Iron Man

Iron Man is composed almost entirely of win. There were a few scenes here or there that I just wasn't into. I think the handling of Gwyneth Paltrow's assistant/love interest character Pepper Potts could have been handled in a less obvious, clunky fashion. But that's being curmudgeonly...

The point is, this is a well above-average comic book film, and a big step up for Marvel Studios, better than any of the Spider-Man, Fantastic Four or X-Men films by a country mile.

In fact, I think Bryan Singer and Sam Raimi should be forced to watch Iron Man and then answer a series of "discussion questions" afterwards.

(1) Did you happen to notice that Iron Man was not so deathly serious as to erase out any possibility of fun or excitement? Explain.

(2) Why don't you hire more good, charismatic lead actors? Discuss.

I feel like most comic book films come from a somewhat defensive position, like they have to forcibly prove to us that they aren't just ridiculous adolescent entertainments, but real movies with genuine, important, dramatic stories to tell. I mean, Singer's Superman Returns is just a prime example of this, a film that should be a goofy good time that disappears completely up its own butthole.

Rather than just dive in and have fun with the immense creative and visual possibilities of a movie about an alien who gains superpowers from the Earth's Yellow Sun, Singer wastes 2.5 hours soap opera theatrics or metaphysical blather, turning Superman into some kind of elaborate Jesus allegory. He forgets that his primary mission is escapist entertainment, and only after he's ensured that his movie is watchable can he worry about artistic flourishes and thought-provoking nuance. It's like he feels bad for making a Superman movie, so he just tries to ignore that that's what he's doing..

Jon Favreau takes the opposite approach, and just tries to squeeze every last ounce of zany spectacle out of his premise as possible. He has no illusions about turning in a Best Picture nominee or a mood piece. It's fucking Iron Man, and he lets it be what it is, and it really works.



What we have here is a new twist on Iron Man's origin story. We meet billionaire engineering genius and CEO Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) as he's barreling through the Afghan desert with a consortium of U.S. soldiers in Humvees, returning home from a demonstration of his latest invention, the Jericho missile. Soon after, his caravan's attacked, a bomb deposits some shrapnel in his heart and he's taken captive by terrorists.

In the course of escaping captivity, Stark will invent an armored suit that prevents his heart from exploding, and is capable of wiping out a sortee of terrorists. Oh, and self-propelled flight. After Stark gets home, and begins to deal with the ramifications of his life's work, he decides to use his latest invention to destroy all the damage his weapons have caused humanity. This, of course, causes some conflict with his partners back at the weapons factory and his friends in the U.S. military.

You pretty much get the broad strokes from there. It's hardly a perfect movie. I think there's way too much time spent on close-ups of Stark's gadgets and inventions. A few shots of mechanical equipment busily moving around CGI gears and plates go a long way, and there's probably 10 minutes out of the entire movie just admiring shiny metal.

And, as I said, a subplot about Stark's budding romance with his dutiful but concerned personal assistant, Pepper Potts, never really comes together, and feels kind of stilted. I'm not sure it's Gwyneth Paltrow's fault necessarily that the relationship between Potts and Stark isn't more compelling, but she doesn't exactly light up the screen with her presence either.

But casting Robert Downey Jr., one of the most charismatic actors working today, was truly a masterstroke, and more than compensates for a lot of the movie's relatively minor flaws.

This will probably not go down as Downey's overall finest performance, but I'm willing to bet it will remain among his most beloved and memorable. He's perfect as Tony Stark, the exact right combination of eccentric genius, callous arrogance and self-effacing charm. And the movie's not so overloaded with plot or theatrics that he doesn't have time to just be funny cracking wise. The audience is totally 100% on his side from literally Minute One.

Jeff Bridges is also terrific as Obadiah Stane, Stark's business partner who wants Stark Enterprises to remain in the weapons business. Stane's a successful mogul, and couldn't really be less like Bridges' immortal character The Dude, but it's still kind of a Dude-like performance, laid back and sly and a bit more clever than he lets on. Even after the film gets really effects-heavy and overblown, Bridges continues to actually act rather than just chew the scenery.

