Rare specimen of Democrat politician with spine – possibly also testicles – discovered in Florida

Folks who don’t live in Florida and/or don’t watch a solid amount of Cable News probably haven’t heard of Alan Grayson, the Freshman Democrat Congressman for Florida’s 8th District… but that’s probably going to change once THIS campaign “attack ad” against his Republican challenger Dan Webster hits the Monday news cycle – which was almost-certainly the point.

What makes the ad unique – at least among ads thus-far generally run by “liberals” against “conservatives” – is that it explicitly targets, vilifies and “calls out” the whole concept of “Religious Conservative” political ideology in the harshest possible terms. Summary of the piece: Webster is a hardline anti-abortion/anti women’s-rights Christian Fundamentalist, said views on women and abortion are similarly held by Islamic Fundamentalists, therefore supporting Webster is roughly equivalent to siding with… well, you get the idea – and in case you don’t, it closes out by re-christening Webster “Taliban Dan.”

Video after the jump…

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dvB-mHXcWzg

Now… there’s a part of me that looks at that and says “Ugh… y’know, regardless of what side it’s on this sort of hyperbole and villianization is exactly what’s wrong with the discourse as a whole.” The OTHER part of me, however – the part that lives in the real world and not Care-A-Lot – says “y’know what? Fuck yeah! Spot-on, about time SOMEONE said it out loud, more of this PLEASE!”

Okay, yeah… the generic “Arabic”-style script on “Taliban Dan” is probably a nudge too far.

But otherwise? Yeah, I’m not ashamed to admit that this particular smackdown makes me more than a little giddy. I’m no more a “liberal” than I am a “conservative” or a “Klingon,” but you don’t need to be a partisan to see what a cancer the “Religious Right” and “Social Conservatives” are on this country – and it’s been too long in coming for rational members of modernity to get up in said ideologies’ faces about how much their “values” have in common with the “values” we’re supposed to be at war with right now.

surprising

I’ve linked, grudgingly, to “Big Hollywood” – the ‘nominally-conservative-has-been-filmmaker-pity-party’ arm of Andrew Breitbart’s despicable New Media empire – in the past mostly for cautionary purposes, but I’ll give them a modicum of credit for actually putting something up worth reading.

For context, this was supposed to be part of a series on “Hollywood Feminism,” which has mostly been what you’d expect: A succession of would-be Church Ladies whining about too much sex on TV. But to editor John Nolte’s credit, he’s also put up an “alternative” (to put it mildly) take by his friend Lexi Alexander – the German-born female kickboxing champ turned director of “Green Street Hooligans” and the monstrously-underrated “Punisher: WarZone.”

Give it a read HERE – it’s probably the most reasonable thing that particular site has EVER bothered to post.

"Voltron" concept-art looks like you’d expect

Joblo.com scored some pieces of the concept art Atlas Entertainment is using to pitch a live-action “Voltron” movie to studios. It’s about what you’d expect – “Transformers”-style jaggy mecha design, magic-hour lighting, etc. You can’t really see if you don’t brighten it up, but the Lions are color-coded and look to be in the “proper” arrangement; so that’s something at least…

Honestly, they’re more interesting to look at in the context of HOW a “visual pitch” is intended to work: Notice how, while “explaining” the basic “big human-shape robot made of smaller lion-shaped robots” hook, it’s also working it’s ass off to remind potential investors of other profitable hits like “Transformers” (the mecha design and lighting) and “Iron Man” (look at “his” eyes and face.)

The Statue of Liberty is mainly there for scale (“Our robot can step on The Transformers!”) but I’m wondering if someone in the artist is making a funny about how The Internet somehow assumed that “Cloverfield” was actually teasing a Voltron movie. In any case, if this accurately reflects the story their pitching as well, that’s the element that’ll be the most controversial for Voltron/GoLion fans – the original story took place in a Star Wars/Trek-style future on another planet.

Milestone

The date has already passed here, and possibly where you are to, but just in case I didn’t want to let this pass without notice here: “Super Mario Bros.” is 25 years old today.

The original SMB was released on the Nintendo Famicom in Japan on 9/13/85. The game, alongside the NES, would arrive in the United States in limited release one Month later before a full roll-out in February ’86.

about book-burning

Believe it or not, I AVOID mentioning non-movie-related political stuff on this blog lately because A.) it requires an up-to-the-minute-ness I just don’t have time for and B.) I’d really rather not suddenly turn myself into a “public relations” liability for the various professional entities I’m involved with. BUT, sometimes there are “implications” or tangential questions to political stuff that I actually feel like speaking on and/or having a conversation about, so… here’s the deal: The (in my opinion) not-controversial part goes here BEFORE the jump, and if you feel like hearing a self-important movie critic prattle about more specific/dicey stuff you can keep reading AFTER the jump. Okay?

