Spam Subject Line of the Day

"Explain no mischief"

Today's offering requires no explanation.

Spam Subject Line of the Day

Today's selection is just too amusing to pass up. But I'm afriad it doesn't really kick butt on its own, so it gets to go through the dreaded... TRANSLATO-TRON! This time, the mix will be English-French-English-Dutch-English.

Before:

Accept a enormous modify on your RX
faithful characters, leading quality.


After:

Take a gigantic at that a changes on your RX the

faithful signs and takes the quality.

Hmmm... I think the original might be funnier.  

Spam Subject Line of the Day

"Your Perfect Home Business Opportunity Is Just Around The Corner"

Ummm... If it's a HOME business opportunity, shouldn't it be right HERE? At my HOME? That seems a tad inconvenient for a home business opportunity.

Spam Subject Line of the Day

Or... Why This Country is the Way it is.

I have several email addresses. Hotmail, Gmail, Yahoo, Hotmail, .mac, and my ultimate destination of pobox. So I have a vast complex from which to choose my crazy spam subject line riffing material. pobox kindly emails me a list of the spam which it has filtered and kindly declined delivery. That's a daily list of anywhere from 10-30 spam messages. My yahoo account, being the oldest, has weaseled its way on to so many spam lists that I receive upwards of 400 spam messages there every day, only 6-8 per week make it through the junk filters. I check hotmail about once every 3 months, so I don't really know what I miss. Gmail, I get about 100 over a week. .mac? Well, I'm paying 99 dollars a year for nothing. I don't use it at all any more.

So, you can see that I have quite a selection for my new chosen passtime. Today's head-shaker comes from gmail. Evidently, the new thing in spam messaging is getting people to fill out surveys (as opposed to low-rate mortgages, credit cards with no credit check, and male enhancement pills.) On one page, I saw the following subject lines:

Jeremy, Do you like George Bush?

Jeremy, Do you think we should pull out of Iraq?

Jeremy, Do you like Ice Cream?

Jeremy, do you like Icecream?

Jeremy, do you like Cheescake?

Jeremy, Do you like Ice Cream?

(all with their spellings as I received them.)

So, evidently to this poll-spammer, the dessert choices of this country are 4 times more important than what they country thinks of our buffoon of a president we have or the illegal, unjustified, and fabricated war this country's sons and daughters are fighting so Bush and his buddies can have even more money over and above the money they already have that neither they nor their great grandkids will ever be able to spend.

The job market in Vancouver looks appealing.

One last thing... the manic depressed should never, EVER drink. Especially 6 shots in a 45 minute interval. It ruins the rest of the night for everyone else invloved.

Spam Subject Line of the Day

"U.S governments new Colorado State detection"

Much has been said about the inadequacy and ineptitude of the current administration, particularly by me. But this is beyond the pale. Could it be that our government actually lost the ability to detect the state of Colorado? Evidently... so much so, in fact, that they had to come up with a new means of detection.

I guess they ARE with it enough to know that Colorado is my favorite state, and therefore had Ciera Young (clearly a top official in the Colorado State Detection department) personally email me, in case I had also lost the ability of detecting Colorado and needed to purchase their new technology so I could ski or hike once again.

Movie Review: Clerks II

The Genius of Kevin Smith

I saw Clerks II last night. Here's my review. I'll avoid spoilers if I can, but will issue a spoiler warning if I am unable to control myself.

First, I'll start by disclosing the fact that I'm one of Kevin Smith's biggest fans. Ever snice Clerks and Mallrats, which I caught on video, I've eagerly awaited each ane every View Askew production. The man writes the funniest dialogue I've ever witnessed. He casts actors who 'get' him, who are able to verbally convey the spirit in which words written and the emotion behind the stories that Kevin writes. Do I care that he's used the same 6 actors in all of his movies? Hell no. I enjoy their performances, and they are as much a part of the vibe of View Askew as Kevin's writing and directing.