Iron Man has some satisfyingly epic action moments, like every good comic book film requires, but I think what really brings everything together this time out are little details. Favreau's a funny guy and knows how to compose a funny sequence, and I actually think he gets more big laughs in here than a lot of mainstream Hollywood comedies. Plus, there's just a lot of great little touches - Stark listening to Suicidal Tendencies while working in his lab, the mechanical arm with a human personality, the unexpected interior of Stark's private jet.

Oh, and you absolutely must remain in your seat until after the credits. Iron Man has, hands down, the best secret post-credit sequence in movie history.

The Teasers

The special secret about the Mahalo VLOG Idol competition that's heating up several of the Internets is this...the teasers!



We're not just putting these together in an attempt to get you to watch our show! No! I mean, we are doing that.

But the teasers are really giving you Behind-the-Scenes insight into how the show was made. Think of them, if you will, like the Special Features on the DVD that is Mahalo VLOG Idol.

I really didn't intend for all of this footage to see the light of day...I realize I come off as something of a monster. But that, my friends, is the cost of perfection. Sometimes you have to break a few eggs. And by eggs, I mean Idol host Ryan Budke.

Mahalo VLOG Idol Starts...NOW!

Here it is, Day One of our search to find my Mahalo Daily co-host. This whole project has been an amazing amount of fun to put together and I'm really excited that we finally get to share it with you, the Mahalo Daily viewer at large:



The competition really starts to heat up tomorrow with the Cewebrity Panel auditions. Stay tuned...

Harrison Ford's Hilarious Insanity

I know celebrities feel empty inside and want to use their pointless and excessive notoriety to some positive end...but can they all just shut up about the goddamn stupid environment already? It's fucked, we're all gonna burn up and die, I get it. We all know it. I'm not denying the veracity of the claims.

[Just a side-note to Climate Change deniers here...You've picked probably the least sexy or dangerous form of "Denial."]

But we can't do anything about it because switching to fluorescent lights won't clean up that Texas-size clump of plastic in the middle of the ocean or force the Chinese to stop driving the cars they were only able to afford for the first time three months ago, and our government's owned by a bunch of corporate criminals who patently refuse to do anything about it. Pretty much regardless who wins in November. So just leave us alone and let us enjoy our last few decades in peace, alright? Go make an action movie and get out of my face.

Okay, so that's pretty much how I feel any more about celebrities and their precious little "let's all go green for just a day!" stuff. But Harrison Ford's patently ludicrous attempt to "raise awareness" or whatever is just too precious to ignore. I mean, seriously, H.F., how much pot would you say you're smoking...per day?

Harrison invited Access Hollywood along as he embarked on a personal project to promote going green. And just how did Harrison, who is the vice chair of the global environment group Conservation International, want to get his message across?

By waxing his chest, of course. In an effort to showcase the pain involved in deforestation, Harrison willingly subject himself to the painful process of stripping his chest of all its follicles.

Huh? Harrison seems to have missed the best thing about hurting plants...they don't feel shit! What does waxing his chest have to do with cutting down trees again? Is this just an excuse to get him to take his shirt off on camera? And to what end? The guy looks fucking ancient these days. I mean, hey, folks, I love Han Solo as much as the rest of you. He acts like he doesn't care, but he actually does. But I can think of no good reason for him to take his shirt off on camera. That's just some of my patented Straight Talk, folks, get used to it.



Yikes. It looks like a melting wax sculpture of Harrison Ford that someone's desperately trying to suture and mend.

I mean, if Harrison's deeply concerned with deforestation and wants to work tirelessly on behalf of tree frogs or cures for various diseases that never seem to pan out or delicious new varieties of Starbucks or whatever the hell they have where deforestation is a problem, that's totally his choice and I wish him all the best. If it keeps my pasty white ass alive for a few extra days, I'll be really thankful.

But, do me a favor, let's go ahead and remain fully clothed, Sport.

Idol Preview

The Mahalo Daily Team whipped up two fantastic videos today. The first is just a tiny taste of the "Mahalo Idol" juggernaut that awaits you all. I seriously CAN'T WAIT to get these episodes out there. We've all been having a really great time shooting the competition thus far, and I'm hoping that it's going to be compelling stuff in the somewhat hokey fashion of reality television. I can hardly handle the suspense, myself, and I already got the job.



