Profile 
zinco
Website: -
Find Me On:

Latest Comments

Comments

 0Posted on May 24th, 2012 | re: Zach Galifianakis IS Ignatius J. Reilly (31 comments)

Seeing as many people as I do here who found the book underwhelming or dull is maybe the most depressing thing I’ll see today. Not that I don’t respect that opinion, but it has to be the funniest book I’ve read, and it’s disappointing when it doesn’t click with people.

I already have watched the perfect Where’s Waldo movie, in my head, every time I listen to “I Still Haven’t Found What I’m Looking For”

 +2Posted on Jun 21st, 2011 | re: More Twitter News: Roger Ebert Hurt Bam Margera's Feelings! (131 comments)

I don’t know if anyone’s still reading comments here, but Ebert has confirmed that he has never smoked in comments on his post (http://blogs.suntimes.com/ebert/2011/06/_bam_margera_i_just_lost.html). His cancer probably arose from radiation treatments as a child.

 +3Posted on Jun 21st, 2011 | re: Roger Ebert Vs. Bam Margera Twitter War UPDATE (68 comments)

Even if you were “just pointing this out,” it’d seem like a strange non-sequitur. “I don’t like what Roger Ebert said. Let it also be observed that his heretofore unhealthy lifestyle, consisting of overeating and alcohol indulgence, certainly gave rise to his thyroid cancer, and subsequent loss of his jawbone. The cancer thus being his fault, the implication is unavoidably that we must live healthy lifestyles, else we be blamed—and fairly—for our health problems.”

I suppose you do acknowledge that this is similar to what Ebert did for Dunn, only with the opinion that your public opinion doesn’t matter compared to Ebert’s, as his opinion is far more widespread. I don’t necessarily agree with that, particularly if his intent was to bluntly make a point, and your intent is purely to anger people by mocking a cancer victim. If nothing else, I don’t see why the difference in your public statures would excuse hypocrisy on your part.

 +5Posted on Jun 21st, 2011 | re: More Twitter News: Roger Ebert Hurt Bam Margera's Feelings! (131 comments)

I’ve never heard about Ebert being a smoker. I don’t think he was.

 +13Posted on Jun 21st, 2011 | re: More Twitter News: Roger Ebert Hurt Bam Margera's Feelings! (131 comments)

My dad regularly drove drunk. With me in the car. While I’d be devastated if he died from driving drunk, I would also be beyond furious with him for doing something like that in the first place.

I didn’t find what Ebert said offensive at all, and I was a little surprised to see that other people did.

If you look at Roger Ebert’s Facebook page now, incidentally, there are a lot of well-wishers who’d like to throw him down one. (A well.)

 +4Posted on Mar 26th, 2011 | re: Videogum Everywhere Mission: Don't Write A Screenplay In April! (50 comments)

I had no idea NaNoWriMo inspired this sort of hostility. As long as you’re not expecting to actually turn out a good work in a single month, attempting to write a novel in that short a period of time has merits in and of itself. Discouraging a creative activity just because the result is going to be bad or unfinished seems to be missing the point in this case, particularly since no one actually reads the raw NaNoWriMo results.

 +2Posted on Jan 29th, 2011 | re: Monsters' Ball: The Week's Best Comments (144 comments)

I’m not entirely at ease, but, fuckin’, whatever.

 +16Posted on Jan 11th, 2011 | re: Jon Stewart Discusses The Arizona Shootings (44 comments)

Maybe I’ll read your comments again when enough people tell me you’ve stopped being a nasty troll jerkface!!! >:(

 +1Posted on Aug 3rd, 2010 | re: Inception Ripped-Off Scrooge McDuck & The Beagle Boys! (104 comments)

Well, hold on, now. Don Rosa has mentioned in the Life and Times of Scrooge McDuck Companion (in which this story is compiled) that he got the idea for this story from a fan, and then a few years later watched The Cell and realized that the reader must have ripped off the plot from *that* movie.

 +5Posted on Apr 26th, 2010 | re: South Park "Scandal" Open Thread (207 comments)

Thank you, dictums. It’s not easy to paint cancer jokes with a broad stripe, because I’ve made some pretty funny ones myself! I think context is enormously important, though, and only the person with the cancer can really set the terms (and to use or abuse the superpower of instantly being able to make someone feel awkward with an especially black joke). So if I’m joking around with my girlfriend or friends, that’s one thing, but watching something like South Park and suddenly having cancer come back to the forefront of my mind isn’t a lot of fun. But it doesn’t bother me enough that I would want to make a fuss about it.

 +9Posted on Apr 26th, 2010 | re: South Park "Scandal" Open Thread (207 comments)

Oh, absolutely, it does. If you want South Park to have free reign in mocking people, you’ve got to expect to eventually get burnt yourself. I can dislike their cancer jokes, but give them a pass if I want to keep enjoying their show (broadly speaking, anyway, since I haven’t liked the show as much lately). I think that South Park should show Mohammad if they want to and deal with the consequences if they’re prepared to do so. I don’t even mind if they did the episodes that they’ve done just to stir the hornet’s nest, because the discussion they’ve provoked is pretty interesting.

That said, Comedy Central, as their distributor, has the right to look out for their own interests, whether it goes as far as preventing people associated with the network from getting murdered (a PR no-no) or from creating negative buzz for the network. It’s not like they’re fucking over Matt and Trey or canceling their show or anything, it’s just something that goes beyond their line of comfort. And if Matt and Trey cared that much about their right to show Mohammad, they could do it outside the confines of South Park, or they could take their show elsewhere (god knows where if they didn’t choose to distribute it independently). They may be bothered by the censorship, but they can’t be that incensed. And anyway, they’ve made their point, certainly not ineffectively, with their depiction of the heavy-handed censorship that they have to deal with as a result of pusillanimous studio heads kowtowing to Muslim extremists.

 +23Posted on Apr 26th, 2010 | re: South Park "Scandal" Open Thread (207 comments)

My girlfriend has cancer, so I found that episode kind of unpleasant to watch, too. Actually, it’s hard not to be more aware of how many cancer jokes there are floating around. Just a few weeks ago, my friend was telling me that he wasn’t feeling so good, then joked it was because he had cancer, and then immediately went wide-eyed and started apologizing, although that time I actually did find it funny.

I don’t know how much to complain about this kind of thing generally, though, since nearly every joke a show like South Park makes is going to tweak somebody for some reason, so I don’t know about how fair it is to say that they shouldn’t make one particular kind of joke, even if that joke pertains to unambiguous tragedy. All I can really say is that cancer isn’t quite the laugh riot it used to be for me.