The narrator intones "it was very, very hot. Something had to be done." We see bucket after bucket of ice and bottles of Smirnoff Vodka. It's a dark, dark night, so the ice and bottles of vodka practically glow on the screen.
One car after another pulls up to a dark hillside which appears to make up part of the back yard of a very wealthy person ( I don't know what gives me this impression- there seems to be an aura of richness and privilege hanging over this entire commercial- maybe it's the glowing bottles of Smirnoffs.)
And what is the "something" that "had to be done" because it was so "very, very, hot?" We see a bunch of half-naked guys spread out yards of plastic sheeting, drench it with lawn sprinklers--- and then we see the presumably inebriated "adults" throwing themselves down the improvised Slip And Slide to the delight of presumably not-quite-as inebriated onlookers.
Sigh. I've got to give credit to the makers of this commercial for finally injecting a little Truth in Advertising: When it's hot, and you're bored, and you're drunk, the likelihood that you will do something really stupid and dangerous increases dramatically. I imagine that after a few glasses of vodka, hurling your body down a sheet of wet plastic is not the limit to what you'll be willing to attempt, especially if you are being egged on by friends. But I'd like to throw a little cold water on this whole situation by posting this line from the Wikipedia entry on Wham-O's Official Slip and Slide Toy:
"Both the manufacturer and the Consumer Product Safety Commission recommend that only children use the toy due to the risk of back and neck injuries when teenagers and adults use it. Injuries occur because people heavier or taller than children might stop suddenly when diving onto the toy. Between 1973 and 1991, seven adults and one teenager reported injuries suffered while using Slip 'N Slides including neck injuries and fractures, quadriplegia, and paraplegia.[1]"
So what the good people at Smirnoff who made this commercial are actually doing is encouraging adults to get drunk and do something that has been shown to cause major injuries to adults. Super. As if judgment isn't impaired enough when one has had a bit too much to drink, the manufacturer is now SUGGESTING dangerous activities to partake in upon consuming his product.
I'm looking forward to future commercials suggesting that the way to liven up that dull backyard barbecue is to dig into your banned toy stash and get everyone involved in a quick game of Jarts. Because really, the only thing more entertaining than watching your drunken friends suffer spinal cord fractures is watching their skulls getting pierced with heavy metal darts, right?
Sunday, June 14, 2009
Saturday, June 13, 2009
I suggest the Witness Protection Program- or at least, moving to a new neighborhood
I'm watching ESPN while on the treadmill a few nights ago when I see this scene play out in front of me-- a woman in bed hears a sound downstairs and flips on a light. She throws on a robe and goes into the hall- "honey? Is that you, are you home?" Teenaged daughter, having already come in from her date, pops out of her room- "no, mom, I'm home already...."
Suddenly the front door is smashed in, and a menacing-looking guy wearing a gray sweatsuit and a matching cap rushes in. Alarms blare, however, and he rushes off.
Mom is now on the phone- Security Alert guy says "are you all right?" Mom: "Somebody has tried to break in to our house!" Security Alert guy: "We are sending help right now."
We then get to hear about all the benefits of the Security Alert system being peddled in this ad (for one thing, it will set off loud alarms certain to frighten away gray-clad burgler/rapist/murderers) and how, for only a few dollars a month, you can protect yourself and your family from the marauding bands of thugs out there just waiting for you to close your eyes so they can bust down your door and kill you.
Literally moments later, I see another commercial: Mom and Dad are going out for the evening, leaving teenaged daughter alone. Seconds after they leave, teenaged daughter hears a noise outside. Oh, silly mom and dad forgot something. Teenaged daughter heads for the door, when suddenly she notices, staring at her from a side window-- GRAY-CLAD BAD MAN again!! A broken window, a blaring alarm, and a scream later, we are right back to learning about the Security Alert system.