Next up is the farewell tribute to Veronica Belmont, whose enormous, Krusty-the-Clown-reminiscent shoes I and my soon-to-be-cohost will be asked to fill. It's not an easy task, and not just because she's Queen of the Sexy Geeks and I look like an unholy hybrid of Artie Lange and Ron "The Hedgehog" Jeremy. She just had a great run as hostess, and pretty much defined what the Mahalo Daily is all about, as this video ably demonstrates:



I promise, non-Mahalo-themed posts to come! I'm super-serial!

Awwwwwwww yeah....

Really proud of today's Mahalo Daily, "I'm Gonna Git You Spamma." It's hotter than Norton and cooler than McAfee:

Want to Feel Really Old?

Remember when TV promos were actually like this?



I used to watch both of these shows...Young Me had really egregious taste in television.

HiPiHi新闻联播2期横空出"事"

It strikes me that the following may seem culturally insensitive. I'm not trying to say Chinese people or things are inherently alien or weird or exotic or anything. I'm a huge fan of the Chinese people. Their movies are awesome, they are pioneers in the arena of bootlegging cool shit so I can get it for free, their lead-filled toys have never injured me, personally. Best of all, they keep their delicious Americanized restaurants open on Christmas Eve, so I can hook up some spicy Cheng-Pi Beef even though the rest of the world has come to a dead stop, eagerly awaiting the arrival of an obese, gift-bearing hermit.

So, having made that possibly-more-offensive pre-apology, allow me to say this...The following commercial for the Chinese version of "Second Life" is the most insane, creepiest thing I have ever seen. I wonder...would an American commercial for our version of "Second Life" look this weird to a Chinese person?



It probably helps that I don't understand what anyone is saying, but still...this would be weird even if it were coherent.

After some opening titles featuring a globe with non-Earth-like continents, we cut to the inside of some kind of temple, where a man with a bear claw for an arm and a firecracker strapped to his back speaks with what I can only guess is a rabbit. Oh, and the rabbit has a plunger floating just above its head. And they might be hosting some kind of show, rather than speaking to one another. I can't tell.

The weirdest part about this sequence is that the dialogue sounds like it is extremely mundane. Like they're discussing Grain Futures or something. This is supposed to sell me on whatever the hell this thing is called? So far, it looks like a crack baby's nightmare.

Then we cut to virtual news footage from what looks like an event of some sort, though I can't imagine what it would be and there aren't any people around. There's a lot of weird close-ups of crowns. Is it a beauty pageant? Could anything sound more inane than an avatar beauty pageant? I'm thinking it's probably inversely proportional anyway - the uglier you are in real life, the hotter your alternate self. You meet the Second Life Evangeline Lilly, that's probably a 400-pound guy permanently melded to his computer chair.

Then, the news show's "host" stands in front of a freaky black room containing what looks like a large perfume bottle and...I don't know...some kind of sparkly white thing. Perhaps a portal between our world and this Realm of Mystery and Polygons.

Anyway, you get the idea. Second China is frightening. It's like if someone made an Inland Empire tie-in game or something. No thanks...

Cheap Netflix Bastards!

This tweet from Anthony T. informs me that Netflix plans to charge customers more to rent Blu-Ray discs rather than traditional DVD's. This is weaksauce.

On a conference call held earlier today, Netflix CEO Reed Hastings made mention that it planned on instituting a "modest monthly premium" to its normal subscription rate for folks who rented BDs. Of course, the move only makes perfect sense -- after all, the discs do cost more, and according to Mr. Hastings, "consumers are used to paying more for high-definition content."

Naturally, the move makes financial sense. Customers with Blu-Ray players/PS3's have already spent several hundred dollars for the privilege of watching films in high-definition. The vast majority of them will clearly throw Netflix a few extra bucks a month for movies that make the player worth owning. Considering that Blu-Ray discs, on average, cost around $5-$10 over the price of regular DVD's, Netflix has to make up this difference somehow to remain profitable.

It just sucks is all. Netflix remains a fantastic deal, for the most part, but I still somehow feel "nickel and dimed" by them all the time. I'm not sure if it's just a failure of PR or my being such a movie uber-nerd that I notice small differences in rental policies...but I feel like Netflix is constantly trying to get one over on me, and it's giving me a rash, man.

