Wednesday, May 28, 2008
adventures in cellular text messaging
drunk lady: hey honey sorry i missed your call...what are u up 2?
ba dum BLOGger: nada. just got back from the gym. i figured if i had more muscles i wouldn't have to try so hard to be funny. how was your weekend?
drunk lady: lol. do u want 2 come over and hang by the pool?
ba dum BLOGger: shoot. i can't right now. you want to get something to eat later? also, i like when you call me "honey." makes me feel like i'm texting with my grandma.
drunk lady: lol! i am with katya. can i bring her?
ba dum BLOGger: sure. did i meet her?
drunk lady: yes.
ba dum BLOGger: wait. do you girls have bfs?
drunk lady: nah.. we r kinda in early phases of relationships. doesn't mean we cant hang out.
ba dum BLOGger: true. a cooler guy may be able to handle that but i am not that cool nor am i that guy. have a nice rest of your day!
drunk lady: you don't want to be friends?!?!!?
ba dum BLOGger: i already have enough friends (girls who won't have sex w/ me). no hard feelings. i still think u r a really neat lady!
drunk lady: okay. well good luck then... too bad.
drunk lady: ur loss.
ba dum BLOGger: ;-)
we would never cellular text message again...i will die alone :(
ba dum BLOG!!!
Monday, May 26, 2008
bloggers is dumb
people's "battles" with cancer are of great interest to me. especially since i'm attempting to chronicle wins and losses as to create "the definitive, comprehensive official cancer almanac." i'm just not sure how to score "winners" and "losers" sometimes. see, the title of "survivor" is just thrown about, willy nilly, to any old person who had cancer, doesn't have cancer anymore and is still alive. however, i'll contend that "survivor" does not necessarily equal "winner." i guess what i'm asking is how would i score a lady who lost a boobie but is still alive and what section of "the definitive, comprehensive official cancer almanac" would she fall under? clearly not "winners" but how can you have a legitimate sport without a clear delineation amongst "winners" and "losers?" we here at the home office of "ba dum BLOG!!!," by a vote of 1-0, have decided that these people are "losers." sexist? no, by virtue of the commutative and/or transitive property, dudes with one nut are "losers" too. my apologies to john kruk and tom green. what, not funny?
remember how in "dallas" when pat duffy wanted to leave the show to be a big movie star? well, they killed off his character (bob ewing) and ran a whole season of "dallas" sans bob ewing. however, no one wanted him to be in their movies so he came crawling back to "dallas," tail betwixt his legs. so, how did "dallas" explain a whole season of dead bob ewing? they just started off the new season with the last scene pat duffy was in before he died, two seasons prior, and said the previous season was just pam's (bob's wife) dream. well, i've decided my previous six or so months will be like this and while i'm not sure who bob is, who pam is, who "dallas" is and/or who the movie industry is but it's all gonna' be me. see, i don't want a rebirth and/or reinvention like the "madonna" or "the undertaker;" i want a mulligan like pat duffy. however, in lieu of "the madonna's" bindi, i will be sporting "the undertaker's" single black tear. ba dum BLOGger = tears of an ass clown (thank you, smokey robinson and chris jericho)... sad :(
ba dum BLOG!!!
Thursday, May 22, 2008
12 greatest racial slurs of all-time
in alphabetical order
alabama blue gums
(black)
i like this slur because it sounds like an unaffiliated, double-a baseball club. and, with minor league baseball, one of of the main draws is its wacky promotional nights. for example, they can have a promotion where they hand out zillions of blue gumballs and encourage the fans to spit on the opposing team.
bohunk
dirt burglar
(white - australian)
greaseball
jigaboo
shylock
ba dum BLOG!!!
editors note: i resign.
