I have less than 99 things to say about the film "99 Homes"

 

First let me say at the very outset that I did enjoy this film; I thought that the acting, with one or two glaring exceptions, was superb and the story was both important and well-told.  The last thing I want to do is throw any shade on attempts to tell tough stories about the reality of the modern economy.  Forty years ago, "Roger and Me" really opened my eyes to the reasons and consequences for the collapse of the middle class.  "99 Homes" I think attempts to do much the same thing- and, as I said, I did enjoy this film- but also fails on a number of levels. 

First- the ethos of the film seems to be that if you are already in a home and you are earnest in your belief that the house belongs to you, missing mortgage payments simply should not matter.  If a bank requires a homeowner to live up to his contract, that bank is Evil and Wrong, especially if the homeowner has a wife and kids or is a senior citizen.  In short, home ownership is a Sacred Right.  I wonder if the writer of this film has the same grace toward renters who don't pay their rent- can we be evicted if we fail to pay?  What if we have children?  Is the right to renege on a contract exclusive to people who buy property?  

Second- Laura Dern's character is just infuriating throughout the whole film.  She lives with her son and grandson and "runs a business" (is a hairdresser) out of the home.  She worries about money when they are forced to move into a motel but makes no effort to get an actual job that would pay a regular salary, being perfectly comfortable to put the entire burden on her son.  Then she rages at her son for taking a job foreclosing homes- a job which will get them out of the motel and back into their home.  Then, when he decides to sell the family home to buy a better one, she flies off the handle, insisting that she wants "their" home back and will not live in the new house.  

Um, the old family home is not yours, lady.  Your son bought it.  He can sell it if he wants.  What is the matter with you?  Why are you acting as if you have a say in this?  But it gets worse- she decides to take her GRANDSON away with her rather than live in the beautiful new house.  Um, excuse me?  How does she have the right to do this?  Isn't this kidnapping?  THAT IS NOT YOUR SON, LADY.  If you "can't" live in the new house, there's the door.  But you don't take the boy with you.  What planet are you from, anyway?

Third- with one exception, every single person who faces eviction in this film is a victim of their own choices, yet acts as if they are under attack by "The Economy" and "The Rich" and "The Banks."  At one point the "bad" guy points out that one couple failed to make their mortgage payments after taking out a stupid loan to add an extension they didn't need.  That improvement could just as easily have been a swimming pool or a Disney vacation- it was a decision to borrow money which must now be repaid, but we are told to be angry at the creditors.  The one exception is the guy at the end who keeps his house because of a technicality (an unfiled legal form) and not because he actually paid his mortgage.  Warms the heart, it does.

I don't know- maybe I'm just getting cold-blooded in my old age, but my empathy meter didn't move much during this film (except for the widowed old guy who got scammed by a reverse mortgage; I felt bad for him.)  Maybe it's because I've rented my entire adult life and even during the great housing fire sale of 2008 I didn't take the jump and tie myself down to 30 years of payments I was not sure I could make.  Am I really supposed to have sympathy for people who have lived in appreciating assets during the same time but for some reason failed to make their payments?  Because I don't.  Someone explain to me why I should.

Michael Shannon is not a villain in this film, Andrew Garfield is not a villain in this film, and Laura Dern is not a heroine in this film (she's just a screechy anchor around her son's neck.  And a kidnapper.)  Ok, I'm done.

This Bizarre Golden Corral Commercial, Part I

 

"I'm sure you're wondering why you brought you here to Golden Corral."

Yeah, is something wrong?  I mean, this place is crap and with the actors being chosen to portray actual customers, and the extras chosen to depict actual customers in the background. and the cleanliness and excellent lighting and the rest, this sure doesn't resemble any Golden Corral I've ever seen.

"It's because the food here is almost frighteningly cheap considering what it claims to be.  Do you know how expensive this would be in an actual restaurant with real health and quality standards that DOESN'T cater to people who wear sweatpants almost exclusively and have BMIs that resemble highway speed limits?"

"My script says I'm supposed to say 'no, I'm only six,' because ad execs still think that's the way six year olds talk."

"Well, it would cost a LOT."

"Since I'm a precocious kid in an American television ad, I'll just throw in 'well, you get what you pay for,' and I didn't imagine that this bland, greasy sludge was particularly hard on your wallet, dad."

In both this ad and the upcoming Part II, the parents act as if they've never heard of this Golden Corral place and are just stunned to find that there's a building calling itself a restaurant where a family can stuff itself with all of the reheated fish sticks, chicken and gravy it can hold down for one low price.  Again, is something wrong here?

That Homeaglow Commercial that didn't land well....

 

Spoiled rotten blonde suburban princess found out that she could save a few bucks by having Homeaglow do the housekeeping she is probably perfectly capable of doing herself, so she happily FIRED her housekeeper.  She didn't "stop looking for housekeepers" or even "let her housekeeper go."  She FIRED her.  Which would mean Unemployment Benefits and other security except that you just KNOW the housekeeper who got fired was being paid under the table (and was probably dependent on a job which involved scrubbing this hideous woman's toilet) and Blonde Wifey Model #37 caused a severe financial crisis when she decided to respond to a clickbait "Super-Cheap Housekeeping Service" ad on YouTube.

