Just listening to Underworlds latest offering "i’m a big sister, and i’m a girl, and i’m a princess, and this is my horse", the third in their Riverrun project. Available for download from their online shop underworldlive.com along with free downloadable content, this 30 minute long mix enters a dub phat phase of melancholy, like it’s tickled dubnobass with sticky fingers and gone off to play.
For many years now Underworld has been my favourite band, turned onto them first by my sister I have watched as they moved through many spirals of evolution into their current form. Truly, their older stuff was their heyday, but without a doubt also they are producing work that is exciting and fulfilling to listen to.
I remember back in the days of dubnobasswithmyheadman I used to listen to their albums like a broken record, and funnily I find myself sampling their fare rarely these days; However Underworld are not just the music they made but every tune I have ever listened to which they pimped to me. Nothing has inspired my love of music more than listening to and being influenced by their auditory hallucinations, divinations and abandoned melodies. A band of words most sublime, their work is a culmination of design, meandering and lost places made found.
‘i’m a big sister’ features Hyde’s dallow voice, echoing between bars and chasing the beats as it wanders. What I have always found most fascinating about Underworld’s work is the way they associate words and images, if you look at the title of their latest work there is something both melodious and yet unsettling in it, and this is case for many of their works. Words loosely strung together that hang like limbs connected, touching yet unsure where they fit. Perhaps as if reassembled with no prior knowledge of the complete whole.
OK, I went and watched ‘A Scanner Darkly’ yesterday. I don’t think I am ready to give a review yet, as I am not actually sure how I feel about it. I can say that my friends who came to see it with me, enjoyed it a whole lot more, and I suspect that is because they had not read the book. I spent a great deal of the Movie making subconscious comparisons between it and Dick’s novel. I guess there is a problem on my part, where I can’t actually turn off and just enjoy something.
Scanner without a doubt is a Masterpiece. Linklater has tightened up some ideas introduced in his earlier films, and the visual and auditory result is a sometimes disturbing but always compelling feast. At the end of the film, as in the book there is a list of Dick’s friends. I heard people querying this list and what it meant, to my amusement. This film is about addiction as much as anything else, and so the list represents Dick’s friends who were lost to various drugs. As Dick says, their only mistake was to play the game. Having discussed with my mum the 60’s-70’s era and what it was like, pharmaceutically speaking I can say I feel quite pleased that I wasn’t there. I will quite happily give ‘permanent psychosis’ (as some of Dick’s buddies are listed as having) a miss.
It seems this is turning into a Scanner review, even if it wasn’t meant to be. Perhaps it’s actually just a few thoughts. I’ll just let them meander (like snakes on a scanner) and see where they go. This may well mean I write spoilers (give away parts of the movies plot or ideas) so if you read on and find something spoiled as a result, that’s tough.
One thing that was kind of pleasing was seeing some quotes from the trailer expanded into more reasonable dialogue that didn’t seem like some forced dramatic cliche. When I first saw the trailer it left me twitching with anticipation like a chronic junkie, but hearing the same dialogue unfold like origami in the film the sense of satisfaction was beyond parallel.
The thing that gets me about the dialogue is the thought that has gone into capturing the stoner style madness and idiocy. It was cause for more than a few laughs from the audience, there was more than one scene in the movie that had us laughing. None more so though than the I believe soon to be infamous "9 gear bike" sketch. By itself this scene would be worthy of a short film, sitting around watching a bunch of stoners talk about why an 18 gear bike is actually a 9 gear bike, and anyhow who went and stole those extra gears?
I think the laughing might be explained in part due to people being uncomfortable as they watch Arctor slowly begin to lose it, the film decinding to strike a tone similar to ‘Requiem for a Dream’ without resorting to being as brutally visual or visceral. Films about addiction often make people uncomfortable, for obvious reasons; Thus, we laugh. It’s our tonic.
I guess I need to discuss one of the most significant aspects of the film, at least visually. If you are a fan of Linklater’s work then you will have seen ‘A Waking Life’ and know about Rotoscoping. Simply put it is a technique of tracing over live action footage to produce a pronounced, distinctive style of animation. The colours are sharp and allow for an extremely expressive palette when it comes to characterisation. Together with individual animators initiative the combination of human input and computer editing allows for some mesmerizing work.