I've written before about their loathsome policies of punishing more frequent renters and just generally shitty customer service. (I've still never received any kind of response to my complaint about only receiving Disc 1 of Branagh's "Hamlet." They want me to use up a second rental, I guess, to see the full film.) Once again, I'm left feeling taken advantage of, as they begin charging me extra for the same movies they've been sending me for months now.

They need some genuine competition. (Oh, I know that Blockbuster has an online rental service, but I vowed long ago never to do business with that villainous corporation again, and yeah, I could "rent" movies online and then burn them on to a disc and watch them on my TV. Shut up.) I like Netflix's business...just not the shady way they run it.

Politiks Iz Hard

So they do this instead:

You don't need a Weatherman to know how much Charles Gibson blows

I've followed politics closely for only a decade, so I realize this statement doesn't necessarily carry all that much weight, but I think tonight's primary debate questions were the most insipid and ridiculous I have ever heard.

It's tempting to simply discuss the obvious anti-Obama bias on display from both moderators - but particularly former Bill Clinton staffer George Stephanopolous. (The guy used to work for Hillary's husband! Why would you hire him to moderate a debate between a Clinton and anyone else? It seems almost like an intentionally hostile move towards one candidate.)

But the unfairness towards one candidate is only a small part of the story. I think the bigger issue is that the entire first half of the debate was entirely without substance, just a series of useless queries about vapid Beltway gossip.

Question 1: Will you pick one another to be your running mates?

Who cares. We're trying to decide which one of them is going to win, not who's going to be fucking Vice-President. Get a calendar. Also, they've answered this question at previous debates.

Question 2 (Charles Gibson to Obama): Do you understand why some people in small Pennsylvania towns find your comments patronizing?

Gibson intentionally phrased this question as an attack on Obama. He didn't ask Obama to clarify the now-infamous "bitter" "cling to guns" comments (which I think most sensible people agree is just a poorly-phrased statement of truth). He didn't ask Hillary her reaction to what Obama said (which is the way a rational journalist would probably approach the subject). He asked Obama if he understood why some people find him patronizing. It assumes from the beginning that many people in small-town America were upset with Obama, which doesn't really seem to be indicated from his consistent poll numbers.

I mean, why start from this assumption, unless you simply want to carefully phrase a criticism of Obama. "You are patronizing. Tell me why."

Also, please note that this issue is about a statement he made at a private event that he has already explained and discussed for a week. It has nothing to do with anything.

Question 3: Clinton is asked about something she's rumored to have said to Bill Richardson on the phone.

Do I even need to get into this one? This does not sound like a real question at a political debate. This sounds like high school students hanging around the lockers. Who cares what Hillary said to Bill on the fucking phone!

Question 4: Charlie Gibson directly confronts Obama about an invitation he rescinded to Pastor Jeremiah Wright one year ago. Why did it take him a full year to officially distance himself from Wright's inflammatory rhetoric, Gibson demands to know!

Completely asinine. I couldn't believe what I was hearing with this. Gibson is taking up a large chunk of prime time television to bark at a candidate for president for not rebuking his pastor early enough. I mean, what? This kicked off a full 10 minute conversation about whether or not it's appropriate to stop going to your church if you and your minister disagree about politics.

As someone who does not attend church and doesn't really care what Obama's pastor thinks about stuff, this just couldn't have been a less important discussion for me. They might as well have spent 10 minutes comparing various brands of anti-dandruff shampoos.

"Well, I respect Barack's experience, obviously, but if he thinks Selsun Blue is going to be as effective in taking the fight to my scalp itch as the more reliably experienced Head and Shoulders, I would have no choice but to question his potential judgment as our Commander-in-Chief!"

Question 5: To Clinton: Should all of the members of Pastor Wright's church leave?

WHY?!? MAKE IT STOP!

Question 6: THIS IS A REAL QUESTION FROM THE DEBATE: "Senator Obama, does Reverend Wright love America as much as you do?"

What could our wizened panel of expert newsmen have possibly wanted in response to this query? Suggestive arm gestures?

"Well, Mr. Papadopolis, Pastor Wright loves America THIS MUCH, but I love America THIS MUCH."

