The Best of 2016

It was pretty difficult finding much to love about 2016, compared to the worst of 2016, which I, as usual, had plenty of. It was almost to the point of doing that stupid “honorable mention” nonsense that creeps in to other lists. No! I am better than that.

sam

Swiss Army Man

A movie that uses people holding in farts as an allegory to human emotions and how we deal with them, Swiss Army Man is something to behold. What initially appears to be a gross out black comedy, really digs in to that dark black matter towards the end in a twist that you should see coming, but don’t. This is mostly because you’re spellbound by the performance that Paul Dano and Daniel Radcliffe get up to. Taking up the majority of the screen time, the great chemistry and bizarre world machinations of human interaction that two actors share takes you away from the real reason Dano’s Hank was hanging himself in the opening moments. That the movie ends with a giant prolonged fart joke makes this a modern masterpiece in its own right.

bvs

The Batman parts of Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

BvS wasn’t a great movie, fine, I’ll give you that. Nothing that Warner Bros. and DC are doing cinematically to set up this “cinematic universe” is really lighting up the cinema world. However, both BvS and Suicide Squad made a lot of money, so it can’t be ALL that bad, right?

I have a little Batman bias though, and I think the Batman parts of BvS are superb. If there was an “extended micro cut” of the film with just Bruce Wayne/Batman and Alfred fucking shit up, then I’d still pay money to see that. As an aperitif to the inevitable future Batman movies, the Ben Affleck helmed The Batman, it was a fantastic tease in to just how much potential this could have.

Ben Affleck is a phenomenal Bruce Wayne and Batman, which hasn’t ever really been the case in the previous castings. You mostly had to settle with a strong Bruce Wayne and an “eh.” rubber-suited Batman. Affleck is handsome and charming enough to pull off Bruce Wayne, billionaire playboy, and brooding, square-jawed (and ripped) enough to play a….I don’t know what that suit is…Batman.

Jeremy Irons as Arthur and a sexy modern Batcave introduced in BvS shows nothing but promise, and made that movie infinitely better than it hoped to be.

doom

DOOM (2016)

DOOM was a game I was itching for that I didn’t even know I wanted. I started playing Wolfenstein: The New Order earlier in 2016, hoping to scratch that OLD SKOOL first person shooter itch. It got close, but when I started playing DOOM a few weeks later, that itch was scratched and then it kept clawing deeper drawing blood and horrified screams of maybe glee as I got exactly what I was looking for.

Hell, DOOM’s later levels eerily reminded me of Quake III Arena, so much that I was more than open to the notion of a NEW one of those.

Sure, the multiplayer is a mish-mash of also ran modern-day FPS baloney, but my god is that single player campaign the greatest thing video games had on offer in 2016!

stv

Stardew Valley

I’ve played games like Harvest Moon and Animal Crossing; they suck me in for a time, as is their wont. The “just one more turn” button in my mind being mashed repeatedly, as I try to make gains in those types of games. Then inevitably, the grind loses its appeal and I abandon my tiny little world. Therefore, it wasn’t surprising that Stardew Valley hooked me real hard earlier this year.

Developed by one man, Stardew Valley was a slice-of-life simulator like no other. The only problem  was hitting the wall in terms of things to do. While there are lots to do…there’s not enough of it, and after a while I had gotten good enough at the game that I wanted for nothing, and all the years started their Groundhog Day like march of sameness. However, we’re talking after nearly a hundred hours of play.

It doesn’t look like much, but Stardew Valley is a hell of an indie game.

atl

Atlanta

Just squeaking in here at the end is Atlanta. Donald Glover’s “Twin Peaks with rappers” show that doesn’t quite fit that description, but what does that even mean these days? Weirdness jammed up in the mundanity of everyday life? Something that seems cool in the writer’s room that winds up being a throwaway gag at the end of an episode?

Better yet, an entire episode that is essentially a straight half hour of a public access television station? Where only one of the main characters, and it’s not Donald Glover, is the only face we recognize. This kind of stuff is unheard of a first season of a show.

Superbly acted from top to bottom, with Keith Stanfield and Brian Tyree Henry being the MVP’s of the series, carrying it deftly and hanging with the show as it changes beats on a dime. Atlanta is the type of show that needs everyone bringing his or her best, and a network like FX that lets the show operate as needed.

Atlanta’s humor is perfectly balanced with representing the darker side of living life everyday. The odd interactions that we all have from time to time. When you answer the door and a man in a gray sweat suit, wearing a Batman mask asks if your cousin lives there, then runs away. All the while, it tells a great underdog story that ends in a very small, realistic, victory. Atlanta recognizes that the road is long and hard, and it is going to take a lot more than ten episodes to suss out.

The Best of 2016

How the SJW Mindset Propelled Trump to Victory

Look, there were a lot of reasons why Hilary Clinton lost, but I thought I’d focus on one pet theory of mine and run with it. You can go everywhere else and find myriad reasons, both true and hyperbolic as to the “how’s” and “whys” of the 2016 election. Nevertheless, here, you will only find one.