However…
The studio really did a job on Scanner. I heard that they stuck their noses into Linklater’s production when he had his head elsewhere (being in the process of directing other films too) and laid down the law on Scanner, stylistically speaking. What does this mean? If you compare Scanner to Waking life then you’ll find a much less expressive film that shows no individual animators marks or creativity. Each character was supposed to be worked on by an individual animator but you wouldn’t know that. It almost removes the need for rotoscoping at all. It could have been 1) completely CGI or 2) live action.
It frustrated me greatly in some scenes when some elements of scenery were just too photo-realistic, moving the movie away from art and into design. Those two elements are from two different thought and expression sets and should be applied with thought dependent on what they are being applied to. When a film becomes "designed" rather than artistically grown, to me, at least, it loses its message. It becomes product rather than message, and weakens its potential to appeal to peoples conscience rather than their ego.
I guess this doesn’t meet some of the pre-reqs of a decent review, such as a reasonable amount of objectivity but I have to say on my part that I have been waiting for this film for a dreadfully long time, and if my expectations had been any higher, I would have needed an oxygen tank just to breath.
Scanner is far from disappointing. It keeps very much to the letter of the book, and compresses a lot of complex character dynamics into a filmic scenery. Gone however are the ideosyncrasies of Dick’s novel, noticeably so his misogynistic fear of women that pervades throughout the book. The film also would have benefitted from Arctor’s internal monologue, which added a great deal of depth to the book as it allowed you a window into his state as he begins to dissociate from himself. It had a sense of potency as you watched this sad character crumble, his internal image falling away till it only answered to the outside world as an automaton.
If I could recommend anything, it would be that you pick up Dick’s book and read it. Whether you choose to read the book before or after is up to you, people place such great emphasise on literature over other mediums, but I would have preferred to have read the book after. The book is so much more than the film could ever hope to be, and this is not a fault of the film but of the medium. Translating text into silvers is a task of attrition and Scanner is without a doubt not a casualty of this battle, but a victor; However the book is still shoulders above, and if the film touches you then reading the book is a necessity.
I thought it a good way to end this review, with the Dick’s notes from the novel.
This has been a novel about some people who were punished entirely too much for what they did. They wanted to have a good time, but they were like children playing in the street; they could see one after another of them being killed — run over, maimed, destroyed — but they continued to play anyhow. We really all were very happy for a while, sitting around not toiling but just bullshitting and playing, but it was for such a terrible brief time, and then the punishment was beyond belief: even when we could see it, we could not believe it. For example, while I was writing this I learned that the person on whom the character Jerry Fabin is based killed himself. My friend on whom I based the character Ernie Luckman died before I began the novel. For a while I myself was one of these children playing in the street; I was, like the rest of them, trying to play instead of being grown up, and I was punished. I am on the list below, which is a list of those to whom this novel is dedicated, and what became of each.
Drug misuse is not a disease, it is a decision, like the decision to step out in front of a moving car. You would call that not a disease but an error in judgment. When a bunch of people begin to do it, it is a social error, a life-style. In this particular life-style the motto is "Be happy now because tomorrow you are dying," but the dying begins almost at once, and the happiness is a memory. It is, then, only a speeding up, an intensifying, of the ordinary human existence. It is not different from your life-style, it is only faster. It all takes place in days or weeks or months instead of years. "Take the cash and let the credit go," as Villon said in 1460. But that is a mistake if the cash is a penny and the credit a whole lifetime.
There is no moral in this novel; it is not bourgeois; it does not say they were wrong to play when they should have toiled; it just tells what the consequences were. In Greek drama they were beginning, as a society, to discover science, which means causal law. Here in this novel there is Nemesis: not fate, because anyone of us could have chosen to stop playing in the street, but, as I narrate from the deepest part of my life and heart, a dreadful Nemesis for those who kept on playing. I myself, I am not a character in this novel; I am the novel. So, though, was our entire nation at this time. This novel is about more people than I knew personally. Some we all read about in the newspapers. It was, this sitting around with our buddies and bullshitting while making tape recordings, the bad decision of the decade, the sixties, both in and out of the establishment. And nature cracked down on us. We were forced to stop by things dreadful.