It's just ludicrous beyond words. Can we all agree that we're all quite fond of America, that she's a swell gal and we're super-excited to take her to the box social, and just get on with the actual business of life in the 21st Century, please? I figured they'd have to follow up "who wuvves Amewica more" with either a commercial break or "How much do you love unicorns," but no, Gibson had other scuzzy DC backwaters to explore.

Question 7: Hey, Hillary, you lied about that Bosnia thing! How can we ever trust you again?

More silly meaningless pap. Yeah, Clinton almost certainly meant to "misspeak" about her trip to Bosnia, making it sound more dangerous than it was and thus make her seem more "experienced" and "heroic." But that's pretty much what politicians do; embellish. I'm not saying you wouldn't write an article on this if you were the first to figure it out, but taking time out of a debate to force a candidate to admit that she added some spice to an old anecdote to make it more of a crowd-pleaser is like spending an entire interview getting Michael Bay to admit he uses a lot of CGI.

"Yes, okay, I guess you could say that I don't need to always have shots in which impossibly-cumbersome objects are thrown from the back of speeding trucks onto sun-streaked freeways at rush hour, and yet I include these in my films constantly anyway. That would be a fair assessment."

Question 8: (ARE YOU NOTICING A TREND?): Does Obama think Hillary is honest and truthful?

More high school crap. I'm really not interested in what Obama thinks of Hillary at this point. He's spoken about his high opinion of her at length on several occasions, at pretty much every Democratic debate. If he had some interesting new spin on her honesty, I'm sure he'd find his way around to it. Why ask this? It's like they're just hoping he'll say something catty and they'll spar a bit and it'll make for 5 minutes of entertaining footage. In this way, the moderators of the ABC Debate and the producers of syndicated afternoon reality dating shows are identical.

Question 9: They play a fucking video of some insane old fart grilling Obama over not wearing an American flag pin on his lapel.

Ho-ly crap. I was live-blogging this debate, and that's probably a good thing, because it gave me a goal, a reason to go on living. ("Must finish the job.") If I were watching this at home alone, I may have just plunged into a dark Scandinavian despair from which I could never emerge. Such was my lack of faith in the human race upon hearing this question put to a candidate for President.

He didn't wear the right pin? What is he, pledging Beta Chi? IT'S A GODDAMN PIN. You know who's great with pieces of flair? George W. Bush. He'll put on the right costume for the occasion, no matter which member of the Village People you're looking for that day. Too bad playing dress-up is about all the man can do well. (Okay, okay, to be fair...he's a brush-clearing dynamo.)

I'll also add here another major criticism of Charles Gibson's behavior tonight...After this irretrievably stupid video question, Gibson interjected that he felt "this could be an issue in the general election." This was his little Fox News trick for covertly trashing a librul Commie. Pretend you're not directly attacking the candidate by claiming to "report attacks" made by vague external forces.

It's the Sean Hannity "some have said" trick. (And, just so you know, "some have said" that Hannity coached moderator and ex-Clintonista George Stephanopoulos for this very debate). Gibson's blaming hypothetical Republicans who exist months into the future of making a campaign issue AGAIN out of this stupid Obama-flag-pin piffle, when the only one doing anything of the sort is Charles Gibson. I know a lot of Americans are stupid, but are they really this stupid? To fall for rhetorical sleight-of-hand so forced and awkward, it would humiliate Tony Wonder?

(By the by, Hillary also employed the "Republicans will make this attack" trick several times tonight, and it just always seems completely insipid to me, completely transparent. They just think we're all idiots and that we don't get it. Next, they're going to tell us the debate's being held at Asphinctersayswhat Unviersity.)

Question 10: They ask Obama about his relationship with (oh man...) former Weatherman Bill Ayers.

This is so tired. Obama has already discussed this at length, he doesn't really know the guy that well and he hasn't received any kind of real endorsement from the guy. TOTAL NON-ISSUE. You don't need a Weatherman to know how much Charles Gibson blows.

Then they took a commercial break. This was 45 minutes of debate and there was not a single question with any real purpose or merit.

