A Man-Crush Revealed

With the recent release of I Love You, Man, I feel like I should come clean about a man-crush that I’ve had for some time now.  It’s on television’s ultimate badass.  Bear Grylls? No.  Regis Philbin?  Close, but no.  It’s Mike Rowe, of Discovery Channel’s Dirty Jobs.   

He’s so effing cool it’s not funny.  First and foremost, he’s got a sweet job.  He just goes around the country meeting interesting people that have dirty jobs.  He works with them for a day or two, says “thanks,” and leaves.  That is the ultimate job.  Zero long-term commitment while getting to travel and meet new people and lifestyles.  Mike actually lives about a mile and a half from me, so I feel like standing in front of his house with a cardboard sign that says “Take me with you.”  It may just come to that. 

Mike is also hilarious.  He’s a complete man’s man when it comes to humor.  He has the utmost respect for the people he meets, but somehow still makes fun of what they do.  For some reason I think I’d be good at that.  He is also a master of the sexual innuendo.  Not a show goes by without a dirty (pun intended) comment.  Whether it’s a “wild snake” or “a venture down a deep, damp, dirty hole,” Mike never fails to deliver.  

I think Mike and I would get along, and I think he needs a sidekick in his show.  We’d be a perfect match.  (Perfect match for his show, people.  It’s only a man-crush – San Francisco hasn’t changed me that much.)

-Butch Cassidy

ON AN UNRELATED NOTE:  A cnn.com headline today read, “ Empowered Rihanna Gets Gun Tattoo.”  Are you kidding me?  Do you think Oprah would approve of this, Rihanna?  Hell no.  

Much ado about nothing

If one show has grabbed the attention of white people in this past decade, it has to be The Wire. Coarse, honest and full of ebonics (which white people love), the five seasons of The Wire was honest television, absent from any sort of sitcom or Hollywood glam, minus the occasional under armor or Dunkin' Donut plug (c'mon, it's a show about cops).

Yet, it's hard to find any product today that has that kind of independence, especially within movies. 

When reading about movies past and present, a critic made an interesting comment. He claimed that movies like One who Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest and Easy Rider would not see the light of day in the current film industry.

So what does this say about us, the viewers? Has Hollywood found the equation for a profitable movie and just churns script after script through the equation, rendering the art of filmmaking less artistic and more commercialized. It seems so. 

Think of the nationally panned Miss March. It's a story about young gents trekking across the country to get laid (Road Trip anyone?), and the antics that occur on the way. It's the Sex Drive of this year, minus the laughs. 

Let's look at another movie that is currently out, Transporter 3. The first Transporter was successful because Jason Statham was virtually unknown, unless you were a Guy Ritchie fan or paid attention to anyone but Jet Li in The One. So his swagger and harsh cocknean unorthodoxy and cool made him, well, cool when in a leading role. Now, Statham has been typecast into so many crappy movies (Crank, Death Race, The Italian "let's copy Ocean's Eleven" Job) as his Transporter character. Which was, in turn, based on his Guy Rithie character. Transporter 3 is a regurgitation of that typecast, meshed with the Crank premise, Statham's going to die, but not before he can enact his revenge (to be honest, I don't know if Statham died at the end of Transporter 3, I couldn't bring myself to finish it. I hope he did, that way there would be no fourth part in the series. Well, I guess that's untrue, because Crank 2 will be in theaters near you). The point? Jason Statham success in one movie, The Transporter, led to plenty of follow-ups where he does the exact same thing and plays the exact same character, because Hollywood believes it will make them money. Try mimicking Citizen Kane or Casablanca you non-innovative bastards. 

This is what makes shows like The Wire so important. It proves that there is still a spirit for the unusual and the unorthodox, and people can enjoy it. Sin City is cool, but slightly unoriginal because it is an ode to past film noir. As the audience, we don't need odes. We need something new, and exciting in content, not special effects. 

Hopefully, someone can deliver. I have a feeling that the movie won't be on the screens of outr theaters, but on our Macs and PCs.

The Wire  is not a show about Mountain Dew drinks. 

An A-Z Explanation of Fashion

Fashion is strange.  You’re not supposed to judge a book by its cover, but the type and brand of apparel one wears is usually a pretty good indicator of personality.

Let’s go over a few examples of brands and the type of people that wear them – off the top of my head and in alphabetical order…

Affliction: I’m a douchebag and like magic (see: Criss Angel)

Banana Republic: I’m fashionable and upper-middle class

Cutter and Buck:  I’m old and I don’t care

Dickies: I’m so hip, let’s smoke

Etnies: I’m a wannabe pro skater –or– I’m an 8^th grade boy

FUBU: I’m black or wish I were

GAP: I’m an all-American classic, take me to meet your mom

Helly Hansen: I love nature, but love to spend money too

Izod: I like to look like I’m from a country club, but I’m not fooling anybody

J. Crew:  I’m one cool customer, let’s go sailing

Kenneth Cole: I’m serious about what I do, back off

Lulu Lemon: I’m a fashion-conscious gym goer

Mudd: I’m an 8^th grade girl, my boyfriend wears Etnies

North Face: I shop for outdoor clothes at Nordstrom so I’m ready for any polar winds

Osh Kosh B’Gosh: I’m a bad ass two year old, give me your bottle bitch

Prada:  You can’t afford me, talk to my less attractive friend

Quicksilver: I love summertime and borrowing my dad’s boat
Russell: I play men’s league basketball on weeknights

Southpole: I probably have a gun (note: this brand was prohibited at my high school)

Tommy Hilfiger: I think I know fashion, don’t I?

