefromsite&utm_source=avclub_copy&utm_campaign=top

Quentin Tarantino original interview I didn't read, which AVClub is riffing on in above link, I will post here as another link if u want the oridge.

https://deadline.com/2019/07/quentin-tarantino-once-upon-a-time-interview-leonardo-dicaprio-brad-pitt-margot-robbie-star-trek-pulp-fiction-1202647835/

-via Deadline

btw nice job interviewer Michael Fleming Jr!

Benedict Cumberbatch taking a fierce stance for feminism in movies & TV

"Benedict Cumberbatch says he won't take on projects that don't pay men and women equally"
https://news.avclub.com/benedict-cumberbatch-says-he-wont-take-on-projects-that-1826028590

By Sam Barsanti for AVClub.

This kind of news really makes me smile. I've been a feminist all my life, and I'm happy to see women being supported by men more and more. It's men who need to help women in their rise toward equality with men, because in all the world's history, it's never been equal. Except maybe in some small villages in remote parts of the world, where polyandry is practiced.

I'm not explaining myself well here, and I apologize. Limited time today. We all understand that women have been oppressed forever, by men. So men have to give up some of that power and let women take over positions we've always held, for equal pay. Follow the money, they always say. Money, like Rand always said, is a measure of one's worth. I halfway believe that. Showing women they're worth as much as us men, means we have to give up one of the biggest things that keeps us in power over them--an equal share of the money.

Good on ya, 'Batch!! Great form of resistance. Doesn't it feel like he's really standing up to something big and stonewalled with this? Takes bravery! No one should have to fear the wrath of man. We can lose our evolutionary nature to destroy. We can adapt.

Norm Macdonald is doing cool things on his own terms

Lately my go-to thing on YouTube--and the only thing I've been actively searching for and pursuing on YouTube, because I'm weird and in a weird place mentally, what with my enjoyment of entertainment media--has been Norm Macdonald Live.

I've been going back and forth chronologically within the series, watching season 3 videos, season 1 videos, season 2 videos, whatever. I'm pretty sure there's just three seasons.

Norm's just a no-frills guy with a unique sense of humor and it's been hitting me in the right place lately. What I watched today, which touched my ear and my eye and I wanted to share, is a full hour of Norm's own standup from after Tiger Woods was busted and outed for having sex with ladies and after O.J. Simpson went to prison for stealing his own clothes back. My point is it's relatively new, and also that when he talks about those things, it's pretty dang funny to me. And also his bit about gay pride. It's critical without being insulting. Truly observational humor.



Norm's show resonates with me because he says what he wants, he's independent apart from a few sponsors for which the show does their own Norm-orated advertisements, he's smart as a whip, he loves history, and his knowledge of comedy and entertainment is vast. He's also older now, at 50 I think, and he's had a lot of time to hone his craft. He's solid in front of any guest. Mike Tyson in season 1 of his show made him visibly nervous (just for a few minutes), while Jim Carrey in season 3 made him visibly annoyed. Larry King in season 1 made Norm visibly irritated, and he mentions it in several subsequent episodes. It's fun to make fun of Larry King. He can take it.

Twin Peaks: The Return (S3E1-18) has left me

SKAEP NIWT FO SEIRES ERITNE EHT ROF WOLLOF SRELIOPS

with a mind-bogglingly weird set of questions and few answers. Lynch loves to keep us guessing. The way this guy makes TV is really unique. I hear that he doesn't read what people say on the internet about his work. That certainly makes sense. Also, it's a little bit cool.

For the past few months, I've been thinking about this show every day, going to r/TwinPeaks daily to discuss fan theories, and reveling in the beauty that Frost and Lynch have created. Many fans and writers credit only Lynch for the show's attractiveness, but without Frost, there would be no Twin Peaks. The show would suck without either of them; together, they are the force.

Today, the sky is yellow in Seattle. Ash has been slowly falling all night. Wildfires burn close to home, within Washington. Not D.C. Washington State.

Wildfires burn in my heart about the ending. Now that it's over, and Frynch have vaguely answered half the questions they've posed (in my estimation), I don't know what to think. I'm left kind of empty. Horrified, feeling Laura's horror. Seeing her scream in the last scene was really brutal. The lights go out. Done. It's over. We're left with the image of Black Lodge Laura whispering in Dale's ear. What did she say?

Some people have enhanced the audio to hear her barely-mixed-in whispers. It sounds like "Ask your son Sonny Jim about me." But it probably doesn't matter. What Frynch want you to know is that she said something secret--why else would she whisper it in his ear? I doubt Frynch would have had Zabrisky actually say some huge revealing thing when filming. Who knows, tho. He can manipulate audio in weird ways, that Lynch guy. He's responsible for most of the sound editing on this show, I assume. And he's a fucking genius about it. The slowed-down Moonlight Sonata is my favorite part. It seems to be the character theme for the Dugpas/Woodsmen.

