Tumbling up on a previous item,
this is from the deviant art website. It was also a featured object shown to everybody [who cared to be aware] and had 1119 users proclaim it “favorite” as of the time when I saw it, august 2011. Observe the system drawing people in: putting simplistic faces on inanimate objects, particularly the big arc mouth with perfectly circular black dot eyes at the ends. Anything drawn like this is immediately marketable, especially food. Can you write the letter U and a period? Can you draw a square? Congratulations, you created HappyBread® Brands LLC INC. Here’s 3 millions dollars. Don’t put ears on it, though; that’s copyright infringement against CatLoaf, the exclusive intellectual property of Bananazone International Holdings, who get to sue you now. Don’t put eyeshadow and white makeup on it, either; that’s DeathLoaf, the inspired imaginatorneering of Gatherib Wendlemeyer, praise be upon her, a talented genius prodigy 17 year old graphic professional designist from Seattle who gets to order cronies to taunt you on twitter forever and then sue you also. Um I think this is art theft u guys???? I actually have total confidence in my statement but this insecurity is a total put on guys?????? Idek is it??????????????????????? Guys. It’s like, I just.
Watch this, here be a horrid picture of something that I ate, because I compulsively photographed my food for a few years, to assist the coroner.
Here it is again with that one face drawn on it. Notice how it’s still ugly, but it has that face on it. This is “cute” to some people. Specifically, the ones who spend $30 on an ugly flat-colored short sleeved shirt with a slogan or a logo on it. Imagine if you drew this face vomiting a rainbow that also had this face on it. Much like the poster bodonies, it’s really easy and really popular.
What is my problem? Can’t I just be happy for other people’s success? Clearly I can’t (and it is worse when it is people I have met in person but do not have any financial connection to). That isn’t real success, anyhow; the person did three other nearly identical scenes, and almost nobody who looked at this one looked at the others, and even less looked at the things which weren’t this. Why build people up to such a ludicrous degree like that just to immediately chop them down with your negligence? That’s rude. Why not make an effort at an earnest, ongoing appreciation, or, if you don’t truly think it is special, not pretend it’s some historical masterpiece? Because those who appeared were someone else’s crony. They like ugly, easily produced artwork, but only if the right person tells them to.
Anyhow, this was meant to transition into my real point, which is
Hey later, man. I’m eatin’ a celery stick.
That is a good reason. Very well, you are excused. Who is still here?
I have to go, too.
I have witnessed the hobbit film and I do wonder why I fussed over the movie dorks changing the story to make it match the other movies better; that was precisely what I had hoped they would do. I had little interest in this film as long as I knew precisely what was coming next.
I still question the need to have “pretty” dwarves; when I saw those guys with human noses and no beards in the promotional image on the previous occasion, I just assumed one of them was Aragorn, the non-dwarf man from the other film series, whose presence would be superfluous and require me to accept that he was at least 90 years old in the other films. In fact, they are
Kili and Fili Fili and Kili, who are indeed “supposed” to be with the company (which makes me wonder why they are deserting it in that picture) and, true to the source book, distinguishable from the other dwarves.
Obviously dwarves are not born old and bearded (right?) but surely they don’t abruptly grow fat prosthetic noses and British accents once they reach their prime ages. It probably makes financial sense, again, to have a designated “heartthrob” character, and rather depressing that we must absolutely bow to this whim. Anyway it works for Filly And Killy, who are designated the closest thing to that “role,” but I don’t believe Thorin, the boss dwarf, as a young type. His authority comes from his ties to the old dwarf kingdom, so he should be old, or at least really dwarfy. He gets enough screen time that he can be distinctive without looking like Aragaragorn. He has some nice battle wounds gained by conflict new for the film that only seems there to help him get battle wounds, but he is still fundamentally pretty. If you want to make a movie with pretty warriors who fight forever for no reason, adapt a Final Fantasy game.
My only real problem with this is those stupid boots pointing up.
As things are, the director Peter Jackson in his publicity attire looks more dwarfy and less groomed than Thorin does in full costume after weeks of marching, camping, and not bathing. I have also decided against posting any pictures of Peter Jackson on this web-page.
But that is all trickery! Movie magic!
let us talk about something natural.
Does this look all natural to you?
Does this look even partially natural?
The only thing I like more than creepy shiny symmetrical computer people are bright red open mouths. Also, that statement was insincere. This is important because I told you.
