Profile 
xochitl
Find Me On:

Latest Comments

 +33Posted on Nov 17th, 2010 | re: Headline Of The Day: "Man Shoots TV Over Bristol Palin Dancing" (100 comments)

finally the KILL YOUR TV bumper stickers can claim a win. but they have bristol palin to thank? maybe it’s a draw.

all these eric stoltz footage revelations are messing with my space-time continuum.

 +5Posted on Jul 27th, 2010 | re: Dog Mowing Lawn Reminds Us That The Internet Is Still Very Much Itself (53 comments)

watching this gives me a keen, aspirational yearning that i think i’m supposed to be getting from things like the hills or fashion magazines or whatever. where is my log cabin? my green meadow? MYYYYYYYYYY cool lawn-mowing dog?

 +22Posted on Jul 21st, 2010 | re: See You At Comic-Con 2010! (BONUS: BNPG) (1095 comments)

All About Steve Jobs

 +11Posted on Jul 19th, 2010 | re: The Videogum Movie Club: Inception (305 comments)

I like seeing the debate style review because I saw this movie with two friends who did not like it at all, and I really, really did. I went to film school (jealous?) so I could probably come up with a few half-remembered arguments (zzzzz) to support my good opinion but I think the only reason I could give that’s worth anything would be the same one Gabe sites; that I enjoyed the time that I spent watching it, even when Ellen Page is talking, and especially during the FLOATING HALLWAY FIGHT (yay!).

But I think Inception’s major legacy (haha) and the best argument for it, is the likelihood that people who share common interests and aesthetics will continue to disagree about it’s value and success. Because it really is sophisticated and ambitious.

Ambitious is a risky thing for an entertainment product to be. I can think of several movies that I can’t stand because I feel like they attempted themes that they couldn’t ultimately speak to, and when I call something “pretentious” that’s exactly what I mean. But when I see something that I like as much as Inception it makes me want to retire that word from my opinions about things generally, because in this case I’m really glad that there are filmmakers out there trying (with a success that I’m willing to concede is arguable, even though I’ve made up my mind which side I’m on) to have their Special FX Cake and eat The Narrative and Thematic Elements too. You go, Inception!

 +7Posted on Jul 19th, 2010 | re: The 11th Annual Gathering Of The Juggalos 17 Minute-Long Infomercial (132 comments)

There’s about to be Tila Tequilla! There’s about to be midgets! There’s about to be Ron Jeremy! He does have good dick jokes!!!!!! (Is what I hope they will say about me when i die, or perform at Gathering of the Juggalos.)

 +14Posted on Nov 23rd, 2009 | re: The Hunt For The Worst Movie Of All Time: Closer (311 comments)

:)

 -8Posted on Nov 23rd, 2009 | re: The Hunt For The Worst Movie Of All Time: Closer (311 comments)

i nominate 21 Grams. So many acting faces, from some of the faceiest actors in the game.

 +4Posted on Nov 23rd, 2009 | re: This Is The Quote Of The Day (39 comments)

close second: “Pattinson said he feels vulnerable at big film events such as premieres, where he could be the target of an overly obsessive fan or even a terror attack.” Right, everyone should be very worried about global twihad.

runner up: “He said he has come to accept the attention, but would be prepared to give away acting away for his first passion ? music ? if the fans ever became too much.” It is funny both that this guy wants to turn to pop music to outrun his adoring fans, AND that this strategy would probably end up working out better than he is expecting it to.

 +2Posted on Oct 15th, 2009 | re: Hey, What's Up With Topher Grace? (52 comments)

Linguists also use “standard” rather than “correct” to refer to academically sanctioned language and prescriptive grammars. There is an argument to be made that whatever the term “begs the question” once meant to everyone who used it, its semantic meaning shifts with the prevailing ability to comprehend it as meaning “begs that the question be asked”. Your reference to it having been “misused so often that it will never be reclaimed” arguably describes a situation where the meaning has ACTUALLY changed, and the phrase’s origin, its “standard” or “correct” usage amounts to academic jargon. Okay, fine, linguisticsgum. But what bothers ME as much as philosophy terminology bothers YOU, is seeing you refer to people who use non-standard forms (“irregardless”) as idiots. What looks or sounds idiotic to you is really just a case of someone not knowing the same rules you do. The rules of grammar are always arbitrary in the sense that they could as easily be one thing as another. “Irregardless” is more often used by people who do not have extensive academic training in Standard American English, but that should never be considered an indicator of their intelligence or capabilities. Education is important, and THE MORE YOU KNOW, but when it is used as an elitist shibboleth, i think grammar sux. Did you know that February is spelled that way because it used to be pronounced with that “r” sound in the middle? Nobody does that anymore, they would sound like an idiot.