Michael Offutt's Blog, page 18

Tobler-9 from Alien (2022) is a downright nightmarish world.

For long time followers of my blog, y'all know I like the Alien franchise, which includes the prequels Prometheus and Alien: Covenant. This love also extends to comic books. I've been reading one in particular, which is a mini-series called Alien (2022), and it follows a group of elite colonial marines who are all synthetics (think of super-powered humans) being tasked to infiltrate a former human colony called Tobler-9. These are people who can jump fifty feet and lift bulldozers above their heads, etc.

That being said, this new world that was introduced into the alien mythology last year is pretty scary. In this timeline, humanity is dying and only rare biotechnology has even the slightest hope of being able to save us. The only trick is that humanity has to get this biotechnology from Tobler-9, which is a "paradise lost." They explain that nothing organic could possibly survive on its surface, prompting the United Systems to reach out to Steel Team (the synthetics I mentioned above) who are the only ones who have a shot at retrieving said biotechnology. As I've been reading the comic, the hostility of the planet is pretty crazy. But to Steel Team's surprise, they've encountered people alive on the planet, this despite some pretty badass alien drones and radioactive rain. Take a look at this panel:

So yeah...the whole planet has been irradiated by atomics causing the rain to be lethal. I haven't quite gotten to the point in the comics that explains how people have been able to live on this planet. However, they did explain that the radiation in the water should be enough to make their skin peel off. But this apparently isn't happening (the mystery deepens) even though they apparently have managed to survive by hiding in underground bunkers, and moving to other ones quickly if a hive of xenomorphs that they call the "Icarus strain" happens upon them. Here's a panel featuring one of the bunkers: Anyway, the biologic that Steel Team needs is an egg from one of the Icarus strain monsters. It turns out that this new strain has the potential to help the human race survive in badly irradiated places. However, getting an egg is not going to be easy. Here's a panel from the comic that explains why:

The black lady (survivor) who has lived on Tobler-9 all this time and says "Human Hosts, Always" in the above panel is called "Melody." She goes on to say that there is "too much of us in them, if they were beasts before they are proper monsters now," which sounds like a really bad thing.
Anyway, it's been a fun read thus far and there are plot twists, tragedies, and back-stabbing betrayals that (of course) happen to our would-be heroes. It wouldn't be an "alien" story if that kind of thing didn't occur. The whole "alien apocalypse aesthetic" is something I like, and I think it is visually stunning whether it is on screen or in a comic panel. It's hard not to think of an apocalypse scenario as deeply interesting, especially when the overall reason for it happening in the first place seems derived from the dark side of human nature more than it just being an accidental occurrence. "We did it to ourselves!" It's hard not to really want to peel back the layers on that statement. And Tobler-9 is one hell of a nightmarish world to serve as the backdrop on this story.
Anyone else out there reading along in this comic? If so, what do you think?

Welcome to the March 2023 Insecure Writer's Support Group post.

Even though it isn't spring, and winter has a firm grasp on the part of the country where I live, March always makes me think of spring. I feel like this March is going to be particularly challenging, because I'm getting roommates to help pay the bills. It's the first time I've had roommates in over twenty years. So, lots of changes are happening in my life. One of the things that I like about this situation is that my two roommates and myself have a lot in common. And they've promised to help out around the house. When it snowed 14-inches last Wednesday, I realized after four hours of shoveling that it probably will be good to have some help now and then. I'll probably say the same thing once summer arrives and the lawn needs to be mowed. So, I'm focusing on the positives and seeing how that will work out.
And being the first Wednesday of March, it is also time for the Insecure Writer's Support Group post. This blogfest rolls around every month. It was started by Alex Cavanaugh, whom most of you probably know. If you are interested in signing up for it, you can go HERE and do so at your leisure. Here are some more details about the IWSG that I modified from their website:

What is the purpose of the IWSG?: It is to share and encourage other writers. Writers who post during the IWSG can express doubts and concerns on their blogs without fear of appearing foolish or weak. Those who have been through the fire can offer assistance and guidance. It’s a safe haven for insecure writers of all kinds!