When I saw the ending scene a few nights ago, I at first felt empty. Angry, even. I scoffed at Frynch from the comfort of my couch. I was the fan I have always said has the wrong mindset to watch Twin Peaks: one who expects to get what he wants. I didn't get resolution, but only more questions. However, resolution wasn't what Frynch were trying to give me. That was never their intention, I see that now.

And you know what? After reading lots of others' analysis of what it meant, I feel complete--like I'm in a good place with this show. It respects me enough to not give me all the answers, to not treat me like an idiot who couldn't figure it out for himself, to not spoon-feed me the answers. No! Frynch are really on to something here with this whole not-revealing-all-the-secrets thing!

Now that I think back on several elements within the show, e.g. Mike constantly asking, "Is it future, or is it past?", I realize there's more resolution to this story than I originally thought--it's just hidden WITHIN THE SHOW I ALREADY WATCHED!! Now that's some genius shit right there.

All in all, 5 fucking stars out of 5. Fuck you too, Frynch. Fuck you too. I love you.

For further reading, here's a great A.V. Club article:
There Should Never Be Another Episode of Twin Peaks, by Clayton Purdom for A.V. Club
Once again, great analysis by AVC. Keep knocking it out of the park, you guys.

Here's more great Twin Peaks analysis from IGN:
Why Twin Peaks had the Perfect Ending, by Chloi Rad for IGN

It's slippery in here.

James Rolfe's 50 Favorite Movies vids got me excited about movies again, and my #1 Favorite Movie of All Time

Wow--Back to the Future, Jurassic Park, Wayne's World, and a treasure trove of movies I've never seen, but need to, and never knew it? And none of them newer than American Movie (2000)? Man I like this guy. I'm constantly reminded that I'm aging, though. I saw him doing Angry Video Game Nerd videos when I was younger, and then I had kids. Then he had a kid. And he started branching out, doing all kinds of videos, all under the Cinemmasacre moniker. And these videos show a more mature, practiced James Rolfe, doing his thing, talking about a subject that he knows best--film. It's what he's spent his entire adult life doing, and he's good at it. So I trust his judgement. Plus, his tastes are mature. He's seen it all, and he's not fooled by bullshit. Good job on these videos, James, if you ever end up reading this. By the end of it I could see your eyes moving down to the cue card, though--my only criticism. 😅 Sorry.

James' personality and career trajectory aside, this all made me want to talk about my very favorite movie, and about favorite things in general. Because one thing James said about his #1 favorite movie of all time is that you don't choose your favorite--your favorite chooses you. And it made me think many things. One is that my favorite movie of all time continues to be Lost Highway (1997)--and I don't know why the fuck that's the case. It just gives me this certain perfect feeling. I've seen it so many times and it took that many to really understand it.

And when I felt I did, I felt as if I had climbed a mountain, like--and this is going to sound shitty--I was on a higher plane of understanding than the general public. Like I had achieved a thought triumph and could hold my head high; be one of a select few. That thought of exclusivity really appealed to me then, and still does today, but to a lesser degree and a different angle. When 1997 began, I was halfway thru junior year of high school. Suffice to say, my understanding of the world and myself have changed, but overall--and this is something I've learned that gives me peace--my tastes have not. I don't want to say this exclusivity feeling was pure selfishness, but it's just that, to my own personal memory, there's no one I've spoken to about this movie who understands it on a deep level. But who else has seen it as many times, I wonder? And why would they? It's weird af, really supernatural, and it explains nothing along the way. It's off-putting, to say the least. You need patience and a big love of darkness and shadows. Right up my damn alley. I haven't counted, but I think I'm between 10 and 15 views.

Mulholland Drive came after, and I think the plot was more or less the same as Lost Highway, just more palatable. Lost Highway was a more intense, dark approach.

Back to the subject of favorites--when I was watching Rolfe's videos today, as he was getting down to #1, I had to think about what mine would be. Lost Highway popped into my head immediately, which made me think--why that one? I started questioning my own intuition, with questions such as: 'Why?' and 'Is it because you've just told yourself that's your favorite, and are forgetting some other movie that's had as strong an effect on you long-term, maybe because you're such a dumbass pot smoker, you idiot?' Or is the reason more simple, less guilt-trippy? Is it that I've just told myself that it's my favorite movie throughout the years, and kept reinforcing it, and that's the main reason?