"I've done a good job for you, why are you firing me?"

"Because I found a cheaper option.  Say hi to Pepe for me."

"His name's Mario.  I don't know how I'm going to tell him we might have to leave the area to find more work, all his friends go to the school he's in now."

"That's sad.  I bet you can get a job with Homeaglow.  Sure, they won't pay you anywhere near as much as I was, but at least it will be familiar work and Pepe gets to stay in his school."

"Mario.  His name's Mario."  

"I'd love to chat, but I'm late for my MAGA rally.  Hope you and Pepe have an awesome day, and if I don't see you again, good luck in Mexico."

"Nicaragua.  We're from Nicaragua." 

Apple "Intelligence" Commercial shows No Such Thing

 

It's 21st century American television, so of course the main character of this trash is a fat, lazy, clueless white man who isn't even bright enough to know how to pretend to look busy at his cushy office job.  I have to assume he's someone's nephew, because this guy has earned his PhD at Not Giving One Flying Damn University.

After f--king around for I have to assume All Day (and also have to assume As Usual,) Bored Idiot surrounded by Intelligent, Productive Women Not Related to the CEO finally decides to send a text that is so obviously AI-generated brown-nosing (and focuses primarily on shifting responsibility up the chain of command) that it stuns his boss into silence.  Never mind that this only works if the guy who gets the text is less aware than the lump of cells molding it's shape into an office chair more valuable than the employee sitting in it.  I mean, I'm a Boomer and I can recognize AI-generated content.  If the doofus slob wanted his text to be believable, he would have kept it littered with broken syntax and maybe thrown in a few emojis to replace the thoughts he doesn't have in his head.  

This guy is all but announcing over the intercom that he is doing no work, does not know how to do any work, has no interest in doing any work, and responds to requests to do work by attempting to use AI to hand the work off to someone else.  I see no intelligence here, but he might be smarter than the people willing to put up with his nonsense and keep him employed in that office.  Except, of course, that whole nepotism thing.

Buy Now, Pay Later: This couple is so very screwed

 

"Hey honey, it's your turn to vacuum."

"No problem- I bought a $499 Roomba.  No worries, I used CommBank StepPay, so it only costs $125 every two weeks for two months."

"Um, ok.  Oh by the way, remember I recreated my grandmother's meatloaf recipe from scratch last night.  So it's your turn to cook."

"No problem- I ordered Uber Eats, it will be here in a minute.  Just $20 every two weeks for two months.  Easy peazy."

"Um....ok.  Just one more thing.  Where did this new couch come from? I thought we said we were going to hold off on new furniture?"

"That's before I discovered the wonderful world of Buy Now, Pay Later.  This couch is only $200 every six weeks for six months.  We can afford $200!"

"Thanks for reminding me why we have separate bank and credit card accounts, honey." 

Capital One's "Well Deserved" emails: A Quick Rant

 

Full Disclosure:  I have a Capital One credit card.  I use it for big purchases (airplane tickets, hotels, stuff like that.)  I have nothing against credit cards as long as they don't prey on economics-challenged desperate people who are on their way to Payday loans with plastic cards as a temporary way station.  They are useful tools when used correctly.

My only reason for making this post is because this morning I got my daily "Well Deserved!" email from Capital One, which as usual offered to "reward" me with an offer to buy something.  According to Capital One, pretty much everything I "deserve" involves an opportunity to use my card and accumulate debt.  I deserve debt?  I should reward myself with more debt?  This sense no makes.

If Capital One would really like to reward me with something, how about more rewards points or a lower interest rate?  I think I Deserve those things.  

By the way, this commercial was made in 2006.  I bet those actors playing the parents of that fat doofus are dead now.  Maybe fat doofus son is dead too, unless he got that weight under control.  Pardon me for being morbid.  It's Monday, after all. 

Copper Cures Everything?

 

I mean, no wonder it's so expensive.  Copper cures all aches and pains and is just magic, I guess, especially when combined with tight straps and especially when included in rigid material that holds the back in place.

Wait, what?  It's the pressure that eases the back and wrist and knee pain, and not the copper?  Is that why my compression socks help despite the fact that they don't contain any copper?  Or is their lack of copper depriving me of the relief I could be getting?  Could someone explain to me exactly HOW copper is supposed to ease pain- what is it about the chemistry of copper that gives it pain-alleviating properties?  

I still maintain that copper is the Stone in the Soup of Pain Relief.  Pressure increases stability and relieves pain.  Adding copper increases....the price.  And those copper wristbands?  I put them in the same category of placebos, rabbit's feet, etc.-- believing that they work may make it so for some people.

This is using tension to reduce stress, and there's nothing new about the use of back braces.    Considering that a lot of these ads are more than a decade old, there's nothing new about Copperfit's scam, either.