Monday, May 19, 2008
peck of pickled blog
can you be both dumb and evil??? see, that's why i've never completely bought into being a full-on george w. bush hater like hippies and lesbians will want you to be. you can't have it both ways; anti-bush people need to pick one and just stick with it or else you are just contradicting yourself. the only person i can think of as being legitimately both dumb and evil is gargamel. however, he was smart enough to create smurfette but then, when she turned good, he wanted to destroy her like the rest of the smurfs. wait a second, kinda' like how america created saddam hussein only for him to turn evil and bush wanting to and destroying him through the sorcery of creating a silly war. like woah.
i don't understand the economy nor do i think it really involves me much. i hear it's bad now and i know gas is expensive and people can't sell their homes but that don't impress a me much (thank you, shania twain). but what does impress a me much is the trickle down effect that all things economical is having on fast food restaurants. you have the 5, $5 foot longs at subway, $5 deli favorites at quiznos and the new, under a dollar value meal at the taco bell. i think i even saw something cheap at boston market too but i'm not sure. see, i understand the economy: high gas prices and bad real estate market = cheaper fast food. yeah, economy - you think you're "bad" but do you have the touch? do you think you're elvis or something?
every good, innovative movie spawns horrible, copycat-ish movies. first we had "borat" as a foreigner-out-of-water sort of deal that was hilarious and now we'll have such unfunny summer fare attempting to capitalize on this phenomena with adam sandler in "don't mess with the zohan" and mike myers in the "love guru." who knows, maybe these movies will be good but i don't see it. foreign guys with funny accents and cultural naivety does a funny movie not make. sure, this genre existed before "borat" with movies like "coming to america" and "austin powers" but you can't tell me it's just coincidence that these two surface just a year after "borat." but see, adam sandler and mike meyers miss the point because "borat" wasn't about borat being silly but how stupid americans and american culture is. see, it happens in tv too; a year after "sex and the city" went off the air we were blessed with "the lipstick jungle," "cashmere mafia," and " the clitoris cartel."
ba dum BLOG!!!
Tuesday, May 13, 2008
van blog
so, the pope says it's okay to believe in aliens. well, considering the pope also mentally and/or physically masturbates to the idea of a jewish carpenter rising from the dead and literally flying up to heaven, it makes sense. i mean, at least he's consistent. but this isn't about xtian bashing (friend of the blog, big joe, already chastised me for blogging too much of this - and he was right). this is about aliens. see, i totally believe in aliens and just think they are over evolved humans from a planet further along than us. i think the agreed upon, most popular vision of an alien is the one with the huge head, huge eyes, little body, white/grayish/greenish skin and long fingers, right? well, if we just keep on evolving, this description is exactly where we'll be in like a million some years. see, i took a ton of anthropology classes in college and every physical characteristic aliens have is consistent with basic evolution and common sense. first off, as we evolved from cavemen, our heads grew and our bodies shrank and/or atrophied. i can't remember if our heads actually grew or if it just looks like that because our bodies shrank but, either way, we used our heads more and created technology so our bodies would do less work and thus, atrophied. secondly, i seem to remember something about intelligence in species being related to eye to head size ratio (i can't find anything in a rudimentary googling search that substantiates this, but still...). then, we're all becoming paler because we're spending less time outdoors because of computers and, in the future, because of the sun/pollution. and finally, if you look at all our technology it keeps getting smaller and smaller thus resulting in our fingers becoming longer and more spindly. see???? aliens = over evolved humans. simple science.
ba dum BLOG!!!
editor's note: "ton of anthropology classes" hardly qualifies as being able to draw the ridiculous conclusions ba dum BLOGger draws.
Thursday, May 8, 2008
ba dum BLOGger jr.
my show
http://badumblog.blogspot.com/2008/04/gimme-bucket-o-blog.html
mark burnett's show
http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117973076.html?categoryid=14&cs=1
another ba dum BLOG!!! post-modern flashback/update!!! saw "iron man," solid movie, not great... but they managed to use the most cliche/lame-o action shot in the world. yes, the hero's casual, unflinching walk away from and explosion. remember when i blogged about this??? i hope you appreciate all the memory laning in this blog; i'm just making sure that you know that i know that you know how relevant and timeless my blogging is. oh, on a semi-related note, is there a pedagogical reason in the english language for the way superheroes utilize the surname "man?" for example, we have "superman," "iron man" and "spider-man...wtf???
