User talk:MisterBadIdea

By KEN MUNSON I think the problem with romantic comedies is that comedy isn't romantic, or vice versa. A lot of romantic comedies are heavy on the comedy, and they often turn out to be very hateful, nasty things, like "Failure to Launch." But even when they try to be not wacky but low-key, so often they can't make it work. Take, for example, "Dan in Real Life." Now here's a movie in which the actors try so hard -- so very, very hard -- to be charming, you want to give them an "A" for effort. If only the rest of the movie tried this hard, but all it can do is fall back on lazy resolutions and boring, broad comic situations. The "In Real Life" part of the title irritates me the more I think about it. Steve Carell plays Dan, a widower who writes a parenting advice column, and he's got three beautiful daughters who at no point resemble children in real life. Despite the advice column, his daughters actually think he doesn't have all the answers, based on a series of embarrassingly tired comic situations. Dan's uncomfortable with his oldest daughter driving! The middle daughter wants to date but he thinks she's too young! He leaves the toilet seat up, and white people walk this way while black people walk that way! There's no excuse for material this old to be in this movie. Things pick up at an annual family reunion, where Dan meets a pretty stranger, Marie (Juliette Binoche). Dan and Marie hit it off beautifully, but unfortunately she's just started another relationship with another guy. And extra unfortunately, that other guy turns out to be Dan's brother Mitch (Dane Cook). This is the kind of love triangle that easily turns into high drama, and director Peter Hedges resists the urge to make anything in the movie dramatic. Everything is flattened out to the mellowest vibe. Dan and Marie want each other, but they can't do anything out of respect to Mitch. Some of the greatest movies in the world have been about repressed romance, but Hedges chooses to display this emotional dilemma by contriving situations where Marie has to be naked in the shower with a fully-clothed Dan. That's supposed to be funny. But love isn't funny, it's deadly serious to the people it's happening to. Comedy puts distance between you and the characters, you can't feel what they feel. That's what scenes like the shower scene do, with the added bonus of not being very funny either. Still, they try. Juliette Binoche can play the down-to-earth dream girl in her sleep, and Dane Cook is the most ingratiating he's been since he got famous. In fact, I think I felt more for his character than Carell's; as a not-that-bright dude who realizes he's dating well above his usual standards, he's actually more sympathetic, who we already know is gonna get the girl because that's the kind of movie this is. And of course the whole family finds out and everyone's angry at him "Dan in Real Life" ultimately leaves a very mild taste; it's a garden salad with fat-free dressing on the side.

