While I humbly admit have no clue what the solution to the “social dilemma” could possibly be, I do, however know what it is not. The film “The Social Dilemma” proposes an increase in government regulation on the internet as a whole, which I cannot state how much I disagree with. The internet is supposed to be the Wild West. Crazy, wacky ideas that can be exchanged and expounded upon ad infinitum. The charm of that would feel diluted if it were to become over-regulated.
The issue with social media platforms isn’t inherent, the problem stems from how these systems are utilized by both the user base as well as the companies responsible for maintaining them. This is why I propose that the answer for solving this modern “social dilemma” lies not in regulation, restriction, or systematic overhaul; the answer can be found in education.
The internet is a powerful tool that can be harnessed to do wonderful and despicable things in equal measure on a scale never before seen. Much like a car, the internet requires a baseline of experience to properly pilot. This also happens to apply to social medias, as they are an extension of the internet itself. I believe that if people were to be properly educated (preferably at an early age) on internet etiquette, and given direction on what to look out for, then social media and its side effects on society wouldn’t be as much of an issue as it is today. In general, if people knew better how to navigate the perils of the internet, they would find it much easier to use social media in a responsible manner.
It’s a time-honored tradition of mine to kick it back on Halloween night, hop onto Netflix and put on “White Chicks” for the umpteenth time. There’s just something so alluring about a good bad movie. Whether it be “The Room,” the prolific “Scary Movie” series, or anything created by The Asylum (ah, Syfy, you never fail to fail in the most entertaining way imaginable), you can bet a good B movie is always sure to put me in a good mood.
What is a B Movie?
B movies share a few stand-out characteristics. However, as time passed the identity of a B movie has evolved and expanded from the rigid framework presented here in this list.
Low budgets
Tight/sporadic shooting schedules
Relatively short runtimes
Minimal production design
Originally, B movies served a similar purpose to opening acts at a music concert. They were essentially the film equivalent of the appetizer before the big blockbuster main course. The lackluster quality they were known for was only a byproduct of their production. The genre has now skyrocketed in popularity along with rise of ironic humor, and that has spurred the genesis of studios, like The Asylum and the Wayons Brothers, that are dedicated entirely to perfecting the craft of the so-bad-it’s-good genre of movie. There are leagues of people, like myself, who casually enjoy these kinds of films knowing full-well that what we’re watching is going to be the antithesis of quality.
It’s impossible to cover the topic of bad movies without mentioning the elephant in the room… or rather the eccentric Pole himself, Tommy Wiseau, and creator of the cult classic, “The Room.”
Oh, hi Mark!
It would be an understatement to call this movie iconic. The pure awfulness of Wiseau’s “The Room” not only spawned a cult fanbase that enjoys the film specifically for its goofs, it birthed an entire culture surrounding viewings of the film. No joke, this film is frequently the focus of special, Rocky Horror style viewing parties in which the filmgoers get piss drunk and follow a preestablished guideline of call and response style obscenities at certain points in the movie. Hell, fans are even encouraged to bring plastic spoons with them to wherever the screening is being held to pelt the screen with after a certain scene. The culture that has developed around “The Room” is one of chaotic, riotous bliss and it would not have been so if Tommy Wiseau had not unintentionally crafted his film to be such an artfully incompetent masterpiece of cinema.
Chaotic, riotous bliss encapsulated within a mere thirty-seven seconds.
Legacy Immortalized
In 2017, Seth Rogen, James Franco, and his brother Dave set out to recreate the magic of “The Room” with their film “The Disaster Artist.” The movie was based on Greg Sestero‘s (the actor for Mark in “The Room”) written account of the making of Tommy Wiseau’s movie, and was meant more to be a humorous biopic that would help shed light on the origins of the movie to unaware fans. While a commendable effort, I personally thought the movie was only alright. It didn’t quite capture the essence of what made “The Room” so special, but it really isn’t a fair comparison in the first place. You’d be hard pressed to find a cinematic disaster as enchanting as an interstate pile-up as the gargantuan titan that is “The Room.”
The movie “White Chicks” is the poster child for the artistically starved, culturally depraved, and anything devoid of any semblance of substance… and yet, I can’t seem to look away. This movie is terrible. Everything about the story, the premise, is wrong, but somehow it has managed to successfully captivate myself along with many others.