Here's what really gets me, though: I'm pretty sure that in both instances, the SAME ACTORS ARE USED. Same mom. Same daughter. Same gray-clad maurader. Which means that if have been paying attention, and we accept the premise of the commercial that These Are Real People, this is a Realistic Situation, and This Could Happen to You, we have to buy in to the idea that the same family is constantly being terrorized by the same guy. And he keeps getting scared off by the Security Alert Alarm.
Two things: First, I walk by houses all the time with these "This House is Protected by ---" signs on them, and I assume that the purpose of the signs is to tell the population of gray-preferring maniacs out there to move on to the next house. Does this particular system not include the signs (or window stickers) letting the predators that This House is Protected?
Second, can't the nice people at Security Alert find some new actors? It's kind of depressing seeing the same people narrowly avoid attack again and again. I'd also start to think that the Scary Door-and-Window-breaking man is someone I know, and it's only a matter of time before he gets me while I'm getting out of my car, or walking my dog, or am otherwise outside my Security Alert cocoon of protection.
At the very least, I'd move.
Suddenly the front door is smashed in, and a menacing-looking guy wearing a gray sweatsuit and a matching cap rushes in. Alarms blare, however, and he rushes off.
Mom is now on the phone- Security Alert guy says "are you all right?" Mom: "Somebody has tried to break in to our house!" Security Alert guy: "We are sending help right now."
We then get to hear about all the benefits of the Security Alert system being peddled in this ad (for one thing, it will set off loud alarms certain to frighten away gray-clad burgler/rapist/murderers) and how, for only a few dollars a month, you can protect yourself and your family from the marauding bands of thugs out there just waiting for you to close your eyes so they can bust down your door and kill you.
Literally moments later, I see another commercial: Mom and Dad are going out for the evening, leaving teenaged daughter alone. Seconds after they leave, teenaged daughter hears a noise outside. Oh, silly mom and dad forgot something. Teenaged daughter heads for the door, when suddenly she notices, staring at her from a side window-- GRAY-CLAD BAD MAN again!! A broken window, a blaring alarm, and a scream later, we are right back to learning about the Security Alert system.
Here's what really gets me, though: I'm pretty sure that in both instances, the SAME ACTORS ARE USED. Same mom. Same daughter. Same gray-clad maurader. Which means that if have been paying attention, and we accept the premise of the commercial that These Are Real People, this is a Realistic Situation, and This Could Happen to You, we have to buy in to the idea that the same family is constantly being terrorized by the same guy. And he keeps getting scared off by the Security Alert Alarm.
Two things: First, I walk by houses all the time with these "This House is Protected by ---" signs on them, and I assume that the purpose of the signs is to tell the population of gray-preferring maniacs out there to move on to the next house. Does this particular system not include the signs (or window stickers) letting the predators that This House is Protected?
Second, can't the nice people at Security Alert find some new actors? It's kind of depressing seeing the same people narrowly avoid attack again and again. I'd also start to think that the Scary Door-and-Window-breaking man is someone I know, and it's only a matter of time before he gets me while I'm getting out of my car, or walking my dog, or am otherwise outside my Security Alert cocoon of protection.
At the very least, I'd move.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Not Smart- or Funny
Two grown men are hanging out at the zoo together (look, it's a commercial. It's not supposed to make much sense.) One guy holds up a camera and tells the other that he should jump into the bear's den because "I want to get a picture."
The second guy is skeptical- gee, isn't jumping into a fenced area containing an untamed animal with claws and sharp teeth dangerous? "Nah" is "friend" reassures him, "it's winter. Bears hibernate."
Oh ok then, no problem! Moron boy proceeds to jump over the fence. Freeze-frame, and the words "Not Smart" appear on the screen.
Then the scene switches to CarMax, and the guy who was jumping into the bear's den is now jumping into the back of a truck. Ah, get it? This IS smart- buying a truck at CarMax! And the other friend, who apparently has a camera surgically attached to his hand, takes a picture of him jumping in. Brilliant.