SJWs propelled Trump to glorious victory!

trmp216

“But Chad,” You may be asking. “How is that possible? Trump is literally the antithesis to the SJW hive mind.” Moreover, this is true. SJWs helped build a giant asshole fumed filled bubble and trapped many left-wingers, millennials, young women and fooled them in to thinking that there was just no way Trump could win! I mean, the polls literally said so!

The SJW mindset permeated deep in to the Hilary supporter and brought a host of problems to a political campaign. Namely, tertiary and duodenary bullshit “problematic issues” that needed to be addressed that, frankly, no sane person actually gives a shit about.

For instance, the false notion of a woman making 77 cents compared to a man making $1. The SJW mindset dictates that the Hilary campaign focuses and harp on that point. Women are being taken advantage of and being held under the heavy stifling yoke of the patriarchy! When Joe Sixpack, who has been largely underemployed or unemployed for an interminable amount of time, looks at this, he sees that he’s making zero cents to anyone’s money. This not only alienates him, it makes him angry, and when Donald Trump says he’s going to “fix it”, Mr. Sixpack is more than happy to support that.

dt4-e1442272498197

Instead of that, Hilary could’ve focused on the universal umbrella of something approaching a higher minimum wage. Everyone’s wage would go up, there would be better paying jobs that Joe Sixpack could possibly get a chance at. Ideally, women could possibly make more under the idea, seeing as they purportedly work the majority of the minimum wage jobs in the first place. Perhaps it wouldn’t quell the white-hot misogynistic anger that resides deep inside Mr. Sixpack (next to his nigh constant urge to rape), but it would go further to not out-and-out alienate him from a Hilary presidency.

The vast majority of Trump supporters, “old white people”, actually vote. Speaking Anecdotally, I heard so many first time voters call in to the local (right-wing) talk radio station on Nov. 9. Men in their mid-to-late 30’s feeling compelled to vote for the first time. It wasn’t outwardly said, but they’ve been under attack from SJWs for a good many years and found this election as an opportunity to “correct” a perceived “wrong” by putting anyone but Hilary in to the presidential office.

dt3-667x247

Repeatedly I would hear that it was more a refutation of her than an implicit support of him.

Oddly enough, the “old white people” voter contingent has largely been unchanged. The same numbers that voted for Trump in 2016 also voted for Romney in 2012. Hilary lost the youth vote because of the SJW mindset.

Outside of a “yokel” like Joe Sixpack, several white millennial men were left hanging by a Hilary campaign that actively coddled SJW feminists and dickless doods. Who actively told the white men that they’re refusal to support Hilary was because of their suddenly exposed misogyny, sexism and bigotry. “All politicians have faults, it’s time for a white woman to run things…you’ve had your turn for, like, centuries…YEILD!” Moreover, this somehow wasn’t going to alienate millions of male voters somehow?

dt5

As I’ve stated before, the SJW mindset doesn’t have any notions of the long game. They naively believe that things can be done in an instant and that everyone will fall in line because…well who’s totally AGAINST social justice, right?

They have no problem selfishly pushing for single-minded agendas that inevitably alienate more people than help in the long run. On top of this, even the mere suggestion of tapping the brakes is met with instant ire and accusations ending in “ist”. Makes you really  want to get behind a candidate that would seemingly support this, right?

This goes hand in hand in the election aftermath witnessing as the butt hurt and salt flows freely from SJWs that declare bigotry, misogyny and sexism were the main driving force of a Trump victory. There is no self-reflection, no need to check the volume on the rhetoric and hyperbole or tacit support of a shitty presidential candidate. Just the absolute need to alienate as many people that “aren’t like them” as possible. Which sadly still means white men.

There’s a litany of other reasons Hilary lost this election, but you cannot deny that SJWs and their mindset cost her dearly with a plethora of the sane voting bloc. You cannot even begin to approach the notion of unity when the bulk of your supporters are busying themselves “othering” people that dare have a different opinion than them. There’s no discussion or debate, they shout “You’re wrong AND a bigot AND a sexist!” and move on, leaving nothing but scorched earth behind them.

Buy Now Button

How the SJW Mindset Propelled Trump to Victory

Taking Your Review Ball And Going Home With The Games Press

What’s a games press to do when all of the sudden they’re not privy to early access to an upcoming video game to review? Especially from a publisher that has already started anti-games press things like “blackballing” certain outlets, and by “outlets” just Kotaku and not releasing early review copies of the most excellent DOOM earlier this year.

Bethesda Softworks, creators of such fine video games in the Elder Scrolls and Fallout series announced a couple of weeks ago  that they were essentially doing away with day and date reviews for their games. Citing the previously mentioned DOOM and its glorious reception from both gamer and games press alike, it has decided to forego sending out review copies of games of Skyrim: Special Edition and Dishonored 2 well in advance of their release.