If there was any "sin," it was that these people wanted to keep on having a good time forever, and were punished for that, but, as I say, I feel that, if so, the punishment was far too great, and I prefer to think of it only in a Greek or morally neutral way, as mere science, as deterministic impartial cause-and-effect. I loved them all. Here is the list, to whom I dedicate my love:
To Gaylene deceased
To Ray deceased
To Francy permanent psychosis
To Kathy permanent brain damage
To Jim deceased
To Val massive permanent brain damage
To Nancy permanent psychosis
To Joanne permanent brain damage
To Maren deceased
To Nick deceased
To Terry deceased
To Dennis deceased
To Phil permanent pancreatic damage
To Sue permanent vascular damage
To Jerri permanent psychosis and vascular damage
…and so forth.
In Memoriam. These were comrades whom I had; there are no better. They remain in my mind, and the enemy will never be forgiven. The "enemy" was their mistake in playing. Let them all play again, in some other way, and let them be happy.
OK, another person seems to be confused about basic simple principles of common decency, but that’s hardly surprising. What the hell is the matter with people, can’t they think beyond their selves?
I’ll say this simple and clear so you can understand me, Wear a Cycle Helmet. If you don’t, you are a selfish, selfish person. If you don’t wear a cycle helmet and get hit by a car, then it’s not just you that lose out it’s your family, it’s your friends, it’s even me. If you are someone I know who is selfish enough as to not wear a helmet, then you better not bloody bring it up with me, because there is no way in hell I will be reasonable or kind about it.
Interestingly, I posted a question on ask.metafilter.com asking why cyclists don’t wear helmets. Interesting replies. A lot of angry non-helmet cyclists asking me what right I have to question their personal life-choice.
OK I just deleted a whole fucking post by accident so I am gonna try again. Basically, this is the log of a discussion on slashdot which shows how blinkered geeks become when it comes down to anything regarding privacy. Don’t get me wrong, I am for privacy, for encryption and the ability to protect ourselves from the Government but some of this commentary just irritated the fuck out of me.
Original comment that got me going:
Does somebody posessing some bits on a computer equal somebody who posses plans to blow me up? Obviously a crime went into the making of the file. But it’s quite easy to have stuff on your hard disk that you didn’t knowingly download. Should a nasty video that happen to got downloaded with something else make you a criminal? So certain bit patterns make one a felon?
I took issue with that
I’m sorry, did someone compare the two because if they did I missed it.
Also, are you saying that if found possessing child pornography on your computer you shouldn’t be prosecuted. The whole point of bringing a case where someone has been found to have child porn on or about them is to prove their guilt or innocence. Maybe you didn’t realize what you downloaded, but I have just your word to go on, unless other proof supports your assertions. What choice would I have?
"So certain bit patterns make one a felon?" Yes, unless you want to make the data we store on our computers completely ungovernable. People seem to think that they have the right to store anything they want to on their computers, even though it might be highly illegal, just because it’s "bits". Well wake up call, those bits are a photograph of a young child who had no choice in the matter. What gives you the right?
People take issue with what I say
Also, are you saying that if found possessing child pornography on your computer you shouldn’t be prosecuted.
Considering the ease of how most computers are compromised through a Trojan horse, its a nice way to send someone you don’t like to jail. I’m surprised it hasn’t been used more often.
One would wonder if the defense team could get access to the computer afterwards to prove there was a back door installed or would the prosecution not allow "tampering" with the evidence and not let the defense use it as evidence.
Of course that could lead to a plausible deniability if you were harboring such images and were guilty but left an inactive copy of back orifice on your computer so you could blame a so called "hacker" when you were caught.
a good point, not the comments that annoyed me
those bits are a photograph of a young child who had no choice in the matter. What gives you the right?
I’ve never heard of an infant give consent to pictures being taken in the hospital. You better start hunting down all the people with evil baby pictures.
What about mainstream child actors? Isn’t that even more exploitative? Most of those people turn out pretty fucked up too.
You have to admit there’s a ton of hypocrisy and overreaction when it comes to this. It goes way deeper than dealing with the social harm caused by these acts.
This is the one that got me. It seems to be a wilful attempt to ignore certain truths. I reply
you are comparing photographs of children forced to do sexual acts to people taking pictures of their children in hospital or child actors?!
There is a massive amount of poorly written press when it comes to serious taboo issues like this, however comparing paedophilia to baby pictures is just plain stupid and I can’t be bothered to be more polite about it then that.
It’s true that some child actors grow up with problems, but if you hadn’t noticed some adult actors seem to make up for lost time if they weren’t famous as a child and develop their own sets. I think this is a symptom of stardom as much as anything else.
If you were wandering about the difference between baby pics and paedophile photographs, it’s to do with intent. work it out.