So the message is "don't commit suicide by jumping into a bear's den, even if your retarded friend says its ok. DO buy a truck at CarMax, because you'll get a good deal." Seriously. Is this the best you can do, CarMax? I find it hard to believe that a guy dumb enough to jump over a fence at the zoo holds down a job that pays enough money to buy a truck. Or dumb enough to stay friends with a guy who thought it would be fun to get a picture of him being mauled by a non-hibernating bear. But that's just me.
The second guy is skeptical- gee, isn't jumping into a fenced area containing an untamed animal with claws and sharp teeth dangerous? "Nah" is "friend" reassures him, "it's winter. Bears hibernate."
Oh ok then, no problem! Moron boy proceeds to jump over the fence. Freeze-frame, and the words "Not Smart" appear on the screen.
Then the scene switches to CarMax, and the guy who was jumping into the bear's den is now jumping into the back of a truck. Ah, get it? This IS smart- buying a truck at CarMax! And the other friend, who apparently has a camera surgically attached to his hand, takes a picture of him jumping in. Brilliant.
So the message is "don't commit suicide by jumping into a bear's den, even if your retarded friend says its ok. DO buy a truck at CarMax, because you'll get a good deal." Seriously. Is this the best you can do, CarMax? I find it hard to believe that a guy dumb enough to jump over a fence at the zoo holds down a job that pays enough money to buy a truck. Or dumb enough to stay friends with a guy who thought it would be fun to get a picture of him being mauled by a non-hibernating bear. But that's just me.
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Too Much Time on my Hands
It's occurred to me that at some point, Geico will stop throwing mascots at us and finally settle on just one. I just don't think that the American Attention Span will sustain multiple spokespersons/digital images/etc. and that someone over at Corporate will put his career on the line and give the axe to one of the Geico mouthpieces. But which will survive?
Let's take a look at the contenders and handicap their chances:
1) The Geico Gecko. This one first appeared in 2000 asking people to please, PLEASE stop calling and asking him about how to get a great deal on auto insurance, because he's a GECKO, and the insurance company we are apparently trying to reach is called GEICO. Later, the digital lizard "interviewed" for the job of Geico spokesman, and the rest is history (well, not really. You know what I mean.) Over the last several years, the Gecko-as-Spokesperson has been carried....well, not very far, actually. Today's Gecko Commercials look a LOT like the ones that were being made eight years ago. We haven't been introduced to other digital animals that are acquainted with the Gecko, we haven't met the Gecko's family....for which we should be eternally grateful.
2) The Geico Cavemen. Grooooaaaan. Look, the first commercial, with a caveman coming out of nowhere to protest the "Even a Caveman can do it" line, was cute. The follow-up with the Geico spokesman taking two angry cavemen out to dinner as an apology was good, too. The Caveman discussing his issues with a Therepist was just plain funny. But Geico, having hit on a decent gag, decided to do what companies generally do to decent ideas- beat it to death, ressurect it, and then beat it to death again. Cavemen arguing over the propriety of working for Geico. Caveman attending dinner parties. Cavemen bowling, walking through airports, getting caught by the Fan of the Game camera at NBA games. Christ, ABC even had the brilliant idea of trying to create a sitcom based on these fricking commercials in the fall of 2007. It lasted about ten minutes. (When you try to make a tv show based on a commercial, you've run out of ideas. Especially when it's based on a commercial puttering along on a joke that's as stale as last year's donuts.)
In short, look for the Geico Cavemen in the dictionary under the word Played. As in, enough already. As in, let it go.
3) The stack of money with googly eyes. This is a triumph of minimalism which puts "Five Dollar Foot-Longs" to shame. People oddly startled by the sight of a stack of bills wrapped in rubber bands and decorated with googly eyes. Except for the fact that the meaning has to be explained in each commercial, and that we have to endure a remix of bland 80s hit Somebody's Watching Me, there's not much to complain about with this one. Simple, and to the point. No "adorable" lizard with Australian accent, no need to come up with story lines involving sensitive cavemen.