the 'xplosion
(also note all the fanboys' comments of how "coool" it is - lolzzz)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VuUHH1ydnJM&watch_response
original 'xplosion
http://badumblog.blogspot.com/2008/02/jack-and-blog.html
i remember back in high school my pals and i thought it would be hilarious if a computer virus was created called the "tom brokaw is gay" virus. this was back when "gay humour" was the end all and be all of our comedy lives. ("back when"...HAH!) oh, and also back when tom brokaw was still nbc's nightly news anchor - obviously. what if the virus was HUGE like the "michelangelo" virus or the "i love you" virus - these were all over the news. how would tom brokaw approach this? would he raise his hands and use "air quotes," say "whose name will remain nameless is gay" virus or would he suck it up (pun INTENDED) and roll with it? i tend to think he'd suck it up (pardon the pun), clear his throat, roll his eyes and be a pro about it because he's from north dakota and that's how north dakotians do.
when i have a son i will forbid him from ever throwing a football, catching a football, running with a football and/or sitting on a football (because, as we all learned in football practice - the football is not a chair, or was it the helmet that wasn't a chair?) is this because i'm worried about my son getting hurt or because i'm a jon lithgowian, "footloose"-esque, religious control freak (you know, because he made dancing illegal...) no, it's because my son is going to be the greatest kicker/punter in the history of the national football league (because it's illegal to simply call it the nfl). move aside ray guy, sorry morten andersen; ba dum BLOGger jr. will be the next great leg. why should he waste his time running, throwing, catching and tackling? only genetic freaks can make it in the national football league nowadays and, because of injuries and general suckiness, the average career is like two years. also, teams waste two roster spots on a kicker and a punter while my boy will do both. i think this new, super-hybrid position will be called a "kunter" or "picker."
ba dum BLOG!!!
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
14 worst moving pictures of all-time
in alphabetical order
anchorman
box office: $85,288,303
rotten tomatoes: 64%
this is a gateway movie in the sense where "anchorman" opened the door for will ferrell to star in a string of plotless, cookie cutter comedies which showcase his vacuous, inflectionless man-child character that america has grown to love. i don't even think this movie had a script; it was just will ferrell improvising nonsensical lines about "whale vaginas," "scotch" and "rich mahogany." plus, this is the kind of movie that perpetuates all those "movie quote dudes" who mindlessly recite inane movie lines in social settings because they have no personality and/or originality. it's sad that the best snl player of all time and a guy with genuine comedic talent has been reduced to this.
charlie and the chocolate factory
rotten tomatoes: 83%
click
box office: $137,355,633
rotten tomatoes: 32%
crash
rotten tomatoes: 75%
yes, this movie won the oscar for best motion picture. this is one of those bleeding heart, liberal movies that sob about how racist we are. it is so ridiculously over the top that some parts were actually hilarious - like when matt dillon is on the phone with the heavy-set woman of colour or when he feels up the skinny woman of questionable colour. the whole thing was so condescending it came off like a cheesy, 70s after school special starring kristy mcnichol and robby benson.
dogma/jay and silent bob strike back
box office: $30,652,890, $30,085,147
rotten tomatoes: 67%, 53%
kevin smith is hilarious if you ever hear him interviewed or see any of his speaking engagements but his movies suck - it's a strange dichotomy. sure, "clerks" was good but, if you watch it now, you'll realize that it was more different and unique than good. however, "dogma" and "jay and silent bob strike back" were especially bad. "dogma" was actually a pretty good idea but was ruined by chris rock and a "shit monster." then, in "jay and silent bob strike back," kevin smith took the single most worst thing from his movies (jay and silent bob) and created a whole "shit monster" centered around them. as an actor, jay makes chris rock look like sId poitier (continuing with the unspoken rule that you can only compare like races) and silent bob couldn't be less relevant and compelling if he were "invisible bob."
gardenstate
box office: $26,782,316
rotten tomatoes: 87%
i love jews and whiny indie movies (no, i really do) but this picture was trash. this is one of those movies that every college kid says they like just to prove that they're hip. in college, "garden state" is to movies like "dave matthews" is to music. anyway, i didn't even get the plot - zach braff's character is a depressed actor who is still riddled with guilt over accidentally killing his mother when he's five. couldn't he have been depressed and guilty over something a little more subtle? and, even though he got sent away from home like a million years ago, everyone in town inexplicably remembers him at first glance. oh, and natalie portman's character - wtf??? i hate these movies where finding a gf seems to solve all of life's problems.
