jaimeleigh:

It’s over for me. I’ve always had a sort love/hate relationship with the show in that at least once an episode I see something I really, really like—smothered under everything else that I really, really loathe.

But the second to last episode (The Apartment) was just too much for me (though really the entire season has been a waste). How many other ways can the misogynists writing the show find to subjugate and objectify the already ridiculously two-dimensional female characters Hank somehow manages to bed?

Is there even a single female writing this show, or are they just running with the wet dream material of a lonely twelve year old boy who hasn’t yet awakened to the realization that the life of a writer (a novelist no less!) is not glamorous and/or the wet dream material of a rapidly aging has-been who is certain that the life he lived was totally rock and roll and not at all empty and pathetic? I’m not sure! Perhaps they dropped their female writers when they decided to all but write the terrific Natascha McElhone out of the show.

The problems that have taken the show from “okay I’m willing to suspend disbelief on that point to see the bigger picture because it is still marginally entertaining” to “wow this is (break for gratuitous sex scene) ridiculous to the point (break for gratuitous sex scene) of being (break for gratuitous sex scene) insufferable” are too many to even attempt to list.

Oh, and Eva Amurri? Your mom has an incredible rack, too. But she didn’t need to constantly smother our faces in it to get where she is.

I can’t really argue with any of your points - I mean come on, the entire show is basically a giant overblown male fantasyland - other than the issue of Natascha McElhone.   I don’t think the writers chose to minimize her role intentionally.

I was actually wondering the same thing a couple of weeks ago, why her role was so small this year, so I checked her wiki page.  I thought maybe she was shooting a movie or something.  Turns out,  her husband had a heart attack in the summer  of ‘08 and died, and then 4 months later she had her third child by said husband. Pretty awful and life-changing and obligation-heavy stuff.  And by then, shooting on the next season was probably not too far away.  I think she probably asked for a lighter role this season because of her personal issues.  Maybe not, but I would’ve.

And the creative problem with her character being gone, in my mind, is that she has always been the grounding point for Hank, who otherwise would go full throttle into being the manchild that lurks inside of him.  So with her gone, what did the writing staff do?  They chose to turn Hank loose.  Whic has resulted in a less focused season with tons of mysogyny and “strippers aren’t people” bullshit.  I mean the whole, “I’m quitting stripping, Hank, aren’t you proud of me?” thing.  Yikes…

On the other hand, I always felt like Californication was a one season series that should have never continued.  The ending of season one was the perfect cap to that storyline and everything after has felt somewhat like, “oh we have to put something here don’t we.”

davidkaneda:

“All the code that’s fit to printf()”

A few code libraries used at the New York Times, openly released.

scaramouche:

Hell yes!

shorterexcerpts:

cathythighs:

In my 4 day absense from work I started watching Flash Forward. I’ll need something to replace Lost in the near future, and most of my sources said this was a good replacement.

I think it’ll do but there are two things I’m just not buying about the whole plot:

1. That Harold (from Harold and Kumar) could ever score a hottie like Gabriel Union especially the way he treats her and is never with her.
2. That Charlie, the heroin-addicted-rocker-hobbit could ever be a bad guy. Although he’s starting to change my mind.

I can buy Charlie as a villain, but as a super-genius? That’s a bit of a stretch.

FlashForward is incredibly frustrating to me: the premise is awesome, but the execution? Not so much. It’s sci-fi that seems embarrassed about being sci-fi, so we’re stuck with FBI procedural and hospital scenes. Plus Joseph Fiennes horrid American accent.

That’s it!  That’s exactly what’s wrong.   When the plot twists are awesome, I really like it, but there’s so much boring downtime.

And that accent.  Yikes.

walpaper:

It’s not quite a manifesto, but it doesn’t have to be - this list of Short Film Don’ts is worth a read.

I wanted to ignore it, especially due to Peter’s condescending tone, and I certainly don’t want to add more fuel to his fire, but these are all true. I’ve felt similiarly about each* bullet point on numerous occasions.

*”Don’t Make a Serious Film” makes sense in if we’re talking about cliche melodramatic themes, but otherwise if you’d like to make a dramatic short - go for it, just be sure to find the right actors.

Agreed.  He’s definitely in full-on <rant> mode, but the lessons are still valid.

motionsensorsoundtrack:

lawful:

brooklynmutt:

“in her new memoir, Going Rogue, Palin apparently writes that Sarah Palin doesn’t believe in evolution. New York Times reviewer Michiko Kakutani writes: Elsewhere in this volume, she talks about creationism, saying she “didn’t believe in the theory that human beings — thinking, loving beings — originated from fish that sprouted legs and crawled out of the sea” or from “monkeys who eventually swung down from the trees.” In everything that happens to her, from meeting Todd to her selection by Mr. McCain for the Republican ticket, she sees the hand of God: “My life is in His hands. I encourage readers to do what I did many years ago, invite Him in to take over.””

—

In her memoir, Palin says she doesn’t believe in evolution.

Think Progress

So, she’s all God’s fault?

haha. I never understood why you have to believe one or the other. Shouldn’t a process like evolution lend itself to some Great Order or process or something? Plus where did the first thing come from? explain that science. Science is more wrong than right if you ask me. Nobody knows much of anything. I think people that think they know it all and believe in ONLY science and discredit God are as silly as those that ONLY believe in God and ignores all science. Am I alone in this thinking? surely not.

I’m right there with you, man.   There is no reason the two have to be mutually exclusive.

I won’t reblog that on the off chance one of my followers hasn’t seen it, but…

Yeah, those are some serious assholes.