My guess is that when it comes time to cut overhead, the Googly-eyed stack of bills survives. After all, the production costs must be close to zero- no actors to demand more money if and when the commercials become more popular, and I doubt that Rockwell is gouging the company for the use of it's 1984 hit. No need for Kelsey Grammer or anyone else to provide voice work. And best of all, it's hard to see a tv network trying to build a sitcom around the adventures of a bundle of cash with eyes.
Memo to networks: that is NOT a dare.
Let's take a look at the contenders and handicap their chances:
1) The Geico Gecko. This one first appeared in 2000 asking people to please, PLEASE stop calling and asking him about how to get a great deal on auto insurance, because he's a GECKO, and the insurance company we are apparently trying to reach is called GEICO. Later, the digital lizard "interviewed" for the job of Geico spokesman, and the rest is history (well, not really. You know what I mean.) Over the last several years, the Gecko-as-Spokesperson has been carried....well, not very far, actually. Today's Gecko Commercials look a LOT like the ones that were being made eight years ago. We haven't been introduced to other digital animals that are acquainted with the Gecko, we haven't met the Gecko's family....for which we should be eternally grateful.
2) The Geico Cavemen. Grooooaaaan. Look, the first commercial, with a caveman coming out of nowhere to protest the "Even a Caveman can do it" line, was cute. The follow-up with the Geico spokesman taking two angry cavemen out to dinner as an apology was good, too. The Caveman discussing his issues with a Therepist was just plain funny. But Geico, having hit on a decent gag, decided to do what companies generally do to decent ideas- beat it to death, ressurect it, and then beat it to death again. Cavemen arguing over the propriety of working for Geico. Caveman attending dinner parties. Cavemen bowling, walking through airports, getting caught by the Fan of the Game camera at NBA games. Christ, ABC even had the brilliant idea of trying to create a sitcom based on these fricking commercials in the fall of 2007. It lasted about ten minutes. (When you try to make a tv show based on a commercial, you've run out of ideas. Especially when it's based on a commercial puttering along on a joke that's as stale as last year's donuts.)
In short, look for the Geico Cavemen in the dictionary under the word Played. As in, enough already. As in, let it go.
3) The stack of money with googly eyes. This is a triumph of minimalism which puts "Five Dollar Foot-Longs" to shame. People oddly startled by the sight of a stack of bills wrapped in rubber bands and decorated with googly eyes. Except for the fact that the meaning has to be explained in each commercial, and that we have to endure a remix of bland 80s hit Somebody's Watching Me, there's not much to complain about with this one. Simple, and to the point. No "adorable" lizard with Australian accent, no need to come up with story lines involving sensitive cavemen.
My guess is that when it comes time to cut overhead, the Googly-eyed stack of bills survives. After all, the production costs must be close to zero- no actors to demand more money if and when the commercials become more popular, and I doubt that Rockwell is gouging the company for the use of it's 1984 hit. No need for Kelsey Grammer or anyone else to provide voice work. And best of all, it's hard to see a tv network trying to build a sitcom around the adventures of a bundle of cash with eyes.
Memo to networks: that is NOT a dare.
Monday, June 1, 2009
Thom Hartmann is Shameless
First, let me make very clear that I like Thom Hartmann's radio show on Air America. Hartmann is an intelligent, thoughtful liberal with a lot to say about the state of our political system, foreign policy, and economy. Generally, I find him to be a very honest, sincere spokesperson for progressive causes.
Here's my problem with Hartmann: Like so many other radio hosts across the political spectrum, he's decided to use his good name to sell a service called "Goldline International." Goldline International is a network of gold brokers who are in the business of convincing people that the American dollar is on it's way out and the only way to protect personal wealth is through the purchase of "rare" gold coins.