For clarity: I'm going to vote for whichever Democrat is the nominee in the fall, I'd prefer that Democrat to be Obama, and I'm not even particularly upset that he seemed to be the target of the moderators wrath tonight. These questions were just ridiculously inane and embarrassing for ABC.

As for the candidates themselves, I thought Obama seemed fairly off his game tonight, and probably had his worst-ever debate performance. I know I was fairly incensed by the time the Ayers stuff came up, just gobsmacked at how pointless every single issue had been for the entire first half of the night, and Obama by that point seemed tense from playing constant defense. He seemed almost vulnerable tonight, even in the slightly more sane, more policy-focused second half, which is not a good thing.

I don't think Clinton came off much better, but at this point, a tie for her is not bad. She's fighting uphill, so if she ties, it's really almost like gaining ground. It almost felt like watching a general election debate, with HilRod as the Republican. She didn't turn down a single opportunity to hit Obama, no matter how stupid or baseless.

At one point, she made this case: Republicans have spent so long picking her apart, they've already found out about all the horrible things she's done. Obama's fresh meat! Why not go with the scumbag you know?

I think you have to kind of question someone who thinks that way. So because most Americans have already been well-trained to loathe the very core of you, you're a better choice than the new guy they know relatively little about? Guh?

At another point, Clinton said she felt the Jeremiah Wright thing, that has been dissected on television daily for weeks now, needs "further investigation." Then she tried to lump Obama together with Louis Farrakhan. You stay classy, HilRod.

Beghe Ideas (Don't Get Any)

Wow, Scientology makes you freaking insane...



This guy's not even a Scientologist any more, and he's still not making any goddamn sense at all.

The last thing he says during this 2 minute-or-so, largely nonsensical anti-Scientology rant really struck me. He says that he has a unique perspective - he was in Scientology and now he's out. But isn't this true of most people? I'd have to guess that the majority of Scientologists were not raised Scientologists, but came to the "faith" later in life. All of these people have the experience of not being a Scientologist and then becoming one.

What the "ruggedly handsome" Jason Beghe says indicates that Scientologists essentially forget what their lives were like before joining the church. Brainwashing...it's fantastic...

The other part that's just...kind of incredible to me...is the thing about migraines. He was genuinely surprised to meet an "OT VIII" who had a migraine. It just hits home with me sometimes. People really believe this shit. They think that reading a lot of bullshit and giving the Church of Scientology money will give them Cosmic Anti-Migraine Powers. I mean...wow...

I will say this...I hope to begin working the phrase "where's the fucking clear?" into daily conversation.

Shel 'n Me

A puppet has implied I have a weight problem on camera. I can now die a happy man.

Intruder Alert! Intruder Alert!

This David Levy book just sounds wrong, wrong, wrong, 1,000 times wrong:

In this wide-ranging examination of the emotional and physical relations between humans and the inanimate objects of their desire, AI guru Levy (Robots Unlimited) first addresses the question of love with robots, and moves on to consider the mechanics of actually having sex with them. In order to put the reader at ease with the possibility of human-robot love, Levy compares the phenomenon to the ways in which humans fall in love with each other, their pets, and even their motorcycles. From there, Levy argues, it is a short emotional step to the affection people can be expected to display towards robots.

ABORT! ABORT!

Some readers may be turned off by Levy's fairly graphic descriptions of the mechanics of having sex with robots, and may wonder why Levy chose not to include recent research on the human genome that could one day lead to replacing human "parts," potentially making us more robot-like ourselves.

Honestly? Sex with robots? Does that sound attractive/non-creepy to anyone? If not, let's take a look at a review from the Washington Post.

"Love with robots will be as normal as love with other humans," Levy writes...

Sure it will be! Except for the whole "you're having sex with a machine" thing.

..."while the number of sexual acts and lovemaking positions commonly practiced between humans will be extended, as robots teach us more than is in all of the world's published sex manuals combined."

This horny nerd still realizes that humans will only be able to contort in so many ways, right? It's no good having an ultra-bendy porn robot if most humans can't do a Downward Facing Dog. (Also, Levy's something of an optimist if he thinks the future will be all about super-genius AI robots taking the time to consider sexual positions. Shouldn't we get them to work on all those existential threats to our existence coming down the road in the next few centuries before we get them going on Kama Sutra 2.0?)