Not to toot my own horn, but I have been calling for this for a long time now. I even wrote about why the written review was a useless endeavor for games publishers.
rvw1
Of course, this doesn’t mean the utter and complete end of the games press, and I wholeheartedly disagree with Forbes’ Erik Kain that certain gamers shouldn’t be gloating about the games press being declared “dead”. Nevertheless, this does portend a growing trend of their needlessness in general. Perhaps a culling of the apes is in order.

More damning, in that all of the articles and podcast “hot takes” I found no real compelling reason from the games press as to why this was a bad thing. Instead a near universal din of this move being “anti-consumer”. How much this would make a reviewer’s life more unbearable by being forced to marathon a game review in order to beat competitors to be first.

Ideally, this only affects maybe 25 people. Moreover, that’s a games press the world over.

Last year when I quoted the ESA report on video game buying habits, “Written Product Reviews in Video Game Magazine and Websites” polled at an anemic 3% of influencing purchase power. It’s not even referenced this year, instead it seems to have been absorbed in to an all encompassing “Other” of about 22%, or maybe it’s finally fallen of to be statistically a 0%?

Aside from the hot takes, there seemed to be this assertion from many in the games press that this really didn’t matter, as there’s been a shift from “day and date ”to a more long view“ games criticism take on games. There is no need to feed the content monster when you can clog it up with such hard-hitting pieces of playing a ten-year-old PS2 game in 2016 and shaking your head at all the misogyny and general Japany-nonsense all up in it!

More to the point, it’s apparently another way for the games press to pooh-pooh the video game focused Youtubers who once again come out on top in all of this.
rv4
Anecdotally, I’ve always used reviews as a validation device. I buy most video games I want to buy day-and-date, and then I’ll go read the reviews from a few select sites. It’s usually not until the following week that actual discussion and breakdown of a game occurs anyways. So why is there such an apparent “pro-consumer” need for a day-and-date review? Aside from competing websites trying to be the first one and therefore getting the most clicks.

Barring that, most video game websites have a plethora of gamed related “content” surrounding almost every major release, so that regardless of an actual review on the site itself there’s a spike in interest for the game. The game gets some sort of coverage, and with the games press being another de facto wing of the marketing department these days, that’s about as good as you can ask for.

Video is king now. People are more interested in seeing the game in action, getting some form of “hot take” on the video game. Personally, I find this lacking, as most video games are hour’s long endeavors at best, and a quick hot take just cannot do most games justice. I mean how many times have your cemented an opinion on a video game in the first few hours. The only thing you can really comment on is how ubiquitous the tutorials are…at best.
rv2
I’ve always been of the mind that video game publishers are wasting precious resources trying to get video game websites to cover a game. It’s not that’s there’s literally too many  games to play, but the games press is getting smaller and leaner, and becoming more pointed in their coverage. In addition, the average games press member is a chubby white guy in his late 30’s…he’s tired. He cannot stay up all weekend trying to marathon a game for review. Hell, he cannot even bother to write a review in anything approaching a timely manner.

Youtubers, for lack of a better word are what the games press should be now: young. There’s this jaundiced, cynical, chubby staleness to the current games press that can no longer be ignored. There’s a lack of enthusiasm for video games, and it’s gotten palpable to publishers.

What sells games better? “Meh, here’s another one of these.” or “Hey, this just came out and it. Is. Awesome!”

To readers that listen to video game podcasts, how many times have you heard the hosts not even bother playing the games that are currently out, or they’ve only played a few hours to “get a feel” for a game of the year discussion to happen later or to deliver some sort of “hot take”?

More publishers need to follow Bethesda’s example and eschew the games press and just take it to the gamers. Have giveaways on social media for early copies. Get the word of mouth out on a game. That’s what really worked for DOOM, early adopters started playing the game, found it to be awesome and spread the word!
rv3
Of course, it’s not going to work in all cases, a new Elder Scrolls game or Dishonored 2 doesn’t need reviews. It’s going to sell a boatload of copies just on name and previous excellence alone.

Gamers are much more informed than they were in the past, and day-and-date reviews are a more recent development. There were literal decades as a gamer you didn’t know the quality of a game until you played it. If you were really itching for an opinion, you could wait for a magazine to say something….a month later. Typically, word of mouth, previous games in the franchise, or the publisher dictated purchasing a game.

This whole notion of the move away from review copies being “anti-consumer” is absurd. The games press has long proven itself more “anti-consumer” than anything a publisher could do. Taking the message directly to your fans, who actually want what you’re selling, is an infinitely better business move than shoveling your games at a disinterested chubby shaved ape that might not even play your game. In the post, Bethesda even acknowledges that if you are so desperate for a review, just wait for it, then make up your mind.

Nintendo has long proven the uselessness of a games press and many, many year’s later publisher like Bethesda are coming around to this idea. The games press is not your audience, the games press is dead.

Taking Your Review Ball And Going Home With The Games Press

Clearing the Low Bar of Intellectual Conversation in Games

I would love as much as anyone for the video games press to be able to talk about topics like race, politics and the ever-elusive “games as art” topic. Problem is, the games press is full of fucking idiots.