Well I'm happy to say I got an answer to those questions when I schmoogled 'lost highway movie' and got the old pwickapedia preview on the upper right, with the logo and stills of the actors. All these scenes came flooding back to me--the ending in the desert, the prison cell sequences, Bill playing that sax live, meeting Patricia Arquette for the first time, and who he becomes later, a literally completely different person. And if I could say one thing in answer to myself, and also to just sum it all up--why it's my favorite movie, why I've been saying that for 20 years, why it gives me that perfect feeling, why it's something I never forgot, why no movie has toppled this one in my mind yet--it's this: "I'm in your house."

Then you're Bill Paxton, and you go, "What do you mean, you're where in my house?"

Then I, Robert Blake, hold up this obnoxiously big 90s cell phone and I go, "I'm there right now." And then my face gets really dark and my tone turns sinister and I say with a slight, furious growl, barely contained among my perfect composure, "Call me."

Okay, I got it wrong, but that's how I remembered it offhand. The memory was powerful. It actually goes like this:




The scene is exponentially more powerful than my memory. That's the one quintessential scene in the movie, and it's really all I feel I oughtta say about why Lost Highway is my #1 favorite movie of all time.

Hey, thanks for reading.

Kevin Hart, Louis C.K. and The Rock made me laugh so hard today

Found these randomly on YT today. Never seen Secret Life of Pets, but these interviews with Louis C.K. and Kevin Hart together are hilarious. The chemistry between these two guys is amazing.




Buddy cop movie starring these two. Lethal Weapon-style, but Kevin is Riggs and Louis is Murtaugh. The best thing about Lethal Weapon was the chemistry between Gibson and Glover. Hart and C.K. have that rapport.

Plus they're both excellent comedians of different styles, the combination of the two resulting in mass hysteria in me laughing too hard.



Let me also say that, as a journalist and PR dude, I really like these styles of interviews. The interviewers are being really cool, it doesn't seem like there's a PR person off to the side, saying, "Don't answer that."

Then I saw this and it made me laugh the hardest: Kevin Hart and Dwayne Johnson impersonating one another:

YouTube's Most Watched Videos 2016

I was just wondering, what are YouTube's most popular videos? Which vids have been most watched? This one by YouTube channel Top Trends goes in depth about each video, and does a good job not spending too much time on each one.



So this video was published January 13, 2016, and I wondered if it's outdated by now, in April. Not so much, it turns out—as you can see in this mercifully short video from last March (couldn't readily find stats for April by searching YouTube, what's a google search?):

John Stamos Reads Negative Fuller House Reviews

This made me happy. These guys have fun with negative criticism, and John Stamos takes everything in stride. Full disclosure: I found this video thru the A.V. Club emailer to which I'm subscribed. Of course they wrote about it, because Seth Myers, below, mentions them and the stellar title of their Fuller House review, "Fuller House is like a porn parody without the porn."



The whole time, I was thinking about this:



"Where'd they print that? You can't print that!"

I have not yet watched Fuller House, but I have the same feeling about it that I have when I see, e.g., a celebrity endorsement advertisement. My thought it, "You go, celebrity. You make that money. More power to you. Be a slut. Slutting is fuuuuuun!"

If D.J., Steph, Kimmie, Rebecca, and those three impossibly old gentlemen can come together to make some moolah and make some people laugh, why not?

#watchthis: Pound House

Doug Lussenhop, I believe, was the editor for Tim and Eric Awesome Show Great Job!, and Pound House is Doug's post-all-that-show, featuring Tim in some eps, but not Eric.

Doug gets to be the straight man, while co-star Brent Weinbach, portraying a genius duality of character, steals the show. The co-stars are all awesome.

The show stays true to itself and follows a solid theme throughout—if I were to give an elevator pitch for Pound House, it would be that it feels like Tim and Eric, less spastic, mixed with David Lynch, starring comedy insiders, with great editing, great acting, and featuring at least three memorable, new characters (Doug, Brent, and the rapper/stick guy)—while breakout episodes like "Skate" take it in unexpected, even uplifting directions.

"You just got sprayed."

Pound House 14, "Balls," just came out three days ago. Haven't even watched it yet. There it is, right there. Boom. Eat it.

Last Week Tonight with John Oliver: Whitewashing (HBO)

Growing up in the Seventies—Bill Burr on Opie Radio

Bill Burr, talking about his childhood, with a few other 40yo guys. Apparently not as much emphasis on safety from parents towards kids in those days? Part of me thinks they're full of shit, and the other part knows they're right.



Last night I tried on F is for Family on Netflix, with Burr voicing the main character, the patriarch of a five-person family. I like it. It's mostly good. After two episodes, I can see they're finding their footing, but it's got a lot of room to grow, and I'm interested to see where they push it. Complaint: I wish, for once, the father wasn't the main character in these Simpsons- and Family Guy-style cartoon shows. Sure, it reflects the harsh reality of life, but do we need television shows reinforcing that?