“White Chicks” by the Wayans Brothers is a hilarious film. It’s a two hour romp that never fails to brighten my day when I view it. The premise is that Marcus and Kevin Copeland, who are two FBI agents who really suck at their jobs, are sent to protect hotel heiresses, the Wilson twins, from a kidnapping plot at a notorious fashion event. On the way to the hotel where the event is taking place, the Wilson sisters’ dog causes the car to crash in a wacky series of events, and it ends up that they are unable to attend. However, the Wilson sisters start to have a B.F. (a Bitch Fit) which prompts the Copelands to find a way to get the Wilson twins to the fashion event without actually having them be there. This is where the title of the movie comes into play.
Hold my poodle, hold my poodle!
The Copeland brothers are very obviously black males, and they decide to go undercover as the Wilson twins, who are very obviously petite, white chicks. The agents take the Wilson sisters’ place and pose as them at the event, and hilarity ensues. Their disguises are ridiculously unconvincing, and yet no one blinks an eye, which adds another layer of funny. Hilariously enough, they end up improving the reputations of the Wilson twins through their various antics and shenanigans. There are so many iconic, quotable moments that have etched themselves into the recesses of my subconscious. I couldn’t tell you how many times “It’s not just a bag, it’s Prada.” pops up in my daily stream of consciousness and I love it.
It’s not just a bag, it’s Prada. 💅🏿
The comedy in “White Chicks” is wild and raucous, slapping you silly with jokes left and right. Sure, the bulk of it is low brow humor, but there are a surprising amount of witty jokes and gags sprinkled in every now and then. Everything about this movie is bad (not in a technical sense, but in an artistic sense), but when I watch it I can see how much fun all the actors are having, and I just can’t help but be swept up in that too.
Have you ever wondered what it would be like to watch a porno, but without the pornography? Me neither. But when I stumbled upon this incredibly niche channel, my eyes were opened to the fascinating world of pure, unadulterated porn acting, porn writing, and porn… cinematography? Originally, the creator of this channel made it his mission to curate as much of Steve Rambo‘s filmography as he could (sans the inappropriate bits) and compile it onto his YouTube channel, but recently he’s been branching out into all kinds of classic porn films. If you’re ever bored (or high) out of your mind and looking for a good laugh, I couldn’t recommend this channel enough.
Honestly, I could go on all day about bad movies. I could comb the very recesses of Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu, and whatever else streaming services there are to find the best bad movies. The real cream of the crop. I could write a ninety page paper on the subject if I felt so inclined.
Alas, all good things must come to an end… even if they’re bad. Real bad.
All around the world, different cultures have their own urban legends, their own unique boogeymen or reasons to not go out walking alone at three in the morning. I’ve always been a fan of these myths, and the mystery that permeates their very being. Despite my rational brain knowing that these are fictional, that inkling of doubt and sprinkling of plausibility is just enough to make the idea of urban legends exhilerating.
That’s why this video from the YouTube channel TopTenz immediately caught my eye. Simon, the host of the show, presents and explains several urban legends from all over the world, and this particular one caught my eye. It’s a tale about a bus in Beijing, China that disappeared under mysterious circumstances one night, and turns up a few days later with a grisly, inexplicable scene contained within. It’s an unbelievable situation that actually happened, and I find it fascinating the way the legend of The Last Bus to Fragrant Hills attempts to rationalize those events.
This notorious legend of Bus 375 was said to have happened in Beijing in the fall of 1995. The way the story goes varies from telling to telling, but the gist is that one night Bus 375 was heading from the Yuan-Ming-Yuan terminal to Xiang-shan (Fragrant Hills). This was the last bus for the night, and in it was the conductor, the driver, and four other passengers: an old lady, a young couple, and a boy. After a bit, the driver noticed two men on the side of the road who were asking to be let onto the bus. At first, the driver was adamant to let them on since they weren’t at a bus stop, but as he neared them he realized that the two men were supporting a third man who looked weak and weary, and his head was bowed which obscured his face. All three men were allowed on, and everyone on the bus noticed something peculiar. The men were all wearing traditional Qing Dynasty robes and their faces were gaunt and as pale as the moon.