When does everyone post?: The first Wednesday of every month is officially Insecure Writer’s Support Group Day. As a participant, your responsibility is to post your thoughts on your own blog. This is your opportunity to talk about your doubts and the fears you have conquered. You can discuss your struggles and triumphs or offer a word of encouragement for others who are struggling. You should also do your best to visit others in the group and connect with your fellow writers. The suggestion from the IWSG sign-up page is to aim for a dozen new people each time and return comments. This group is all about connecting! You also want to be sure to link to the IWSG page and display the badge in your blog post. Finally, you want to make certain that your avatar links back to your blog. Otherwise, when you leave a comment, people can't find you to comment back.
Let’s rock the neurotic writing world!

The Twitter handle for the Insecure Writer's Support Group is @TheIWSG and their hashtag is #IWSG.

The awesome co-hosts for the March 1st posting of the IWSG are Diedre Knight, Tonya Drecker, Bish Denham, Olga Godim, and JQ Rose!

Is there a question/prompt I can answer if I'm struggling to write a blog post? Yes, there is. Every month, the IWSG announces a question that members can answer in lieu of a post on writing. These questions may prompt you to share advice, insight, a personal experience or story. Include your answer to the question in your IWSG post or let it inspire your post if you are struggling with something to say.

And all that being said, I usually just answer the question. So here is the March 1st question:

Have you ever read a line in novel or a clever plot twist that caused you to have author envy?

Of course, yes! But it happened when I was quite young (still in high school). I think that is an age when people are constantly comparing themselves to others. I would read a really good story and rather than be inspired by it, I'd get a little depressed that my mind didn't come up with whatever this thing was. However, those feelings of envy went away in my early twenties. Now, I just read things, and I enjoy things for what they are. Maybe this is one way adulthood and maturity finally arrived for me. If I come across a super good story, I think, "I'm so fortunate that I found this story and that someone spent a ton of time trying to get this into my hands." Here are a few more examples that illustrate what I'm talking about.

I have friends who make tons of money, way more than I make, and I have the same feelings towards them. I'm happy that they found a path to whatever it was that they wanted. I can't walk those same paths, and I realize that. I have my own roads I need to follow, and my own opportunities. I know that some things are just not reproduceable. It's been over two centuries, and the world has yet to create another Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart and maybe it never will.

I think one of the most important things to learn in life is to know what is possible for you, and to explore where those pathways lead. It's actually important in everything. If you have a friend that becomes a model for Vogue magazine, that may not be something you can reproduce for yourself. The best thing to do is recognize this and wish them well and then concentrate on your own life and how to make yourself comfortable in it. An example of this is looking at any superstar celebrity. I'm going to pick on Tom Holland for a minute. I'm sure that Tom Holland had childhood friends. Whoever these people are would have needed to realize that the success Tom Holland achieved isn't reproduceable by them even though they hung out with him all the time. It just isn't. The best thing they could have done (and I hope they did whoever they happen to be) is just to wish him well and go about living their lives and doing the things that they are capable of doing.

Americans in particular have a kind of toxic view of failure. I saw a post on Reddit about a teenaged girl and her teenaged boyfriend who are having a baby together, and they are worried (and seeking advice) because they are poor, and they have no familial support. They got tons of crazy advice, so much so that the thread got locked by Reddit. And you can guess what the advice is, but the short list assumes that a baby...any baby...deserves to live a good life. So adoption and other things were thrown into the mix under "what you gotta do now is...." and blah blah blah. The thing is, all of it is wrong. The teenaged girl and her teenaged boyfriend don't have to do anything. There are poor people everywhere. And there always have been. And there are poor uneducated babies that grow into impoverished adults. There are homeless individuals everywhere. If the United States agrees (collectively) that capitalism is the superior system, then this is natural. We should all be okay with this. We should stop shaming the poor and just admit it is natural and go about our business. Capitalism doesn't work if there is no one on the bottom. Capitalism has a "nature to it," and I've learned in my life that it is best to let Nature (for the most part) take its course. To be clear, I don't like this system. I prefer socialism with safety nets. But that's not what we have in this country. And the message from the capitalists is "you better toe the line or else." So, I toed the line. And this pregnant and poor teenaged girl is going to need to toe the line too. Welcome to poverty, and that's okay. Failure happens all of the time. I dare anyone to prove me wrong on this.

