OPINION: AI Image Generators Shouldn't Exist -.-

In the early 2020s, there was a website called Dall-E Mini that was made a laughing stock on YouTube because of it's inherently broken function. Basically, you typed a prompt into the text box, press create, wait a few seconds and it gives you a bunch of horrendous images that barely (if at all) resembles what you typed. This was done by the website's artificial intelligence scouering the Internet to gather some preexisting images mixing them all together until it forms a picture. This was rightfully made fun of because the images were all hideous blobs of goo that never got the characters accurate, the lighting was inconsistent, the textures were flat and whatever text was in the image turned into gobbledygook. Little did we know that this faulty and broken program who be commonplace and that people would unironically defend AI image generators as better than actual art. 

Why do people think AI images are better than actual art? The reality is they don't and are in pure denial because they want to keep their inherently broken toy. See, AI images are never truly art because art is made exclusively by people. It takes hard work, patience, and one's undivided attention in order to be made. All qualities are lost when you simply type in a prompt into a computer program that doesn't even work. AI generated images lack the patience, hard work and dedication to truly qualify as art and the prompters lack any sort of integrity nuance and self-confidence to realize they're not actually creating anything meaningful. What they're actually doing is telling a broken computer program what to do and conflate an incoherent and stolen image with a masterpiece in digital art.

The real big issue that should be painful obvious is AI images generators are really plagiarism outlets. In order for them to generate their faulty images, they take the data and styles of actual artists online without any form of consent. Not that any artist in their right mind would consent to it because AI image generators hurt the environment and mock actual artists with its presence. And people will be quick to say "well artists steal from other artists too" not realizing how they just exposed their own stupidity with an objectively false statement. Artists don't steal from other artists, they are inspired by other artists. They use other people's work as a reference to elevate their own style of art. Stealing is what pathetic lowlifes do when they're too lazy to work for what they want. AI image generators aren't inspired by other artists because they don't generate their own style. If you put 2 of them side by side with the same prompt, you will not get the same style.

The amount of processing power required to keep AI image generators up and running is dangerously high. The data centers used to bring AI image generators produce up to 626,000 pounds of carbon dioxide (source: The Real Environmental Impact of AI | Earth.Org https://share.google/alE6HxqZzFflNVuUi). This high amount of CO2 is slowly but surely cooking the planet and in time there won't be a planet left to live on. Temperatures will rise, the ice caps will melt, sea levels will increase and flood major cities, and before long humanity's numbers will drop by the billions. All because AI image generators need too much electricity and produce dangerous amounts of CO2 just to give people their incoherent images for 15 seconds of unwarranted attention.

There is a solution to all this, though, and it's one that benefits us all in the long run: ban any and all AI image generators. In addition to that, destroy all the data centers keeping these things up and stop giving the companies that make AI image generators money. There's no good reason to keep AI image generators up and running and there's no reason they should exist in the first place. In addition to being inherently broken, it encourages lazy people to believe they don't have to work hard to get attention that they don't deserve and it's killing the planet. The message is clear: have some integrity and take down the AI image generators. Trust me, no one will miss them -.-

A Scathing Letter To Danielle Bregoli

 Forsaken Danielle Bregoli,

You've gotten away with being a pampered and spoiled sow long enough! It was already excruciating to witness a 13 year old milk her unearned 15 minutes of fame dry and act nasty, uncoordinated, and spiteful at every turn. Now you had the gaul to bring your daughter into this world while you're just as toxic as ever? This will not stand and if you don't want Child Protective Services to take her away, you WILL fix you disgusting attitude and not let her suffer the same terrible childhood as you.

Your parents made a grave mistake not giving you the proper amount of love and affection after you were born. Instead of teaching you right from wrong, raising you in a safe environment, and surrounding you with people who you can trust, you got the filthy end of the stick. You're parents hated each other, you grew up in a dangerous neighborhood and your so-called "friends" were degenerates, hoodlums, and creeps. These nauseating circumstances morphed you into an uncompromising delinquent. You went on to steal things, get into fights, and cuss out at your mother. Your infamous catchphrase is proof positive that you are NOT emotionally stable or have any common sense. If the wrong person did catch you outside, you'd get you posterior clobbered and/or you'd be dead before you'd get a chance to scream for help!

But it wasn't enough for you to appear on the Dr. Phil show, was it? It wasn't enough you became a viral meme overnight. Instead of getting help, seeing a therapist, rekindling your relationship with your mother, and becoming a model citizen to society, you instead became a terrible rapper and doubled down on your nasty attitude. The stones you released under the moniker Bhad Bhabie all showcase what NOT to do as a rapper. Clunky lyrics, repetitive and dull beats, and a very forced and unconvincing delivery. You also make it clear that these songs are just about you boasting how better you are than people, how everyone is wrong and incompetent, and how you're not afraid to fight anyone. This is the exact kind of rap music that even die hard fans of the genre make fun of and call cringe! Why? Because it reeks of shallowness, toxicity, and incompetence!

I was hoping by the time you became an adult you would realized how inept you were being and finally change your ways. Seeing your recent songs and photos on Instagram, as well as seeing a tattoo of your ex who put his hands on you, confirming you got back together, proves how foolish I was for being optimistic! In the 8 years since your appearance on Dr. Phil, you haven't changed one bit! You're still a toxic person, you're still a terrible rapper, you're still incompetent, and you're still shallow! It's now made even worse because you have a kid and you're not emotionally mature or wise enough to give them a proper childhood! I know for a fact that if you don't change your ways now, she's going to end up a delinquent just like you! Heaven forbid when she's 13, she repeats your infamous catchphrase and the wrong person takes her up on her offer and you never see her again!

Sincerely,

An Actually Mature Adult -.-

A Scathing Letter To David Zaslav

 You are the worst CEO working in Hollywood today. Ever since Discovery bought Warner Bros. and made you boss, it has just be a constant string of bone head decision after bone head decision. You'd think with decades of experience in finances and even starting out as a lawyer, you of all people would know how to make money AND fight for what's fair.

I want to believe you came from humble beginnings as an innocent kid from New York. I want to believe you wanted to grow up and change the world. I want to believe you had the best intentions when you became the head of Discovery. But based on your current actions, I find it much more believable the you were a snot nosed, greedy little brat that bullied kids out of their lunch money and dreamed of being having his own swimming pool of gold like Scrooge McDuck. And now, here you are, an old, rich, stingey pig who's the CEO of one of the biggest entertainment companies on Earth.

In case you're head is too far up your own sphincter, let me breaking down everything wrong with you. You cancel movies when they're already completed for tax write-offs, you pull the plug on preschool programming after 1 year of trying, you changed HBOMax to Max, which was pointless and stupid, you removed a whole bunch of shows from Max, you made Chris Licht CEO of CNN without interviewing internal candidates, you oversaw cuts to TCM, and during the writers and actors strikes, you were nothing but selfish, arrogant, and unsympathetic.

You know what? Scratch that last one! You ARE selfish, arrogant, and unsympathetic! You constantly throw your employees under the bus, you undermine all their hard work by canceling their projects for tax write-offs, and you're not the least bit sympathetic towards employees who lost their jobs because of you. Worst of all, none of your tax write-offs are worth JACK DIDDLY! Coyote vs Acme cost $70 million to make and you only got $30 million after canceling it. Batgirl was $90 million, you only got back at best a quarter of that after canceling it. Scoob: Holiday Haunt, same story! You could’ve made triple the money you got from your write-offs on the opening weekends for these movies! So not only are you uncaring towards the creators of these movies and you're employees, YOU'RE ALSO A BLOODY MORON!!!

I normally don't campaign an executive to be removed from his position (and I doubt you will unless WB stocks are through the toilet), but you are the major exception. I hope you are not only fired, but blacklisted from the industry. I hope you are forced to resign and be walked out of the Warner Bros. property buck naked with everybody booing you and throwing tomatoes at you.

Sincerely,

Someone Who Will NEVER Work For You -.-

A Scathing Letter To Adam Of YourMovieSucksDotOrg

 I'm glad I unsubscribed to you years ago. You're such a pretentious dirt bag! It's straight up impossible for you to respect filmmakers and audiences members because all you are is ego!

"tHiS iS a DuMb BaBy MoViE fOr DuMb BaBiEs" GROW THE FLOP UP!!! You sound like a spoiled 3 year old stubbornly refusing to accept that not everything is going to be made for you! You should've stopped reviewing mainstream movies years ago because you're never gonna find one made with your tastes and you're not good a reviewing anyway! Stick to just reviewing indie films!

Or better yet, JUST MAKE YOUR OWN! You have a camera, you have friends, you have sound equipment, and you have a backyard full of grass you should be touching instead of insulting talented filmmakers! The only thing thing stopping you from making your own films is your stupid ego! You'd rather waste your free time belittling talented and hard working men and women who spend their free time following their passions because you can't bear the thought that these people were just like you when you started this channel. Young and ambitious artists who wanted to make movies and give audiences a good time. The very idea that these people are living their dreams sickens you because you failed to make yours a reality.