I did like Laura Dern's mom character breaking out into tears while she finally has time to enjoy her day. That was a bit of heavy reality, and it was also hilarious with the fish bowl on her head, and the dog Major humping her leg. I love Major's eyes that look in two directions, that's hilarious. And I do enjoy Burr trying to make the Seventies real for viewers. It's a nice period piece. The intro credit sequence is really awesome, too. I have a hard time feeling any empathy for the dad character, though. He'll have to break out of being a complete dick. But, I guess Burr's dad never broke out of that. So I dunno.

They're going for something not completely new, but a new take on an old thing. F is for Family, in my mind after seeing two episodes, is a cross between South Park and The Simpsons. I don't think Family Guy had as much of an influence here, that show's too spastic and disorganized. F is for Family focuses completely on the family members, with solid narratives, and believable plots.

It's shocking to viewers these days. I think that's what Burr wanted, though—to wake everyone up and say, "Hey, it wasn't always this way. It would behoove you to take a look backwards."

They've got some voice actors I can almost place, but I'm having trouble finding online. All I get are the actors for the family members, but not the neighbor kids, the fat cop on the TV show, the announcer guy on the other TV show, and some other people. David Koechner's obese, fried chicken-pounding, chain-smoking boss is hilarious. ("They should make a chicken of just skin.")

I swear the fat cop is either the Unsolved Mysteries guy, or a voice actor from Fallout 3.

I'm pleasantly surprised, and impressed, that Haley Reinhart is a voice actor on this foul-mouthed show. She needed to get a little cooler. I just tried to watch her sing Radiohead's "Creep," and it made me throw up in my mouth a little bit. There was absolutely no substance. Being attractive does not mean you deserve attention. So good on her for doing the little brother character and throwing f-bombs for her professional career.

Here's an IGN review of SSN1 that's mostly well-written.

Is Netflix completely kicking ass lately, or is it just me?

Gamer Poop, Skyrim #14, by Mans1ay3r

Everyone's talking about Fallout 4 and I'm here like, "So hey, how about that Skyrim?"

This is a new Gamer Poop. Thanks Machinima and Mans1ay3r, you're geniuses.

Fallout 4 - Launch Trailer

This.







Won't be long now.

Perusing Cody Johnston's LOST paraphernalia will let me be now like him

LOST was a show I discovered when every single person in the world began talking about it around season 2 or 3. I was all, whatever. Then I started watching it on Netflix 1.0, when it was dvds-by-mail.

Then I became obsessed. The unanswered questions, the killing of that douche cop from "Heroes" in episode 1 by the smoke monster (making us think it was dinosaurs or something—with ground-pounding sounds, roars, and high-up shots of shaking tree-tops, without showing the thing—genius), the epic scale of events, the seemingly limitless treasure trove of secrets the Island had to offer (right up until the very last episode), and the story's dark tone, really grabbed me.

But, like any good artwork, LOST was never without its antipode. The whole time you're watching it, you're like, "OMG, this is stupid. WTF am I watching." The choices the characters make come completely out of left field, often feeling like pandering to an audience already used to a show with a likewise left-field, and thusly completely original, plot. I can see the writers going, "We've got to keep it wacky—it's the only way to keep people watching! Make that character start yelling for no reason! Make that character macho-punch the other one for words he said!"

Dramatic television seems to be bread and butter for host network ABC, and in early-2000s tv, the shmaltz and cheese was thrown at us high horse. Every. Single. Episode. I mean, Britney Spears was still popular back then. Think about that. That's where we were. Bieber was up-and-coming.

Why tf would Evangeline Lilly be trying to stop Dr. Jack from continuing CPR on a recently-dead dude? WHAT. THE. EVER. LOVING. FUCK. The drama had actually gotten to the point where it was preferable to Kate to stop trying to save this life, feel the feels, and do nothing. Why would you get in the way of a doctor trying to save a life, even if all hope seemed LOST? You're on a deserted (Hawaiian) island with no hope of rescue, and The Others are closing in!

Is every episode going to have this? Am I going to have to sit through another inane conversation about uninteresting relationship gall and watch these poor actors trying to spit out these ridiculous lines, in order to get to the meat of the story, the reason I'm watching this? Every episode's gonna have at least 50% bullshit? Every one?

Fine, whatever.

That's what watching LOST is like. You take lots of bad, in order to get lots of good. It gets you hooked, like black tar heroin.

I think TV's gotten a lot better since then, because every generation improves upon shortcomings of their elders, right? I think we're headed in good directions, as an entertainment-creating species. However, it's taking a long time. When I watch Hulu and get glimpses of network television, I see the same old tropes re-appearing.

Also, I see LOST's influence on almost everything that comes out now. To be a dark drama is easy these days—it sells. Look at Daredevil, and The Flash.

