Cranston Owns a Dude

Yes people, there is a reason he is the one who knocks...;)

The Time For Debate is Over (Gay Marriage is Finally Legal)

Last week, as I'm sure many people are already aware, the United States Supreme Court made a landmark ruling granting equal marriage rights to LGBT couples. The timing, during National Pride Month, couldn't have been more perfect. That same night I attended a rally for New York City Pride, and the sense of victory was overwhelming. Not to mention all of the beautiful couples with signs reading things like "We've been together 23 years, now we can finally be recognized by law". Wrap your head around that for a moment. 23 years this particular couple had been together. Unable to get spousal benefits. Unable to be each other's next of kin over existing family members. Unable to be validated, basically. Second class, essentially. The look of joy and emotion on their faces was palpable. I cried myself when I saw the news reports. And I've never even come close to getting married. But after a lifetime of having our legal system, and by association the country that utilizes it, tell queer people that we were not worthy of being equal, here was absolute proof that we were. Mind you, the Justices' pages and pages of debate and reasoning was often loaded with some of the same nonsense that's kept us from being equal from the beginning. "Marriage is between a man and a woman..." Says who? Somebody in a book written centuries ago? "Marriage is sacred." I believe this also, but there are loads of straight people cheating and getting divorced and remarried multiple times who apparently do not. You get my point. Any and all opposition to equal marriage always boils down to: "I do not believe two men or two women can be called a marriage because" a)  My God told me so b) I hate queers and me being equal with them is appalling c) If we allow two men and two women to marry they make a mockery of marriage what's next a man and a dog?

Now let's be honest. All of those reasons are bullshit. First of all, and beyond the fact that it is made up dogma garbage, why should what your God tells you is morally right affect my civil rights in any way, shape, or form? It shouldn't. Period. That's like me coming to you and saying I just read this amazing book denouncing religions so from now on we won't be granting tax exempt status to them or acknowledging their dogma in our political system (which we're not supposed to be doing anyway, motherfuckers!). So sorry not sorry. Yes my example is very extreme. But it is disproportionately the same thing. A group of people who read a book and decided that the supernatural being they live their lives by hated queers and wouldn't want them getting married decided to make sure that didn't happen in real life. It sounds absolutely ridiculous, like the plot of a South Park episode, and yet it's kept queer people as second class citizens for countless decades. Then there's the B option. Hey, at least when some hateful religious douchebag tells me he doesn't want equal marriage because he hates queers, I don't get that smarmy sense of condescension that I get from most political figures who try to hide their hate in reasoning and fancy words. At least with option B you know you're dealing with a reprehensible piece of garbage right up front. But he's an honest reprehensible piece of garbage. I have to admire just that. Also, at least with the option B assholes we know where we stand. Until they experience a drunken, lonely night of mutual masturbation with their BFF and fellow gun club member Cooter, there is no coming around to the proper way of thinking for these people (notice I am aware I've made the hateful people a closeted, self-loathing dude mainly because those are the ones I ran into throughout my young life but obviously there are haters of all walks, creeds and sexes). There will never be an epiphany for these people. There will never be a meeting them on mutual terms. It makes it that much easier to dismiss them and continue the struggle. Then there's option C which is really option B gussied up with a "What if...?" scenario. In no way does allowing two men and two women to marry begin a slippery slope toward bestiality. That's just hate masquerading as fear mongering. So they're all bullshit reasons. And here we are. Finally we have been validated as equal citizens with the rest of the country. Several decades late, but I digress.

And yet, this week has seen a surge of news stories concerning county clerks and Governors who have refused to follow the Supreme Court's ruling. One office in the south resigned en masse in protest. Why do Governors even have an option? That's like me saying know what I don't agree with the criminalization of marijuana so I'm gonna go out score an ounce and light up in my local 7-11 parking lot. Do you think if a cop pulled up next to me he would deal with my "I find this law to be morally against my religious beliefs" bullshit? No! I'd be arrested in a heartbeat. I understand this is a bigger issue about state rights versus country rights, but when you're dealing with basic human rights I don't think any state should have a standing to say "No, no we don't recognize those fags as equal humans sorry. They're mentally disturbed and we're not going to placate them." And that's what the Governors of Kentucky and Alabama and numerous other Bible Belt states are saying. Point blank. You can try to couch that message in any sort of pseudo-loving religious nonsense you want, it doesn't change the fact that you're breaking the law. So, no doubt in the next several months we will see a surge of these types of encounters. And a surge of lawsuits. And hopefully, despite this opposition, a surge of queer couples getting married.