And that, by itself, is fine. Radio shows cost money, which means they need advertisement revenue. Hartmann's not the only host to peddle Goldline- Randi Rhodes, Bill Press, and Ed Schultz do it too. And it's not just liberal hosts- I've heard Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham warn their listeners that if they are relying on paper wealth to provide for a stable financial future, they are setting themselves up for disaster when the economy inevitably tanks.
But here's where Hartmann crosses the line-- I'm listening to a rebroadcast of his show on Sunday afternoon. Hartmann is discussing the economy in very general terms, when he "just happens" to mention that economic indicators point to a rise in inflation coming, possibly by the end of the year. "We can see prices already starting to rise, and that explains the spikes in gold prices over the last year." After making a few more points, Hartmann goes to commercial---- and the VERY FIRST COMMERCIAL that comes on is- you guessed it- Tom Hartmann pitching "rare gold coins" from Goldline International "as a hedge against Inflation."
Come on, there's got to be a line here that's been crossed. Hartmann educates his listeners on the issues of Global Warming, the Health Care crisis, etc. His weekly interviews with Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont ("Brunch with Bernie") are not to be missed. But Hartmann cheapens his profession and brings everything he says into question when he uses a general discussion of the economy to provide a subliminal plug for one of his advertisers. Makes me wonder if Goldline is paying extra for this kind of advertising- or Hartmann has a financial stake in the company. Either way, it's dishonest and dirty.
We expect more of you, Mr. Hartmann. A lot more.
Here's my problem with Hartmann: Like so many other radio hosts across the political spectrum, he's decided to use his good name to sell a service called "Goldline International." Goldline International is a network of gold brokers who are in the business of convincing people that the American dollar is on it's way out and the only way to protect personal wealth is through the purchase of "rare" gold coins.
And that, by itself, is fine. Radio shows cost money, which means they need advertisement revenue. Hartmann's not the only host to peddle Goldline- Randi Rhodes, Bill Press, and Ed Schultz do it too. And it's not just liberal hosts- I've heard Sean Hannity and Laura Ingraham warn their listeners that if they are relying on paper wealth to provide for a stable financial future, they are setting themselves up for disaster when the economy inevitably tanks.
But here's where Hartmann crosses the line-- I'm listening to a rebroadcast of his show on Sunday afternoon. Hartmann is discussing the economy in very general terms, when he "just happens" to mention that economic indicators point to a rise in inflation coming, possibly by the end of the year. "We can see prices already starting to rise, and that explains the spikes in gold prices over the last year." After making a few more points, Hartmann goes to commercial---- and the VERY FIRST COMMERCIAL that comes on is- you guessed it- Tom Hartmann pitching "rare gold coins" from Goldline International "as a hedge against Inflation."
Come on, there's got to be a line here that's been crossed. Hartmann educates his listeners on the issues of Global Warming, the Health Care crisis, etc. His weekly interviews with Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont ("Brunch with Bernie") are not to be missed. But Hartmann cheapens his profession and brings everything he says into question when he uses a general discussion of the economy to provide a subliminal plug for one of his advertisers. Makes me wonder if Goldline is paying extra for this kind of advertising- or Hartmann has a financial stake in the company. Either way, it's dishonest and dirty.
We expect more of you, Mr. Hartmann. A lot more.
Saturday, May 30, 2009
Debt-Free Stimulus- Don't Call until you are both Desperate AND Stupid
"Do you have more than $10,000 in Credit Card Debt? Wouldn't you like to get out from under the stress of the outrageous payments? Well, now you can get the fresh start that you deserve!"
Yay! But wait...I don't have $10,000 in Credit Card Debt-- yet, I consider the payments I'm expected to make on purchases I've made in the past "outrageous," so can this company, "Debt Free Stimulus," help me out?
Turns out that the answer is "no"- "You must have AT LEAST $10,000 in Credit Card debt to qualify."