To return to the question posted by the IWSG, I think we'd be best to remember this lesson as writers. Failure happens all the time, and that's okay. Some writers will go on to be George R.R. Martin and J.K. Rowling. Many of us will not, and we need to be okay with that because we aren't entitled to success. This is the system that we have. Being envious of someone else's abilities helps no one (least of all you), and that all starts by letting go of author envy and just growing up and realizing that life is unpredictable, and that the chips are gonna fall where they may.

Thanks for visiting.

Chainsaw Man is a weird and grotesque animated show.

I recently finished watching the first season of Chainsaw Man on CrunchyRoll. If you are unfamiliar with this anime, it is an adaptation done by a studio called MAPPA of Tatsuki Fujimoto's action shonen anime. To define "shonen," this is a genre of Japanese comics and animated films aimed primarily at a young male audience, and they are typically characterized by action-filled plots. For example, you may have heard of DragonBall Z. This is a kind of "shonen anime," although what it shares with Chainsaw Man is exclusively limited to the genre as there is nothing else in common at all (at least from what I can see). Additionally, Mappa has made several other anime's that have kind of "blown up" into a worldwide pop-culture phenomenon, the most obvious of which is Attack on Titan. Chainsaw Man is blowing up in a similar fashion, being talked about in local game and hobby stores enthusiastically by nerds to the point that I had to watch it.

Chainsaw Man is set in an alternate version of Earth where monstrous beings called "Devils" exist. The originality of these creatures was kind of breathtaking, as I saw everything from a huge ball of hands to a gargantuan and horrifying leech with luscious human hair and multiple boobs. People who live in this world make bargains with these devils, and in return for whatever they have to offer, they receive supernatural powers. The story of Chainsaw Man then is one that begins with a teenager named Denji, who is forced into a lifestyle of being a "Devil Hunter," which is a very dangerous occupation, by the Yakuza who came to collect on his father's massive debt to them. Denji spends years living in abject and horrifying poverty with a pet devil named Pochita, who has a chainsaw on his head (but is otherwise identical to a cute dog). And then in a horrifyingly bad sequence of events, Denji gets ripped apart by zombies in one of the most gruesome displays of animated carnage I've ever seen. But his pet devil somehow combines with his body and by doing so, Denji basically pulls himself back together, and now he has all the strength of a Devil when he needs it, and can transform into a terrifying monstrous abomination with a chainsaw for a head and two chainsaws sprouting from his arms. Needless to say, this anime is gory, gory, gory.

One of the things I'm getting used to in watching and consuming anime is how unabashedly sexual and lust-filled the characters are. But even though I'm "expecting this kind of thing," it still catches me by surprise when it is so "in your face." For example, teenage Denji spends a lot of time thinking about girls and getting laid, which oftentimes seemed distracting to the actual violent and dark storyline. And there were these really unsettling moments of pure grotesque, which I wasn't used to, but it was kinda like watching a trainwreck. I mean...you just couldn't pull your eyes away.

Denji is obsessed with breasts, and you see in this animated show what (in America) would be very casual sexual assault (the boob graze, the feel up, etc.) at least once an episode. And when he gets his first kiss from a girl he finds attractive, she does so in a state of intense drunkenness. Here's where it gets really vile: while she is kissing him, she literally throws up into his mouth, ruining the experience for Denji as now he has this vomit taste in his mouth. It's awful, and I wonder why some author even thought of this as something they wanted to capture.

And then this girl drags Denji home, and he's essentially incapacitated by alcohol, and she date rapes him. I gotta say...I've never seen anything like this in a cartoon. It's complicated by the fact that Denji has legit feelings for this girl, but he's having difficulty processing what she does/is doing to him. But there aren't any real consequences (unless you count being murdered a consequence), because the girl is literally killed by a devil in the next episode and her soul is then sent to hell where she will suffer for all eternity. It is an awful death. In that violent outcome, Denji also loses most of his "friend" devil hunters as they too are just ripped to pieces by the monsters and horrors of this world apparently overrun by these supernatural creatures. It also becomes painfully apparent that the devils that grant these hunters power are insufficient to deal with what's coming at them. So, it is kind of like watching a show where characters who have likeable traits (and are physically attractive) get repeatedly violated in unspeakable ways, and then they get murdered in short order. It's honestly kind of crazy.