Under Armour: I’m fit and want you to know it, look at my nipples

Van Heusen: I’m just beginning my trek up the corporate ladder

Wrangler: I need a new pair because my can of chew wore a hole in my back pocket

Xtra Large: Not a brand, but a size of person

Yves Saint Laurent: I’m the definition of fashion meeting art

Zegna: I prefer to by $150 polos, it ain’t no thang

 

I may be wrong on some of these, so feel free to disagree or post your own list.  

Sorry for the posting hiatus, we’re back.

-Butch Cassidy

Goodbye Las Vegas

Remember the band Dragpipe?

Anyway, fashion has been changing for quite some time now. Instead of wearing mammoth-skin togas complimented by a sabretooth necklace; we have dissected dresswear and accessorized ourselves into an amalgam of colors, looks and materials. As much as we need the food that goes inside of us to satisfy our appetite, so we need what goes on the outside of us to be tailored to our id.

Of the latest craze, was the not-so-popular-then-somewhat-socially-acceptable emo look. Everything went dark. People dressed as if they were going outside during a World War II air raid (too obscure?). Let's just say there was an abundance of black clothes.

Now, we are in the presence of a fashion reaction.

What does this mean? Well, let me take you back to the '80s for a relatively esoteric parallel, where bands like Stryper and cock-rock heroes Tesla experimented with lugubrious guitar shredding and effeminate stage presence (see:Ratt). Then fast forward to the grunge scene. Surly guitars that required distorting, non-hedonistic lyric writing. Those who were considered “rock stars” became so not because of the noodly appendages located in the center of their midsection, but to their brainy insecurities.

The popular dresswear today is chronos inversion of the cock-rock/grunge binary. Emo-style, the predecessor, is akin to grunge. Whereas, the scene look duplicates the flash of cock-rockery. So, scene becomes the rejection of emo, which was the rejection of whatever came before, which (if memory serves me correctly) was the inexplicable vogue of American Eagle, Gap and Abercrombie and Fitch.

The scene look is an explosion of loud colors covering every shade of the neon rainbow. It's popularity came to the forefront through the omnipresent, ever-growing experimentalism of Threadless.com, American Apparel and Urban Outfitters, and became embedded into the mainstream through bands such as MGMT, Schwayze and anyone who sports Nike kicks.

My question is, what's next? Usually, within mainstream fashion there is a push/pull relationship of colors. Much like many other historical developments, fashion has a tendency to return to simplicity, to the emotastic nature of being withdrawn. Currently, we are in the cock-rock of color stage, and if my self-proclaimed fashion model is true, we will soon be back in black, or whatever other color that represents are desire to not stand out, to be carelessly ineffectual, while at the same time extremely particular about our look.

I'm not entirely sure what it will be, but I guarantee you the change is coming. I just hope that the new look will still be available on flannel.

An easy way to determine up and coming looks is to examine the styles of up-and-coming bands. I see a unisexual styled future . . .

-Mozart

Two more days

Yes, the rumors are true. The Derelict's Vegas trip will be sponsored by Red Bull. 

So expect things to get a bit jumbled.

Until VEGAS . . . 

-Mozart

Sin City, Meet the Derelicts

It has been confirmed.  Hide the kids, shut the doors, and bolt your windows because Butch and Mozart are going to Vegas.  Vegas is the entertainment capital of the world, so it’s only fitting that we go there and check out the scenery.  Don’t worry, we’ll do it right too.  Booze will be consumed in copious amounts.  We’ll chat with hookers (with no intention of paying, obviously.  I’m there to gamble for money, not scabies).  Also, while Vegas is home to some of the best shows in the world, they will not be seen.  That is something girls, couples, or old people do.  We’re just going for a weekend of debauchery in its most pure form.

Vegas has history too.  Dean Martin and Frank Sinatra were the kings of the town.  Tom Jones has had more panties thrown at him there than any other man in history.  Roy got mauled by a tiger there.  I mean this place is happening!  Soon Butch and Mozart will make their mark.  Or, more likely, Vegas will make its mark on Butch and Mozart. 

You can be sure that you will be updated and the reputation of vegas as an entertainment mecca will be analyzed. 

-Butch Cassidy

I apologize for the short post; I just got done with work and it's time to get some sleep.  Yes, I do have a job.  Suck it Halpert. 

Mainstream television rules (for the most part)

It's hard to call TV "mush." There's always something of interest that can be extracted from any popular television show, whether the script seems to be the work of a binge-drinking frat guy, or the Coen Brothers. 