No problem, I say. I'm heading out to Sears to buy clothes and sneakers and big-screen tvs I don't need and can't afford. That will put me over the minimum needed to qualify for what Debt-Free Stimulus calls a "Bailout" ("The Government is bailing out the banks, now it's your turn!") It sounds so official! I've been hearing about all this bailout stuff, it was only a matter of time before I was offered my own, personal bailout, right? Right?
But wait, there's a caveat- "if you are now working, and can afford to make monthly payments, you may qualify for one of our Debt-Free Stimulus Programs...." Darn it, always a catch!! If I was working, and could afford to make monthly payments, I wouldn't NEED a bailout!! I would just send those monthly payments to my CREDITORS! And I wouldn't jack my debt up to above $10,000 before doing it!
Here's the bottom line with Debt-Free Stimulus: They don't want your business unless you are 1) Desperate, and 2) Have a Bank Account available to be drained. . If you owe, say, $5000 to American Express and just don't WANT to pay the $50 minimum monthly because gosh, that's annoying, Debt-Free Stimulus is not for you. If you don't have a job that allows you to put money into a drainable bank account, you aren't an attractive candidate for Debt-Free Stimulus's "services," either. When the spokesperson says "the fresh start that you deserve," she's not referring to YOU, specifically. And there's the door.
One final complaint- "Debt-Free Stimulus?" "The Government is bailing out the banks, now it's your turn?" I call False Advertising here- sounds for all the world like this is a Government-sponsored program passed by Congress. And there's another program called "Tax Debt Bailout" ("get out from under your tax debt!") just in case "Debt-Free Stimulus" is too complicated for some listeners. I'd bet anything that they are the same company. Scumbags.
Yay! But wait...I don't have $10,000 in Credit Card Debt-- yet, I consider the payments I'm expected to make on purchases I've made in the past "outrageous," so can this company, "Debt Free Stimulus," help me out?
Turns out that the answer is "no"- "You must have AT LEAST $10,000 in Credit Card debt to qualify."
No problem, I say. I'm heading out to Sears to buy clothes and sneakers and big-screen tvs I don't need and can't afford. That will put me over the minimum needed to qualify for what Debt-Free Stimulus calls a "Bailout" ("The Government is bailing out the banks, now it's your turn!") It sounds so official! I've been hearing about all this bailout stuff, it was only a matter of time before I was offered my own, personal bailout, right? Right?
But wait, there's a caveat- "if you are now working, and can afford to make monthly payments, you may qualify for one of our Debt-Free Stimulus Programs...." Darn it, always a catch!! If I was working, and could afford to make monthly payments, I wouldn't NEED a bailout!! I would just send those monthly payments to my CREDITORS! And I wouldn't jack my debt up to above $10,000 before doing it!
Here's the bottom line with Debt-Free Stimulus: They don't want your business unless you are 1) Desperate, and 2) Have a Bank Account available to be drained. . If you owe, say, $5000 to American Express and just don't WANT to pay the $50 minimum monthly because gosh, that's annoying, Debt-Free Stimulus is not for you. If you don't have a job that allows you to put money into a drainable bank account, you aren't an attractive candidate for Debt-Free Stimulus's "services," either. When the spokesperson says "the fresh start that you deserve," she's not referring to YOU, specifically. And there's the door.
One final complaint- "Debt-Free Stimulus?" "The Government is bailing out the banks, now it's your turn?" I call False Advertising here- sounds for all the world like this is a Government-sponsored program passed by Congress. And there's another program called "Tax Debt Bailout" ("get out from under your tax debt!") just in case "Debt-Free Stimulus" is too complicated for some listeners. I'd bet anything that they are the same company. Scumbags.