Another thing about this anime that strikes a chord with me is the loneliness of the characters. It is primarily a male-oriented anime. However, it is for this very reason that I recall a weird statistic I read online that indicated some 60 percent of young men in America are single, which is nearly twice the rate of unattached young women. So men in their 20's (in modern America) are more than twice as likely as women in their 20's to be romantically involved, sexually dormant, friendless, and lonely. There seems to be this underlying meta-commentary on modern life that goes something like this: "these days with books and tv, you can have one-sided, parasocial relationships, and the solitary life is less risky." Then, the whole "parasocial relationship dynamic" neatly describes fandoms (by extent) from obsessed k-pop fans to manga to twitch and to instagram and the legions of people who follow thirsty celebrities like Tom Holland, but who remain single because no man who isn't Tom Holland is good enough for them (or they don't want to move on from their comfortable obsession). It's also another reason why these fandoms become so harmful.

Anyway, our world is a mess. It's obvious that Chainsaw Man got me to think a lot about what I was actually watching, and its overall story. I will watch season 2 whenever it becomes available. I also do kinda wonder why foreign stuff is where you get the really visceral and depressing stories, and why America seems uninterested (for the most part) in this kind of storytelling. I also kinda wonder why I found this depressing and grotesque and oftentimes vile story so mesmerizing. But I did. What does that say about me?

Season Three of Picard shows that Kirk is basically the prototype for every part of Jean-Luc's personality that even includes a secret son.

I heard a long time ago that the character of Picard was basically one half of James T. Kirk. They split that character in two. Riker got all the womanizer bits and Picard (played by Patrick Stewart) got all the caring and leadership ability (as well as a good dose of wisdom). Now that the first episode of season 3 of Picard have landed on Paramount +, I think I believe this more than I ever have before (spoiler alert).

In the first episode, we are introduced to Jack Crusher, Beverly Crusher's son that she had with Jean-Luc and kept secret for several decades. At least that's what I've figured out thus far. Honestly, I don't really care too much about this character yet. But I do think it is odd that there's this tradition of sons popping up for male Star Trek captains, and never a daughter. It's almost like there is a preferred "sex" to the offspring for a story being written starring alpha male captains.

Additionally these male captains are "too busy" to warrant being told about such things. Is it a tired trope that the "alpha man" wants a son and not a daughter? Honestly, if I'd been born straight and had a child I'd have wanted a daughter. They are more compassionate and caring for older folks (an observation I've had for a very long time). So, the chances I'd have a daughter who would care for me in my old age as opposed to a son who said, "eff off...I gotta go live my life" is much higher. Not saying it's a guaranteed thing...but just something I've observed.

Anyway, we saw this same thing happen in Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan. In that story, James Kirk (alpha male) finds out that he has a son named Marcus and that the mom, Dr. Carol Marcus, kept it secret "all these years." Then that kid ends up getting killed by a Klingon which kind of cements Kirk's hatred of the race in general. Picard rehashing the same kind of plot does seem to be a reinforcement of the idea that "Picard's personality flows directly from Kirk." I don't know if that's exactly what Michael Chabon intended, but it is what it is. I guess in the end I'm glad that Picard is ending with this season. The entirety of its run has not created anything new at all, which has been kind of surprising since every other series breaks new ground and forages ahead in unexpected ways.

There is one question I do have though that will probably get answered: Does Wesley know about his half brother? He probably does since he's a super being now (the Traveler). But it would be fun to get some acknowledgment of that. Anyone else watching Picard? 

I'm sharing my thoughts about Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania. Please share yours.

I saw Ant-Man and the Wasp: Quantumania this weekend. It was an exciting and fun-filled adventure, and I think I enjoyed it as much if not more than the other Ant-Man films. I also need to remind myself not to overthink the show too much. That usually happens with any story that messes with time, and if I find myself following the different threads to suss out how everything relates to everything else, then I butt my head against paradoxes and things that cannot happen. That being said, I do want to discuss it. So here is a minor spoiler alert to anyone who has not seen it but may be planning to do so in the future.