By KEN MUNSON The rest of the movie-watching world is gearing up for the big Oscar-bait movies of the year, but me, I would rather talk about “Saw IV.” I think it’s far more interesting. The “Saw” series is of course the most prominent and successful franchise in the so-called “torture porn” genre, horror movies where the victims are not just killed but have graphic, excruciating pain inflicted upon them. Critics have called these movies sadistic, misogynistic, pandering to the worst and basest elements of humanity and an appalling sign of the decline of society. Are all these criticisms true? Yes, they are… if you’re a pansy. But personally, I have a lot of respect for horror movies, even these ones, for wanting to provoke a very real, very powerful reaction from its audience. That it makes so many uncomfortable is an argument for it, not against it; trash like the “Saw” movies are the genuinely challenging movies, not numbing, simple-minded pap like “Michael Clayton.” The previous entry, “Saw III,” may be one of the most brutal movies I’ve ever seen, and largely for this reason it remains the pinnacle of the series. I hated the first “Saw” because it was so preposterous and stupid. The sequels never really changed much in that regard, but by the third one, I had come around to its ridiculously elaborate deathtraps, moronic plot twists and each film’s attempts to fill in the previous entry’s plot holes while adding dozens more of its own. I acknowledge these movies as the cheap fast food version of “The Silence of the Lambs” or “Se7en,” but there’s some kind of sociopathic brilliance to them all the same. “Saw III” genuinely reminded me of Dante’s “Inferno,” and I don’t feel like I’m reaching to make that comparison. But “Saw IV” is a real disappointment, the first sequel to not improve on its predecessor and possibly even as bad as the original. Sadly, I admit I should have seen it coming—the last movie ended with the death of its star, the deathtrap-building serial killer called Jigsaw. Jigsaw still makes plenty of appearances in “Saw IV,” however, through flashbacks and recorded footage, and he still left plenty of overcomplicated mind games and physical tortures to inflict on some helpless victims. But with Jigsaw dead, the filmmakers seem to have lost their focus. The biggest problem is that the movie has just too much plot going on, in a franchise that was too complicated to begin with. With several of their colleagues abducted or killed in previous movies, the police hunting for Jigsaw now take center stage as they try to stop more deaths from happening. I counted about four and a half different plotlines going on in this movie. The first involves Detective Rigg chosen by Jigsaw (or his possible accomplices) to find a series of people caught in yet more traps; that Jigsaw requires that the detective to not help some of them is a sign that Rigg is possibly being recruited to take Jigsaw’s place. Rigg is trying to save one of his colleagues (Detective Matthews from “Saw II”), who waits in another deadly contraption for help. Meanwhile, another group of detectives is trying to save Rigg. And all the while, we get some of Jigsaw’s backstory from his ex-wife. Also, we get some resolution from a hanging plotline in “Saw III.” That’s much too much happening at once. (The fact that two main characters look exactly alike doesn’t help matters.) These movies work best when they’re finding new horrible ways to kill people, and worst when they’re focusing on its clever-yet-stupid plot machinations. This movie skimps on the cheap nastiness which is its reason for being, and the handful of horrible devices-o’-pain don’t even seem that horrible this time around. And by the time the ending comes along, it naturally makes no sense in the grand “Saw” tradition. This particular sequel seems only to be a setup for the already-announced “Saw V” and “Saw VI.” But this movie still managed to hold my interest, and that’s because I think Jigsaw is a fascinating villain in his own right. Jigsaw’s M.O. is to put really worthless people in horrible Erector-set devices, where escape is readily possible provided you do something really awful like gouge out your eye. He believes this brush with death will teach the survivors to really value their lives and kick the drugs, or treat their wives better or whatever. Most of the great slasher villains, like Jason, Leatherface or Michael Myers, are mindless golems who don’t need much backstory or motivation. Jigsaw is different—his motivations, twisted as they are, are all too human. Who hasn’t seen some lifelong screw-up and judged them harshly? A backstory for Jigsaw is not just appreciated, it’s almost necessary, and what we see makes the character so much more interesting. Before Jigsaw the serial killer, there was John Kramer, the rich, successful civil engineer and devoted husband. Kramer, in flashbacks, suffers a terrible loss; shortly thereafter, he’s diagnosed with terminal cancer. We see him turn angry and withdrawn, and we also see his first murder. He conducts this in person, without the silly mask or videotapes he would use later, and it’s amazing. He’s not the untouchable Hannibal Lecter-esque movie character, but more or less human; he’s just a very smart, arrogant, angry and vindictive old man who opted to play God because God wasn’t doing a very good job. Tied into his transformation into Jigsaw is his wife’s work helping drug addicts at a recovery clinic. Jigsaw ultimately decides that his wife’s work is futile and just enables the problem, and he may have a point. As most drug counselors know, no counseling in the world will help a user who doesn’t want help. Jigsaw doesn’t try to be nice about things; instead, he practices the world’s toughest brand of tough love. So much is tied into Jigsaw’s decision to do what he does; the need to establish some kind of meaning in a meaningless world, the need to succeed where mollycoddling doctors have failed, and the simple desire to hurt someone badly. Jigsaw is genuinely complex where the rest of the film is merely convoluted, and it’s for insights like these that I watch “bad” movies; they go where a lot of good movies fear to tread. “Saw IV” will only come across as incomprehensible gibberish if you haven’t seen the previous movies, and even if you have, much of it will still be pretty inscrutable. But I can’t imagine spending my Halloween weekend without it.

Thoughts: stuff about not killing people --bodies like toys --recruitment?