And now, all you do is insult them and insult people who support them because if you couldn't make people happy with your movies then no one should be happy with movies. You're such a sad, pathetic and nasty man who's living a miserable life and is making it everyone's problem. I know you're laughing at me for saying all this because you just don't care and you think I'm just a butthurt Mario fan. You'd just be proving my point, and showing that you're too pretentious and nasty to even take criticism. I'm mature and sane enough to take criticism like a man, while you are took weak and narrow minded to handle something as simple as "I disagee." Those two words alone make you vomit because you believe you're opinion is the only opinion that truly matters and everyone else is a braindead moron for thinking otherwise. Newsflash, jerk dish: THAT'S NOT HOW OPINIONS WORK!!! Opinions are personal tastes and preferences, not indisputable facts of life! You're not the end all, be all of movie critics! You never have been and you never will be! All opinions are different because all people are different. Just because you didn't like a movie that doesn't mean someone is wrong for liking it. A bloody 2 year old has more common sense than you! I hope more people realize what a terrible critic you are and stop watching your reviews.

Sincerely,

A Real Film Fan -.-

Opinion: Driving Should NEVER Be A Right -.-

 In the United States of America, all living citizens have a significant number of rights. We have the right to vote, the right to practice religion, the right to bear arms, and the right to express ourselves. We do NOT, however, have the right to own and drive a vehicle of our choice. If you're expecting me to say "it's time we change that" or "I think now's a good time to make it a law" you are sorely mistaken. While I do have my disaggrements with Congress, I applaud them for sticking to their guns and never making it the law of the land for every U.S. citizen to be able to own or drive a care. As controversial as it may sound, I earnestly believe we need to restrict access to automobile ownership like we've been trying to do the same for gun ownership.

Driving in the United States hasn't always been a thing, unlike all the other rights in the Constitution. The first automobile, the Benz Motor Car, was patented in 1886, with units being sold within the first 20 or so years. By the time cars swept the nation in the early 1920s, it had already been 150 years since we became a nation. In that time, manny laws were passed and ammended to suit the needs of the American people. When it came to cars, however, things got complicated. See, like the locomotive before it, cars had this one problem that made it evidently clear that this wasn't to be a right. Everybody wanted a car, but not everyone was responsible enough to own one.

Car accidents, while they're common place now, they're not a recent phenomenon. In 1896, a bicyclist was hit by a car in New York City. This was the first of countless instances in which operators of motor vehicles abused their ownership of a car to cause harm or death to an innocent bystander, whether it was intentional or not. The first state to recognize the dangers of motor vehicles was Connecticut and on May 21, 1901, the state passed the first automobile regulation law in the nation. This law, An Act of Regulating the Speed of Motor Vehicles, stated that no motor vehicle was permitted to go over 15 miles per hour on the highway or any place outside city limits, or 20 miles per hour on the highway or any where within city limits. A valiant effort, but it wasn't enough to prevent accidents. To do that, would be drivers need to be taught the rules and regulations of the road.

Driver's education and training began in the United Kingdom in 1909, but for the United States it started as a high school class course in 1934. Created by Amos Neyhart, this course taught students the rules, regulations and history of automobiles which still apply to this very day. While getting a driver's license was nothing new at the time (the first one being issued in 1899), taking a driver's ed class became mandatory for a license in the mid 20th century. It was also during this time when new laws were passed that regulated automobile operation for drinking, running a red light, abusing your car horn and manny more. Ideally this would make our more responsible and car accidents would be at an all time low. Yeah, unfortunately that's not even close to the world we live in.

In 2020, yes the same year we had to stay indoors due to the pandemic, 38,824 people lost their lives in a car accident. To put that into perspective, that's almost the same amount of people that live in my one horse town I call home. The circumstances of these accidents differ, from distracted driving, drinking, a tire blowing out, a pot hole sneaking up on them or an animal lacking common sense before crossing. The one thing they all have in common, though, is that the driver is at fault for not following the rules of the road and not being responsible. I'm well aware nobody's perfect, believe me I know I'm not. That said, perferction and responsibility are NOT  the same thing.  Being perfect means you have no need to be responsible for the rest of your life because things always work out. Being responsible means you take full ownership of your actions and reactions. You see a pot hole, you go around it. Your tires blow out, you pull over and call a tow truck. You have alcohol in your system, don't get in the bloody driver's seat. With the prescene of the Internet, there's now no such thing as "wElL i DiDn'T kNoW." It's your responsibility to prepare for what's to come on the road. It's your responsibility to avoid hazards on the road. It's your responsibility to stay out of other people's blind spots.  If you hit someone or something on the road, there's no one to blame except yourself.

And there are real people out there who think driving should be a right and not a privileged. In case you haven't been paying attention, let me spell it out for you. If you need to be taught how to do something, you don't automatically have the right to do it. You don't have to be taught to express yourself, practice religion or vote. You also won't go to jail for expressing something negative, affiliating yourself with a controversial religion or voting for a politician that made very bad choices. Driving and owning a car shouldn't be a right because you don't have to work for your rights. You don't have to take a test and get a license to express yourself. On top of all that, if driving was a right, than all the laws that regulate and restrict it would be unconstitutional, thus causing more car accidents and deaths than their already are. You know what we should do, instead? Add more restrictions and car laws, like what we're trying to do with guns. There should be a law that forbid people prone to anger and violence from owning a vehicle. There should also be a failsafe installed in all vehicles that makes the car not turn on if the driver has alcohol in their system. More laws like this are guaranteed to save lives and make driver's think twice before making stupid mistakes.

As someone who's in the process of becoming an official driver, seeing car accident after car accident makes me want to puke up my internal organs. I don't think the rules of the road are hard to follow, nor are they confusing when you read them thoroughly.  I also don't think it's hard to responsible behind the road and be a decent driver. Ignorance is not an excuse in the age of the Internet and there is not "iT's NoT mY fAuLt" when there's over a hundred ways to avoid an accident. If you want to learn how to drive, here's the most important lesson for you to learn: it takes less effort to be responsible than it does turning the ignition. And don't gimme any of that "driving should be a right" malarkey. Your thinking druving is easy is not even close to being a good enough resaon to make it a right. Here's a right for you: I have the right to tell you that you have NO right to be a driver, especially if you're mentally unstable. Don't like it? Tough bananas -.-

A Scathing Letter To Cartoon Brew

 Dear Cartoon Brew,

You are one of the worst websites for animation I know. You're everything I despise about bad faith reviews and news reporting. I can't believe what start out as an honest endeavor by Jerry Beck and Amid Amidi has now turned into a sad, pathetic and painfully unfunny joke of itself.

I first saw just how bad you were are reporting news when Chris Savino was fired from Nickelodeon. Instead of simply doing your job and reporting what happen, how it happened and leaving links to hotlines for victims of abuse, your editor decides to go on and say The Loud House should be canceled for what Chris Savino had done. Oh sure! Let's fire 100s of hard working employees with families because their boss was a creep! Do you see how cruel that sounds? This is something I'd expect from a 2 year old who thought firing people was part of the game we call life!

But it didn't stop there, did it? No it only got worse and worse as you spread misinformation and lie to your viewers. You knew Cartoon Network wasn't going to shut down after Warner Bros. merged with Discovery. Yet you go and published that article anyway, causing everyone and they Grandma dread and anxiety. This isn't even your first offense as in 2020 you claimed Disney wasn't supportive of The Owl House's push for LGBTQ representation, when the creator confirmed that was not even close to true. You give other journalists and reporters a bad name because of how much you lie and hype up misinformation just to get views.

Just when you couldn't get anymore pathetic, you post a news article about Rebecca Sugar buying a house and POST HER ADDRESS ONLINE???!!! What the flop is your problem?! Why would any one of your editors think that was a good idea?! Regardless of intention, you just doxxed Rebecca Sugar and put her and her husband at risk of getting killed! I can't even think of a valid reason why anyone would do something this incredibly stupid! If I was Rebecca, I'd get my lawyer on the phone and sue your pants off!

If I had any respect for you, it left the building years ago. I'd even go as far as to say Cartoon Brew was better off laying dormant since Jerry Beck left because now it's just a freak show with Amid Amidi as the ring leader. It's clear you don't even have a so much as a speck of dignity left because this website should've shut down a long time ago. Hence for, I will NOT be using links to your website and I shall discourage others from doing the same. You are the bane of animation's existence and the medium would be better of if you cease to exist.

Sincerely,

A Real Animation Fan -.-

A Scathing Letter To Mr Enter

 Dear John,

I just want to say congratulations on proving your haters right. Over the years you've been called, selfish, egotistical, pretentious, and overall ignorant among many other things. I used to be one of your defenders until recent years and I feel like an idiot for not seeing it until now. 

Firstly, how dare you call any cartoon or creator lazy? Do you really think people who spent more time learning the craft of animation that you learned the fine are of basic common sense wouldn't bother putting in any effort to their projects. Even the poorest quality of animation takes a lot more effort to make than anything you or I could put out because we have no experience in the medium.

You say health care shouldn't be a right? Then I guess the Affordable Care Act, which was passed to give everyone health care even when they couldn't afford it beforehand, was rather pointless. You clearly don't know the struggle of not being able to pay medical bills to save a loved one's life or your own. You've clearly never had the displeasure of not having enough money to pay back the hospital after they treated you. If you did, you would know just how dangerous your argument of "health care shouldn't be a right" actually is.

You think Disney and Pixar are just greedy corporate executives cracking their whips over content creators. A bit of hyperbole, but it's not far of with how you feel about Disney or any of the major animation companies. Disney isn't just guys in suits having business meetings. It's also hard working men and women trying their best to entertain the audience. The people that make the films and TV show you hate more often than not are people how have always wanted to work for Disney and leave their mark under the Mouse House. They're not slaves under the thumb of a Pharoah who only cares about his own ego, and even if they were, you ain't Moses.