The OC is a prime example. Sure the script sucked for the most part, the acting blew (for the most part) and the plot called for unashamedly vain characters (always), but if you can look past the downside, the upside shines brilliantly. First of all, the music on the show was phenomenal. With the show's popularity, and most popular character, Seth, they were able to bring independent and unheard of talents to the forefront. Artists like Matt Pond PA, Alexi Murdoch and Jem benefitted  from The OC's music supervisor, Alexandra Patsavas, unique approach to teen-show scoring. She brought in the not so popular, nor hip, and gave them credibility. 

Not only was the musical selection respectable, but Seth Coen made being non-jock actually cool. A concept a lot of Star Wars lovers can appreciate.

These shows, whether they are inherently crappy or brilliant, define the character of the generation that follows them. This is why these shows are important, they become ingrained into our being. Chuck Klosterman asserts that people who followed the Real World are able to typecast their friends as characters on the show. They adhere and soak in so much of the Real World, that instead of claiming that characters on the show remind them of their friends, they invert the claim, placing the fake people from the show above the real people in their lives. The same phenomenon can be observed in fans of the show Friends. I tend to look at life through the eyes of the show Seinfeld, it's applicable to how I view the world. 

So, these people in our TV shows may be petty, but they help develop mainstream consciousness, so I hesitate to label shows like The Hills and movies like Twilight "mush," even though that is exactly what they are.

The Derelicts may be going to Vegas. Hookers and liquor stores beware . . .

Bring Back the Music Videos! Please?

Mozart bring up a good point in yesterday’s post, “Seize the Day, and Film It.” Mindless activities can turn your brain into mush. He was talking about YouTube, but obviously the same concept applies to the rest of the computer realm, video games and television. While I don’t buy into the BS that any of these things can turn you into a violent monster (that’s a whole different discussion), I do believe that a few TV shows can lower your IQ. A couple shows stick out above the rest. Following the success of the early seasons of The OC, MTV in its infinite wisdom gave to the world Laguna Beach and its ridiculous spawn, The Hills. These shows allowed influential youth to learn the habits of the hot, rich, obnoxious and utterly dumb. Most recently, MTV (which I have boycotted in its entirety) has come up with Bromance. It features guys competing to join the ranks of Brody Jenner’s posse. Seriously? This crap gets airtime? What have we come to? I thought Celebrity Deathmatch was bad when we were kids, but this is a whole new level of television trash.

MTV is a business, so they do what ultimately brings them profit. If people are watching this, they’re going to keep giving it to us. One must ask, “Who watches?” Well, it’s not only people on the shallow end of the gene pool that watch this stuff, the audience runs the entire gamut. While it’s true that the less-intelligent are the proud and unapologetic viewers, the people that should know better call it a “guilty pleasure.” No, I don’t think so. A guilty pleasure is ice cream after midnight. A guilty pleasure is a couple extra glasses of wine with a Wednesday night dinner. Hell, it’s a stretch, but Gossip Girl can be a guilty pleasure. Being a fan of The Hills or Bromance is a mind-wasting, time-taking bad habit.

To all of you that watch this stuff, stop it. Really, for the well-being of our country and our planet, stop it. Don’t tell me that there’s nothing else on either. Watch the Discovery Channel or the Food Network instead, they’re healthy replacements ... Or here’s a novel idea: get off your ass and do something that will get you a house in Beverly Hills. This way you don’t have to watch someone’s bratty kids live the life for you.

-Butch Cassidy

Seize the day, and film it

Undoubtedly, youtube is one of the best innovations on the internet. In conjunction with its pornographic counterpart “redtube,” youtube has become one of the most utilized websites throughout America. Teachers use it for class, stoners use it incessantly and bloggers use it as their visual aid. But, is there a downside to youtube?

An easy attack would be to call youtube a time-consuming monster that eats up your life in 4 minute clips. Well, Facebook has the same effect, and no one complains. So that’s a weak assault.

What I dislike about youtube, is that the chance of doing something situationally original or novel is vastly diminished. Shows like AFV and reality TV are fairly limited in their scope of action. The actions on reality TV are hyperemotional and unrealistic. AFV is wry and slapstick. But youtube, youtube encompasses every part of life, from mouth-pooping to our reactions to mouth-pooping. All of the sudden, cool events that happen to us are less cool, because another person has done it online, and 72,398 people have viewed it. The extraordinary becomes commonplace, and instead of going out to do sweet ass stuff ourselves, we perch ourselves in front of our sleek laptops and watch clips of what we could be doing.

I realize my whiny grievances aren’t novel; it’s the whole “TV turns your brain into mush” mom attack. But, there is some validity to what mom says. Youtube is sweet to the max, but I’d rather be experiencing youtube worthy moments than watch someone else experience them for me. When I start living vicariously through my computer, then it’s time to make machines self-aware, because I’m definitely not.

Ladies, I have a larger than usual hippocampus.

-Mozart