Spray Perfect- another Made for TV Gem!

Well darn, I was JUST about to order this AMAZING new product (just for my toes, of course- in my line of work, it might be dangerous to my paycheck to use it on my fingernails) when I scrolled down the comments and realized that the makers of this ad are engaged in a rather blatant form of Lying By Omission.  It turns out that the reason why the spray-on polish "magically" sticks to your nails and not to your fingers is because you have to apply a "base coat" to your nails first- oh, and you do that AFTER washing your hands very carefully to remove any trace of oils which might prevent the spray from sticking to those nails.

So when push comes to shove, spraying probably doesn't take any less time than applying polish the old fashioned way.  I guess you're supposed to find this out after you've purchased it and the makers of this junk have your money already.

I still might consider buying this- not for me, but for my students, if I find that the spray does not produce the same migraine-triggering stench that comes whenever one of the girls in my classes pops open a bottle of polish or polish remover.  I mean, I'd rather explain to the building manager why the desks are covered with spray paint than explain to the police why I had to throw that kid out the window for "forgetting" that Mr. Jamele can't deal with the smell of toxic chemicals, not to mention that Room 133 is AP History, not a freaking Nail Salon.....

Verizon's "never explore on your own ever" crusade against humanity continues...

...or you could actually carry on a conversation, play cards, read books... you know, like non-lunatics did before it was possible to lose oneself in a phone or (ugh, someone kill me now) 3-D glasses which let you "see" what you're going to see before you get there...gag....

Hey, you know what else lets you see things in 3D?  Your EYES.  High-Def, too.  No, really.

Never mind.  Just put these things on and descend further into that isolating electronic cocoon you've allowed technology to build for you.  Sad, sad people.

23andMe: The Ultimate Selfie

Or maybe it's just the Ultimate in self-absorbed, money-burning-a-hole-in-your-pocket naval gazing self-absorption?

There's a radio commercial on XM/Sirius for this company that basically screams "look how f--ing insane this product will make you, you bored jackwagons!" It features a couple on what seems to be their first date.  The guy tries to make small talk but his attempts at being friendly are constantly foiled by his date's obsession with her new 23andme report.  He offers her a coffee, and she declines, telling him that her 23andme report says she's more likely to be addicted to coffee.  He suggests a movie, and she replies that its a good idea because her 23andme report says she's more likely to be a night person.  When she says she has to run, she adds "and I CAN run, because my 23andme report says I am likely to be a good sprinter!"

Her date responds politely, which suggests to me that she's probably really, really hot, but I can't tell for sure because after all it's a radio commercial.  If he were me, I'd respond by telling her goodbye and tossing her phone number in the nearest garbage can, because looks aren't everything and I've dated more than my share of lunatics in the past.

As far as I'm concerned, 23andme (and Ancestry.com and all the other Find Out Who You Are By Ignoring Your Actual Life "services") are just symptoms of the cocoon-society we find ourselves in. If you want to "know who you are" these days, you don't take classes or volunteer or write or do anything to discover and unleash hidden talents.  You just send a few drops of your spit to a laboratory or pay some internet company to tell you where your great-grandparents were doing a hundred years before you were born.  You don't build anything yourself- you just take credit for what some distant ancestor did in another country because after all, that guy passed his genetic material on through your family so....um, well, that's about it, actually.  And you don't take responsibility for anything you do, you just find some chemical excuse for it- "I'm addicted to coffee because that runs in my family."  Oh, and you totally toss out the concept of Free Will along with your individualism- "I'm just a bag of germs mixed with DNA strands made up of people who came before- whatever I do is pretermined by that DNA."

This sounds good to some people- mainly those who are so bored and directionless and afraid of life that they need a security blanket and a map and big shove to get them through each day.  I thought that was what established religion was for?  Or are 23andme and Ancestry.com just the new religion?  The Church of Me, anyone?

Verizon's idea of "Balance...."

One of the world's most successful drug dealers has noticed that some people are starting to spend all of their waking hours partaking of the drug being sold to them.  So that very successful drug dealer, having spent millions of dollars in commercials convincing its customers that they should never, ever stop using the drug and should not ever let anything else interfer with the use of that drug, decides to create a series of advertisements designed to convince the junkies that the drug dealer is really concerned that the drug has become a little too important and wants to offer a compromise.

Let's say your kid really wants you to be at his birthday party.  But you'd rather be taking your drug.  No problem- just physically be at the birthday party while mentally devoting all of your energy to the drug.  The kids won't mind- they'll look up and see you every once in a while, standing there with a big stupid look on your face, and they might even be able to convince themselves that those smiles are for them and not a consequence of your ability to feed your addiction while "attending" the party.

 It might add a little to the deceit if you could bring yourself to look up every once in a while, but hey, baby steps.