Your hatred for executives is exactly what's holding you back from making Growing Around a reality. You say you want to do it independently, but that's easier said than done. You didn't provide so much as an animatic in your Kickstarter to intice more people to back it. You have yet to make a pilot for your concept to get people invested in your idea. If you're really dead set on making Growing Around happen, than you need a financial planner to help you with investments. Whether you like it or not, you need a business plan to bring your cartoon to life; otherwise it's just going to be another idea in a sea full of them in your mind.

Your worst quality, though, isn't your pretentious attitude, or dangerous takes, or even your recent selfish review in which you imply Domee Shi was ignorant for not mentioning 9/11 in her film that's set in 2002 (despite the fact that it has NOTHING to do with the story). No, the worst part about you John is you are so cynical that you retired Admirable Animations. To you Soul was the last great animated anything, when since that film's release we've had a quite a few really good animated projects you could've and should've talked about. Netflix is absolutely killing it with their animated releases with films like Flee, Vivo and The Mitchells vs The Machines recieving critical acclaim. Then there's the animated shows on the platform like Kid Cosmic, Arcane, The Midnight Gospel and Inside Job among so many others. Outside of Netflix, HBOMax has really good shows like Looney Tunes Cartoons, Jellystone and Primal. Amazon Prime has been killing it with Invincible, The Legend of Vox Machina, and Undone and AppleTV+ has some shows like The Snoopy Show, Pinecone & Pony, and El Deafo. We are living in a golden age of animated content and you don't want to talk about any potential great ones because all you care about is trying to make your own animated project a reality.

John, when you started making reviews, you were irritated at a show's failures but very complimentary to a shows strengths. I thought if you looked kept talking about good animated shows and movies, you'd have a greater appreciation for the art form abe more understanding and respectful when you do critcise animated projects. Instead of that happening, you just became more spiteful, selfish, egotistical and ignorant to the point where everything your detractors said about you is true. You're not the worst critic, but you're most certainly among the most pretentious and I should've seen it coming sooner so that I could've help prevent this outcome. I hope you lose all your subscribers and people stop giving you money on Patreon. 

Sincerely,

A Former Fan -.-

My Powerpuff Girls Review Extended

5/10 A Jar Of Candy With An Even Mix of Good and Bad Pieces

30 years ago, a young CalArts student Craig McCracken drew a simple drawing of 3 girls with big head, large eyes and stubby arms and legs as a birthday card design for his brother. These 3 would become the basis for one of Cartoon Network's first show. I'd call it one of the network's best, but that'd be far from the truth having rewatched the entire series on HBOMax. Don't get me wrong, when the show is good, it is indeed a smart, funny and action packed show that more than delivers on its concept. At the same time though, it also has some truly awful episodes that make the entirety of Teamo Supremo look like Avatar: The Last Airbender.

The premise of the show is rather simply: 3 kindergartners with large eyes and stubby limbs beat the tar out of villains and monsters in the city of Townsville. Each episode is normally follows the patteren of having the Narrator introduce the show with a shot of Townsville before cutting to the girls fighting the villain of the week. This formula could've gotten repetative and tiring, yet the writers and storyboard artists manage to find clever ways to shake it up. These include having the opening line "The city of Townsville" spoken by someone other than the Narrator, the Narrator not being present at all or the girls being in school rather than in the city fighting evil. The humor of the show is usually slapstick, clever word play and visual gags that generally get a good laugh out of me. What really sells a typical episode is the action, which is always fast paced, has genuine stakes and great camaraderie between the girls. That said though, episodes tend to succumb to bad writing and unfunny humor that makes the runtime of each episode feel wasted. Episodes such as Los Dos Mojos, Monkey See, Doggy Two, Super Zeroes and Him Diddle Diddle have their plots based on one joke that goes on for way too long. Rather than ammend this issue as the series progressed, they doubled down on these overly drawn out jokes in Seasons 5 & 6 with episodes like Toast of the Town, Save Mojo, Pee Pee G's, Mo' Linguish and That's Not My Baby. One of the most infamous episodes from the show is Sun Scream which is 11 minutes of the girls being in agony as they have sun burn. I recognize comedy is subjective and the writers must've thought these episodes were really funny (otherwise they wouldn't have made it passed the conception stage), but to me these episodes are prime examples of what NOT to do when telling a story. Another problem I personally have with the show as a whole is the amount of missed opportunities the writers had to make the show better such as making Mitch Mitchelson the focus of Mojo Jonesin instead of 4 random kids or making Bubbles' impaired vision permanent in Bubblevision instead of returning to the status quo. At the very least the girls should've grown up with each passing season because having the characters not age a day after 6 years just make me think Townsville is in some sort of purgatory that just loops over and over.

Moving on to the characters, each one is memorable in their own way. The main triplets themselves all have distinct personalities and act just like real little girls if they had powers. Starting with Blossom, she's the smartest of her sisters and comes up with strategic plans to defeat the baddies. She can be bossy at times, but she means well and cares for her sisters. Buttercup is the toughest and temperamental of the trio who is more than willing to give a beating to baddies who deserve it. She acts tough and often butts heads with her sisters, but she does love them deep down and grows as a better person as the show continues. Then there's Bubbles, the sweetest and most childlike of the girls. On a typical day she's the first to want to show compassion and cares about everyone deeply. But when she gets mad or pushed to her breaking point at best she cries and at worst she gets vicious. The 3 of them together make a great team and act just like sisters. The play, they fight, they laugh, they cry and at the end of the day they love each other.

Their father, Professor Utonium is...not a great parent. I mean, he's not even close to the worst father in a cartoon, but he should've been better. Yes there are episodes such as Boogie Frights and Knock It Off where he acts like a genuinely caring parent. But in episodes like Uh, Oh Dynamo, PowerProf, Daylight Savings and The Mane Event where he's just a nuisance. I also hate how the Professor acts childish in the final 2 seasons because it really devalues his character. In my humble opinion, the Professor needed to be to the girls what Greg Universe was to Steven: a fun, caring and helpful parent that is the one person above everyone else that deserves to be saved.

Another not so great character is Ms. Keane who has more episodes showing her as a bad teacher then as a good one. Yeah she rightfully scolds Buttercup in Paste Makes Waste, but in Schoolhouse Rocked she scolded the girls for rightfully trying to stop the Gang Green Gang from hurting the other students. In Daylight Savings, she demanded the girls be put on a curfew even though she knows how helpless Townsville is without them (more on that later). In Keen on Keane, she neglects to do her job because she and the Professor start dating (side note: they're better off as friends). She's not the worst teacher, but these episodes don't do her any favors.

The Mayor of Townsville is a complete moron who can be funny sometimes, but other times I roll my eyes and wonder how he got elected in the first place. Ms. Sara Bellum is clearly smarter than him in every way and yet she's not the mayor of Townsville because potatoes. It may seem like he cares deeply about his city, but episodes like Monstra-City, Toast of the Town, Live & Let Dynamo and Night Mayor make me thing otherwise.

I'd be re-missing myself if I didn't talk about the girl's rogues gallery. Starting with the most (in)famous, Mojo Jojo is an intelligent chimp who relishes in being dastardly. He also has a unique way of talking in which he overly explains what he means which didn't get on my nerves until Mo'Linguish in Season 6 when everyone else started talking like him. HIM is the living embodiment of all things evil and he just loves being sinister and devilish. He typical speaks in a calm high octave masculine voice but when he's serious it becomes more monstrous and loud. Princess Morbucks is a spoiled brat but unlike Gem Stone, she's not taken seriously by the girls until she takes control of the story. Plus she get's rightfully punished at the end of her respected episodes. The Amoeba Boys could've easily been forgettable villains, but their incompetence and accidental evil deeds do make them entertaining and fun villains. Fuzzy Lumpkins is a pink hillbilly who gets very personal about his property. Another one of the missed opportunities of the show is how his red rage form is only used twice in the whole show. That would made him a much more formidable foe than just a pink hillbilly. The Gang Green Gang are a group of green skinned teenagers that like picking on other people because it's fun. They all have unique personalities but one thing they all have in common is they're not to be trusted. Sedusa is a promiscuous lady who uses her good looks and her living hair to get what she wants. Thing is though, she only has 3 major appearances in the show, but that's forgivable as they all have her be a great villain. Most of the one off villains are hit or miss, though I do like Femme Fatale who's basically a man hating Karen and I wish the Boogie Man had comeback for revenge. My personal favorite villains of the show though are the Rowdyruff Boys. They are every bit as nasty as the girls are sweet and they couldn't have it any other way. They put up a good fight with the girls every chance they get and act just like the girls would but as boys: rude, rough, gross and inconsiderate of other people. They are the perfect opposites of the girls and the only downside is that they weren't in more episodes.

Then there are the citizens of Townsville, who are without a doubt one of the worst examples of the mindless sheep trope that I hate so much. There are very few instances (not episodes, instances) where they actually act like really people with their own opinions and beliefs. More often than not they're either siding against the girls for some stupid reason or they're completely helpless without them. Too Pooped To Puff is one of the worst episodes about the citizens and it just shows that if the girls didn't save their ungrateful lazy butts, they'd be annihilated because they're too stupid to fight for themselves. Girls Gone Mild is a prime example of how useless the police are in this city as for almost 5 minutes straight a guy steals a car and when the cops get there, they let him go Scott free. In Major Competition, they all turn on the girls and side with this macho superhero who just showed up almost instantly. The worst part about the citizens of Townsville is that the average family outside the Utonium household are one dimensional jerks who only care about their own happiness. I'm not just making that up, that was basically confirmed in the episode Supper Villain where Harold Smith is a pathetic father, Marieanne Smith is a short tempered mother, Bud is an angsty son and Julie is a dimwitted daughter. This alone makes me want to stay as far away from Townsville as possible because a city that's mostly comprised of bad people might as well be a jail.