Someone replies to me
If you were wandering about the difference between baby pics and paedophile photographs, it’s to do with intent. work it out.
I’m confused. Intent of the photographer, or intent of the viewer of the photograph?
Should pictures of naked babies be illegal? How about if a paedophile took a picture of a naked baby? What about a picture of a naked baby sitting on the lap of a naked man?
I couldn’t be bothered to answer this one, it’s an age old debate and I think all I need to say is that it all has to do with your intent. People seem to want to draw a line in the sand which best suits them, without thinking of the greater repercussions. Back to the main convo
And if the persons possesing the bits had anything to do with producing them in the first place — either directly or even just by creating a demand — then there’s a crime a related to the act of producing or obtaining the information.
But frankly I don’t see how the information itself can be either illegal (I know that technically it is illegal, but that doesn’t mean it makes any sense). If I’ve seen a bit of child porn, perhaps as a result of prosecuting its producers, is it illegal to metally recall that image? If not, how is the memory different than the file on a disk? What if I had a really good memory and drawing skills and repoduced the image faithfully on paper? Possession of information should never constitute a crime; the only sensible crimes are related to the production, distribution, and possibly the use of data, but never to the mere fact that it exists in some reproducable form.
Can you see where this is going folks?
unless you want to make the data we store on our computers completely ungovernable.
I imagine most readers here, myself included, would like to make the data stored on our computers ungovernable by any but us. That’s why in most countries, strong encryption is legal with no requirement to turn over the keys.
I agree that child pornography is a serious problem, but I think we should distinguish between those who produce it and in the process abuse children, and those who simply download a picture, intentionally or otherwise. It is perfectly legal to possess footage and images of other crimes (robberies and sometimes worse are frequently broadcast on the evening news), yet we want to toss someone into jail just for possessing pictures of kids being abused. Given how easy it is to transfer files to an unsuspecting user through e-mail attachments (which even if the user deletes without opening can still leave "evidence" on their hard drive), or web pages which can leave images in their cache, I think the lesser of two evils would be to abolish laws which criminalize possession of kiddie porn.
OK, this is something else I take umbridge to, that the people who consume child porn are not as bad as those who make it
that’s absolutely ridiculous.
OK, we can assume that as many registered sex offenders as there are, there are still more who have never been caught. There are also people who haven’t offended yet, but might do. Now, is it really such a clever idea to make child porn available to those who might commit an offence if pushed to it by readily available imagery like that. If you make the possession of child porn legal then the knock on effect would be beyond imaginations of horror.
You sir, are part of the problem if you don’t think that the person who downloads child pornography is as responsible as the person who took the photo in the first place. You simply cannot passs the buck like that.
I suggest that anyone who feels that owning such a kind of porn should be legal is part of the problem. I really do feel that. It’s this total disassociation from the subject that bothers me. A bunch of geeks arguing for the legitimization of child porn so as they feel that viewing it is OK because it’s just a reproduction. If anyone else says anything but ‘aye, tis true’ then you get accused of being the Thought Police.
If you make the possession of child porn legal then the knock on effect would be beyond imaginations of horror.
Yes, great columns of fire would shoot out of the earth and the rivers would flow with blood. Children would be openly raped in the street. Politicians would have to find another boogeyman to use to cut back on our civil liberties and get easy votes… erm wait…
You sir, are part of the problem if you don’t think that the person who downloads child pornography is as responsible as the person who took the photo in the first place. You simply cannot passs the buck like that.
How is he part of the problem? Is voicing his opinion a problem?
not much to say on this, except it leads to my reply
because he assumes that simply downloading child porn doesn’t make him culpable. To put it another way, most post people are aware of the tenets of a free market, the one I would focus on in this case is supply and demand. If people demand a certain type of media (say child pornography) than the supply will increase to meet the demand.
If it were not illegal to own child porn then the demand for it would go up. I can’t prove this, but I can make basic assumptions based on how supply and demand work.
So i meant to suggest 1) that the incidence of creation of child pornography would increase to meet demand because of the legalization of ownership of said pornography and 2) that people who think that they can absolve responsibility from their actions by passing it to a third party by saying that they did not create it, are as bad as the originator of the porn.