Nostalgia is hot too—look at the upcoming Twin Peaks and The X-Files continuations (that both have me super excited), the Wet Hot American Summer prequel (that kicked so much ass), and the new Muppets television show, just to name a few. I mention nostalgia because, mark my words, it won't be long before a LOST reboot comes knocking on our doors. I mean, which one of those actors would say no? Which one of them have been anything close to as famous as they were under Lindelof and Abrams' tutelage?

It'll happen within the next three years. A LOST continuation series. I have no sources. I'm just guessing—that it would be foolish to see all the press these reboots are getting and not try to cash in on it. Now's the time, if ever. Shit is blowing up, and as soon as enough people realize it, the nostalgia train will come grinding to a halt. Hell, if LOST doesn't reboot in three years or so, the social momentum for nostalgia-in-television might be lost.

Anyway, so something obviously sparked all this LOST interest in me, right?

WHY IS HE WRITING ABOUT A SHOW THAT ENDED MAY 23, 2010?

Perusing Cracked.com, which is becoming a weird, LOST-in-scope, entertainment institution of its own, I found several LOST articles penned by one Cody Johnston, head writer for Cracked Video. He's the bearded guy who isn't Michael Swaim.

Turns out that Cody's such a LOST nerd that he not only came up with answers to all of the LOST questions that hardcore LOST nerds could think up (or ≥108 of them), but he got approval from LOST co-creator Damon Lindelof, who directed, via his Twitter feed, those seeking LOST answers,

Okay, so look at this shit, it's all Cody-penned (codepended):

12 Musical Jokes About LOST
108 Answers to LOST's Supposedly Unanswered Questions
http://lostanswers.tumblr.com/

He's Dr. Mister when he's answering LOST questions. I don't know.

Skyrim has endless replay value

And for poor gamers who don't just go out and buy new games when they're released, replay value is key.

WHY IS HE REVIEWING A FOUR-YEAR-OLD GAME?

Because, for some reason, "Elder Scrolls V: Skyrim" (released Nov. 2011) continues to be relevant, especially for Fallout fans. Bethesda owns both franchises, and owns them well. The similarities between the two are apparent—Skyrim is, loosely, a better-designed Fallout 3, set in medieval times. If Skyrim is this good, imagine what the future will hold. To have improvements on games already this good is unprecedented, and it's an exciting time to be a gamer, and a follower of Bethesda Game Studios.

"Skyrim" is more a world than a series of levels, disconnected game areas, and characters. It's an open world in which you can go anywhere, at any time, emphasizing player freedom and an absence of linearity in a big way. With the sheer size, variety of gameplay options, DLC content available, and myriad quests large and small, Skyrim is, as far as I know, the closest thing to an endless game that exists.

The biggest downsides, to me, are the load times, and the monotony of commerce. The quests can seem monotonous too, with lots of go-fetch versions. But that's really all I can think of for now. The upsides more than outweigh the downsides. And the load times are more a fault of the technology than the game makers—I'll take it to get at that large world on a PS3 console.

My wife and I both have multiple ongoing characters, with different stats, skills and attributes. She hasn't had much time to game lately with Lucy being in school again, but she's onto her 3rd character, which inspired me to start anew as an alchemist and conjurer.

I haven't played everything, but I do have life-long gaming experience. Just last week, I was in my childhood home, peering into the bottom cabinet of an entertainment center containing the Nintendo Entertainment System, various controllers, and games I played as a kid. It all started when I was less than 10 years old. The point of all this is to say that Skyrim is mind-blowing to me when I compare it to my introduction to gaming. For others, maybe not so much. And that's fine. For me, it really works.

Bethesda puts into a game what you want in a game in this day and age: the ability to customize your character, male or female, marry who you want, male or female, any race, and yet have some game characters make racist and sexist remarks, and to have others talk about it. You have both social progression, and a mirror up to what really exists, emphasizing how hard it is to get over that stuff socially. It's a really smart way to go—having a medieval game with more lax sex laws and social customs than our world today.

I don't know what I can say about this game that hasn't been said before. Read this incredibly thorough review by Charles Onyett for IGN.

Coming soon: screenshots and short bios of my four main Skyrim characters. I'm proud of them all, and they all deserve their individual posts. which...is just me... patting myself on the back... Stay tuned!

Stay game!

And someone tell me how I'm going to afford a PS4 by #Nov10!

Fallout 4 trailer analysis: in-game artwork

I just commented the following on a YouTube video by TheNthApple. Thought I'd re-post here.

So at 1:58 in your video here, we see a Power Armor-wearing person rising up from a view inside the Vertibird. And this short piece of the trailer has always interested me—it displays several new art forms which will inhabit this new addition to the Fallout universe.

This... delicious-looking addition.