What also brings the show down is when the characters act out of character for the sake of forced conflict. Blossom, who's supposed to be the smartest and most responsible of the 3 girls, steals a golf bag in A Very Special Blossom, laughs at Bubbles' glasses in Bubblevision after the events of The Mane Event, and lies to the Professors face in Ploys R Us. Bubbles, who's supposed to be the sweetest of the trio is uncharacteristically nasty in Curses, Los Dos Mojos (getting bonked on the head is NOT an excuse), and The Mane Event. Buttercup is usually butting heads with her sisters, but I did NOT need that to be the focus of Three Girls and a Monster.

Other side characters that are worth a mention include Mitch Mitchelson, a sneaky little twerp who relishes in causing trouble, Robin who moved next door to the girls and became their new friend (though I wish she appeared in more episodes), Bunny who the girls made in Twisted Sister and who at the end of the episode had a good heart, and the Narrator, who is a funny character that makes clever commentary during the show.

Visually the show still looks incredible even for the time it was made. The character designs all look distinct from one another with mostly sharp noses, varying body times and different hair and clothes. The girls meanwhile maintain their look from Craig's original birthday card albeit with slight differences. The backgrounds are also very well detailed and the city feels like it's populated by a lot of people. The animation got a slight upgrade when it switched from cels to digital and the colors and designs pop much more in the later season.

What truly brings the show as a whole to life is the amazing voice acting on display. Cathy Cavandini, E. G. Daily and Tara Strong were perfectly cast as the main triplets. Each one makes the girls sound very distinct from one another and they have great chemistry with one another. Tom Kane does a good job voicing the Professor and makes him sound like a smart and caring father figure. Tom Kenny shines as both the Narrator and Mayor, Jennifer Hale makes Princess and Ms. Keane sound very distinct from each other and Roger L. Jackson was just perfect as Mojo. Other actors like Jim Cummings, Jeff Bennett and Dee Bradly Baker all make memorable impressions throughout the whole show. 

Overall The Powerpuff Girls is a mixed bag of a show with some really good and really bad episodes. At its best it has some great writing, intense action scenes, lovable characters, amazing voice acting and really strong humor. At worst though, it also has terribly written episodes where characters act out of character, the citizens of Townsville are mindless sheep and it’s painfully unfunny. I say at least the first season is the best of the series but each season has at least 1 truly great episode. I recommend giving it a watch for yourself but you’d be forgiven for not wanting to sit through Seasons 5 & 6.

In Defense of The Ice Age Sequels

 The Ice Age franchise, despite being one of the most financially successful animated film series, has recieved mixed to negative reviews with each passing film. Specifically, while the first film recieved positive reviews from critics and audiences, the reactions to the sequels were mixed at best with the last film getting the most negative reviews in the franchise. Having rewatched all the films not so long ago, I find myself in the minority that find genuine enjoyment out of these film and think they have some merit to them. In this post, I'd like to explain why I like the Ice Age sequels despite their reputation.

The most common complaint regarding the Ice Age sequels is that they rely more on comedy than telling a story. This is understandable as the best moments from all the Ice Age films, including the first one, were the comedic ones. This is especially true with the character of Scrat, who is always a riot because he just can't keep hold of that one nut. The filmmakers knew that these films make the audiences laugh and kept coming back for the comedy aspect. This is not to say that the films don't have stories to tell though as each film continues the ongoing journey of Manny, Sid and Diego.

The Meltdown is about the herd treking to a boat when they see that the ice is melting and could flood the entire valley. Along the way, they encounter Ellie, a mammoth who believes she's a opposum. I think The Meltdown is the best of the sequels and is of similar quality to the first. In addition to being very funny, there are also moments where the visuals speak for themselves. I also really like the character of Ellie and just how fun and sassy she is. Crash and Eddie made for a funny duo and Sean William Scott and Josh Peck do great work voicing them.

Dawn Of The Dinosaurs follows up The Meltdown by focusing on Manny wanting to make sure everything is safe for his soon to be born child. In the midst of this, Sid adopts 3 baby T-Rexs and is promptly kidnapped by their Mom. Now Manny and the rest of the herd have to save him while treking through the dinosaur work with their weasel guide, Buck. This film is kinda underrated IMO because of who understandable Manny's motivation for wanting his unborn child to be safe. If you recall ftom the first movie je lost his family once and he's not risking that again. It's also no secret that Buck is the MVP of the entire franchise next to Scrat. He's wild, fun, a bit of a loon, but a master survivalist; and Simon Peg gives a magnificent performance of this character.

Continental Drift is about Manny, Sid, and Diego treking to reunite with Ellie and Peaches (who's now a teenager) after a powerful earthquake separates them. Along the way, the trio encounter pirates who are nothing but trouble. I like how the filmmakers decided to have pirate be the antagonists of the film as this just make the journey Manny, Sid and Diego have to go through more perilous. I also like Sid's Granny (played by the brilliant Wanda Sykes) and just how sassy she is.

Collision Course finds the herd treking to a volcano to redirect an oncoming comet that could bring them to extinction. All the while, Manny has to cope with the fact that his daughter is getting married and could potentially move away. I like how Manny and Ellie are still concerned for their daughter's well being and the filmmakers made a great decision in bringing Buck back. I also really enjoyed the Shangri-Llama and just how loose and bouncey he is.

One element that many people agree about these films is that there's a noticeable upgrade in quality when it comes to the animation. The team at Blue Sky Studios always strived to improve their animation quality with each passing film. Each film explores new environments for our characters to go through and many of them are gorgeously rendered and feel lived in. The dinosaur underground in DawnoOf The Dinosaurs looks amazing and feels like a luscious land full of towering dinosaurs. The character animation also became looser as the filmmakers doubled down on slapstick and visual gags. In addition to that, the textures of the characters looked more real and flowed more naturally. 

The characters themselves grow and change with each passing film, yet are still as fun and as entertaining as they were when we first met them. Manny has becoming more willing to interact with others and his past trauma has effected how he acts as a father to Peaches. While many grew tired of Sid's antics with each film, I found myself always laughing at him because he tries so hard to belong and be respected because his own family doesn't respect or care about him. Truthfully underneath his silly and inept exterior is a very lonely sloth who just wants companionship. Diego, once a ruthless predator, now serves as a good ally who's always got his friend's back. His arc in Dawn Of The Dinosaurs felt natural and had a satisfying payoff in the end. Ellie went from being a mammoth who believed she was a opposum to a great wife for Manny and a good mother for Peaches. 

Another element that I don't think is talked about enough is how good the voice acting is. Each of the actors give very good performances and have at least one moment in each film to truly shine. Ray Romano, John Leguizamo and Denis Leary all still do wonderful jobs voicing Manny, Sid and Diego respective. I like how Manny slowly looses his depand tone and becomes more eccentric, showing that he's not as depressed as he was in the first film. Sid squealing like a girl always has me in stitches and the tribal sloth number from The Meltdown is still one of my favorite scenes in the series. Diego leaving was handled brilliantly and he sounded both sad and sincere. I think Queen Latifah was perfect as Ellie, as she brought the right amount of sass and nuance to the character while also giving her some genuinely funny moments. Her shouting "Yabba-Dabba-Do!" as she rides down a branchiosaurus in Dawn Of The Dinosaurs gets a laugh out of me every time. Major credit should also go to the first film's director and Blue Sky's co-founder Chris Wedge for voicing Scrat. He's a real trooper having to scream and yell in the recording booth for hours voicing this character and none of them were in vain. KeKe Palmer did a really good job voicing Peaches, making her sound sassy like her Mom but also resourceful and fun. Peter Dinklage gave a stellar performance as Captain Gutt, making him sound charsmatic, intimidating and firece. 

All that said though, there are a few elements about the sequels that I don't think quite worked. I found Cretaceous and Maelstrom (the antagonists from The Meltdown) to be serviceable predators but not particularly interesting villains. The most interesting things about them are their names and designs, but they were never referred to by names in film nor did they even talk. While I like all the Scrat segments in these movies, I thing the stall the pacing in Dawn Of The Dinosaurs. Had they been removed, I thing more time could've benefited Sid's arc in the film. Did anyone else find it jarring that Peaches went from a baby at the end of Dawn Of The Dinosaurs to a teenager at the start of Continental Drift? I feel like we missed an entire movie focusing on Manny being protective of his daughter when she was still a child. Then there's the character of Louis, a molehog who has a crush on Peaches but is friendzoned for most of Continental Drift. He had a good arc in that film and was generally a likable character. Yet Collision Course did him dirty by reducing him to a blink-and-you'll-miss-it background cameo. Why? Maybe Josh Gad (who voiced Louis) chose not to return or the filmmakers thought it wouldn't feel right if Peaches ended up with someone outside her own species. I disagree with the latter strongly because if a mammoth can be raised by opposums, why can't a mammoth and molehog be a couple. Also, I found the dinobirds to be serviceable, but not as interesting as the main cast. The most egregious problem I have with the sequels though is that the humans are nowhere to be found. Why? Well apparently the filmmakers were going to reintroduce the humans in one of these films, but that never happened because they didn't serve a purpose to the story. It's unfortunate, but I still think it was a missed opportunity to have Manny, Sid and Diego reunite with the baby from the first movie now all grown up. Other factors I didn't think wrked that well include Crash and Eddie not developing as characters, Sid's family being the absolute worst (I know that's the point, but still), Julian just appearing in the last film already in a good relationship with Peaches.