I think that pretty much summarizes it. someone suggests
Well, just to play devils advocate…what about making it perfectly legal to have computer generated porn of your choice? If this was indeed kiddie porn, making this legal might satisfy those pervs. that get off on this stuff, they could get their ‘fix’ at home, and might prevent a real child from being molested. If no child is harmed in the creation of this content…and it might keep even one real child safe, why not make that perfectly legal to own and produce?
and anon coward is back
because he assumes that simply downloading child porn doesn’t make him culpable
Ahh… so he’s part of the problem because he’s making assumptions you don’t agree with? Nowhere did he imply that he personally downloads kiddie porn, he was just offering his opinion on the matter. You sir, are getting dangerously close to acting like anyone who doesn’t agree with the kiddie porn laws must be some sort of a pedophile themselves.
While the material is certainly reprehensible, I personally think the kiddie porn possession laws amount to little more than thought-crime persecution. Does that make me part of the problem too?
Oh look, this was what I was waiting for. The Thought Crime finger. A thousand pale faced geeks gushing foam from their mouthes as they gnash their teeth and wail. My reply
From my point of view, yes. In the end it does come down to my view against his, and I do think in this case that I am right and he is wrong. What is slashdot but a stomping ground for people with strong opinions.
You are putting words into my mouth by suggesting that I said if someone disagrees with me that they are a paedophile. I certainly don’t think that. However I do feel that if people think it shouldn’t be illegal to own child porn it is a tacit recognition that its creation is ok too.
Personally I don’t think that writing or CGI that contains paedophilic elements should be illegal. I realize there needs to be line drawn somewhere between freedom of expression and going too far.
Its all very well bringing up ‘thought crime’, a very potent image to a bunch of geeks but what people seem to be doing here is not connecting thought and intent. People find thought to be sacrosanct, in much the same way as the data on our computers - but thought with malicious intent can be a terrible thing, and a lot of our thoughts do lead to actions.
and yes, it does make you part of the problem in my opinion.
anon cowards response
However I do feel that if people think it shouldn’t be illegal to own child porn it is a tacit recognition that its creation is ok too.
The difference here is that some people are able to make the distinction between actual child molestation and kiddie porn. For you, they seem to be one and the same. You seem to believe that a man that possesses a photograph of a naked child is just as guilty as a man who actively molests a child.
but thought with malicious intent can be a terrible thing, and a lot of our thoughts do lead to actions.
Fascinating. So you support there being criminal penalties based solely on a person’s thoughts?
and yes, it does make you part of the problem in my opinion.
Do you think, since I am "part of the problem" due to my opinion on certain legal issues, I should be criminally liable for that opinion?
and my final response
Technically you are correct, child molestation and child porn are different ‘things’, but they are both bad. They seem to be frequently linked too, i.e. someone who molests a child might also look at child porn. For me, that puts them in the same ballpark in terms of the actual horror of what they are. And yes, I do think that a man/woman who possesses child porn is as guilty as the one who molests a child, I find someone who enjoys looking at child porn for their enjoyment equally horrific as someone who commits sexual offences against a child.
Now, if someone is found to have child porn on their computer then the reason for that porn being there needs to be established in a court of law. It could be that some malicious computer virus has placed it there.
"Fascinating. So you support there being criminal penalties based solely on a person’s thoughts?"
Er no, you have again done what I suggested people have been doing, which is not linking thoughts and acts. If someone were to merely think of committing an act, of course that isn’t punishable, it shouldn’t be. However it they *act* on those thoughts then well, you could hardly disagree that that is another matter. You seem to put pictures of childs being graphically abused in the same realm as that of fantasy, when in-fact that happened somewhere, sometime. It’s hardly surprising that people remove their selves so much from what they see around them, in our minds when we see something as a bunch of fluorescent pixels on the screen it takes on an aspect of unreality, Computers and the Internet are extremely bad for this and it is something i deeply dislike about them.
"Do you think, since I am "part of the problem" due to my opinion on certain legal issues, I should be criminally liable for that opinion?"
If it’s your opinion that child porn is OK, then as I have pointed out that is fine (as far as I can say finding child porn to be acceptable in any way is ‘fine’), however if you decide to act on that and either acquire or create child porn. what the hell do you think?
Hmm… Well you can read it all for yourselves to decide. I just get sick of geeks living in their worlds of idealism. Idealism is great but it only gets you so far, and when you can’t look beyond your own needs for privacy to other peoples need for safety then there is something wrong. The trick of course is to strike a balance between privacy and safety, which a thousand tracts have been written about, and an infinite number more wait to be written.