Kevin has received some criticism for moving away from the raunchy comedy to try more emotional stories. Odd, because he's either criticized for writing raunchy comedy with no heart, or he's slammed for going away from the comedy for the sap. Chasing Amy and Jersey Girl were his departures from the comic-driven laugh fests. Personally, I thought that Chasing Amy was his overall best movie (but not the funniest.) Here's where I diverge from the path of what some people say is the TRUE Smith fandom... I'm not an apologist. I didn't think that Jersey Girl was that great a flick, but it was still enjoyable. Ben Affleck, George Carlin and Liv Tyler all gave good, heartfelt performances. But the attempted emotional tugging really overshadowed what comedy there was in the flick, which led to it being a sub-par Smith movie.

Clerks II takes the best parts of the comedies... raunchy rapid fire conversation, very witty wordplay, manic performances by Jeff Anderson and Jason Mewes, beleagured and beat down portrayal of Dante Hicks by Brian O'Halloran... and combines it with the genuine emotional heart of Chasing Amy. In my mind, that makes this the ultimate Kevin Smith movie. It has now moved to the top of my list. There were several bits I missed because I was laughing so hard - I found myself reaching for my Tivo remote to rewind, only to be disappointed when all I grabbed was the boob belonging to the very surprised strange woman next to me in the crowded midnight showing. (Kidding...I wasn't really disappointed to find a boob instead of a remote control in my hand.)

Much hue and cry was made over Kevin casting a known star (Rosario Dawson) as the female lead... supposedly done as a sell-out move to get star power in the flick and perhaps make it earn more money at the box office. Well, those people are idiots. First of all, Rosario isn't THAT big a star. If Smith was really going to do that, he has LOTS of big name friends who would love to be the female lead in his movie. Second, people who think that every movie he makes should be like Clerks (made for 27,000 dollars financed by credit cards) are totally delusional. Clerks was a great movie. It had no known actors in it. It looked like crap. He caught lightning in a bottle with that process. It also didn't make any money theatrically. Contrary to the belief of some knuckleheads, movies are made to make money. But that's neither here nor there... Rosario was great in this movie. She was funny, took right to the Smith style dialogue, threw herself into the role with no reservation, and was quite charming and believable as Becky. Unlike Marilyn Ghigliotti, who couldn't utter a line without stammering or stuttering in Clerks, and seemed so stiff, it was hard to believe she had any acting experience at all prior to Clerks. Even Smith's wife, who isn't an actress, gave a believable and funny performance as Dante's hen-pecking fiancee. Anderson, whose forte in the original was the in-your-face over-the-top Randall jackassery, really comes through with depth. I left the theater thinking that he made the movie with his nuanced emotional performance.

The story... well, here's where Smith's skills really shone. Not only was the dialogue spot on vintage Smith, nostalgic of Clerks and Mallrats, but the story itself was engaging. An engaging plot drove the narrative, I was emotionally invested in the characters and what happened to them. I cared about the characters and how their lives would be affected by the pivotal event that was forthcoming. While Clerks II didn't have quite the gut-wrenching emotional grip of Chasing Amy for me, it was close. And it was easily funnier than Chasing Amy. Clerks II may not have been as funny to me as Mallrats or Clerks, but I cared more about what happened to the characters beyond where the next joke was coming from.

Many accusations have been hurled as to the film's vulgarity. Well... that's to be expected in a Smith movie. That's part of the package. It's no worse than any of the others, and not as bad as say a Richard Pryor or Chris Rock stand up. People may say that Smith relies on the vulgarity to drive the comedy... but like the above referenced comedians, it's not just some jerk saying 'cock... shit... fuck' then everyone laughs.... the stuff is funny separate from being vulgar. But the two rely on each other for maximum punch: it's a well-mixed recipe. I don't like straight bourbon. I don't drink Coca Cola because it's too sweet and has too much sugar to drink on its own. But you mix the two together, and you have the magic elixir of life.

All that being said, I don't think that this movie is for everyone. It obviously wasn't for Joel Siegel, who walked out of the critics screening 40 minutes in, being an unprofessional jackass and causing a scene, interrupting the movie for the other critics. You will definitely need a strong resistance to dirty jokes and situations, if you don't get or like Smith's style. But for fans of Smith and the View Askiewniverse, it's what we've been waiting for since 2001.