Despite their faults, I still enjoy the Ice Age films as a whole. They're all wonderfully animated, funny and engaging films with fun characters and excellent voice work. I think these films, like the first, are fun for the whole family to enjoy and I expected nothing less from these films. It's unstandable these films aren't for everyone, but I still have fun watching them nonetheless.

Opinion: Lazy Writing Doesn't Exist

Lazy is commonly used to describe bad writing in fiction. Be it in a movie, a tv show, a song or even a video game, if it's bad, the first kneejerk reaction is to call it lazy. I myself am guilty of this, but as I've grown older I realize that that particular word is not only false, it is hurtful. To call a writer's work (or the writer themselves) lazy is to imply that they did not do there job. Not that they didn't do their job well, but rather they didn't do the job at all. Let's talk about that clear as day difference.

A writer's job is to, well, write. Specifically, they have to turn the ideas in their heads into written words on paper. If that sounds easy, let me be the first to tell you having several years of experience in writing: 👏it's👏not. Even if you have basic spelling and grammar rules down, you still need to structure your work so that it's easy to read and follow. You also have to give your piece your own unique voice. How does your writing skills stand out from everyone else's? What makes your material worth reading? Another factor that comes into the writing process is learning to take constructive criticism and improving on previous works. And when I say criticism, I'm talking about feedback that's on the lines of "I didn't find this piece very interesting. Maybe add some comedy or character drama." That's the type of criticism you should listen too when you want to be a better writer. As for the ones you should ignore, that's where today's topic comes in.

The literal definition of the word "lazy" is being unwilling to work or use energy. Whenever I hear this word lumped into what's supposed to be constructive criticism, I roll my eyes and think "oh you don't know how wrong you are." Fart jokes are often called lazy because apparently anyone can do it. Tell me, can anyone you know make a fart joke funny every single time? Writers are also called lazy for ignoring plot holes. Can you name me a single work of fiction without plot holes so that writers can use that as an example? Then there's the times when writers incorporate pop culture references and are called lazy for that. So writers aren't supposed to make pop culture references anymore even though they've been doing in since Day 1?

See the problem with using lazy as a form of criticism is it implies the writers were just sitting on their couch all day and let the written work write itself. Maybe the writer included the fart joke because they thought it was funny. Maybe the writer ignored a "plot hole" because nobody needs to know everything that doesn't matter. Maybe the writer included a pop culture reference as a fun little nod to a previous work. You never know and you should watch what you say because being called lazy is not helpful: it's hurtful.

Why It Worked: Glory

 Introduction

Glory is a 1989 historical war drama based on the military career of Colonel Robert Gould Shaw and how he commanded the 54th Massachusetts Regiment in the Civil War. Directed by Edward Zwick, the film stars Matthew Broderick, Cary Elwes, Denzel Washington (who won an Oscar for Best Supporting Actor for this film at the 62nd Academy Awards), Morgan Freeman, Andre Braugher, and Jihmi Kennedy among a slew of other actors playing the soliders in the regiment. Distributed by Tristar Pictures, the film recieved critical acclaim (93% of 44 critics aggregated by Rotten Tomatoes gave an average score of 7.88/10) and made $27 million at the box office. I first saw this film when I was about 12 or 13 and rather than watch it in history class, I watched it on TV at home with my Dad. I've since rewatched this movie many times over the years and have come to appreciate it as a great film that perfectly captures the great impact Col. Shaw and his men had on the Civil War. So without further adieu, let's dive right into why this film is one of the best war films every made.

The Plot

As with all films based on real life, some liberties were taken to make the film more dramatic. I personally forgive any and all inaccuracies if the final product turns out to be a well made film; and in my opinion, this is a very well made film. As said before in the intro, this is based on Col. Robert Gould Shaw's career during the Civil War and how he commanded the 54th Massachusetts Regiment. The film opens with him recieving the offer to lead the regiment and after accepting, he trains the men to be battle ready while also dealing with the systeminc racism of the military at the time. This film takes the time to humanize not just Col. Shaw, but also the soliders in the Regiment and how they handle the systematic racism of the military. The film addresses the lack of proper foot wear for the black solider, how they were paid less than the white man and used for general labor as opposed to fighting in battles. The film manages to tackle all of these issues and more by keeping the focus on either Col. Shaw or the soliders. It also helps that the film has stupendous production quality. The sets and costumes look excellent and the Matthew Broderick looks like Col. Shaw leaped off his portrait from May 1863. The battle scenea are explosive and noisy, yet the focus is never taken away from either Col. Shaw or his men. And James Horner's score is awe-inspiring with that majestic choir and powerful orcastra. The best moment in the entire film is one that would not exist if this film were more "historically accurate." After Private Trip was caught trying to escape, he is flogged in front of the whole regiment. When he removed his shirt, it's shown that Trip has been whipped before with several scars on his back to prove it. As he's being flogged, he looks at Col. Shaw with a straight face as a single tear rolls down his face. If you're a history buff, you know that flogging was abolished in 1861, long before the regiment was formed. And yet this moment is necessary for the film because it shows something very important about Trip. He doesn't see Col. Shaw as any different than his former master. It's because of this that Col. Shaw spends the rest of the film trying to be better. This film, first and formost, is about how Col. Shaw and the regiment complimented each other and moments like this show that perfectly.

Cast & Characters

The cast for this film is excellent and each one of them brings such raw authenticity to their respective roles. Starting with Col. Shaw himself, this is one of Matthew Broderick's greatest performances in his career. He's so calm and generous, yet also a real commanding officer who knows what he's doing. I also love how Broderick portrays Col. Shaw during the heat of battle. He's scared, yes, but he's also very brave and willing to die fighting. Cary Elwes was really good as Major Cabot Forbes, a friend of Col. Shaw's. Him and Broderick have good chemistry and he's quick to object Col. Shaw's training methods. Yet by the end he finds that the men became great fighters because of Col. Shaw and respects him. Denzel Washington was fantastic as Trip and more than earned his Oscar. Trip is a relatable character that doesn't get along well with free black men but as the film progresses he comes to respect his fellow soliders as well as his commanding officers. Morgan Freeman is always a win and his performance as Sgt. Major John Rawlins is no exception. Playing a smart, no nonsense sergeant is something Freeman can do in his sleep and that speech his gives to Trip before their first battle was perfect. Lastly we have Andre Braugher as Private Thomas Searles, a free black man who grew up with Col. Shaw. Training was hard for Thomas, to the point where he broke down in tears. But as the film continues, he grows more confident and becomes a true soliders by his first battle. Andre Braugher gave a wonderful performance as Thomas and I really bought that him and Col. Shaw grew up together. Other cast members such as Jihmi Kennedy as Private Jupiter, John Finn as Sgt. Major Mulcahy, RonReaco Lee as the mute drummer boy, and more all do a good job of fleshing out the regiment and making them all feel like real people.

Where It Falters

I really have just a few nitpicks that aren't really deal breakers, but just things I would've liked to have seen in the film. Abraham Lincoln is mentioned alot in this film and yet were never see him in the film. Not saying he needed to be in the movie, but it would still be nice if we had a scene of him hearing about the Battle at Fort Wagner and being pleased with the regiment's efforts (despite them not winning). Also, I would've like to have seen one of the cast members (besides Col. Shaw, obviously) survive to tell the tale. Maybe Thomas or Jupiter, I don't know, I love the ending either way. 

Conclusion

Glory is a great film with a fantastic cast, amzing score, remarkable sets and costumes and excellent cinematography. This is a movie I find myself rewatching every now and again not just because it's a great film, but because its story is a great piece of history. Without the valiant efforts of Col. Shaw and the 54th Massachusetts Regiment, the Civil War might not have ending in the Union's favor. So in closing, I'd like to thank these men for their service and for helping change history for the better. I salute you 🙋‍♂️

Opinion: Cuties is part of the problem with sexualization

 I do NOT support the sexualization of children in anyway shape or form. If there's one important thing you need to take away from this, it's that sentence. I never want to hear that this type of behavior is okay. Cuties, a film on Netflix that attempts to tackle this issues, falters heavily on its message. Yes, I saw the film. No, I don't recommend you watch it. I will encourage you to strap in because we got alot to talk about.

Director Maimouna Doucoure attempted to tell the story about the sexualization of children in today's culture. I say attempt because the actual execution DOES infact sexualize the characters in the movie (all of whom are 11). If the movie wanted to tell this story, it went about it the wrong way.  These kids should not have been filmed doing any of the provocative dances and the religious aspect of the feature isn't prominent enough in the feature. It's all kinds of uncomfortable and I was wrong to think the controversy was overblown. This movie is not worth watching for these scenes alone, but that's not the worst part.