I find it galling that people don’t agree with me - I like to be right. I’ll say that right now. A friend once gave me a book called "The art of always being right" because I am well known for being an argumentative chap. However sometimes I have good reason.
More than anything else I see a terrible gap widening between the world and us, it’s people. We find more and more ways to absolve ourselves of the horrors in the world, our favourite one by far is to place a screen or window between us and what we have done. Windows are powerful, powerful symbols. They are used to separate and contain their subjects. Anyone who has ever seen video footage of missiles killing hundreds of people will know what I mean when I say how very unreal and even boring they are, they don’t illustrate anything except what we want to see.
I read comments on /. that suggested to me that people are comfortable ignoring the link between producing child porn and consuming it. Someone even suggested that it should be legalized so as to lure more people into making it, and then catch them. I guess that these people could have been baiting me, but I suspect not. I’ve read enough commentary on /. and other similar sites to recognise that people really do believe what they are typing.
When did people become such fucking selfish, thoughtless dreadful morons?
Well perhaps not a neo-Luddite, but I’m all anti-social baby! I’ve been thinking about what keeps me in Bristol as opposed to moving back to Wales or to Sheffield. It dawned on me last night as I ventured to an art installation and shin-dig in an abandoned garage, with my friends - What keeps me in Bristol is the learning of something that has as of yet eluded me, socialisation.
If you know me then you’re probably aware of what an anti-social, old moaning bastard I can be. It’s not something that I go out of my way to be but sometimes it’s hard to suppress the impulse to hide from the world and if I do have to interact with it, moan. I realized last night I never learnt sociability when I was younger, and so now, here in Bristol this is my new project.
Now to some people growing learning to be sociable and communicative is a necessity, or a pleasure. To me it was neither, and the problem with that is now I am in a city where if you don’t work at communicating with others you would call your friends, they just carry on regardless. I guess I am not quite ready to have an adult sticker, but I am working on it.
Have you ever noticed though when you enter a situation that makes you feel uncomfortable - being sociable in my case - that your mind starts painting alternatives, and saying ‘why are you wasting your time, there’s other things you could be doing?’. My greatest battle is going to be with that little pale limbed twat sitting in a purple velvet reclining chair in my head, pulling little brass levers and bits of twine.
I know that I will never be the most sociable of people, I enjoy my privacy and I enjoy my solitude; However I sometimes, shockingly have a good time in the company of others. When it involves having to seek out their company though, that is where I fall down.
I’ve always felt embarrassed for some reason to seek out others company. I assume that if they wanted my time they would contact me, and that if they don’t it’s because they somehow find me to be boring, annoying, taxing or something even worse. I realize that this is paranoia on my part, and may seem silly to most of you reading this but just because I realize it is paranoia does not mean I can shake it. When you find your head disappearing under water all you want to do is hide.
I write to you on the Day of the Depressed - though I feel anything but that today, let me assure you! Sunday is for many the most depressing day of the week. What the hell are we supposed to do on Sunday. I almost feel like going to Church, sitting in one of the back rows with a ghetto-blaster and playing Satanic Music when the Pastor stands to speak. That would be as useful as anything else you could do on a Sunday - A gloomy one at that!
As I mentioned earlier I happened across an art installation yesterday, a one day special run by I’ve no idea, I think partly the squatters who live there. Among others things there was some very nice Graffiti there. Click on the image below for my photoblog with more shots.
Yes, I realize that the image is cutting over the menu on the right, this is something I need to fix. I’ve intended to completely redo nemof.org design for a while, so I will keep in mind that I enjoy being able to show large images. The only reason that I’ve had a fixed width structure till now is that I cannibalized someone else’s design so I could get my blog up and running quickly. I hardly even like how it looks these days, so expect changes. sometime. soon. ish. this year. I promise. really.
YARGH! My back is still hurting. oweee. I will get arnica tomorrow and see if that is useful. I have decided that the next two-four weeks will be Nemo gets fit Summer Super Workout. Doomed to fail from the get go this exciting multi-discipline festival gala of events will have fireworks, backpain and lots and lots of blood and sweat.
What, you mean you got this far?
*edit*
Just thought I would add that for amusements sake I thought I would download and watch the infamous ‘Bloodrayne‘, one of the lowest ever scoring films on IMDB. I now understand the phrase: "Uwe Boll bad". Uwe, I hope you die a horrible fucking death, slow, protracted and writhing about on the floor in agony.
Why is child pornography as bad as terrorism?
(Score:5, Insightful)