First you've got the Red Rocket (hilarious name in and of itself, with GTA-like levels of in-game history, e.g. 'Pay-n-Spray,' 'Burger Shot') sign, in a circular logo, screen right, with the word "GASOLINE" above it, and two other words I can't make out. An up

Second, you've got a poster on the lower left with the acronym "GNN," which may be Galaxy News Network, which may be how we experience Three Dog in-game—which MAY indicate that Fallout 4 takes place not too long after FO3, if he's still alive. However—Institute. Cyborgs. They could have prolonged his life somehow. He might be a robot Three Dog.

Third, you've got this awesome, sheik billboard with a "FALLON'S" logo in red, and a (to find this, I literally Googled, 'famous 80s artwork' and it was the first entry) Patrick Nagel-esque woman's face in black and white with a black slash going thru the whole thing. Very hip, very cool.

I hope Fallon's are goddam butchers or torturers or something. Going thru a clothing department store on a Fallout game would be suuuuper cool. Getting outfits?

Oh, and here's what I'm also looking forward to—enhanced character modification! Picking up outfits, designing faces, etc. Can I make a Nuka Girl pinup character w/o mods now??? CAN HER LACEY, THIN CLOTHES HAVE A HIGH ARMOR RATING?!?!

With the voiced main character—I think it'll help with player immersion. I've got a feeling Bethesda's going to do this right. Aaaand I think they've been working on this a long time, and it's like Zelda for Nintendo now—with a game this important—and this one is legendary—what a great time to be alive indeed, TheNthApple!—you don't want to cut any corners. Obsidian's lack of attention to the bugs will be a thing of the past—I guarantee it.

Could you imagine Bethesda being sloppy with this one? Do you think they actually want to make money, or lose money?

With the Fallout 4 reveal trailer, Bethesda gives fans exactly what they need—emotional release

Okay, the Fallout 4 trailer. Here it is:

I saw it the morning it was released and just about hit the ceiling with joy. The Ink Spots—good move. Everything I needed to see, to feel. Finally.

Finally.

I can't describe to you the release and emotional high I felt and still feel about this. The new, amazing Fallout title is finally here. I can finally step back into the Wasteland, and this promises to be the biggest and most advanced trip there yet, in a new and immersive depiction of Boston.

I just watched these guys at IGN talk about it and Vince was critiquing parts of the trailer.

When I heard this, I thought, “SACRILEGE! BURN HIM!”

I’ve been waiting for Fallout 4 ever since New Vegas became boring again, for the third time. You know what’s really the worst part of those games? The load times. The between-building load times. I really envy PC players that have decreased load times between environments, because I play on the PS3. Oh, and the freezing gameplay? Don’t get me started.

But anyway, so yeah, I’ve logged way too many hours into Fallout 3 and Fallout: New Vegas. They were game-changing, next-level games for the time, stretching the limits of the systems on which they were played, and most importantly, were incredibly immersive. Also, the story is always interesting: you’re in a post-apocalyptic United States, 50 to 200 years, depending on the game, after the bombs fell. Now, what’s different is that the Fallout world’s history splits off from ours sometime in the 1920s or 40s. Science goes in a different direction, we keep the jingoistic patriotism, looks, and music styles of that time period until 2077, when the bombs fell. I believe New Vegas takes place in 2277.

LINK TO FALLOUT WIKI PAGE ABOUT THIS SHITE

My brother showed me Fallout 3 one day, and I had no idea what it was going to be like. Immediately, I’m hooked. You make your own character? I’m in a vault? What the fu—bright light—Wasteland? I Can Go Anywhere? WTF IS THAT THING? Then I played New Vegas. Then I downloaded Fallout and couldn’t get my head around the controls on a MacBookAir without a keyboard or mouse, and I’ve got two kids man, they’re young. I don’t have all the time in the world.

So I never played any of the Fallout games between 1 and 3, and I’m not gonna, really, because motherfucking #Fallout4. #motherfuckingfallout4

Bethesda was so tight-lipped about it the whole time! They let nothing slip! They gave Three Dog (srsly read Erik Todd Dellums's Twitter feed right now) a license to say some cryptic bullshit, and Kotaku found a script, and some guy said Bethesda were scouting the Boston area, and then #Survivor2299 broke my fucking heart, and then Ron Perlman said after the fact on Twitter that it was the hardest secret he’s ever had to keep—it’s all been such a whirlwind!

So that’s why I thought ‘sacrilege, burn him, and there was much rejoicing, yaaay,’ so there, I explained myself. I’m deeply involved in these games. Now, to critique their review of the teaser.

Yes, nine paragraphs in, I give you:

THE REVIEW OF THE REVIEW OF THE FALLOUT 4 TEASER TRAILER THAT ISN’T CALLED A REVIEW BUT THE VEIL IS THIN

Firstly, I think Destin Legarie (@DestinLegarie) and Vince Ingenito (@Vincogneato) represent both standpoints of the diverse universe that is Fallout fans and how they feel about this whole thing, and thusly are good hosts for the review.

