All movies not created sequel

Last weekend the animated sequel Ice Age 2 earned some $67 million more than another sequel that also debuted, Basic Instinct 2. Instinct director Paul Verhoeven claims that the lack of interest in the Sharon Stone vehicle is due to the puritanical, Christian attitude of the U.S. as exemplified by the current presidential administration.

Of course the paltry gross may just be because it’s a bad movie, but Verhoeven could be on to something. Consider that the much-acclaimed gay sheepherder movie “Brokeback Mountain” has grossed about $80 million in the 17 weeks its been out – roughly $10 million more than Ice Age 2 did in just its first weekend, and some $200 million behind what “The Chronicles of Narnia” has taken in during those same 17 weeks (source: Box Office Mojo). Is it merely a case of good vs. evil or silly triumphing over slutty, or is it something more? I haven’t seen either one of the movies, but let’s, er, go to the film and break it down to see which might get my $8:

  • Ice Age 2 features cute prehistoric animals that make you care about what happens to them; Basic Instinct 2 features a Tyranosaurus Sex.
  • In Ice Age 2, moviegoers wanted another chance to see Ray Romano as a woolly mammoth; In Basic Instinct 2 apparently few people want another chance to see Sharon Stone’s woolly.
    (See, Marty, I’m trying to be evil.)
  • If you go to an Ice Age 2 kid’s matinee you leave feeling dirty because of what you just sat in, as opposed to feeling dirty because of what you just sat through.
  • Ice Age 2 has animals that act almost human; Basic Instinct 2 has humans that act like animals.
  • The actors in Ice Age 2 are cuter and more animated.

Sorry, Mr. Verhoeven, my money’s on the cartoon but good luck with your film. Perhaps you’ll sell more tickets in those Islamic countries.

There goes my street cred

“I don’t care if Ned Flanders is the nicest guy in the world. He’s a jerk — end of story.”

— Homer Simpson

Marty Andrade has been offering one paragraph “Who are these people?” descriptions of the blogs on his blogroll (actually, Marty calls this feature something else, but I try not to use that kind of language here). Yesterday the spotlight turned to me:

I think John is the least evil man ever. A family man, a right honorable person who just isn’t evil. He does a good blog, he’s almost the Ned Flanders of the blogosphere. That’s all I could think of. It’s weird, whenever I read his blog (which again, is excellent) all I can think about is how completely not evil the man is. I don’t know if that’s an endorsement or not…

Hey, I can be evil! I can! Just this morning I left some stray beard hairs in the bathroom sink. Bwa-ha-ha! My wife told me to clean them up, and you know what I said? Huh? Well, I didn’t really say anything. I just went in there and cleaned them up — but I didn’t say I was sorry, either! Ha! Also, I mock our cat mercilessly. Mercilessly, I tell you, until I make him cry! And Jeff Kouba at Peace Like a River is always saying I’m evil! I’ve even waved bloody knives at the Mall Diva’s prospective suitors! And next week I’m … oops, mustn’t say too much … the world will just have to wait and see!

The Marshall Planet

I saw the excerpt below in today’s The Writer’s Almanac and it raised some questions in my mind that I thought I’d throw out for comments. But first:

It was on this day in 1948 that President Harry Truman signed the European Recovery Program (known as the Marshall Plan) into law, which allocated more than $5 billion in aid to help revitalize the economy of European countries after World War II. That amount eventually grew to more than $18 billion, which is the equivalent of about $100 billion in today’s dollars.

At the time, Europe was on the verge of economic collapse. Whole cities had been destroyed. Factories had shut down. The winter of 1947 was one of the coldest on record and many Europeans were unemployed and homeless, freezing to death.

Though the plan to help Europe became known as the Marshall Plan, it was not George Marshall who came up with it. In fact, it was a small group of lesser-known American strategists and diplomats who realized that the situation in Europe could result in communist takeover of the entire continent. So they turned to Secretary of State George Marshall, who as a well-known war hero and public figure at the time, hoping he could sell the plan to the public.

Marshall immediately bought into the idea and became its spokesperson. He announced the plan at the commencement ceremony at Harvard on June 5, 1947. He then went on a countrywide tour, promoting the plan to ordinary Americans. He later said it felt like he was running for president.

It was a hard sell. Most Americans were tired of all the sacrificing they’d done during the war, and they weren’t too excited about continuing to sacrifice for the benefit of Europeans. The Marshall Plan might never have been enacted if a communist government hadn’t taken control of Czechoslovakia in the winter of 1948.