No, the worst part is that Cuties' mere existence is a byproduct of a bigger problem. You wanna know why this film was made in the first place? To be blunt, it's because we as a society let this happen. Not just the movie, but the subject matter this movie tried to tackle. We let the sexualization of children go on for too long and we didn't notice until it was brought to our attention. Had we not normalize open sexuality in the first place, Cuties would've never existed in the first place.

Let's not beat around the bush: this world has become more perverted with each passing decade. Sure, humanity has always been pervertrd but things really took off in the 20th century. With the rising popularity of pornography and putting sex into mainstream movies, sex and nudity was slowly but surely being normalized until it became common place in the 21st century. Ever hear of the term "sex sells?" Unfortunately that's become the unofficial law of the land. Whether it's in commercials, music videos, movie posters, billboards, games shows or what have you, you will always find a suggestive looking woman or man posing with few clothes on. We're like flies being attracted to the bright bug electricutor. Even if we know it's bad for us, we can't help but go towards it. It's even gotten to the point where children are being attracted to it.

Kids have always imitated whatever they see, that's how they learn. In today's perverted world, if a kid sees Iggy Azalea or Miley Cyrus twerking, they're going to think that looks like fun and imitate it. 👏This👏is👏bad. Any form of provocative dance or gesture should not be imitated by children, and yet they do it anyway. Why? Because we don't monitor our children closely enough to make sure they don't imitate this stuff. I'm not just talking about having a filter on your browser. I'm talking about demanding the big media corporations discourage such vulgar and provocative behavior in their marketing. In order to proctect the children of the world from this kind of seduction, we need to actively say no to ALL forms of sexualization in media. Sex itself isn't bad, but it should strictly be between a husband and his wife: no exceptions.

I'm willing to be called a prude for the rest of my life if it means standing by my opinion that this world is perverted. Cuties was made to bring the issue of sexualizing kids to light, but in doing so it became part of the problem. I'd much rather this film be about something else than to try (and fail) to tackle a problem in our society. In closing, don't watch Cuties, don't let your kids watch Cuties and don't let the big media corporations get away with sexualizing them. 

It's Time To Retire The "Sex Scene"

Many movies and TV shows aimed at adults tend to incorporate sex scenes into the narrative. Many people have criticized the inclusion of these scenes and I can definitely see why. Even if they're integral to the plot, a sex scene is problematic for the actors involved and it tends to make casual audiences uncomfortable watching it. With the rise of more prominent women in shobiz, I think now is the right time to retire the practice of sex scenes in general.

The reason behind sex scenes being included varies from filmmaker to filmmaker. The most common though is because it stimulating to watch two actors have sex. To put it bluntly, it gives the filmmakers an excuse to make porn without directly calling it porn. The problem with that mentality is the same problem with pornography in general: it's degrading. It dehumanizes the people involved, particularly the women, to essentially make the porn stars for the sake of stimulating the filmmaker. Of course not every sex scene is like this, but even the exceptions aren't worth filming in the first place.

Take for example the attempted sex scene between Bruce Banner and Betty Ross in The Incredible Hulk. The scene itself isn't bad as it shows Bruce can't even have sex without Hulking out. However, that's a fact that could've been left unsaid because it was already established in the beginning of the film that he can't let his heart rate go up so high before he turns green. As such, the scene is superfluous.

Even movies about sex, such as Don Jon or American Pie, could've gotten their point across just fine without filming the actors having sex. Showgirls, the most notorious example of gratuitous sex and nudity, did not need any of those scenes to tell the story of a girl trying to get into showbiz. I know a remake is never going to happen, but if I were to remake the film I'd focus on the anxiety and stress Nomi goes through while being a glorified prostitute. Instead of showing her performing or having sex with guys, I'd show the aftermath with her drinking, smoking, crying, calling her parents and trying to get out. Maybe have it end with her being a born-again Christian as a little cherry on top.

Now I know what you're thinking, "but what about show, don't tell?" and to that I counter argue less = more. Contrary to popular belief, not everything in the story has to be spelled out for you. You don't need to see the characters going to the bathroom all the time, you don't need to see character stopping to take a cigarette break, and more importantly you don't need to see characters having sex. Even if sex if part of the story, you don't need to show it. 

Many actors have also come forward to say that they were uncomfortable filming sex scenes. While filming the sex scenes on Jessica Jones, they were filming all day and Mike Colter was getting back pains. While there was a mediator there to make sure everything ran smoothly, it's still a tedious process to shoot a scene that ultimately establishes what we already know: Jessica and Luke Cage are compatible with each other. There are many actor who refuse to film sex scenes because it goes against their beliefs and as such they aren't hired for the project in mind. This is unfortunate because it enforces the stigma that sex sells, which itself should no longer be tolerated especially today.

Instead of trying to making filming sex scenes more comfortable, why don't we instead try making the story more engaging without the need to have the actors take off their clothes? It's not artistic to film a lady giving a guy a blowjob; it's disgusting. It's not important to show characters having sex because they love each other; it's redundant. In closing, let's start a new era in filmmaking where the sex scene is not common in mature movies and TV shows. Instead replace it with good character interactions, a strong story, and some laughs along the way.

In Defense of Kangaroo Jack

Kangaroo Jack is mostly remembered as that edgy family film from the mid-2000s with a talking kangaroo. Critics hated it and yet it managed to make a decent profit at the box office and was even given a direct-to-video sequel. Having watched it recently, I found that I enjoy it as a funny buddy comedy with solid performances and great humor. Today, we'll be looking at what works about the film, what doesn't and why it ended up the way it is.

This film does tell a solid story about 2 guys who travel to the land down under to deliver a package to someone named Mr. Smith. While they were taking pictures with a kangaroo, it steals the package (which Louis put in his jacket, which he then put on the kangaroo) and now they have to chase him to get the package back. The story is very straightforward but culminates with a big twist at the end that puts the whole thing into perspective. It also helps that there are alot of funny jokes in this film, particularly the camel scene. Most people scoff at fart jokes, but I personally found it kinda funny.

Obviously the best part of this film is the chemistry between Jerry O'Connell and Anthony Anderson. They work so well with each other and their performances particularly shine when they're walking in the desert near the brink of dehydration. I especially love Anthony Anderson's wild and goofy performances and how much fun he's having on set. All the other actors give a solid performance with what they got, particularly Christopher Walken and Michael Shannon. Walken brings the right amount of menace and charsma to his character and Michael Shannon just hams it up every chance he gets.

The characters themselves offer quite a bit to like. Charlie is a good man who just wants to do the right thing and Louis is lots of fun and deeply cares about his best friend. Jessica is a smart, funny and resourceful wildlife expert and Frank is a short tempered gangster who relishes in putting Charlie down. The biggest standout of the cast though is Kangaroo Jack himself. He's such a funny little creature and the sequence in which his speaks and raps was just hilarious. Also, the CGI use to bring him to light looks pretty good. He moves like a real kangaroo and the jacket he wears throughout the film moves organically with him.

I really do think the cinematography deserves some credit in this film. Peter Menzies, jr (who also provided the cinematography for The Incredible Hulk) shot some amazing shots of the Outback, from the rugged canyons to the luscious oasis. I especially love the wide shots that showcase the vastness of this Australian desert. Overall, it's a well shot film.

There are a couple elements that don't work about this film. For one, I didn't care for the romance between Charlie and Jessica as I felt they didn't spend enough time together to form som chemistry. I also don't like who when Charlie thinks she's a mirage the first thing he does is grab her boobs. He totally deserved that canteen to the face. Another element I don't think worked as well was the climax. I felt it could've been more exciting, but as is it's just adequate.

Did you know that this film was originally going to be R rated? Shocking, I know but it's true. This film was originally going to have more cursing and violence and the kangaroo was only going to appear in one scene. Producer Jerry Bruckheimer saw a rough cut of the film and felt it wasn't working. So after recieving positive feedback from the kangaroo, the filmmakers decided to reshoot most of the film and tone it down significantly to appeal toward a family audience. Thus this film is one of those PG rated films that just teeters toward the line of PG-13.

Overall, Kangaroo Jack is at best a funny buddie comedy and at least a guilty pleasures of some sorts. I totally understand why some take issue with this movie being an edgy family film, but for what its worth I found it to be all good fun. Thanks so much for reading and I'll see you soon ;)

Why I'm Done With Pornography

This has been something I've been struggling to confidently say for years. When I tried to go cold turkey before I would eventually relapse and the cycle would repeat itself. This time however I feel more confident in saying that I have no desire to look at pornography of any kind any more. If I were you I'd get some snacks and strap in because this post isn't going to be a deep dive into how my addiction started, how it has affected me in the long run and what ultimately made me decide it just wasn't worth it anymore.

When I was a kid (maybe 9 or 10), I picked up a Men's Health magazine and on the second to last page was an ad for a sex pill with a bare chested woman laying on top of a man. This was the earliest memory I can think of when I found that women being partially or completely naked looked cool. It then lead me to look up basic phrases on the Internet such as "naked women" "nude girls" and "sexy girls" among others. I went down the rabbit hole that was pornography and was hooked for almost a decade and a half.