A Conservative acquaintance brought up this passive/aggressive argument concerning the equal marriage ruling: that we didn't really win anything because it wasn't brought about by popular opinion in every state. I was kind of flummoxed by the topic, really, because its always been a black and white issue for me. There is no room for gray. And I could care less about state rights when it concerns basic human rights for all. That's like Hitler saying during the Holocaust "Well I can't really stop killing Jews the states haven't really voted for it so it must be ok." Again, extreme example, but totally merited. I could also care less about whether it feels like a "real win" to me. What's a "real win" in this person's mind? A moral victory? Fuck that. I want a human rights victory, no matter how I get it. A "real win" is Dave and Kevin walking up to the counter in the clerk's office, getting their marriage license, finding a priest they like , and tying the knot so that they can share in the exact same marriage benefits everyone else does. And if that's not morally right to you. then you are part of the problem.

This is also not to say that the battle for equal rights begins and ends with marriage. In something like 32 states in America LGBT people can still be fired for simply existing as an LGBT person. Not to mention the areas of the world like Uganda, Russia, and the Middle East, where queer people are routinely publicly shamed and often murdered by vicious mobs. No, the fight is far from over now that LGBT marriage has been made legal. But a supremely important and historical step has been taken. And above and beyond all of these talking points is the fact that two people who love each other had previously been held down by the rest of society and not been allowed to validate their union. Boiled down to that simple equation how can anyone still shout their nonsense anti-marriage equality rhetoric? In a world that's as shitty as this one is at times, filled with war and hate, how can you deny two loving people the right to legally be together? It is beyond me. Just as it was when I watched those loving couples crying tears of joy on the pier in New York City that day. Love is not always at a premium in America. We'd like to believe it is. So I was glad that in this particular instance, for once, love did win unequivocally.

The New Terminator Film (whether you're ready for it or not) *SPOILERS*

Going into this movie, I really thought I was going to hate it. But you have to be emotionally invested in something to actually muster up the energy to hate it. The last time I was emotionally invested in this franchise was in 1992. A long, long time ago cinemtatically. So I was pretty much starting off from a blank slate. The movie, unfortunately, is not. It jumps through hoops to fit into the established events of the Terminator movies which wouldn't be a problem if the script knew how to make them interesting. It doesn't. James Cameron knew how to make characters in a scifi/action epic relatable and memorable. The screenwriters here do not. Its not like they don't try, mind you. There are several moments afforded to Kyle Reece and Sarah Connor who, as we know from the first two films, must fall in love and sire a son so that he can grow up to be the leader of the resistance. They're just ham-handed and might as well be used as snippets in a music video for all the dramatic tension that they build. Actually, I've seen some music videos that got me to care more for the characters in them than this movie did. Jai Courtney is a perfect example of what is wrong with this movie. I've never liked Jai Courtney as an actor. He has all the charisma of a department store mannequin to me. Mind you, he's a spectacular slab of man hunk. But the movie isn't even smart enough to put that to good use. Twice for plot mechanics Jai Courtney has to get naked. Lemme just state for the record here and now, more shots of Jai Courtney's stupendous ass would have helped me not think so hard about the rest of what was going on. But no. We get one brief glimpse when he first falls to the ground and that's it.

I thought, initially, that the plot and how it trashed all over the first two films, would be my main sticking point. I've heard lots of reviews state that it's needlessly complicated. Fair dues, I guess. But watching four fucking seasons of Stephen Moffatt-run Doctor Who has toughened me to complicated timey-wimey nonsense. I don't mind complicated. But if the film surrounding all of this complicated time travel bullshit isn't that good it kinda makes you want to stop putting effort in to figuring it out. Even the movie itself, in the guise of Kyle Reece, states "This time travel stuff hurts my head." Simply stated, this film is an alternate timeline story. I suppose the whole Terminator-verse now exists in that alternate timeline since events have now changed. That's fine. I rolled with it as I rolled with a lot of things. But the movie keeps putting obstacles in your way. And not plot mechanics, just stupid bullshit that takes me out of the story while I ponder it. Here is a laundry list of things that I can remember:

- The film takes great pains to make some things look exactly as they did in the first movie (the hobo, the garbage truck driver, the department store) and yet the three punks who Arnie's original Terminator murders for their clothes are dressed and have hairstyles completely different.