There’s a sheer cliff drop off from the topic of video games and everything else in a general games press’ purview. This was never more apparent than last week with the discussion surrounding Oculus founder Palmer Lucky reportedly giving money to the dark Satan that is the “alt-right” and Vice Gaming’s Austin Walker interview about race and the like in Mafia III with the games senior (black) writer. Then go ahead and toss in some post presidential debate talk for good measure.

I’m here to discuss politics in video games!

As I was listening to the scant few video games focused podcasts I listened to, I found that when the topic of Luckey reportedly giving money to “alt-right” group Nimble America, there was plenty of silence for the most part.  This is standard operating procedure for the games press, especially when it comes to most topics that aren’t video games first.

The fact they were even covering it was also questioned, as it is technically “video game related”, but then that means that the people discussing it have to do the “both sides” dance or be as milquetoast as possible when discussing their thoughts about the topic. Just saying, “It’s gross!” over and over again isn’t really coverage.  So why even bother?

More to the point, it’s in the realization of the utter hypocrisy of the games press, when Alison Rapp (yeah, remember her?) was let go from her position at Nintendo earlier this year. The games press erupted about someone’s private life being foisted out in to the open and the ensuring harassment from those no-goodniks on The Interents towards Ms. Rapp who, mind you, wasn’t just “minding her business doing nothing” to garner this “harassment”. She was actively starting shit with various anti-feminist groups and trolls on twitter, but when it got “too real” suddenly she was just a scared little girl that was being bullied by those big nasty goony men!

But Palmer Luckey? Because he’s a rich white dood…fuck that guy? The harassment and bullshit he and his girlfriend are getting…A-okay? No one in the games press was talking about that aspect. Just how gross and wrong it was that Luckey maybe supported Trump, and that a couple of companies are pulling their support for Oculus as long a Mr. Luckey is around.

vg2

Aside from that, you also get a heaping helping of this somehow having a profound impact on the suddenly “fledgling” virtual reality sphere and you have yourself a slow news week for video games at best.

The problem with all the race bullshit around Mafia III is the not so subtle preemptive disappointment with the games’ shortcomings in the discussion on race. All through the interview the games senior (black) writer, Charles Webb essentially says that the game is only taking a broad approach to race in the game. Sure, he can talk about race and politics all day long, but as it serves the game he is writing on, it doesn’t really matter. Mafia III is being marketed and sold as a broad mainstream open world crime title with vague connections to other 2K Games properties. The game will be no more racially charged than a Grand Theft Auto game, which is typically the only game that attempts to tackle topics like race and class in its narrative/world, if anyone cared to notice. But we’re too busy worrying about the plight of the hookers!

Mr. Walker is mostly upset that Mafia III isn’t going “far enough” with the socio-political elements or that use of nigger is more for color (no pun intended) to really paint the bad guys as…bad guys. They say nigger without any shame for crying out loud!

vg3

Then you get to the spartan comment section and the interview as being lauded as something great and of some note. Which reminded me of the first days of video games site Polygon, with all its high-mindedness and focus on things “gamers” supposedly wanted? Initially, the site offered some of the best features on video games and was actually worth a shit. After a couple of years of losing money that way, it was decided gamers apparently wanted click bait social justice hand wringing bullshit and shitty game reviews focused on tertiary nonsense.

As it stands now, Vice’s “gaming” section is nothing you haven’t seen before and more likely what the new venture will wind up turning in to anyways, another half-coked Kotaku clone. Better yet, it will operate under the structure of having a few fully paid “personalities” that guide the site “editorially”, meanwhile a raft of underpaid freelancers do all the content heavy lifting. Where’s the deep concern and investigation in to that bullshit?

Mr. Walker’s new video game website venture doesn’t really fill a need as is currently being laid bare. There’s (arguably) too many of these pop culture websites focused on duodenary elements of nerd culture and how it’s “problematic”. Then there’s this perceived satisfaction that through articles like the Mafia III interview, the site is elevating the games discussion to a completely new level. Nevertheless, this intellectual bar is a low one, dare I say subterranean in nature.

What’s more, gamers don’t really care about this shit! High-minded or no, this type of content is the niche-est of the niche! It reads more as children putting on dress clothes and pretending to be “adults” than a serious discussion on the relevance of games to the deeper artistic discussion therein.


I would love nothing more than to have a games press that could discuss art, sex and politics…on top of video games. I’ve been a gamer far longer than I’ve been active in the other realms of adulthood as I assume much of them have. However, it has been proven, repeatedly, that members of the games press don’t possess the intelligence necessary to have these discussions.

But what do you expect from people that eschewed college, or were English majors, and people that got their jobs in the games press because they knew a guy who knew a guy and could cogently string together a couple of sentences about flashing lights and loud sounds coming from a television?

Clearing the Low Bar of Intellectual Conversation in Games

Movie Review: Star Trek Beyond


It seems like every couple of years an executive at Paramount Studios looks over the books, sees that they are a few hundred million dollars light of easy money, and then proceeds to green light another Star Trek movie. That is about as passionless all of these modern day Star Trek movies have felt. Top that off with franchise janitor extraordinaire J.J. Abrams and his cadre of Orci, Kurtzman, and Lindelof, and you are guaranteed some success at the box office.