Now, with my school classes currently concluded, I do, in theory, I have time to finish some of the long and baffling incomplete website objects which I have accumulated in the past four months.
NO ME LIKE BAFFLING SERIES OF NONSEQUITURS WITH NO ENDING BETTER. ME PUNISH.
However, I will probably play old video games I have completed before and continue posting half-thoughts at about the same interval as before, now that I have gotten used to not doing it very often.
I am kidding; I can also play newer remakes of older games
Additionally I can play slightly older remakes of equally old games
I can play slightly newer remakes of slightly less– excuse me, am I boring you?
I can also play Wanderers From Ys
that’s what I thought. I am glad you are behaving reasonably.
I am not quite back in control yet; I nearly had something for Friday but could not bring it into a functionally stupid phase
Barbie shows up the critics who claim she is a bad role model who stereotypes women as dumb and unfit for employment in male-dominated fields by beginning her 2012 presidential campaign immediately following the election. I come in this store at least once every two weeks and I never saw this display until [yesterday], November 29. Today is 15 days from then, I am aware. I haven’t even had a chance to turn my last calendar page yet, with all the unsatisfying futile time-eating rubbish about. I can’t wait to see what month it is.
Vote for Barbie(R) If corporations are people, registered trademarks might as well be, and they might as well run for president.
Also, I heard there was a movie about hobbits being made. Hobbits are regular people who just happen to be short and have a funny name and are skilled at having books about them get turned into expensive films. I thought I had from last April or the year before some big dumb thing written about from it but it turns out to only be a paragraph. I probably thought pah I will finish this later when I have more time. It was the “pah” which doomed the idea, I suspect.
Searching my hard drive for hobbit-related imagery I only pulled up “Hobbit Mario,” a pointless and effort lacking super mario bros. edit in the bland tradition that some gork had put on the internet at some point, so hopefully we can have this entry resolved with a minimal amount of visual distraction.
Back now in April or a year before I inadvertently became aware of a hobbit film, I went through various information about it, regarding changes to the script and actors reprising their roles from the Lord of the Rings series. I momentarily thought “oh that’s neat that Christopher Lee changed his mind about portraying Saruman in the The Hobbit movie,” for an earlier report had suggested he didn’t want to get on an airplane and go back to New Zealand at his age. And then I remembered that he isn’t actually in the The Hobbit story at all. And then I saw that Frodo and Legolas, who also weren’t supposed to be present, had signed on to appear, and it started to remind me of the Star Wars pre-sequels, which were so incapable of developing interesting characters or situations that every scene or so hey look it’s Jabby the Hutt or boy howdy it’s Chewbaccy! They have nothing to do with the story, but the story isn’t any good anyhow so look gee it’s R2D2! Forgive this film’s faults by remembering better movies this director has directed! Because you’ll pay to see it however awful it is!
It already, as of now in April when I wrote this has a 500 million dollar budget; higher than the gross of all but the most successful movies in history. This thing would have to take in half a billion dollars of revenoop even to justify its existence, never-mind make a profit.
I tried to figure out who had been cast as Bowman, the bard, who is brought into the story toward the end moments before suddenly doing something important. As long as we’re changing stuff up, could we bring Bardy in sooner so his significance makes more sense? No I think they’re going to cut him out altogether and have Legolas take his place. It’s not enough that he gets to take the place of the multiple archers who kill the evil elephant in Return of the King and by the way also die in the process? He gets to [do something], too?
I understand wanting to compensate for the lack of characterization in the book, among characters that are allowed to live, anyway. Mr. Tolkein, the writer, liked nothing better than to introduce a villain and kill him in the same chapter. In The Hobbit he actually would kill the villain and THEN tell us who it was. By the way that Goblin who just got slain abruptly after appearing was the great king of all west goblins and was cousin to the other king goblin I killed earlier and has 7 CMA awards and crochets in his spare time. Well now he’s dead. Good work.
As for non-villains, JR introduces 11, I think, dwarves at the start, and then he realizes that he can only think of five distinct dwarf personalities. Thorin, the head dwarf who is obsessed with being a dwarf, Ballin, the more sensible dwarf, Bomburo, who is fat and resents the other dwarves for resenting his fatness,
Feely and Key Lee who are small and function as one character, and all the rest, essentially. Dwarves are short anyway, but these two are smaller than most dwarves but still bigger than hobbits, I surmise. Even pairing them up doesn’t alleviate the clear superfluousness of half the cast because that still leaves three pairs that have no purpose. Two of them start the story with tinder-boxes, which are used for starting fires, but they LOSE their tinder boxes and so become generic “this guy and that guy.”