Levy goes on to imagine a world of robot prostitutes, or "sexbots," which would offer people a chance to practice their technique before entering a human relationship. "With a robot prostitute," he writes, "the control of disease is implicit -- simply remove the active parts and put them in the disinfecting machine."

Perhaps Buffalo Bill wasn't really a serial killer at all? He was just a Man of the Future, ahead of his time in his desire to remove a lady's "active parts" after use. (Also, the notion that guys are visiting prostitutes to "practice their technique"? Hi-larious. As if most dudes even care if their technique is any good!)

Seriously, this Levy character comes off as a perverted clown here, but you've got to give him some respect for actually having the stones to write a book about how he wants to fuck robots. Most guys, they'd just keep this fantasy to themselves, maybe clear out the lint trap on their dryer and give it a try one wild night when the wife's visiting her sister in Poughkeepsie. But Levy's like, "Fuck that, I'm turning this sick, ludicrous fetish into a best-seller! Suck it!"

[Hat tip to Sadly, No!, which observes that Glenn Reynolds can't wait to get a copy of Levy's tome in the mail. I am incredibly surprised that this conservative schmendrick has a weird erotic obsession with robots!]

Batmanime

This forthcoming animated Batman anthology looks schweeeeeeet. That is all:

Clash of the Titans

Two giants of podcasting - the Shel Israel puppet and Jason Calacanis - together at last.

@Rules

WARNING: What follows will quite possibly be the nerdiest post in the history of Crushed by Inertia. You've been warned.

I did not realize Twitter had rules. Apparently, it does. Elaborate, unspoken rules governing conduct. What I'm saying is, I may have accidentally violated a Twitter rule. Even worse, I actually feel kind of bad about it. That's where I'm at right now, in my life...I'm actually concerned about my conduct on Twitter.

The whole thing started when my boss, @JasonCalacanis, encouraged his legion of followers (the "Jason Nation") to follow me. See, I feel like, if someone goes out of their way to follow me on Twitter, I should in turn follow them back.

This is not just common courtesy (although, if you asked me, it sort of is...what fun is a one-way conversation?) Twitter only makes sense if you follow lots of people, including some people you don't know.

When I first signed up, I only had a few friends. Most of them were in my office. It was dull. Not because we were boring. We just didn't need Twitter. We were all sitting right there.

Now that 1,000 people are following me, and I'm in turn following almost 1,000 people, my Twitter feed is actually kind of amazing. At the very least, it's functioning on different levels.

1. News feed

Twitter is just a collection of people commenting on whatever they are doing, reading, hearing or watching. Following 1,000 people means you're getting updates on several different current events at any given time. Twitter users, I've found, tend to read a lot as well as write, and I now discover 5-10 interesting articles or blog posts per day via strangers.

2. Social outlet

This one's kind of obvious. You can meet interesting strangers, network and get to know acquaintances better if you're just talking to people online all day.

3. Public art project

Now, now, hear me out. Just me writing little snippets about whatever I'm doing is meaningless. But 1,000 people doing it all day every day? Now that's fascinating. Browsing my Twitter feed on a random night is like reading an experimental novel (albeit one with a rather mundane writing style.) People, exhausted, flop down on hotel pillows as others get up, shower and head to work. Someone rants venomously against the cable company as another drinks "primo" at some place called "The Otter."

4. Perspective

I'm not saying that Twitter gives you an accurate, scientific sense of where people stand on anything. These 1,000 people I'm following are not evenly spread out around the world - current events in San Francisco get far more attention in my feed than those in, say, Burundi.

But there are people outside of Los Angeles, which is a start. I tend to forget, for example, that anyone remains a global warming skeptic. I haven't spoken to someone who honestly doesn't buy the whole "global warming" thing in a while. On Twitter, I read global warming skepticism constantly.

"Boy, it sure is cold today...Wish they'd send me some o' that global warming stuff."

And we all share a hearty laugh.

Anyway, I've really been enjoying reading my Twitter feed for all these reasons. And I'm not the only one.

