The bad news, the show is filmed at SEA WORLD! EWWWW. Now, here's the thing with sea world. . . I've been an animal lover my whole entire life. So, when I was little I loved to go to the zoo and to Sea World (the one that used to be in Cleveland, which was right near where I used to live.) This is because I did not realize how evil Sea World is. They train animals, we all know that entails beatings and starvation. The animals live in areas too small to engage in their natural, God-given behaviors (ie: use sonar in the case of dolphins). They live in CHLORINE, which is horrendous for their health. Well, also, I'm not sure the Australian Sea World is connected to the U.S. chain, but nonetheless, it is a marine park with abused animals. This is sad to me. It hurts my heart a bit (as all animal abuse does.) I'm kind of a bad person, in that, I feel pretty vindicated (I don't know if that's the right word. I don't think it makes sense. I guess I feel vindication on the animal's behalf. ? .) any time a trainer of a wild animal (ie: someone who abuses God's creation at a circus or a marine park) gets attacked, mauled, or even killed. I'm not kidding. I'm a bad person. I think, "well, you shouldn't've been fucking around with wild animals asshole!" Firstly, it was just a mean thing to do. Secondly, it was just a dumb thing to do. Even house cats can rip holes in your flesh if(when) they want to. Why do you think a lion, whom you are pissing off by shoving a metal rod done his throat, won't one day snap and do the same!? And, probably, you deserved it, because you shoved a metal rod done an innocent animal's throat.
K, so that was the animal rant of the day. Today, for the animals, I wrote Trader Joe's about offering more vegan options. Probably that won't actually do anything. But I also resent the e-mail to the humane certified people because the one I sent yesterday got sent back to me because I typed the e-mail address wrong. So, that mighta been good. Perhaps I will make these people think more about these issues. And if they already consider them strongly, I will be better informed when I am recommending the products which are certified humane to other people.
So, know what else I want to mention? Short Bus. Man, I am one harsh movie critic. What is with all these so-called sex positive messages that turn out to be NOT sex positive!? Just a question. So, Short Bus was a'ight. It was not nearly as good as Hedwig (and how could it be if it wasn't a musical, right?), but it didn't completely suck upon first viewing. Some of the characters were quirky in a non-annoying way, their lives interwove in a believable fashion, all of the actors were good at acting, the ending wasn't so corny, though it was predictable, that you wanted to puke or anything horrible like that. So, it wasn't bad. It was just another hum-drum movie that I probably wouldn't watch ever again, but it didn't bother me on any level. It was only upon further contemplation that the movie got to me.
So, John Cameron Mitchel (if that's at all how you spell any of his names) started off wanting to make a sex-positive movie with real sex. That was seriously the goal. Something about how all the real sex in movies coming out of Europe represents something bad, and sex is something good. His movie, however, wasn't about sex. It was about human connection. And sex was used as a metaphor. So, he is still not positing a positive message about sex, rather he is positing a positive message about human connection. Additionally, in this world, where sex is equivalent to connection, there is no place for the asexual individual. I think I have talked about asexuality before on this blog in regards to the Kinsey Institute adding a 7 to Kinsey's 0-6 scale. (This is dumb. There should be two scales one for homo-hetero and one for a-hyper, if you are a 0 on the a-hyper one, you don't need to fit on the homo-hetero scale. However, people who are like a 1 [mostly asexual] still deserve another number.) Anyway, I think my point is about marginalizing a whole group of people who are currently misunderstood. I am not myself asexual, but I cannot STAND how people don't acknowledge that asexuality exists! In the world of Short Bus, they cannot exist, for if they did, they would have no way of connecting to other people.
Next: what is with the story of the woman not being able to cum!? This has been done so many other times. And it has been done WELL. (see: coming soon. Haha. It's brilliant) So, there is nothing inherently wrong with the story. But John Cameron Mitchel, as a gay male, does not know how to pull this one off. Additionally, to make the entire movie hinge on this one fact, which I admit is an important one in the life of the character, to the point where the FINAL moment is of her cumming, and then only show it for a split second! Like show the gasp and the "about to scream" and then cut to New York City's lights coming back on (Yeah, apparently her orgasm was so great it fixed the blackout) is just cheap. It is still as though, though this is the most important part of the film, the climax if you will (pun attended, hahaha!), you still cannot show it in all it's glory even though we've seen multiple males ejaculate. ANNOYING. Also, to equate it with the power coming back on makes it something special, as opposed to something a woman has every right to experience everyday the same way a man does.
And maybe I am reading too much into the woman cumming thing. And I think perhaps I don't even understand completely what I didn't like about it, but there was something that didn't sit right. If you are a womanist, a feminist, a sex-positive individual, a woman's rights activist, whatever, and you have seen this movie, perhaps you can share your opinion with me.
The other thing I didn't like was how it was such a male dominated cast. This is to be expected of a white, liberal, gay, male I suppose. (If you need me to explain that statement, chances are you wouldn't understand what I mean even after the explanation.) But it still bothered me. I am one of those annoying people who is always keeping score. (i.e.: whose name was shown first in the credits when the male and female lead had the exact same amount of screen time and shared equally in the role of protagonist?) I can't help it. I feel like the majority of people in this country like to assume and pretend that sexism is over, that women have equal rights, and equal treatment. This is not the case. And it is DEFINITELY not the case that women have equal representation in government jobs or high-end corporate positions. Forgive me for wanting to see them represented equally in Indy-Flicks.
Also, what is with the whole idea that this movie is not supposed to turn you on because it is not porn!? Now, it didn't really turn me on, that's most likely because I am probably only a 1 or 2 on the whole asexual to hypersexual scale that I invented. But, I can't see how it is not supposed to turn other people on. There is mad sex right in your face. And why is John Cameron Mitchel all opposed to porn in the first place!? You can't objectify all of these people's bodies for "art" and then say it's a crime against humanity that people are objectifying their bodies for the sake of sex and sex alone. (I did a whole post on this once. Go find it if you care.) If this was designed to be sex-positive, he should be happy to be showing sex for the sake of sex. (That should be a new movement, right? Sex for Sex's sake like Art for Art's sake, only we must be on a closer guard against venereal disease in this new movement I am proposing.) Am I wrong? Should he be showing sex for art's sake instead? Is that sex positive, or just art positive?
So, other than that, it WAS your run-of-the-mill Indy-Flick. Some "deep" movie with grand symbolic gestures that actually seem kind up shallow and useless when one puts on his/her analytical reasoning hat. Except it has real sex; this is how it is different. So, if you can't stomach that for one reason or another, don't see it. Otherwise, probably still don't see it 'cause you could spend that hour and a half or whatever watching actually meaningful things like Battlestar Galactica, Mad Men, My So-Called Life, or Wonderfalls. (Yes, these are all TV shows, not movies. But it stands that they are all better than most movies.)
OK.
That's all for now. I still don't have new kitty pictures, so I think I'll put up this bat picture from Halloween. See, 'cause I told you all about this bat, but I don't think I ever pasted up an image. And if I already have, forgive me for the re-run.
Love, Calla and her kitties.
No comments:
Post a Comment