- So much is left to our imaginations, most importantly how this alternate timeline skews from the one we know. I don't mean the actual event, that much we know (instigated by none other than Matt ne Matthew Smith sounding very important but sadly in the movie very, very little). But the first fifteen minutes of the film shows us the events that kicked off the first movie and we know exactly how they turned out, so how can Matt Smith's involvement take place? Did he come from the future? The past? Who sent Arnie's "new" Terminator to rescue Sarah Connor in 1973, an event we don't see mind you but are told in plodding exposition? Who sent the T-1000? In previous events, he was sent to 1992 and looked like Robert Patrick, now he's Asian and running around 1984. Why does Arnie's model keep being re-used, yet every other Terminator who's been sent looks completely different? Is he like the Terminator version of vinyl, and some people simply aren't willing to give him up? Why does the time travel device kill the new Terminator but, inexplicably, give Arnie an upgrade to T-1000 level?

- Matt Smith's entire character, if you can even call it that, is laughable. He's given a few cheesy 1970's style evil villian lines and does absolutely nothing.

- J.K. Simmons is completely wasted as well. I thought for sure he was going to be the psychiatrist from the first two movies. That would have been a brilliant callback (as would Bill Paxton de-aged via computer to play 1 of Arnie's punk victims again). What's worse is they actually DO have good motivations for him to be involved as he is personally saved by Sarah in 1984. But as with most of the movie, this is not put to any good effect. Any love I have for his character stems from the simple build up I just told you and the fact that he's J.K. Simmons which is not enough.

- IF, and that's a big if, IF the action movie surrounding all of this scifi/time travel mumbo jumbo was any good we'd probably forgive it. It's not. Alan Taylor is not a good action director. I loved Thor: The Dark World, but the mystical/supernatural elements there suited the action better. Here, there's lots of explosions and lights and noise, but very little of substance. And that's down to directing and editing. It's not like James Cameron split the atom in the second movie. He just knew how to make a tractor trailer chasing a motorcycle seem really exciting. It helped that the truck and the cycle were real, which leads me to...

- The CGI. Oh my fucking God. Look, everybody who's ever talked to me for more than five minutes knows that I have a love/hate relationship with CGI. I'll take practical effects and miniatures over CGI any day. But CGI CAN be well done. It's simply not here. That scene of the bus flipping over on the Golden Gate Bridge that we've all seen from the commercials is just as bad as you think it's going to be. But it's not alone. Most of the CGI in this is woeful. Especially the Terminator effects. I love that they stuck with the established T-1000 effects. They're retro now but still look good because it's what we're used to. The new Terminator's glitchy pixel thing pissed me off to no end. Simply put, in a film that probably cost upwards of $150 million to make, I should not be having a critique like this.

- The script actually does make attempts to say something unique, but then completely abandons them in favor of an explosion. The whole concept of Genisys, for instance, is a nice comment on technology in our lives as they are now which couldn't even have been imagined by Cameron when he wrote the script in the 80's and cell phones were still the size of a cinderblock. But it's just there. It's not really explored to any degree.

- There are lapses in logic that become difficult to ignore eventually. Despite street leveling explosions, there is only ever a police presence when plot mechanics requires it. 1 minute the new Terminator is on a roof, the next he's in a helicopter in high speed pursuit of our heroes. I could go on but you get the point.

So what are we left with? Arnie back as the Terminator is great. They work in some great lines for him acknowledging that he's gotten older ("Old, not obsolete.") and he also gets 1 or 2 one-liners that ALMOST reach the heights of the first two movies ("John Connor talks too much."). And I didn't hate it. But really, shouldn't I want for more out of a movie?

The Doctor and the Dominoes

Blurred Trek