The passengers were unsettled by the men, but the conductor urged them to stay calm and consider that maybe the men were simply actors in costume. After a few stops, the young couple exited the bus. All of a sudden, the old woman started making a fuss and claimed that the boy had stolen her purse. The boy protested, but the old woman demanded that the driver stop the bus at the next stop so she could take the boy to the nearest police station. When the bus stopped, the old woman and the boy stepped out and watched the bus drive away. The boy then noticed that there was no police station in sight, and the old woman told the boy that she saved his life. Naturally, the boy was confused, but the old woman explained that she had been watching the three men closely, and she knew they were ghosts when she saw that they had no legs.
Two nights later, after failing to report back to the station, the bus was found sunken in the Miyun Reservoir, which is about 100km from Xiang-shan. Inside the bus were three heavily decomposed bodies: the driver, the conductor, and an unidentified man.
Jim Nobles of thebeijinger.com lists more mysteries surrounding the incident, adding several deeper layers to this already preternatural mystery.
The bus did not have enough gas to drive all the way to the Miyun Reservoir and when the police opened the petrol tank, they found it was filled with blood.
Jim Nobles, thebeijinger.com
The bus did not have enough gas to drive all the way to the Miyun Even though the bodies were found only two days after they disappeared, they were very badly decomposed. Even if it was summer, the process of decomposition could not be this quick. An autopsy confirmed that there had been no intentional meddling with the bodies. How could they decompose so quickly?
Jim Nobles, thebeijinger.com
The police did a strict inspection of all the security camera tapes on each entrance leading to the Miyun reservoir, but the bus wasn’t seen in any of them. In fact, they found nothing out of the ordinary whatsoever. How could the bus get there without being seen?
The Social Network, directed by David Fincher, was a movie that I had seen many times in the past with several different people. Once with my family, once with my extended family, and a third time with my friends at a sleepover. When I was younger, I remember fervently hating the movie, not for a lack of quality, but because at the time I believed it glorified Mark Zuckerberg excessively. Rewatching it now for the fourth time, however, I see that the information presented to the viewer is much more neutral than I had originally thought. Considering the last time I saw The Social Network was when I was at least sixteen, I think it’s safe to say that I was able to pick up on more nuance regarding the acting, directing, writing, and cinematography this time around. The acting was fantastic all around, despite Jesse Eisenberg playing another antisocial neurotic genius type character, I can’t really fault the guy because he plays that archetype well. The dialogue was sharp and snappy, while staying relatively believable. Well written dialogue is something a lot of literary/otherwise media struggles with, but when it’s good, it can be quintessential in helping the audience relate/sympathize/empathize with a character.
The beginning shot, from this conversation alone, I immediately understood everything I needed to know about Mark Zuckerberg’s character. The power of well written dialogue. Image provided by film-grab.com
I also loved how the themes of the story were woven in very subtly, like how (especially when it comes to the beast that is mainstream media) perspective can often be more powerful than the truth. This was illustrated perfectly by the scene in which Eduardo was revealed to have been accused of animal abuse, when in reality the incident was simply him accidentally feeding chicken meat to his pet chicken. As usual, something that was really just an honest mistake was blown way out of proportion by media outlets, which ended up tainting his image and leaving a permanent scar on his reputation as a whole.
In terms of directing, was especially a big fan of how David Fincher handled the asynchronous storytelling of the invention of Facebook. The way the movie switched back and forth between the lawsuits involving Mark, Eduardo, and the Winklevoss twins, and their various experiences navigating life as fledgling twenty-somethings/students of Harvard was a good way to build drama and intertwine a level of suspense. I was a big fan of the ending, and how it basically left it up to the audience to decide who was right or who was wrong (if there were rights and wrongs in the first place). Overall, I always knew this was a good movie, but watching it now that I’m a little more wise than my sixteen year old self has provided me with a new perspective on the film, and one that I can definitely appreciate. It’s a little eye opening to realize that I have shifted from vehemently despising the movie for blatantly pandering to Mark Zuckerberg, to realizing the information was only being presented to me and coming to an understanding that Mark did what he did because that was the only way Facebook could become the behemoth that it is today.
The ending shot, in which Zuckerberg is portrayed as acting like just another Facebook user (implying that, in the end he’s just like us, or something to that degree) Image provided by film-grab.com
.jpg?bwg=1547470966)
.jpg?bwg=1547470964)
Duck Duck Design 