Okay. THIS, I think, oughtn’t be at all controversial: The Pastor in Florida (no links, no names, he’s gotten enough free publicity) who’s behind “International Burn A Koran Day” is SCUMBAG, simple as that. Furthermore, anyone trying to draw some kind of “equivalency” between this douche and his nutcase “congregation” and the folks who want to build an Islamic Community Center two blocks from “Ground Zero” is – at best – being incredibly dumb. But, yeah: Guy’s a scumbag, hope he doesn’t do it, etc.

More after the jump.

HOWEVER…

This whole thing has made me ask a question I don’t think I’d have otherwise ever considered asking: Does “book burning” MATTER now as much as it once did?

Now, right off the bat – YES, I understand that the books in question here are Holy Texts which has a whole other dimension of taboo attached to desecration. I get that. That said… look, I’m not especially religious myself so, forgive my perhaps lacking sympathy, but… from where I sit, while I have nothing but CONTEMPT for the pastor pulling this stunt, honestly I have something close (not equal, but close) to the same contempt for anyone of any faith who reacts to this sort of “nyah nyah” affront with retaliative violence or even tacit “approval” of such.

Look, I’d more “get” the outrage if this asshole had, let’s say, snatched up a bunch of sanctified Korans from local Mosques and he was going to burn those. Or if it was a hand-written, one-of-a-kind Koran from the 12th Century, something like that – or a collection of Islamic Holy Relics; that sort of thing. Being angry about that I get. That crosses the “that which can never be replaced” symbolic-destruction line between “you’re a jerk” and “you’re Hitler.” Still not sure I “get” throwing a bomb over it, but I get being infuriated and hurt and soured on the whole “getting along” thing.

But what’s actually set to happen here? A few dozen idiot rednecks in Florida burning a bunch of cheap, mass-produced, assembly-line-printed copies of The Koran they picked up at Barnes & Noble? I’m sorry, like I said I get being PISSED at the juvenille “screw you!” taunting aspect of it… but I’m just don’t get the “blasphemy” of this sort of thing, in Islam or otherwise. The whole concept of commercially-produced “sacredness” is part of what turned me off (organized) religion in the first place. I was an Altar Boy back in Catholic School, I distinctly remember that actually seeing all the “holy” accoutremants like Sacremental Wine, Holy Water, Communion Wafers, Incense, etc. coming out of shipping boxes (Communion – aka “The Body of Christ” – came in big air-sealed bags like store-brand cereal!) being one of the bigger “wait a minute…” turning points. I just can’t wrap my head around – or “empathize” much with – being “jihad-level” angry at THIS particular act. I mean, wasn’t there just an actual full-fledged Mosque hit by an arson attempt in (I think) Tennessee? If so, why is this a bigger deal than that?

But… whatever, that’s just one cranky Agnostic’s perspective on the matter. If you genuinely believe in sacredness and holy writ and whatnot, I imagine it makes more sense. I respect that – I don’t get it – but I respect it.

Thing is, just ruminating on THAT point is what made me ponder whether or not – in the broader sense – any book-burning ought to “mean” much anymore. Again, as with the specific Koran case, I’m not talking about First Editions or rare pieces or irreplacable texts – I mean regular, off-the-shelf, 800-copies-taking-up-space-at-Borders books. Should this still be a HUGE taboo in 2010?

I understand the longstanding symbolism of book burning – the idea of “purging” an idea from the world in it’s purest concrete form, and I agree it’s disgusting symbolism and I’d never willingly burn even an “evil” book. But the thing is, the reason it was ever seen as SO abhorrent – both the reason that the Nazis did it and why we condemn them for doing it – is because it wasn’t solely a symbolic act: Until fairly recently, it actually was concievable that if you put you’re mind to it you really could burn an idea or a story out of existance by burning enough copies of it. THAT was the nightmare-scenario of “Fahrenheit 451,” not just the burning of books but the extraordinary lengths one would have to go to to preserve the ideas and stories within them.

You see where I’m going with this, right? “Burn all the books?” Well, okay, do-able in theory… but are they ALSO making sure to track and down and fully-destroy all the trillions of discs, flash-drives and even SD Cards that can hold hundreds of thousands of books? And even if that, are they also going to scrub the entire Internet, The Cloud, the “Singularity,” whatever, too? For all practical purposes, The Digital Age has essentially rendered “Fahrenheit” an all-but-impossible scenario. Books – and all that they entail – are safer now than they have EVER been. Think about it for a minute, it’s really kind of monumental. Memo to Mr. Bradbury: The good guys won, thanks for the head’s up.

(Damn, but this turned out long) So, what I’m getting at here is: Are we giving all asshole book-burners way too much “power” by still treating their actions as anything more than a purely symbolic act of douchebaggery when technology has essentially made it a meaningless, futile gesture? Or is this a rare moment of misplaced optimism on my part?

Alright, so that’s my “piece” on this. Once again, pastor guy is a jackass, anyone who reacts to pastor guy with violence is also a jackass, burning the Koran is wrong, book burning of any kind of wrong, terrorism is wrong, can’t-we-just-get-along, etc. It’s late, goin’ to bed now.