So here's how you balance "life" with "television:"  Go through the motions of being engaged in life, and just keep watching television, you drooling zombies.  Any other questions?  Ask Google.

Questions for the writers of this Even Dumber than Usual AT&T ad....

1.  Why is Lily just staring at this guy as he walks out of the store?  Her job with him is done.  There are other customers in the store waiting for service.  I know- I've been to AT&T stores, and I've never once seen a situation where a customer service rep is just waiting around to help someone.  It's always wall to wall customers and when you're done with one, you start with another.  But in these ads, Lily is always shown just shooting the breeze with the customers as if they are the only people in the store.  And other than nameless, faceless non-Lily employees, they usually are.

2.  At least the jackass walking out of the store doesn't do that "whaaaaaaaat?" sound out loud.  Man, is that played.  It's beyond stupid, it's "Cray Cray" stupid.  I really hate the 21st century, but it would be slightly less loathsome if we could ditch this brain-dead shorthand for language.  Why does that have to be included in this ad?  Because you hate me personally?

3.  This guy is really so infatuated with the "deal" he got (available to everyone, and certain to make AT&T a nice profit otherwise it would not be offered, moron) that he actually has to remind himself to stay calm until he gets out of the store, as if he's an f--ing shoplifter or something?  I can only guess this this is your image of the fantasy customer, completely euphoric over the latest "deal," convinced that he's put something over on AT&T by "negotiating" it, so giddy with the new toy he'll regard as an antique six months from now that he can't keep himself from walking into the freaking door?  Really?

4.  Why do you hate us so much?  Other than line up hours before the store opens to buy your latest gadget, what did we ever do to you?

Point of Personal Privilege: The latest "Star Wars" Movie.....

First, a message to those who don't know me that well: I am a huge fan of the original Star Wars films.  And by "original" I mean the versions that were released over the six year period 1977-1983.  Those are the ones I went to see in the theater multiple times each, the ones I first owned on VHS, and the only ones I really acknowledge as "Star Wars" films.  I don't really mind the "Special Editions," otherwise known as "George Lucas getting bored and going back to 'fix' things that weren't broken," except when they actually change the original story (Han didn't just fire first- he was the only one who fired.  He killed Greedo in cold blood.  Period.)  I skip over the "Han confronts Jabba" scene added to the original because it's not necessary and stupid and it didn't appear in the version I saw in the theater in 1977.  But I'm starting on an old rant, and that's not the point of today's blog post.

The prequels were just garbage, and better forgotten.  However, I do have to mention them today in reference to the film I saw last night:  Rogue One:  A Star Wars Story.

Here's what I have to say about Rogue One:  It was reasonably well-acted, the special effects were not overwhelming, and unlike the prequels and Episode VII it was not an  over-the-top bastardizations of the original series.  There were nods to the original film but they were subtle, not insulting, and they reminded me of my childhood rather than attempt to rob it like Episodes I-III and VII did.  The CGI was toned down and the characters were more in focus than in any Star Wars film since the originals (the most remarkable CGI was not used to create the battle scenes, which were obviously but not obnoxiously an homage to the final battle in Return of the Jedi, but in the recreation of the Peter Cushing and Carrie Fisher characters, which were not insulting or overbearing, but welcome and seemed natural.)   I don't know if I want to see Rogue One again, but I know I didn't leave the theater disgusted and angry like I've pretty much gotten used to since 1999.  I felt like I had watched a film made by people who really cared about the Star Wars legacy and were not JUST looking to squeeze another billion dollars out of the concept.

In fact, I'd say that an appropriate working title for the film might have been Rogue One:  A Missed Opportunity, because this film would have served as a far superior alternative to the putrid mess dished out to us as Episode III back in 2005.  It takes us right up to the minute the original Star Wars films start, which brings me to my only real quibble with a film I thoroughly enjoyed (I have to do some complaining, right? Well, here it is:)

Just before the end of the film, we see Darth Vader enter the rebel ship and effortlessly deflect the blasts of a dozen or more lazers with his light saber.  He basically single-handedly invades the ship and wipes out the defenders.  But in the original Star Wars which picks up minutes or maybe hours later, Stormtroopers have to fight their way into the rebel ship, losing a significant number of their own before overpowering the rebels, and only then does Vader enter.  If Vader was capable of wiping out the rebel defenses and capturing the ship without sacrificing stormtroopers, why didn't he just do that the second time around?  I can only guess the reason:  the makers of Rogue One needed to show Darth Vader using his lightsaber strictly for Fanservice.  Oh well, can't have everything.....

Love- it aint what it used to be

With Verizon's new unlimited data plan, you can do more of what you love- as long as "what you love" involves staring at your stupid fricking phone as the world goes on around you.  As long as it involves downloading and streaming and sharing videos.  If it's all about you and your screen, Verizon's got you covered.

Have a great "life," morons.