Vince sticks to his guns, representing the less-pleased portion of the Fallout fanbase, but by the end of the video he’s got to admit that he’s excited, and that even if his fears—of the game being nothing more than revamped existing Fallout tropes without innovation—come true, that wouldn’t be a bad thing.

Wasn’t Skyrim a revamped version of previous Elder Scrolls? Wasn’t Grand Theft Auto V just a revamped verion of GTAIV? Aaah, but here’s the rub—when you compare Fallout 3 to every game in the Fallout series before it, you get a completely different game style. So it’s not fair to say that Fallout 3 is simply a revamped version of what came before, because the previous games were a top-down, almost simulation-style game, whereas with Fallout 3, which I believe was Bethesda’s first shot at a Fallout title, they changed the entire thing to a first- and third-person shooter, set in an open-world /sandbox-style environment. They kept the look, feel, and characters of the previous games, stayed fearsomely devoted to the storyline, and gave it a completely new feel. Somehow, the results were magical. Game-changing.

Fallout 3 changed people’s perceptions of gaming and what a game could be. When Bethesda handed the reigns to Obsidian to create Fallout: New Vegas, it was very cool, probably cooler than Obsidian or Bethesda imagined it would be, but it wasn’t enough. Fallout fans wanted more. Their hungers were not completely sated, although both of those games kept us all waaaaay too busy for waaaaay too long. It’s a testament to their greatness.

It’s not unfair for fans to expect game-changing-ness with Fallout 4, but I don’t think it’s going to happen as obviously as with the transition between Fallout 2 & 3. I think where the innovation is going to be this time will be in the area of load times and transitions between game environments, thereby decreasing annoyance and disconnect from game world immersion. I predict that glitches will be less frequent, that getting stuck in some crack in the game world will be a thing of the past, and that game flow will be increased. I also expect the realism, believability, and overall game immersion to increase with the enhanced graphical capabilities between previous- and next-gen consoles, and with probably something about how NPC sprites move their mouths when they talk. Maybe they’ll hire a greater number voice actors, too.

Oh, and I also expect greater options and ease of character creation and outfitting, and of in-game mechanics. There were flying ships in the trailer. Seems like The Institute and more scientific progress is going to accompany this game, meaning perhaps we’ll be able to pilot vehicles. Power Armor is obviously here to stay—perhaps we’ll be able to customize it? Fast travel and environment exploration will also be streamlined. They might get rid of some features, like finding food and using campfires, for example, or hopefully streamline those, too. There’s got to be lots of detail in these games—little items, pieces of the world, boxes of cereal and old machine parts lying around. You know.

Also, I think they’re going to take you back to the Pre-War period more than they have in previous titles. You had a holographic reproduction with “Operation: Anchorage,” you had a flashback in the spooky building near Tenpenny Tower in Fallout 3, and the nightmare Pre-War illusion that is Tranquility Lane, and New Vegas’ barely-preserved, un-bombed Vegas Strip, but there was never a time where you could take your character walking thru the Pre-War world of the Fallout universe. What made it cool, I think, was the mystery—the clues you would find, on old computer terminals or notes lying around. You had to put the picture together yourself, and Bethesda and Obsidian did great jobs at telling stories thru visuals, or pieces left over, skeletons in funny positions, and then just weird shit, like teddy bears and garden gnomes set up playing cards, and Monty Python references.

But yeah, so the trailer—pretty obvious stuff, I’ll give you that. It’s like, we’ve still got Deathclaws, Centuars, Ghouls, Power Armor, I hope Super Mutants, a dog companion, and the usual tropes. What they did not do was not try to give you specifics—they gave you a broad, emotional landscape. And you know what? It was exactly what Fallout fans needed.

“Here, guys. You've waited long enough,” Bethesda seemed to say. “You wanted this? Oh, you're getting it. This is us delivering. The wait is over, you've been patient, and we thank you, because this shit took us a looooong time.”

And goddam if the reveal trailer above didn’t and still isn't wringing tears out of me right now. We fans have been waiting so long, and staying so dedicated, that at this point it’s more than just a waning hope. We all knew. We knew! Even though they said nothing official, we knew. We knew all the noise we were making wasn’t falling on deaf ears. It’s a way of life. It’s #falloutlyfe.

Pheh. “Fallout 4’s Reveal Trailer May Play it Too Safe.” Pheh, I say. We got the big, 'Here it is.' Now it's time to wait—half a year. We can do this. And we only have until June 14 until #BE3

Thank you, Bethesda. I can’t wait to see you give us more details on June 14!

THANK YOU BETHESDA!!! THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU THANK YOU!!!