On the other ehh, this mere jrr token acknowledgement gives more personality to the rabble than a generic label of “the crew” or “the others” would. Maybe they are supposed to be unimportant, but they’re still PEOPLE, goshgrabbim. I think my point is that instead of adding more people we should do more with the people we already have.
Also, this is to be TWO movies? Hobbit had the largest print and sparsest pages of the series, so how does it get two movies? How much of the running time will be the dreary chant-songs that the book occupies chapters worth of space with? How much extra, unnecessary screen time will Gollum get? How much of it will be the gang stopping and feasting for a month every time they meet someone Gandalf knows?
And eat it too, I suppose!
Alright, I see. I didn’t post it because it was stupid. Fortunately, I regularly post stupid things; I merely try not to. I expect to see the film this weekend with family members because I realized that’s the only use I am as company: doing things that don’t require any personal interaction or input. Even if a decent amount of people hypothetically had shown up at my famous art show I wouldn’t have much to say to them apart from “hey I am the person who made that over there.” Thankfully, I can say that in my life time I have made something.
and this wasn’t worth ten minutes! MY ten minutes; I realize you hacked and distributed this in 7. And now I’ve contemplated my response to this imagery for 20 minutes. This will make great mandatory extra deleted scene footage for the dvd release. In fact I should delete it right now.
This imagery was worked into the background on a website where I attempted to look up showing times, with the left on one side and right on the other. Which of these prominent figures is The HoBBIT? Which of them is supposed to be relevant for more than 20% of the story? Which of them is supposed to be in it at all? I get the impression the filmmakers wished they had been making a different film. Or the advertisers wished the filmmakers had wished that.
Cards that were, I presume, used in a limited variety of areas to promote the “real” art show that will occur regardless of my personal involvement on Thursday of this week.
This, being legally Thursday, would be unreasonably late to make such an announcement, but I am unaccustomed to anybody I know from the internet having easy access to any of my locations. That is probably the best for all parties involved. I pose this out of compulsion. That is also a safety matter.
I am concerned that the only people I know will be showing up are people who could just come and visit me at my apartment. That would have saved much effort and one awkward, sleep-deprived bimshwel entry. However, the promotion promises a “holiday party for the arts community” which is probably the same group from the Summer “member shows,” and that is swell; it’s really not right that we should only have the opportunity to utterly not relate to each other only once a year. I never get tired of people who never get tired of dreary local landscapes and collages of random newspaper headlines painted red and put in frames.
The title is not my doing; when I saw “no, seriously” I said “oh, honestly.” However, I can be blamed for negligence regarding the name associated with my outgoing email. Beans cunningham because it vaguely resembles my given name. I would not use some internet alias for an important occasion like this because that would be silly. However, n ow that I have experimented with being called “beans” in person I dislike it also. I am too dull in person to be owed a name like beans. Fortunately, this is actually just that office again and not a real art gallery. Ah safe, reliable obscurity.
It is a nice office, though, and well-heated. I also approve of work being done.
The other side. The nemitz was not on the real card, I added it just now. Any sooner and NOBODY would be showing up. I couldn’t stand there being a white space. This modification is to teach me a lesson, then, clearly.
It is a reused nemitz; I am far behind all matters and not in a proper functioning state if I can’t take three minutes to draw a slightly different dumb mitz. That thing is SO PROUD and doesn’t even realize it’s a perfect duplicate of another nemitz. There is absolutely nothing unique about it! What a derivative scumbag!
The cover-claiming was similarly beyond my control; I would prefer to share it, for this setup here makes me The Establishment and a deserving target of resentment. I imagine enough as things are without actually needing to receive any.
I recently attended another art related “event,” and some of these cards were present there. A bit later, when I went to leave and get hustled for $3 by some guy outside waving a rake around, pretending to be the janitor (the real janitor would have, again, seen my pictures and known I couldn’t possibly have sold anything), I noticed the cards were all gone. That meant they were either all taken or deliberately tossed on the floor/into a waste receptacle. The first is good because it suggests interest in what I am doing and the second is good because it shows a triumph of taste and decency
The idea of people unknowingly bringing this into their homes is horrifying, and them doing it with full knowledge is worse!