Nevertheless, it is in that Abramsization that a lot of the soul of the Star Trek series was washed away in lieu of a glossy sheen, vacuous scripts, weak villains and lots and lots and lots of lens flare. Star Trek Beyond attempts to transcend that with a new director Justin Lin and a script by Simon Pegg and Doug Jung, and it largely succeeds.

Gone is the egregious lens flare, the extreme close ups of peoples faces for no real reason, the glossiness of the future is toned down, and there’s actual Star Trek in a Star Trek movie instead of a bland action movie dancing around in a skin of stitched together Star Trek tropes and the other (better) movie plots stealing nonsense.

In addition, no Spock ex machina to be found! Hooray!st1Sadly, it all seems a bit too little too late, as aside from what was stated earlier, there’s largely nothing here on display either. Star Trek Beyond is the kind of summer movie that you see and then as you’re walking out of the theater is slowly leaves your brain. Therefore, when you decide to reflect on it, or hell, even try to recommend it to someone, there’s nothing noteworthy to say about it. Which is great for a movie in the summertime, but not so much if you’re a Trek fan?

However, that’s been the issue with this entire crop of modern day Star Trek movies, they’re largely empty affairs that are only meant to keep the Star Trek franchise name relevant and nothing more.

If you’re the kind of Star Trek fan that loves masturbatory shots of the Enterprise, you’ll find much to love about Beyond, as there are several shots lovingly draped around the ship as it docks, and later on, rebuilt. There’s also a fair amount of space action, but it’s largely one-sided affairs with the villain possessing a hive-like swarm of ships at his command that are meant to overwhelm and destroy, not hang out and chit-chat with humans.

The acting continues to be the strongest part of this franchise as by now all the actors have their parts down, and what I suspect a lttle nuance, with Chris Pine affecting a little Shatner in his captain logs. Keith Urban’s accent is still a little all over the map, and I swore I heard him try a little southern in an end scene. Idris Elba falls in to the age’s long Star Trek trap of trying to act around a lot of makeup and mouth prostheses that make his lines indiscernible at times.st2Elba is fairly standard as the movies antagonist, Krall, an entity bent on destroying Starfleet Academy for betraying him long ago. His primary point in the plot is to serve as a duality with Captain Kirk’s own burgeoning dissolution in the idea of his five-year captaining of the mission he is currently on. Days are blurring together, the alien races are unfriendly to the notion of Starfleet’s goal of planetary unity and he decides to apply for a vice admiral opening. This even goes to the hilarious symbolic heights of an end fight between Kirk and Krall who is wearing a yellow uniform top. This would be something worth knocking the film for had the last film not had that ham-handed Kahn scene.

st4

At a little over two hours, Beyond moves at a good clip, but still maintains its Star Trekyness in a sort of shorthand. Beautiful actresses in alien makeup, some macguffin that will do cataclysmic damage to something important, Captain Kirk self-sacrifice nonsense, Spock wet blanketing, Bones curmudgeon grumbling through scenes, Scotty bungling through cramped spaces, you get the idea. Nevertheless, that it stays compelling and not bog down the film is a credit to Justin Lin’s deft hand at directing.

I do hope that Simon Pegg and Doug Jung have a bigger hand in the scripts going forward, which looks to not be the case currently. Pegg and Jung were able to sprinkle just a little more Star Trek in to the modern day franchise that has been sorely lacking.

The more tired elements of the film are more a modern day movies problem than the films. Too many movie fights are the same tired martial arts laden affairs that are just there to provide “action” or make a character look “badass” or some other nonsense that fits poorly in the Star Trek franchise. Sulu is given more “dimensionality” by being gay now, which is somewhat useless and serves no real plot point. It perhaps giving the film stakes as his family lives on the station that Krall is going to destroy isn’t bothered with or even mentioned by the character. Just a picture of a little girl on the console and a couple of shots of Sulu’s husband running around looking scared as it is beset by Krall’s minions is it.st3In fact, a lot of the drama and deeper plot elements set forth in the first moments of the film are quickly jettisoned in favor of the main thrust of Krall’s plan and the action therein, never to be heard from again. Perhaps the next movie will pick those up for further examination? Probably not.

Star Trek Beyond isn’t nearly as flashy as its predecessors are, but it’s certainly just as entertaining in addition to being much more of a “Star Trek” movie. Justin Lin is proving to be a fantastic director with an ability to bring a clean action movie aesthetic (ridding the modern day Star Trek franchise of it’s glossy extreme close-ups and nausea educing shaky cam action), and still allow quieter moments to resonate in the film. Here’s to another three-year wait for the inevitable sequel.