The first thing that this movie seems to pull into focus (more than it was when it was a "stand-alone" product) is the series Loki. In that show, we ended up seeing that 1) other multiverses do indeed exist, and 2) that they exist in the timeline controlled by He Who Remains (who is a variant of Kang), and 3) that they all have to follow the basic beats in order to not deviate from "The Sacred Timeline." So, the Time Variance Authority where Owen Wilson's character worked and where they enforced the Sacred Timeline appears to be just a timeline that is allowed to exist as long as it doesn't pose a threat to whatever the Kangs are doing. So, as long as other multiverses are the kind that don't rock the boat in a way that bothers the Kangs, they're allowed to go on existing. Is that right?

So, when Sylvie (the Loki variant) killed He Who Remains, it re-set the multiverse. Before that point, there really was only the Sacred timeline. However, since He Who Remains was eliminated outside of time, it made it like there were always infinite multiverses forever. Although the Sacred timeline still played out the same way, it's as though the other universes were never pruned, and they all played out on their own simultaneously. Hence, the return of a ton of Kangs that we see in the post-credit scene in Quantumania. Does any of that make sense? I'm actually not sure it makes sense to me, but that's what I'm thinking is going on.

Regarding a thing that doesn't require me to do mental gymnastics in trying to figure anything out, I enjoyed MODOK. I was not expecting Yellow Jacket (Daren) to make an appearance after he was the villain in the first Ant-Man movie. And he made a suitably creepy MODOK, which has always been a really weird creature in the comics. And MODOK is supposed to look ridiculous. There's no way not to make him look ridiculous, because he's a giant head with little arms and legs in a floating murder chair. 

Finally, Jonathan Majors as Kang is electrifying. Thanos was one kind of villain. He was bulky, strong, towering, and nearly always in control. He was like an irresistible force. However, going with another villain like that would have felt too much like a retread. So, I think that Marvel studios made a really good choice post-Thanos. This time around, Kang is much pettier, much more emotional, but also a brilliant scientist and warrior. He's someone who can manipulate the very fabric of time and space with his advanced technology. And all of his variants seem to be evil, with maybe "The Conqueror" being the worst of the bunch. He says, "Do I look like a liar?" But he is. He's a liar, a cheater, a megalomaniac, and a psychopath. It was exciting to see the ways in which Majors brings this character to life, and I look forward to more. And that pretty much sums up all my thoughts that I have on Quantumania. It felt like I was reading a comic book, and comic books too often leave me a little bit confused until I see the entire story laid out. 

How To Train Your Dragon is becoming a live action adaptation but I seriously doubt it can keep its all-white cast of characters.

This story has no people of color. That is a problem in 2023. My guess is that Astrid 
(the female lead) will once again be flipped so that a minority can be cast in that role.
In the land of transitioning to live-action movies in beloved remakes of animated films, Disney seems to be king. But I just read on some of the blogs I follow that How To Train Your Dragon (a DreamWorks franchise) is now going to be remade as a live-action set of three movies (there were three total installments in the franchise), and it makes me think that the story will have a strong tonal shift. I was a huge fan of the How To Train Your Dragon movies which are only a little over a decade old I think. The last one (which came out a few years ago) landed completely flat with me, being mostly a story that seemed like a retread of prior stories. I learned only recently that the fault for this lies with Steven Spielberg. If you're interested in hearing about it, read on. Otherwise skip the next paragraph.

Here's how I understand the events that led to part three being so "meh." The original plan was for Drago (the villain from part two) to return and eventually be redeemed. Although I have no idea how that would play out, Spielberg apparently told them that they didn't have enough screen-time to do it justice. So, they ended up scrapping it. When I consider what could have been versus what I got, I feel like Drago could well have been the missing element that would have made that movie feel like less of a retread. And maybe, it would have been better to cut the Light Fury instead so that we didn't have that whole, "Let's breakup the couple" thing that happened between Hiccup and Toothless. But whatever...it is what it is. I only ever rewatch the first two and just skip part three whenever I see it is playing.