Wednesday, May 27, 2009
When the Cure is worse than the Disease
In a darkened room, a little girl lays on a couch, watching television. Suddenly we are treated to a Poltergeist flashback, as the girl is enveloped by a weird static band of light projected from the television. As if caught in a tractor beam, the little girl is lifted from the couch and gradually pulled toward the television set- joined by her little brother, who before becoming transfixed by the jumping images on the tv seemed to be sitting at a desk engaged in (gasp) some kind of creative activity, and the family dog.
Now all three are caught in their own beams of light, hovering in front of the television, moving closer....and then suddenly the spell is broken by a doughy adult I must take as The Dad, who opens up the door and calls out "hey guys, I got Dunkin Donuts!"
We hear the sound of bodies crashing to the floor, then kids rushing into the kitchen as Dad- joined by Mom, opens up the box of donuts- twelve of them, no two alike. Dad's also brought two huge cups of coffee, I assume just for himself and Mom, because of course coffee is for adults only. Greasy rings of fried dough slathered in icing is fine for children, but caffeine? Not 'till you are at least sixteen, kids.
A few notes- the tv room is very dark, but when the scene shifts to the kitchen, we can see it's daytime, with bright sunlight pouring in. So these kids were spending a beautiful, sunny day sitting in a dark room until dad came in with the Cholesterol Delivery Systems. And what's with the twelve different donuts? Are there eight other people yet to arrive for the blood-sugar spiking, death-hastening snack? Do the people in this family prefer one type of donut for the afternoon break, and another type for their before-bedtime snack? Or did Dad go to Dunkin Donuts without Clue One as to what type of donuts his family prefers, and so decided to go with a random assortment?
Finally- it's nice that Dad got the kids away from the darkened room and the Evil TV. It's kind of depressing that he did it with a bribe of donuts. Maybe the television was turning their brains to mush, but is a five-minute, 500-calorie break the best Mom and Dad could come up with? Once the last empty calorie has been consumed, aren't these kids going to go right back into hibernation in front of the television?
Here's an idea for next time- go into that room and turn the damn idiot box off. Take your kids to the park. You can drink your coffee as you walk. Your kids will get some sun and some exercise, and they won't grow up equating fun with shoving balls of greasy frosting down their cake holes. Just a thought.
Now all three are caught in their own beams of light, hovering in front of the television, moving closer....and then suddenly the spell is broken by a doughy adult I must take as The Dad, who opens up the door and calls out "hey guys, I got Dunkin Donuts!"
We hear the sound of bodies crashing to the floor, then kids rushing into the kitchen as Dad- joined by Mom, opens up the box of donuts- twelve of them, no two alike. Dad's also brought two huge cups of coffee, I assume just for himself and Mom, because of course coffee is for adults only. Greasy rings of fried dough slathered in icing is fine for children, but caffeine? Not 'till you are at least sixteen, kids.
A few notes- the tv room is very dark, but when the scene shifts to the kitchen, we can see it's daytime, with bright sunlight pouring in. So these kids were spending a beautiful, sunny day sitting in a dark room until dad came in with the Cholesterol Delivery Systems. And what's with the twelve different donuts? Are there eight other people yet to arrive for the blood-sugar spiking, death-hastening snack? Do the people in this family prefer one type of donut for the afternoon break, and another type for their before-bedtime snack? Or did Dad go to Dunkin Donuts without Clue One as to what type of donuts his family prefers, and so decided to go with a random assortment?
Finally- it's nice that Dad got the kids away from the darkened room and the Evil TV. It's kind of depressing that he did it with a bribe of donuts. Maybe the television was turning their brains to mush, but is a five-minute, 500-calorie break the best Mom and Dad could come up with? Once the last empty calorie has been consumed, aren't these kids going to go right back into hibernation in front of the television?
Here's an idea for next time- go into that room and turn the damn idiot box off. Take your kids to the park. You can drink your coffee as you walk. Your kids will get some sun and some exercise, and they won't grow up equating fun with shoving balls of greasy frosting down their cake holes. Just a thought.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)