the last samurai
box office: $111,127,263
rotten tomatoes: 66%
i hated this movie for the imperialistic, super offensive "great white hope" bent it had to it. so, you have tom cruise as an alcoholic civil war soldier who gets sent over to japan to teach the army how to fight and somehow ends up with the samurai's who, in turn, teach him how not to be such a jerk and kick his alcoholism and then, when they all go to war, he ends up being the last samurai standing because, only after a few months of training, becomes a more effective samurai than all the japanese dudes who were practically born as samurais. seriously, how offensive must this be to the japanese? i mean, tom cruise of all people becomes the last living samurai?!?!?! this would be like a dinka becoming the last, great blogger.
knocked up
box office: $148,768,91
rotten tomatoes: 90%
now, this movie is more overrated than "bad" per se but, with that being said, i think i lol'd out LOUD only once and knew exactly what was going to happen before i even saw the movie. gal gets pregnant, she's stressed, guy doesn't understand, girl exiles him, guy pulls it together, mad dash to the hospital where hilarious labor hijinx ensue, guy proves to the gal he's gots what it takes just as the baby crowns and the gal, vulnerable from pushing out a baby, falls for it. never mind, it was bad. also, the premise was so ridiculously unrealistic it angered me. look, i'm a wise-cracking, lovable loser and that NEVER translates into me scoring with a hot chick like that - and i'm not even fat plus, i have a 401k and benefits!!! plus, abortion wasn't even discussed. this is the situation abortions were mercifully made for.
oceans 12
box office: $125,544,280
rotten tomatoes: 55%
now, this movie was an excuse for clooney, pitt and the boys to play grab-ass and philander over international waters. however, that doesn't account for the writers and directors having julia roberts' character impersonate herself as a julia roberts impersonator (yeah, huh?) and having the fella's climactic attempt at stealing an egg thwarted - only to learn, in a post-climax flashback, that they already stole the egg and replaced the egg in an anticlimactic flashback which undercut the original climax. yes, it was an anti-climactic climax which followed a faux-climax which really wasn't very climactic to begin with (yeah, huh?). oh yeah, and we were all led to believe all subsequent action was manipulated just so catherine zeta-jones' character could meet up with her long lost papa (yeah, huh?).
pirates of the caribbean 2
and 3
box office: $423,315,812, $309,420,425
rotten tomatoes: 54%, 45%
i have never been more confused by movies than i was while watching the second and third installments of "pirates of the caribbean." look, i've always been in the highest reading groups in elementary school, took ap and honours english and literature courses in high school and received a degree in communications from an accredited california university and i was still completely lost - by pirate movies?!?!?!? yet, these movies had nothing to do with piracy; booty stealing and ship commandeering were eschewed in lieu of voodoo, zombies, half-dead fish people, convoluted pirate law and order, upside down under worlds and a gigantic, pulsating heart. and, there were no stakes in the movies because every character died like five time over, always being saved by some pirate loophole so during all their death defying, swashbuckling stunts there were no stakes - rendering the plot moot.
box office: $44,668,798
rotten tomatoes: 87%
this is the oldest and probably best moving picture in the bunch. see, it was a good movie in the sense that the story and pacino were so ridiculously over-the-top that it is a real fun and intentionally/unintentionally funny picture. however, the cultural relevance and reverence this movie holds in the hip hop community is ridiculous and totally underscores any validity it has. all these rappa's and gangsta's seriously look at tony montana's (no tilde button for my enyay) life as a blue print for success and that magical word - respect. c'mon people, tony montana was an egomaniacal, psychotic, homicidal, incestuous (albeit overtonal) no-good punk. this guy was hilarious and fun to watch but by no means should he hold the esteem he does. seriously, hip hop looks at this guy like he's michael jordan - only if michael jordan dies on a mountain of coke and riddled with bullet holes.