Movie Review: Star Trek Beyond

Maddy Myers of the World: Stop Using Your Self Diagnosed Mental Disorders to Hide Your Cuntiness

Pokémon Go came out at the beginning of the month and instantly became all the rage among anyone with a smartphone. All of The Internets had to comment on this phenomenon, even those pesky click bait sweatshops found some way to get their grubby little opinions out on a variety of topics all related tangentially to the game. Least of which was The Mary Sue, the self appointed “nexus of pop culture and the uncharted universe” which must be a mistake as the site appears to be the nexus of the charted click bait universe and nothing more.

Being in a rut lately, The Mary Sue has really been beating their sweatshop workers…I mean “journalists” to really hit that nexus lately. So of course, Pokémon Go got its respective turn at the wheel of thinly veiled feminist critique.

Here we find yet another Maddy Myers article where she insists that all gamers play a game the way she would prefer. She’s done this before, namely with last years Splatoon, and extolling the games lack of voice chat as some sort of landmark endeavor in protecting her soft, dainty ears from the harshness of teammates daring to tell her what to do.

Ms. Myers represents much of what I’ve found so disgusting with SJW gamers. A lot of thinly veiled misandry, masked under this notion that because of a perceived minority status within nerd culture they are free to shit on “others” in gamer culture. Namely, the vast bulk of gamers that is male.

mm1

One of the many articles she churned out about Pokémon GoStrangers of the World: Stop Hitting on Me While I Play Pokémon Go”() is great representation on the typical toxic garbage spewed from SJWs like Ms. Myers and click bait sweat shops like The Mary Sue.

The spirit of Pokémon is gloriously simple: go explore the world and interact with other trainers to catch and battle Pokémon. End of story. Pokémon Go is the physical manifestation of that ideal. It’s diabolical in its ability to get a traditionally sedentary beast like the gamer out and about looking for Pokémon, while also discovering more about their respective living areas via landmark expropriated as gyms and shops.

Yet here we find ourselves with an article that not only is anti-gamer in nature, but also seems completely naive about the general workings of society and how people interact.

Ms. Myers sets the table with the classic SJW tactic of empathy for her condition:

“I don’t like talking to strangers. I never have, and I don’t think I ever will. It’s not that I dislike people, or believe the worst in them, or anything. It’s just that I have social anxiety, so talking to strangers always feels more difficult for me than for other people.”

Because of “therapy” and “practice” she’s supposedly gotten better, but then it begs the question that if someone has social anxiety, can you really believe them when they relate several anecdotes about their poor interactions with other humans? In addition, why would you play a game that demands a fair amount of socialization as one of its core components if you don‘t like people in general?

I do love the part where she says that she doesn’t dislike people or believe the worst in them but then writes an entire article doing just that towards doods that dare play Pokémon Go in her general direction!

The first fearful tale of a male hitting on her takes place on an evening stroll with a group of friends to an athletic field with a track. Other people…namely men…then dared to show up!

“[…] a guy in a hooded sweatshirt saw us from across the street, stared at us, walked over, and began to make his way around the track, slowly but surely.”

Unbelievable right? Who the fuck comes to a track to “walk around” it? He must be a creeper. At least that’s what Ms. Myers are her other girl friends believe.

mm5

“[…] I did my best to quiet my discomfort about the guy lurking in the shadows.”

Wait, I thought he was walking around the track? I’m assuming this place is lit like a Christmas tree, as many athletic parks tend to be. Was he just lurking in the dimmer parts of the track, locked in a deep stare with Ms. Myers’ group of Pokéfans as he made his way around the track?

“This guy was probably trying to muster up the nerve to become our friend, and I was the jerk who didn’t want to talk to a complete stranger in a dark field on a Saturday night.”

The entire article has operative phrasing like this. These men were “probably”  “maybe” doing something. Who really knows right? Luckily, for her:

“He must have sensed our discomfort, because he never did end up talking to us, but he hung out in the dark for a very long time.”

Ms. Myers has admitted to having social anxiety problems, can we really trust she knows intent? I mean, she uses words like “lurking” and “hung out in the dark for a very long time” making sure we know he stayed in the shadows and painting an ominous picture. This has nothing to do with them being at a park…at night. He is just one of those creepy, rapey men. And yet no one technically “Hits On” Maddy Myers.

Making things a bit topical, but veering away from the thesis of the article, a cop car shows up on the scene.

“[…] we all stopped short. Half of my friends started panicking out loud. Not all of us are white, and, well … you know how it is, right?”

How is it, Ms. Myers? The cops were going to rush up and start something? Did they also “lurk” and “hang out” in the dark for very long time? She also relates that if the cops did approach her group she didn’t know what would happen. If it’s the kind of group that is out late looking for Pokemon at a park, I’m assuming a whole lot of nothing. Until the cops leave, then everyone will talk about what would have happened. In fantasy-land. In addition to all of the topicality: no one “Hit On” Maddy Myers.

mm3

Discovering that perhaps it may be safer for her to wander about in the daytime, Ms. Myers is again dismayed to discover that even the hot heat of the day cannot save her from all these male Pokemon Go fans out to catch some monsters and possibly rape! Probably women right? I mean, the Pokemon are not physical things that can be raped, and surely, they are not raping other men…though that could be true…as men can barely control their rape urges as is.