The most common side effects of viewing pornography on a daily basis differ from person to person. For me it was having a skewed perspective on all the women in my life during my high school years. I never had a girlfriend in high school and I thank God I didn't because I either would've treated her like an object or cheat on her with another girl I found prettier. While my sexual urges never caused me to rape anyone, it did make me come across as a creep more than a few times. I once asked a lady I didn't know what sex was at the public library. If I wasn't a minor, I'd would've gotten maced at best or arrested at worst just for asking a question like that. I also had this bad habit of giving one girl in particular various gifts in a stupid attempt to get her to like me back. It got to the point where she rightfully told the school counselor about it and asked me to please stop. I'm glad I did because I was probably one unwarranted advancement away from being put on a restraining order. The most embarrassing moment for me though was trying to share a shower with either my sister or my aunt. Yeah, there's being a dumb kid and then there's being a straight up pervert. I'm more than ashamed I did any of those things and I thank God I've been forgiven for all of them.

Another major side effects to viewing pornography daily was it made me defensive and secretive about it. When I was first caught, it was embarrassing and rightfully so. It's like being caught with your hand in the cookie jar. And yet even after I was caught, I still viewed it in secret because the root of the problem wasn't handled properly. I didn't just watch porn because I liked it; moreover, I watched it because I was a lonely depressed kid with little friends and a severe lack of understanding of my purpose in life. This continued well into my adulthood when I was now stuggling to get a rise from something that was bringing me less and less enjoyment as time went on.

If I could point to the number one worst side effect of pornography, is its negative influence it had when it came to sexual encounters with strangers. I can most definitely say that despite meeting up with many strangers both men and women, I NEVER had a good sexual encounter. They were all varying degrees of filthy, unengaging and overall unsatisfying. While I knew pornography was not representative of real sex, I didn't know how underwhelming casual encounters were until I actually had them.

So, what changed? How did I go from a struggling addict to completely apathetic towards porn in general? Well, it was a number of factors, but the biggest was becoming a born-again Christian. While getting baptized and recieved the gift of the Holy Ghost didn't immediately cure me, I did slowly but surely start to drift away from porn as the years went by. Another key factor in the decimation of my addiction was having good relationships with a bunch of female friends and co-workers. The women in my life today are all smart, funny, caring, patient and understanding and they make me feel more appreciative of all the great women I've had in my life (such as my Mom, Grandma, my older sisters and teachers). Most recently, I've come to the realization that pornography is everything I said I didn't like in my last post about eye candy. Men and especially women in pornography are essentially reduced to sponges when put in front of the camera. Similarly, erotic drawings serve no other purpose than to arouse viewers with characters from an existing IP partaking in lewd acts. I've also come to the realization that if I spend so much of my time watching, writing and drawing porn, why don't I use all that time to create something original and fun?

Sure enough it was these factors that made me decide it was time to finally kick the bucket for good and start living my life. I just turned 24 over a week ago and I know for a fact that I don't want to spend another decade and a half dabbling in pornography. This is going to be the start of a new chapter in my life and this will hopefully lead to much better things down the road.

Why Eye Candy Is Degrading

"I am NOT a prize to be won!" Princess Jasmine from Aladdin (1992)

This quote from Jasmine basically sums up how I feel every time a female character with a strong personality shows up. We are living in a revolutionary era of entertainment where woman are given prominent roles in movies, TV shows and video games and are made to be well rounded, likable, relatable and a true role model. Unfortunately, this wasn't always the case and every now and then we get the occasional female character (with some male exceptions) that are only relegated to just stand there and look pretty. In Layman's terms: they're simply eye candy.

Now this was an inherent problem that dates back long before the concept of filmmaking came into fruition. Women were often placed on display as prizes by prominent leaders and who's primary function was to give birth and nurse babies. A prominent female leader such as Cleopatra and Mary, Queen of Scotts were the exception, but not the rule. It wasn't until as recent as over 100 years ago when the feminist movement gained prominence and women start demanding equal treatment.

Back on the topic of women in entertainment, one of the most notorious tropes that perfectly exemplifies the eye candy mentality is the "damsel in distress." Typically the hero has to save the damsel from a dastardly villain and is rewarded with a kiss or in some cases a hand in marriage. Now, this trope itself isn't bad (obviously a story needs stakes to be engaging) but the fact that many damsels in distress are deviod of personality is itself a problem. Take for example Ann Darrow from the original 1933 film King Kong. Everybody remembers the mighty gorilla, but nobody talks about Ann Darrow, who was the epitome of eye candy. She mostly just stands their and looks pretty, occasional screams in terror while everyone else actually moves the plot along. Disney themselves are guilty of this as Princess Aurora from Sleeping Beauty is often regarded as the weakest Disney Princess interms of personality and character development. While she's is pretty, Mary Costa gives a good performance as her original voice (both speaking and singing), she isn't made to be any more interesting to the audience as she is to Prince Phillip. She is ultimately bedridden at the end of the second Act and almost immediately after Prince Phillip breaks her curse with true love's kiss, they're hitched and dancing in the throne room.

Eye candy is not exclusively linked to the damsel and distress trope, however, as sometime it's a trope in and of itself. Remember Nazz from Ed, Edd, n Eddy? She's a perfect example of this trope and is easily the most boring character in a show full of wacky characters. Episodes like Boys Will Be Eds best exemplify how one-dimensional Nazz is as a character as all the boys (sans Jimmy) fall for her yet her unique personality is just be pretty while standing up for Jimmy. The show never develops her as an interesting character beyond just the stereotypical pretty girl with some hints of a personality, but not enough for me to care.

The problem with making female characters nothing more than eye candy is it makes the girls and women who are watching the show or movie feel under appreciated. It also makes me as a man who supports equal treatment for women feel embarrassed. If all Timmy Turner sees in Trixie Tang is just a pretty face, than I have no reason to care about his attempts to woo her. If Drake Parker doesn't actually care for half the girls he dates, why should I? If you're goimg to make a female character for the male protagonist to fall for, you need to do more than just slap on a pretty face to what might as well be a piece of cardboard. I no longer think it's funny that Susan Storm is forced to strip naked in 2005's Fantastic Four; I think it's degrading and undermines her as a character. I don't just want to save Princess Peach in a Mario game, I want to spend time with her so that when she is kidnapped by Bowser (again) I have more incentive to rescue her.

Fortunately many creators have learned from these passed shortcomings and female characters today are better than ever. Occasionally there is that one show, movie or video game that falls into the eye candy trap but those are now the exception, not the rule. The Disney Princess lineup has gotten significantly more diverse in terms of personality and  character development, female characters in TV shows are far more interesting and engaging then they were in the past and being able to play as female characters in video games has become a stable thanks in part to Metroid. This truly is a grand time for female characters, who have come a long way from being just a prize to be won.

In Defense of Joel Schumacher's Batman Movies

The original Batman movies between 1989-1997 are some of the most popular and topical films starring the Caped Crusader. While the first 2 directed by Tim Burton are often regarded as the most well made Batman films, the ones by Joel Schumacher are...not. I'm of the camp that they're rather enjoyable films, if not otherwise guilty pleasures. Having rewatched them on HBOMAX, I find that they still offer some substance and entertainment value.

Storywise, Batman Forever delves into Bruce Wayne's long suppressed tramua regarding his parents' murder while Batman & Robin finds him learning to trust his newfound partner in crime fighting. Batman Forever is often regarded as the better of the 2 Schumacher Batman movies in terms of storytelling, and I agree. In addition to taking the time to explore this part of Bruce Wayne's character, this film also organically sets up Robin's origin and how he becomes Batman's young ward. Batman & Robin, meanwhile, has a more straightforward plot while also introducing Barbara Wilson, aka Batgirl into the mix. This makes the film a tad predictable, yet the element in which both films succeed it is the over-the-top acting (particularly from the villains), the cheesy lines and outlandish costumes.

Can we just take a moment to acknowledge how fun these films are? Joel Schumacher was tasked to make these film more lighthearted in contrast to Burton's take and he more than delivered. Gotham is more vibrant and lively, and the costumes look more extravagant. I especially love the portrayal of Two-Face in this film, from wearing double sided clothes, having 2 maids dressed as an angel and devil, as well as his goons wearing double sided masks. I'm aware people have a strong distaste for Mr. Freeze's puns, but honestly a couple of them got a genuine chuckle out of me. Many people claim that Batman & Robin was made to sell toys, but having watched both films back to back, I feel Joel Schumacher just doubled down on the campy nature of Forever and gave Batman more gadgets and gizmos as an homage to the 1960s Batman TV series with Adam West.

While I enjoy these movies and all their cheesiness, I do have a couple issue. I felt the character of Dr. Chase Meridian was pretty much portraying the same love interest Batman had in the Tim Burton movies, only this time she's more attracted to Batman in a sexual manner. As such she has little to offer in terms of personality. I also felt Commissoner Jim Gordon being relegated to just calling Batman for help was kinda underwhelming. I kinda hoped he would play a bigger part, but I guess not. I also found it odd that Billy Dee Willams was replaced with Tommy Lee Jones as Harvey Dent, leading me to assume Dent had vertigo (a la Michael Jackson). Lastly, I feel Bane falls into the unfortunate category of Adaptation In Name Only because he's basically just Frankenstein's Monster in a mask as opposed to an intelligent tactician with superhuman strength that broke Batman's back.