Assassin's Creed's public world is an exhilarating place to play

Cracked.com continues to rule

So I missed the boat on Assassin's Creed. It came out in 2007, while I was probably still being obsessed with the Fallout franchise. And the more I heard about it, the more annoyed I became, thinking that there was no way a game centered on just going out and murdering people would hold my interest. It seemed, by title alone (judging book by cover), to have taken the worst parts of games, and centered on that.

Years passed by. Then I see this video from Cracked. (if you want to skip to the parts concerning AC, skip to 3:05)



Now I haven't played the majority of the games Michael Swaim's talking about, but I have played many of the Prime Games: Super Mario 64, Zelda, Final Fantasy, Fallout, Skyrim, Grand Theft Auto, Halo, Call of Duty, and Portal.

King's Quest, Michael. Yes. Thank you.

Incidentally, I also missed the boat on Batman: Arkham Asylum, Lord of the Rings: Shadow of Mordor, Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, 

So I bought Assassin's Creed. Played it for the first time last night. It is indeed a prime game.

The first thing the game teaches you in the opening tutorial, and the first thing you quickly learn to have to work around, is how to move around the people, the NPCs (non-player-characters). If you're running full speed, you'll smack into someone, and hard. It makes a really uncomfortable sound, and you and the NPC go tumbling. Not only can you not interfere with them, you have to follow social custom. If one of the many, many villagers in the opening game environment see you climbing on buildings and running around too fast, they'll comment on it. "What's wrong with him?" And you have a sort of gauge like the GTA star system indicating your "wanted level," but in AC it's more like a "how weird and dangerous you're seeming to the general public and the guards" level.

Right away, I saw that I had been carrying the wrong impression about AC. Ubisoft took what worked about Grand Theft Auto III—and I say GTAIII because that was the first in-public, open-world game I ever played, where you could actually interact with random NPCs, though it usually involved straight up murdering (talking to them became a thing with GTA:SA)—Ubisoft took one big thing that worked for the Grand Theft Auto franchise, and put you in a public space.

That feels cool to me. I like RPGs because going into towns and talking to people makes the game feel more like real life. In AC, they amped that up to 11, and it's what makes the game immediately exhilarating and immersive.

Your PC (player character) is set in a Middle Eastern city during the Crusades. There is a steady stream of NPCs walking through every alley and walkway, and if you don't hold a certain button, you'll end up pushing some of them and causing a ruckus. Social custom plays a big part in how you must interact with the people. You must follow their creed, hence the title. You're also a part of a guild of soldier assassins, and you must also follow their creed. The main character has a lot to learn in this area. At least if I'm playing him. Maybe I didn't have to try to kill that dude? It set off a string of bad stuff.

When the game starts off, there's a sort of disclaimer that says the game was made by a series of developers from differing backgrounds, religious and otherwise. It's a smart way to say, 'This game is going to deal with some sensitive subjects, but we were careful to treat them all respectfully.'

And that's what you get from AC, an experience respectful to culture, history, and the player.

New Rick Alverson movie "Entertainment," starring Gregg Turkington, premiering Sundance 2015

Now this is exciting to me.

First, you've got Alverson, director and writer of "The Comedy," starring Tim Heidecker. I thought "The Comedy" was great. Heidecker's performance was unique, because he's a subversive actor if anything, and because it was his first feature film, to my knowledge, and possibly his first time tackling a role requiring such depth of character. He delivered it. It's a painful film to watch, because it documents a character at the tail end of this personal downward spiral, as he alienates everyone around him. He sees it, he knows it's wrong, but it gives him this pleasure he just can't name, and it's irresistible to him. His rise towards the end of the movie is made that much sweeter. On the other hand, he consistently gets along great with his friends, revealing his redeeming qualities. Alverson's emphasis on the friends' interactions (Eric Wareheim and that LCD Soundsystem dude were really good) gave what would otherwise have been a pretty heavy movie some happy moments.

I'm a big "Tim and Eric" fan. It's great to see both of these fine gentlemen where they are today, because they're made me so happy over the years.

Alverson's "Entertainment" almost seems like an unspoken sequel to "The Comedy," but I think it's going to stand on its own just fine. Because next, you've got one Gregg Turkington, starring in the thing, as the travelling comedian who alienates everyone he meets. Turkington provided the hands-down funniest part of "The Comedy" in a scene with Tim at an outdoor table, he co-stars with Tim on "On Cinema At the Cinema," and most importantly, is Neil Hamburger.

Acchhhhgggeeehhh!!! P-tah. Cough.

Alverson also directed this video for a song by Angel Olson. Quite a beautiful piece. If fits perfectly with the song, and Alverson brings a great performance out of her. His camera work and editing are subliminominal. His defense is impregnable. Fudd morking fissure in a watch.