By KEN MUNSON

By KEN MUNSON Despite the gray clouds and light rain which threatened to end the show before it began, the sun ultimately smiled upon Hopewell’s first annual (hopefully) Americana Car Show, which brought more than thirty restored classic vehicles to downtown Hopewell. “We’re really happy with the success of the event,” said Cheryl Collins, one of the organizers. “It’s all about creating Hopewell as a destination.” The event, part of Hopewell’s 2007 celebration, was nearly halted by the early morning rain, but enough people brought their vehicles to the show to keep the show going. “A lot of people who were interested kept their interest, and helped us with the first of hopefully many to come,” said Collins. Many classic car owners in Hopewell came out to downtown Broadway, for the simple reason that they wanted to show off. “I just like driving it out, and this is a good place to drive it to,” said Roland Peacock, one of the many who brought out vehicles to the event. Hopewell city councilor Randy Sealey went so far as to bring four different cars, including two Dodge Challengers. Mayor Steve Taylor was also on hand to present the Mayor’s Cup to the one car he felt was the best in the show. “I love it,” said Taylor of the event. “I just think it’s a good start to bring the downtown alive.” While many great vehicles were part of the lineup, Taylor handed out the Mayor’s Choice award to the oldest vehicle in the show, a red wood-paneled 1928 Ford Model T owned by Ray and Paula Cordrey. “It was a tough choice,” said Taylor. “There’s a lot of nice vehicles, I could have made any number of choices.” Honorable mentions went to a 1967 Ford Mustang owned by Rick Jones and a 1971 Dodge Challenger owned by Randy Sealey. By KEN MUNSON Minnie Harris has been a cancer survivor for eight years; now she’s helping others fight the disease. Harris is the president of the Minnie Harris Cancer Support Foundation, the new foundation which started last year with just twelve members. Now a year later, the ministry is up to more than twice that in membership, and it celebrated its first year in business with an official ribbon-cutting at the Hopewell Art Worcz, where the foundation will be headquartered. “We all know about trouble – it doesn’t last forever,” said speaker Donna Wells.. “Joy comes in the morning.” The Hopewell Art Worcz is run by Willie Hayes, who is the vice-president of the organization and a cancer survivor himself for the past five years. The Minnie Harris Cancer Support Foundation is a new organization dedicated to giving comfort and aid to those fighting the disease. It provides them assistance, food, health care, and communication with other cancer survivors, people who understand what they’re going through. Communication will be available via phone, email or face-to-face. “God, let this ministry help as many as it can,” said Ellis Hampton, one of the many speakers of the event. The event also featured performances from the Faith and Hope Gospel Singers and speakers who connected the work of the foundation to the work of God. “We’re pleased to share with you the marvelous ways God is working in our foundation,” said speaker Connie Wyatt. “It won’t take you long to discover that this is truly, truly a blessed founation, rich in the relationships that matter most. Growing together, we serve, we laugh, we cry, we learn and we reach out to all cancer victims and their families with transforming truth.” That day, the ministry received a donation of $500 from Gloria Carter, whose late husband Morris recently succumbed to the disease earlier this month. Mrs. Carter asked that all donations be made Those wishing to make donations to the Minnie Harris Cancer Support Foundation can send checks to 205 East Broadway in Hopewell, Virginia.

Pretty muh speaks for itself All the counicilrs ohad this thing as iw as present him Actually I had Judge nye requested that I consider running radar on 295 shortly before I cam into aooofice in 2006 I think he was a little furestraed that non ewas running rdard Statep olice is runnig a little bit occasionalloy but not much Well givem e osme time to get my feet wert and ilooekd into it We were able to get this one car that silvestro Radar unit Set u writing the tickets out there And came back with a 100 tickets Then I went up to the city manager and gve hti s porpoaals to him and tried to get one full time position An he said well how bout two part itme positions That way we don’t run into the benit package for a full time person So that’s what I’m formally asking ffor is two part itme\ Judge nye’s suggestion that we run radar I took it Little over a month and we got a sample We’re not writing the proprlsa So far we’ve written the first sample pool Probably the average pool was around 84 miles an hour I’ds ay 70 percent of the people who received the speeding tickets were out of state I would estimate that 60 percent of them prepai the eticket And you know that means they din’t have to come to court City’s treasury The fines do not go to the stated Two new positions they would be working in the courthouse to fre upthe experienced people to go on the interstate to write the tickets Typically I would just have one person out there during each time Sometimes they’d be two bu they would both be experienced people Working rooms transporting rpis Law enforcement officesr police certification Sodat, ellis, loving, rotz Silvestro he is now police qualified I submitted Form submit to criminal justice service That qualifies Twelve months to complete the police academy In the meantime, he’s police qualified No problem that all Perfectly legit No problem at all Law enforcement officers Some people in the community they like to snipe at things for some reason I don’t know how some of these But deputies are law enforcmenet officers Have any authority to give out tickets In that really line The sheriff shall enforce the law The sheriff’s deputies take on the powers that are bestowed 15.2-6109 It’s very important and very powerful code section in the code of Virginia It authorizes the sheriff to enforce the laws in that locality to whatever level h This penalty I think it’ll be do some good things ffrom a safety aspect As a citizen, I would much rather get the money that the state police When they write tickets, that goes to the state The state police are short This is just a team effort to help out So we want to help patrol on the road Make it a safer place and the fines They’ll go to our I frequently hear this rumor Police department and sheriff department

Disputed non-free use rationale for Image:Tomandviv.jpg
Thank you for uploading Image:Tomandviv.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this image on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the image description page and add or clarify the reason why the image qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for images used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 12:53, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:49, 23 November 2015 (UTC)