Still though, I very much enjoy these movies in the most unironic sense possible. Yes, they're cheesy, yes they're outlandish, yes they're over-the-top, but darn it they're still fun. While I respect that Joel Schumacher apologized for disappointing people who expected Batman & Robin to be great, I don't think he felt any shame for making a couple fun movies. Thanks for reading and I'll see you soon ;)

Why It Worked: Ed, Edd, n Eddy

Introduction

Ed, Edd, n Eddy was a Canadian-American animated series which ran on Cartoon Network from January 4, 1999-June 24, 2008 before officially concluding with the TV movie, Ed, Edd, n Eddy's Big Picture Show on November 8, 2009. Created by Danny Antonucci, the show features the voice talents of Tony Sampson, Samuel Vincent, Matt Hill, Janyse Jaud, David Paul Grove, Peter Kelamis, Keenan Christenson, Kathleen Barr and Erin Fitzgerald. The show ran for 6 seasons and recieved critical acclaim throughout it's run (boasting a 8.8/10 on TV.com and 7.4/10 on Imdb). Growing up with the show and binging the complete series last week, I definitely consider Ed, Edd, n Eddy to be a classic slapstick cartoon. Today I'd like to talk about why this show still holds up even to this very day.

Premise and Execution

The show revolves around 3 boys scamming kids in a cul-de-sac in order to buy jawbreakers, which in this show are about twice the size of a bowling ball. Episodes typically follow the formula of the Eds coming up with a scam, something going wrong and the Eds suffer the consequences. Each episode uses its premise as a baseline to incorporate excellent slapstick comedy. Some of the funniest episodes are thr ones where the Eds get pulverized, particularly Eddy in the most cartoonish way possible. In addition to slapstick, there's also alot of self-aware humor with characters frequently breaking the fourth wall and acknowledging that they're in a cartoon. The animation for this show is amazing. The character designs are stylized to fit their personalities, right down to their walk cycles. The backgrounds are vibrant and have a 50s cartoon feel to them, and the character animation is loose and perfectly fluid. But the best part of the show as a whole is the amazing voice acting. Everybody gives it 110% and make these characters come alive in their performances.

Characters

The characters themselves offer a lot to like about them and are all memorable in their own way. Starting with Ed, he is one of the best lovable oafs in all of animation. He's so in love with the world and everything in it and his lack of thinking before he acts makes him so funny. Edd, often called Double D in the show, is very much the brains of the main trio as well as the voice of reason. In addition to being exceptionally smart, he's also hilariously awkward and not particularly strong. Then there's Eddy, the conniving prankster and self-appointed leader of the Eds. He's stubborn, greedy and egotistical, yet deep down he does care about his friends, mainly because they're the only ones he's got. The other kids in the cul-de-sac have alot to offer in terms of comedy and personality. Kevin, the neighborhood bully, is often the one who trusts the Eds the least and he relishes in referring to them as "dorks" every chance he gets. Johnny 2x4 is such an oddball because his best is a piece of wood named Plank, yet he's also a pretty funny character and his friendship with Plank feels genuine. Jimmy is such a worry wort and is typically afraid of the Eds, but as the show goes on he becomes more confident and even beomes a con artist himself like Eddy. Then there's Rolf, who stands right next to Ed as the most quotable character in the whole show. His unfamiliarity with American customs makes him relatable to every foreign kid living in America and his commitment to upholding family traditions make him all the more entertaining.

Where It Falters

I deliberately didn't bring up the girls in the show because they're one of the 2 major problems with the show overall. Ed's younger sister, Sarah, is one of the textbook examples of a spoiled brat. She's loud, obnoxious, a kiss up to her parents and the most violent kid in the entire cul-de-sac. The Eds have no choice but to put up with her in every episode because Ed doesn't have the assertive nature of Eddy to tell her to back off. Nazz is the very stereotypical attractive girl and is most certainly the weakest in terms of personality. There are moments where she could've been fleshed out more, but for the most part she might as well be a jawbreaker with hair. Then there are the Kanker sisters, Lee, Marie and May. They problem with the Kankers is that they've very much become a product of a different time. They frequently try to kiss the Eds without their consent, they forced them into "marriage," they made out with them in the girls bathroom and frequently refer to them as their boyfriends despite the Eds frequently wanting nothing to do with them. As a kid, yeah this was funny, but now that we're living in the #MeToo era, this type of humor just doesn't sit well. The other major problem with the show is it's commitment to a limited cast prevented them from introducing new characters to flesh out the world. This is most evident in Season 5 when the kids go back to school and it feels so empty. There's no other students present and all the teachers (and every other adult save for Eddy's brother in the movie) is never shown.  There were a few other problems such as Eddy going too far in some episodes, the episode title not being that memorable (outside of the Ed puns) and Season 6 only containing 1 episode, but it's 2 most egregious crimes are a lack of good female characters and a lack of adults or other characters to flesh out the world.

Conclusion

All and all though, I still very much love this show. Despite lacking female characters and Peach Creek being virtually a ghost town, the show still has great main characters, amazing slapstick, incredible animation and outstanding voice acting. It's a show I frequently find myself quoting and still laugh at the jokes to this day. Thanks so much for reading and I'll see you soon ;)

In Defense of The Police (law enforcement, not the band)

Men and women in law enforcement have always had it rough. Even as far back as 100 years ago, long before N.W.A. released the notorious song, F*** The Police, not everyone respected a man in uniform. This post is going to be more appreciative of the men and women who dedicated their lives to upholding the law while also addressing the egregious abuse of power over the years.

It is important to note that a police officer's job is to enforce the law. This ranges from stopping a speeder on the highway, haulting trespassers from entering a restricted area, making sure people don't jay walk and so on. The police also apprehend criminals who rob a bank, invade someone's home, shoplifting, and break public property among other egregious crimes. If it weren't for the police maintaining order in our society, we'd be no better off than our Neanderthal ancestors.

Often a police officer is of male gender, but law enforcement has been enlisting women to be police since Marie Owens joined the ChicagoPolice Departmentin 1891. Women in law enforcement make up at least 12% of all police officers in America yet are just as vital as their male co-workers. Female police officers are smart, tough, intimidating, and take their jobs very seriously. Despite this though, they are often discriminated and harassed by people with higher authority than them.

A common (and valid) complaint about law enforcement is how they abuse their power to harass innocent bystanders. Contrary to popular belief, this is not a recent phenomenon; in fact it was even commen place by the time N.W.A. spoke up about it. The first use of the term "police brutality" dates all the way back to 1872 when it was reported that a civilian under arrest was beaten at the Harrison Street Police Station. People of minority are often harassed by racism police officers, even when their as innocent as an obedient child. Women, meanwhile are belittled, harassed, and even raped whether they're in uniform or not. The unfortunate reality is there are always going to be people who use their power of authority to oppress others. But it's not all doom and gloom though.

Because we live in a democracy, we have the right to speak up against these atrocities and demand justice for the oppressed. Instances of police brutality is caught on camera and posted on social media, making their abuse of power known to the entire world and thus costing them their job. We're also still living in the #MeToo era of history, thus giving women more confidence to speak up about harassment on the force. Most importantly though, police departments everywhere are more willing to double down on charging those who abuse their power thanks to prominent victims such as Rodney King, Trayvon Martin and most recently George Floyd.

Do not mistake my respect for law enforcement for ignorance or police brutality. At the end of the day, the average police officer is not a racist, sexist, bigoted monster who abuses their power for their own personal gain. The average police is a person who just wants to make sure people are say and obeying the law. In closing, I would like to say thank you to all the men and women in law enforcement for your services. Without you, this country would've fallen apart over a century ago. Keep up the great work; I salute you 🙋‍♂️

My Tastes in Animation Explained

Comedy

I love slapstick humor. Watching animated characters have their bodies get distorted and stretched out more often then not puts me in a good mood. I also really enjoy funny facial expressions  like when characters are in pain, disgust or anger. I like random humor as much as the next guy, but I also like clever movie references, sick burns and the occasional pun. For comedy I like a good balance between eccentric voice acting and straightman casual. I don't mind a basic story as long as the characters and humor make up for it.

Drama

The best way to get me hooked on an animated drama is relating or understanding the main character(s). Being likable is a big plus, but at their core I should at least be able to see where they're coming from. I'm also a fan of happy endings or at the very least bittersweet endings. Some clever or well timed jokes are always a nice touch. I like voice acting in dramas that feel earnest and relatable, even in an otherwise fantastical setting. I appreciate it when the story ends the character(s) off in a different mindset at the end than they did at the beginning.

Action

I love it whenever the story cuts to the chase and jumps right into the action with the most dazzling visual and some character interaction to boot. Speaking of which, I'm a big fan well developed and well rounded that have layers revealed as the story continues. May favorite type of voice acting in animated action content is the playful yet determined one as well as the stoic yet modest one. I especially love it when they contrast and compliment one another in the performance. I stories that compliment the action or have the action be a driving force for the story.

Musical

I love it when the visuals compliment or elevate the musical number. Be it though the character(s) dancing or the background changing from it's original form to a more psychedelic look. I'm all for a voice actor who can also sing beautifully, otherwise I'm cool with the character's singing voice being different than their speaking voice. I like musicals that end with a powerful and well delivered message. 

Horror

I don't jump from my seat from jumpscares, but I do get creeped out by unsettling visuals or sound design. I applaud animators that make monsters look so grotesque and unpleasant that the even the characters in the story are put off by it. I'm a fan of subtle yet effective voice acting when it comes to animated horrors, or intentionally unsettling voice acting for the monsters and demons present.

Abstract/Anthology

I love it when animators are able to just express themselves through animation. Big fan of color, but I don't mind seeing something drawn in black and white. When it comes to anthologies, I like both variety and a common theme among the shorts. Should voice acting be present, I like a good narrator as much as the next guy. I'm also a fan of limited/dialogue free animated shorts.