During the quarter century after the Marshall Plan was introduced, Europe experienced its highest economic growth ever. Western Europe’s gross national product increased by 32 percent. It was one of the most generous and one of the most successful acts of American foreign policy.

What occurred to me was to picture what today’s world would be like if there had been no Marshall Plan and Europe had indeed become Communist in the late 1940s. I’m not trying to make any point with these thoughts, but just trying to imagine how different the world might be today.

  • Would the continent have had enough critical mass to have survived, ala China, despite the inefficiencies of the Communist model, or would the sytem have collapsed even more rapidly than what happened in the Soviet Union?
  • Without NATO would a nuclear war have been more likely in the past 50 years? Without an arms race, would the Soviet Union (and/or Communist Europe) still be around?
  • Would Communist Europe have been under Soviet hegemony, or would each country have maintained it’s own government and a prickly peace with the USSR?
  • Having already ceded Europe to Communism, would the U.S. have fought for Viet Nam (and what would a Communist France have meant in Indochina in the 50s and early 60s?)
  • Let’s assume Communist Europe would have failed economically in the last 50 years; would these countries be better off today as a result of failure, followed by reform, or with the slower death by socialism that appears to be the present course?
  • What would have happened to the U.S. post-war morale and economy if the countries we had fought to free had become communist and if we didn’t have access to these markets?

Again, I don’t think I’m going anywhere with this; I’m just trying to imagine a different world than the one I grew up in. What do you think?

Challenging Word of the Week: gargantuan

Gargantuan
(gar GAN choo un) adjective

Anyone or anything described as gargantuan is huge, gigantic, vast, or of enormous proportions. The adjective, often capitalized, is derived from Gargantua, the amiable giant king whose exploits are recorded in the novel of that name, one of the two great satirical works by Francois Rabelais (1494-1553). His books, full of coarse, broad, boisterous wit and humor, are characterized by the type of licentious language associated with the adjective Rabelaisian. Gargantua was noted for his incredibly voracious appetite (garganta is Spanish for “gullet”; cf. French gargoille, throat, and English derivatives gargle and gargoyle), so great that on one occasion the insatiable guzzler swallowed whole five pilgrims – with their staves! – mixed in a salad. In Shakespeare’s As You Like It (Act III, Scene 2), Rosalind asks Celia a torrent of questions about Orlando and winds up: “Answer me in one word.” Celia replies: “You must borrow me* Gargantua’s mouth first: ‘tis a word too great for any mouth of this age’s size…” One can speak of the gargantuan appetite of a trencherman, the gargantuan length of one of those endless historical novels, or the gargantuan task of cleaning up after a hurricane.

* (Note: Shakespearean scholars have apparently overlooked this indication of the bard’s Minnesota upbringing. NW)

My example: As with Gargantua, the gargantuan federal budget could stand to mix in a salad.

From the book, “1000 Most Challenging Words” by Norman W. Schur, ©1987 by the Ballantine Reference Library, Random House. I post a weekly “Challenging Words” definition to call more attention to this delightful book and to promote interesting word usage in the blogosphere. I challenge other bloggers to work the current word into a post sometime in the coming week. If you manage to do so, please leave a comment or a link to where I can find it. Previous words in this series can be found under the appropriate Category heading in the right-hand sidebar.

Random Language of the Week

Hee-hee, Dad’s out of town, so here’s something educational my friend Kerry sent me for you seekers of knowledge out there:

Learn Chinese in 5 Minutes — (READ OUT LOUD FOR FULL EFFECT)

1) That’s not right………………………..Sum Ting Wong

2) Are you harboring a fugitive……………..Hu Yu Hai Ding

3) See me ASAP…………………………….Kum Hia

4) Stupid man……………………………..Dum Gai

5) Small horse…………………………….Tai Ni Po Ni

6) Did you go to the beach………………….Wai Yu So Tan

7) I bumped the coffee table………………..Ai Bang Mai Ni

8) I think you need a face lift……………..Chin Tu Fat

9) It’s very dark in here…………………..Wao So Dim

10) I thought you were on a diet……………..Wai Yu Mun Ching

11) This is a tow away zone………………….No Pah King

12) Our meeting was rescheduled………………Wai Yu Kum Nao

13) Staying out of sight…………………….Lei Ying Lo

14) He’s cleaning his automobile……………..Wa Shing Ka

15) Your body odor is offensive………………Yu Stin Ki Pu