So, back to a live-action adaptation. I don't see how they are going to be able to film this without making some of the main characters radically different to fit within the mold of how Hollywood does things these days. Representation matters, and I get it. But Hiccup would be radically different if he was a black trans woman, and they needed to make that decision in order to maintain diversity. The animated show doesn't have any non-white characters, and that's just not going to fly anymore. They could flip Astrid (the female lead) and cast a black actress, but that seems like it is becoming a cliché. For example, the CW's Flash and Iris (black), or Spiderman's Tom Holland and Mary Jane (played by Zendaya who is black), or Paul Atreides (Timothee Chalamet) and Chani Kynes (Zendaya again). Those are just three examples. Don't get me wrong. Both of these examples work well. However, people may wonder "why is it always the female lead who gets flipped race-wise and why doesn't it happen to the guy?" It's a good question, and it's probably going to crop up when they start casting for How To Train Your Dragon the live action adaptation. Who knows? This kind of cliché could continue for years before activists demand that Hollywood change. But there already has got to be mounting pressure for studios to break the cycle of always making the woman lead a minority.

Anyway, I will more than likely be excited to watch these live action adaptations. I just wonder what's going to happen with the casting, because (as I see it) these shows are going to be problematic to adapt, because no one wants an all-white cast anymore. Lord of the Rings got away with it, but that wouldn't happen in 2023. If Peter Jackson was casting that show these days, half of his cast would need to be minorities and feature some non-binary or trans characters. Gandalf would probably be a black man. And that's just the truth of it. That wouldn't have bothered me, but it would be a tonal shift from the character I read about in the books and saw in so many art pieces done by John Howe and Alan Lee. If Hiccup ends up being played by a young minority, it's going to be a tonal shift, so same thing. And if they don't cast a minority, then the same problem crops up that has always been present: why does the hero of these fantasy stories always have to be white? I have no answers other than this: writers who make new characters for their fictional worlds need to make their stories more diverse to begin with. They need to start featuring people of color in main roles, so as to avoid adaptation issues when a beloved property becomes adapted for television or movies. If people had done this all along, we wouldn't be having this discussion at all, and I'd have no reason to write this blog post.

I'm not sure I understand what elite schools have to offer students anymore.

People in America live in a world that is dominated by a pretty merciless and unforgiving form of capitalism. By the way, this isn't another post from me to begrudge capitalism and its many faults. On the contrary, I'm just stating my opinion of how things are. In my own particular city, the homeless population has tripled in just five years from what it was. This seems to be a real-world example of how brutal the capitalist system is and how money is really the most important commodity in today's world (at least the one in America).

So that being said, the reason I always thought one would want to attend an elite university, school, or college or whatever was because it affected your bottom line. It turned into real world money. It was an investment in a person's future. However, times have changed. I don't think it's an investment anymore. Here's my story of how I came to that conclusion.

I have a friend who is sending her son to one of these to get really good at music, and I wonder what the end game is. I don't think he's enjoying it as much as "she" thinks he is, being away from family, and having difficulty making friends and social connections (at least ones that last longer than a year). If it were me, I'd be pretty unhappy with an identical situation. I'd be afraid to tell my mom who has been whipping this dream for a long time now (is it my dream or is it hers?). Furthermore, I'd be in competition with any friends I'd make along the way for a job at a symphony. That fate has gotta be awful. Imagine walking in and seeing your friend (for example) from school and knowing that they are only hiring one viola player and that you need to compete with them for the job and that one of you is going to walk away a loser.

In addition to that, I looked up the salaries of professional orchestra players, because I'm curious. They make about $110,000 a year. I myself make about $90,000 a year. That's only a $10.00 per hour difference over a 40-hour work week than myself (before taxes take a bite), which could easily be made up by renting out a room or doing some Doordash. I graduated from the University of Idaho with a Bachelor's degree in English and live in a middle-class home in good old South Salt Lake City. I drive 24-year old vehicles that I maintain well, and I live paycheck to paycheck due to mortgage payments, insurance payments, and everything else that's inflated. So, a person that maybe gets into an elite school...gonna pick on Julliard for a second...and graduates with all that music training after spending hundreds of thousands of dollars for that education gets what? A gateway into the middle-class lifestyle that I already live at? How does any of that make sense?