star wars 1,2 and 3
box office: $431,088,301, $302,191,252, $380,270,577
rotten tomatoes: 64%, 67%, 79%
okay, i'm a dork and loove the original star wars trilogy (known in the fanboy world as the "o.t.") however, lucas turned these movies into an orgy of cartoony special effects wrapped around a convoluted plot about intergalactic trade laws and reduced darth vader into a punk, jealous, brooding teenager. look enough has been written about this but if you really want to sink your teeth into all that is wrong with the new trilogy, i'll refer you to this fanboy-tastical, awesome website. http://www.chefelf.com/starwars/
titanic
box office: $600,788,188
rotten tomatoes: 82%
holy mackerel, due to all the critical (like a bazillion oscars) and financial (highest grossing of all-time?) success this has to be the most overrated moving picture of all-time. first off, this is a love story which revolves around a ridiculously over the top evil and snidely whiplashesque bad guy (bill zane) who basically forces his fat and slutty girlfriend (kate winslett) to knock the boots with a twelve-year-old stowaway (leo dicaprio) who looks more like her nephew than the hunky hero who's tossing it in her pail. see, you'd think the story-tellers would be sensitive to the fact that kate winslett is a husky whore and try to draw as much attention away from it as possible, yet the main reason leo dies is because their hunk of flotsam and/or jetsam they're left to survive on isn't big enough to fit the 200 lb. kate and the 140 lb. leo. then, kate as an old bag, returns to the scene of the crime only to selfishly throw a piece of jewelery, which would probably fetch like a gazillion dollars for charity, over the edge of the ship. wtf?!?!?!?
transformers
box office: $319,246,193
rotten tomatoes: 57%
this is the quintessential action movie that gets progressively and assuredly more boring and dumb for every second of mind-numbingly loud and visually painful, plot-killing action sequence. this movie also gave us a blisteringly hot tomboy, auto mechanic and female computer hacker of the same ilk - when we all know there is no such thing. then, the final action sequence of the moving picture occurs in a fictional city by the name of "mission city" which is complete with the skyline of downtown los angeles and a wilshire blvd. to boot. now, with all the special effects in the movie, why wouldn't they add or subtract a few buildings from the skyline or change the street sign so it doesn't read as "wilshire blvd.?" wait, what was i thinking? this movie is awesome! it features talking, alien robots that change into vehicles and make friends with social outcast humans!!!
ba dum BLOG!!!
Friday, May 2, 2008
blogletting
look, i have no problem with the marijuana and would vote for its legalization - if i voted. i even went through the obligatory, short lived pot phase in college when i was trying to find myself. and now, i'll even puff the pipe and/or blow the bong from time to time but now it makes me incredibly weird(er) so i try to avoid it. anyway, with pot being illegal, i don't get how things like "high times" can exist or why celebrities feel so free to wax poetic on it in all sorts of media. isn't a publication like "high times" akin to hypothetical periodicals which glorify other illegalities such as "juicy jimbo" (steroids), "peach fuzz illustrated" (pedophilia) and/or "bleeders digest" (bloodletting)? couldn't the dea just thumb through "high times" and book these dannos one by one? or, when celebrities speak freely on their pot usage, couldn't the narcs also turn the screws to get to their dealer or whatnot? look, it's ridiculous that pot is illegal and maybe the country's collective blind eye to it is indicative of their concurrence with this but i just don't see it. it just seems like all these fuddy duddy political types would be chomping at the bit to use these outlets to bust some hippies.
have you seen the preview for this "what happens in vegas" moving picture? okay, first off, the czar says "NYET!" to all references to the "what happens in vegas, stays in vegas" verbiage - consider it retired. okay, back to bidnesss. in this preview, they feature a scene where ashton kutcher meets cameron diaz's boss and his name is "richard banger" to which the incredibly witty and clever kutcher responds with "i guess that makes you 'dick banger'." really, this joke made it into an actual hollywood movie which cost millions upon million of dollars to make. and, this joke is noteworthy enough to make it to the trailer. "dick banger" doesn't even make any sense. what is this "dick" banging? is this a euphemism for intercourse or solitaire? (yes, i'm so smitten with my own blog that i feel i can freely drop "solitaire" and everyone knows what i'm blogging about, thank you) if it were sex, it'd be "cooter banger" and you don't really "bang" anything during solitaire, do you? ugh, am i really stooping to the level of analyzing this "joke." i'm embarassed for everyone.
ba dum BLOG!!!