Ms. Myers relates that no women Pokemon Go fans ever came up to her in the 72-hour time span covered for the article.

“Strangers kept walking up to me. Specifically, strange men kept doing it.”

However, it’s in the paragraph where she’s going over the previous nights events in her head. In which, one strange man walked “near” her, and the cop car…which I guess could be counted as the man…and a strange one at that…was Maddy Myers adjacent. But that was it, what gives?

I guess as she’s going over the previous nights events in her head and grossly exaggerating just how many strangers are coming up to her, she just so happens upon a few of them!

“I noticed that guys (and, as I said, it was only guys) kept doubling back to look at my screen and then look me over appraisingly, a clear question in their eyes. One guy followed me for several feet, and as he looked over my shoulder to check if I was looking for Pokémon […]”

During all this, she’s pretending to ignore them, looking at her phone, so how does she know they were exactly looking her over “appraisingly“? Maybe they were impressed with her collection of various Pokemon, or maybe wanted her to join their team so they could conquer a landmark, or whatever bullshit you get up to in Pokemon Go. You know the SOCIAL element of the game!

“When I walked by a Pokémon gym and considered battling there, I saw a group of twelve 20-somethings had gathered outside, all on their smartphones, socializing. I didn’t feel like talking to any strangers, so I kept walking, scanning the sidewalk for critters as I went. Soon after, a guy followed me down the street, then tapped my shoulder and gestured for me to remove my headphones. His opening line: “Are you playing Pokémon?” I nodded in silence. He smiled expectantly at me, clearly believing that a conversation should ensue between us. I put my headphones back on, and I walked away.”

Again, you have to wonder just how much her social anxiety is coloring these interactions. The use of “expectantly”, “appraisingly”, and “a clear question” being in their eyes lends this notion that all these men wanted to do was “Hit On” Ms. Myers, when more like they were trying to play the social aspect of the game. Why would you venture out to the various gyms and areas looking to battle, but then when it comes time to do so, not because a man dared to say something at you? The guys expectant smile was probably in relation to someone around his age playing a goddamned kids game so he didn’t feel like so much of a creeper or he wanted Ms. Myers to join his team to battle other trainers?

mm2

For some odd reason Ms. Myers feels compelled to say that the young man “[…] was physically attractive and polite and my age and well-dressed and even had a nice smile.” What about his race or any other duodenary identifying element that needs to be related? Did that factor in why you were such an asshole to him? Disappointingly, I have to stress that no one “Hit On” Maddy Myers in the classical definition of the phrase in this last anecdote either.

Nevertheless, never mind that, Ms. Myers has no time for other people, how does the game affect her and all the other special snowflakes out there in the world? More importantly, it may not even be safe for her “not white” friends! Is there any unseen benefit to the societal scourge that is Pokémon Go?

For Maddy Myers the games provides a few benefits,

“It’s an excuse to leave the house, which helps stave off my depression and encourages me to see landmarks that I wouldn’t visit otherwise. It gamifies exercise and sight-seeing.”

Nevertheless, other people, namely men, are ruining everything!

mm4

In her parting words, she has advice for the other Pokémon trainers: don’t make it weird. Which is a bit odd considering Ms. Myers is the only one really doing so with her self-diagnosed social anxiety, and seeming inability to understand the difference between someone trying to be friendly and ruthlessly trying to drop game.

Instead, we get another classically overwritten 2000 word Maddy Myers column telling gamers how to play a game in the exact opposite way it was designed. You would think a more elegant idea would be for her to just play the near two dozen single player Pokemon games and let all the other sane gamers enjoy Pokemon Go in peace.

 

Maddy Myers of the World: Stop Using Your Self Diagnosed Mental Disorders to Hide Your Cuntiness

Movie Review: Ghostbusters (2016)

I was never going to like Ghostbusters, but not because of all the reasons stated on social media why a person like me wouldn’t like it: ‘cuz there’s women all up in it, that all four Ghostbusters were women, and on and on. Once I really think about it, who wouldn’t love this movie? Everyone just loves being told how to appreciate or approach a piece of pop culture, be it a movie, piece of music or art. The best ways are always the most linear ways!

I knew I wasn’t going to like Ghostbusters from the moment Paul Feig and Melissa McCarthy were attached. That match made in cinema heaven has been tops with the mouth breathing moviegoers for the past five years or so. I didn’t care for The Heat or Spy when I saw their respective trailers, and when the Ghostbusters trailer descended upon my eyeballs earlier this year it played out the same way. I also initially avoided Bridesmaids for the same reason; until enough good word of mouth got out that I watched it very later on.

 

Paul Feig’s movies aren’t just for me, and I acknowledge this. Nevertheless, what about when he comes to Nostalgiatown and starts another mine colony in my childhood? Can I not then voice that I would rather he didn’t and just keep making insipid “White bitch bumps in to shit and falls over” “comedies” without being labeled a misogynistic asshole?

cw2
Yawn.