I see this stuff all the time. People blowing hundreds of thousands of dollars on educations only to just get a job that doesn't pay much more than a Master's degree would that you could get in a community college. There is also trade school, which is far cheaper than Julliard. People who are HVAC certified or who are electricians around here are making 100K plus a year instantly. Oh and that middle class home that I live in? It is now valued at $750,000. In order to take on a $750,000 mortgage, you need to bring in about $250,000 to $300,000 per year as a household. That means that if you are a couple that MANAGES to stay together (and that's a tough one), both of you need to work and have salaries in the $150,000 range. Graduates from elite schools are not getting these kinds of jobs unless they are the exception rather than the rule. And let's just say you do somehow manage to be the exception. Well congratulations! You can now afford to live in the same middle-class home that Mike (me) lives in and you too have won the right to drive 24-year-old cars.

None of this makes any sense anymore. Maybe it used to back in the 70's and 80's. The average wage for Americans was $40,000 a year, and you were considered "well-to-do" at $60,000. Now, $100,000 a year is average. I think I read on Business Week that in many parts of the country, making $60,000 is considered low income now. But the thing is, I think industries are really struggling with paying people more than $100,000 a year in the same manner as they always used to. Only inflation has taken a lot out of the value out of those wages. "I make six figures now" is now "congratulations, you still can't afford a home and will probably rent all of your life."

So, why do people still send their kids to these schools? Is it ego? Is it low self-esteem? Is it narcissism, because they get a credential that allows them to feel good about themselves? They still end up in a middle-class home driving vehicles they can't afford to replace because new cars are topping $60,000. I suppose they could buy a cheap Hyundai, but that doesn't seem to fit the graduate of Harvard or Yale now does it? One of these things is not like the other. And what people can afford versus the costs of their educations (and the other price of said education) is breaking the logic circuits of my brain. And what's more is that these people who attend these elite schools and who indeed end up in the Middle Class look down on their neighbors, because they feel that they "shouldn't" be mixing with the commoners. But that's the Catch-22. They themselves ended up a "commoner" and the elite school didn't do what they thought it was going to do for them. This causes mental illness as they get anxiety and depression, because no one around them is good enough for them, and they secretly know that it all doesn't make sense. "Because I accomplished this and this...I should have different neighbors? Why am I not neighbors with Steven Spielberg? Why am I not friends with Timothee Chalamet?"

And Masterclasses? What a joke those things are. In short, Masterclass consists largely of handsomely compensated celebrities who are exceptional within their fields because of innate talent or even genius, innate drive, and plenty of resources to succeed so that they can try to pass on what they know to others who have none of those qualities. Mozart is famous for responding to a person who asked him how to write a symphony when he suggested that they start with something much simpler, like a concerto. The person said to Mozart, "But you write many symphonies." And Mozart replied, "Yes, but I didn't have to ask how to do it." It's not a slam, but just truth. People somehow get it into their heads that just because they observe one person doing an incredible thing that it is somehow repeatable by them. But it usually isn't, and people would be much better off knowing what their limitations are, because every person is different.

Anyway, it may sound that I'm anti-education. I'm not. I love education. But what I don't understand is the incredible costs of some education. It's almost like people don't plot out their endgame. Or they think that their rugrat is a prince or princess (they are not) and no matter what the cost...THEY ARE WORTH IT! The Last of Us just this week had an excellent example of what I'm saying in the characters of Henry and Sam (Spoiler alert).

Henry threw a really good man and a solid leader under the bus (he was murdered) so that he could get his little brother Sam the leukemia treatment he needed to live. This led to extreme anger and revenge from the survivors of the good man that was murdered. These survivors literally tore post-apocalyptic Kansas City apart looking for Henry and Sam to punish them for what they did. This led to hundreds of deaths from bullets and violence, because they awoke a huge hive of zombies that killed them all. And then Sam got bit anyway, ended up a zombie that his brother had to put down. And then his brother was so filled with guilt and depression that he committed suicide. It was a spectacular example of, "I'm going to do everything I can for a brat and I don't care what it costs!!!" And then it ends up costing hundreds and hundreds of lives, and it is just spectacularly stupid and awful.