However, I was told this evening (by more than one fellow Twitterer) that you're not supposed to follow that many people. That it's rude to follow people about whom you aren't deeply, sincerely interested. The reasoning goes like this: I'm following 1,000 people. I can't possibly read every tweet they write...Even if I had nothing else going on, the come in at a pretty steady clip. Therefore, I'm skipping all the incoming tweets, I won't be able to carry on a conversation and, thus, I'm abusing the system. (Or "spamming," to use their term.)

I'm not sure how widespread a rule this is. In fact, I'd always heard the opposite...that it's rude to not give people the benefit of a follow if they follow you, provided it appears that they actually contribute and don't just send out spam or random messages.

I'd say this rule keeps its adherents from getting the most out of Twitter. Also, I kind of disagree with this reasoning fundamentally. I mean, if I click "follow" on your Twitter page, am I really entering into an unspoken agreement to read everything you write? I frequently reply to random people on Twitter, and respond when people reply to me. It's not at all difficult to keep up conversations, really, provided it's a time I can actually devote some attention away from what I'm doing.

I'm not sure anyone has the expectation that I will copiously read all that they contribute...I certainly don't have that expectation of anyone. I get to what I can get to, and I just assume others are doing the same.

So, anyway, silly rule, I don't subscribe to it, if you follow me (@Lons), I'll most likely follow you back. I do have some Twitter suggestions, though...Not rules, but my own personal guidelines for Twitter conduct.

1. This one should be so obvious. If you're on the East Coast, don't blow what happens on popular shows on Twitter. Let me enjoy Chef Ramsay's put-downs the way they were meant to be enjoyed.

2. No more "Mmmm...[WHAT YOU'RE EATING]" posts. If you want to tell us what you're eating, at least say something more substantive than "mmm." Unless you were once a member of the Crash Test Dummies, and the tweet is meant ironically. (The exception to this would be if you are eating something interesting or exotic. "Mmm...antler soup" would be acceptable).

3. If you're going to set up some system to automatically post updates to Twitter, make sure it doesn't post too often. I don't need to know the status of your XBox Live account every three seconds, DnkeyPncher187, thanks all the same.

4. Don't send out random, aimless invitations. "Hey, anyone wanna go get some coffee?" This is like being the Twitter version of Michael Scott.

5. Don't bother posting a breaking news story if more than 2 hours has already passed. Yes, Charlton Heston died. We know. Very tragic.

Artie Lange Retires To Spend More Time With His Cupcakes, Heroin

Poor Baby Gorilla...After getting into a heated argument with his long-time assistant, the oddly-named "Teddy Microphone," it seems Artie Lange has quit his post at the Howard Stern Show. Too bad. I think he added a lot to the mix, actually, and am very sorry to see him go.

Here's how Mahalo described the incident, which I wasn't listening to because I lamely require at least 3-4 hours of sleep per night:

"While off the air Lange was having an argument with his assistant, "Teddy Microphone," regarding a financial disagreement. When Howard Stern asked that Teddy discuss the matter on the air, the argument escalated...The situation became physical, and the two had to be restrained. After Stern scolded Lange, he offered his resignation."



Apparently, he threatened Teddy's life at one point, and then told Stern "I'm not a good person ... I gotta leave ... I love you." At this point, Artie must just be immune to interventions, as I'm sure people have tried to help him before. But the whole thing seems like a cry for help. (Not to mention that tragic appearance on Donnie Deutsch a few weeks back that I blogged about here).

Some people are just too far gone, I guess...still, it's a shame. He's a really funny, likable guy.

Teeming Masses Reminiscent of a Cecil B. DeMille Crowd Scene

The coffee fans really turned out today for the launch of Starbucks' new house blend, the Pike's Place Roast. And as we are with all Earth-shattering events that happen in Santa Monica, California, Mahalo Daily was there:

Chartsengrafs

You ever just wake up with a song in your head that you haven't heard in a while? And then it makes you really want to listen to that song for the rest of the day? Isn't that weird?

Anyway, it happened to me today with Grandaddy's "Chartsengrafs," a great song from the Sophtware Slump LP that I haven't listened to once in probably 16 months. (I didn't even have that album in my iTunes. I had to track down the actual CD today.)



Ended up listening to the whole album. Really good for the most part, with some skippable, meandering tracks along the way. I still prefer Under the Western Freeway.