For me, watching Ghostbusters was more a social experiment than anything else was. How bad could it be? Well…not that bad.

Not because it’s not a mediocre movie, which it is profoundly so, it just hearkens back to the idea that I’ve floated many times in my reviews: there just aren’t all out bad movies being made anymore.

Hollywood isn’t in to experimenting to the hundreds of million dollars level, and there is no way that any movie being made these days is going to be handled ineptly or incompetently. Movie studious aren’t in the habit of just handing a movie over to someone who just “feels like” making a movie. So, movies these days are at least competently made.

As a reviewer, you then have to look at other areas of the film. That’s where the bulk of critique, at least for me, falls on the script, then the flow of the film, and finally the acting. Ghostbusters tries to be clever all coming out in the summer trying to negate its vacuous plot. This goes further in that if it’s indeed a “summer blockbuster” it is certainly lacking in the BIFF! BANG! POW! Of your standard summer fare. However, that’s because Paul Feig notoriously doesn’t direct action well.

Which is the largest problem I have with Ghostbusters: it just hangs around….talking. Which, to the films credit is to Paul Feig’s directing strength. But there’s a lot of static jibber-jabber scenes that clog up the films run time and really do nothing aside from allowing some of the most egregious product placement since the last Michael Bay movie. A pizza break prominently features a couple of gigantic Papa John’s boxes, Kevin’s (Christ Hemsworth) interview where he shows them potential logos houses a 7-Eleven gag, there’s a Twinkie ad later in the film with the caption “That’s a big…”, and so on. Yeah sure, this isn’t some new fangled concept of blatant product placement, but I don’t think I’ve ever beheld it being so loud and in your face before.

Ghostbusters is that kind of broad modern day comedy that spends more time reflecting on how funny it is and the characters making note of it. As if the screenwriters were unsure of a bit and needed to indulge in a script based self high-five. There are a few times were characters literally say, “That’s funny.” to a joke.

cw3
Oh yeah, the ONE scene where the actually bust a ghost!

There’s also this odd thing that the movie does where it will cut to what is apparently going to be an improv scene, typically involving McCarthy and Wiig banally riffing, then it will cut right back in to the scene as if nothing happened. It’s really odd and it feels like something that could’ve been cut out of the film altogether.

For a movie pretending to be a “summer blockbuster” Ghostbusters takes it sweet time about things. Clocking in at nigh on two hours, it feels padded with the aforementioned “improv scenes”, needless cameos (an Ozzy Osbourne cameo…in2016!), and weird little side scenes that really do nothing for the film.

One in particular would be when the “bad guy” Rowan (Neil Casey) possesses Kevin and uses “ghost magic” to make a police force lock itself in to some sort of goofy poses. Why? It serves no real purpose, other than to give Matt Walsh and Michael Kenneth Williams more screen time. On top of this, those officers were surely crushed when Rowan turns in to a giant evil Ghostbusters logo. Nope, they’re fine, even one of the troops on a tank kept position throughout the entire decimation of New York! Ghost magic must be a hell of a thing!

gbstrs1
The bad guy!

Speaking of Rowan, what a turd of a character. Basically a mysoginerd hell-bent on “cleansing” the world because he has been picked on all his life. The film just blatantly tells us he’s creepy. He’s always addressed as being weird, creepy or a freak, but there’s nothing outside of that that would support those claims. If anything, Rowan is just a dick that just so happens to also hate women, but that is also inconclusive, as he apparently hates all humanity with the same passion.

When he turns in to a giant evil Ghostbusters logo, after a sorry nod to the “choose the form of your destroyer” from the original film, the Ghostbusters shoot him in the crotch to get him to let go of a some buildings and get sucked back in to…ghost world? Why? You could just shoot him in the face to get the same effect?! The characters even reference this notion with Patty (Leslie Jones) saying something along the lines of that’s where they were “supposed to aim”. Yet again, this is the type of movie comedy they chose to make.

Ghostbusters could’ve been a better film had it not tread in the ground of all the reboots and remakes before it. It doesn’t try to really stand on its own. The all-female thing is apparently the only true fresh take it had in its arsenal. It falls in to the reboot/remake trap of trying to wink and nod to fans of the original with throwaway gags and references (oh look a bust of Egon in a scene!) instead of trying to stand on its own. The script cannot decide if the characters address each other by their last names, as they did in the original film, or by their first names. There’s a dizzying vacillation in the film, and it seems as though the movie just needed one more pass before filming to make the references fit better.

Ghostbusters isn’t a horrible dogshit social justice pushing agenda film. It’s a Paul Feig movie which if that is what his films mean these days I guess the haters were right. It’s a summer film for the mouth breathers, like the ones in the audience at my viewing, who are eagerly anticipating the cameos, and clapped and cheered at the end credits. There’s a better movie in there somewhere, but we’ll never see it. Hopefully, the inevitable sequel will be able to stand on its own better now that it has done its poor imitation dance of the original.

Movie Review: Ghostbusters (2016)