Anyway, it's like we now have a society of unhinged parents who think that their darlings are worth everything. No price is too high. Parents no longer ask the important question: what is the final thing that I expect from educating myself in this way? Is the endgame to get a middle class lifestyle? If that is the case, then there are easier and cheaper ways to go about doing this. If the endgame is to be rich and famous, then you are going to need more than education. You probably need good looks, luck, and honestly...probably a willingness to allow yourself to be exploited by rich and powerful people in ways you may not be comfortable with. And that's just the truth as I see it. I wish someone could make sense of elite schools for me. I'd sure be willing to listen. I'd like to believe that they aren't completely useless, at least as far as capitalism is concerned. The world has changed significantly in the last fifty years and what elite schools offer compared to what you can just get with a vocational education has narrowed to the point where the actual things you can buy with the money you get from your job aren't all that different unless you can make millions of dollars a year. But the jobs for people who make millions of dollars a year will always belong to the people (like Mozart) who never needed the education to begin with, because they could just "do it."

The movie 65 looks like a simple dinosaur movie which may mean it's gonna be great.

Yesterday, the movie 65 dropped a trailer during the Superbowl time slot. It honestly looks pretty interesting, and I think the reason why is it appears to be so basic. It foregoes trying to get dinosaurs into our time through cloning and just unwinds a time travel story, placing Adam Driver in the past some 65-million years ago, where he can see the Earth as it used to be.

Honestly, this looks awesome. As a kid, I always wanted to time travel to see the Earth as it was described in scientific books in that time period. Although where I would go in time and what I would want to see (were I to have a time travel device) has changed, the fantasy idea of seeing a Jurassic Earth is still really appealing. And in case you're wondering, I'd probably use my time machine to go and see Mozart live (or something like that) rather than journey to a prehistoric world full of creatures that want to eat me.

I do wonder what kind of dinosaurs we are going to see in this movie, but I guess I'll need to wait until March to view it.

We are less than one month out from Mel Brooks' History of the World Part 2.

When I was a kid, my parents let me watch (and they watched with me) Mel Brooks' History of the World, Part One. I remember the both of them laughing out loud. And my dad explained jokes to me that I didn't quite get. But overall, I remember the experience fondly. It was funny, but I never really understood until I was much older why there was no follow-up that promised "Hitler on Ice," among other things. If you don't know, the original title is a call out of sorts to History of the World Volume 1 by Sir Walter Raleigh, which was planned as 5 volumes, but only the first was ever completed.

In time, I forgot about this show until I was reminded earlier this week of its existence, because the long awaited sequel is coming to Hulu. Of course, I had to click on the commercial and watch it. I'm so happy that this thing is happening and that so many comedic geniuses of the modern era are involved. From Jack Black to Taika Waititi to Wanda Sykes, this thing looks awesome.

If you too are excited, the first two episodes premiere on March 6, 2023, followed then by two new episodes daily through March 9, 2023. Here's a list of the cast (it may not be a full list):

Mel Brooks, Wanda Sykes, Nick Kroll, Ike Barinholtz, Pamela Adlon, Tim Baltz, Zazie Beetz, Jillian Bell, Jack Black, Quinta Brunson, Dove Cameron, D’Arcy Carden, Ronny Chieng, Rob Corddry, Danny DeVito, David Duchovny, Hannah Einbinder, Jay Ellis, Josh Gad, Kimiko Glenn, Brandon Kyle Goodman, Jake Johnson, Richard Kind, Johnny Knoxville, Lauren Lapkus, Jenifer Lewis, Poppy Liu, Joe Lo Truglio, Jason Mantzoukas, Ken Marino, Jack McBrayer, Zahn McClarnon, Charles Melton, Kumail Nanjiani and Brock O’Hurn, Andrew Rannells, Emily Ratajkowski, Sam Richardson, Nick Robinson, Seth Rogen, Sarah Silverman, Timothy Simons, J.B. Smoove, David Wain, Taika Waititi, Reggie Watts and Tyler James Williams.

It looks to me like the producers yelled, "96-year-old Mel Brooks is making History of the World Part 2, so who wants in?" And then a giant ball of comedy people rolled on in, which is how it should be. I'm wondering if Trump will figure into it at all, but maybe that's too current. Checkout the trailer below if you haven't seen it yet.

Here are a dozen things I've observed that show the world of my experiences is getting weirder.

The world I know and live in is getting really weird. I don't think it resembles anything of what I thought I'd see when I was much younger. Here are my latest observations:

1) My professor friend who teaches a class at the University of Utah says that his third-year students no longer have the ability to use punctuation correctly in the construction of English sentences. And these are people who are born in the United States, for the most part white, and who are pursuing bachelor's degrees and taking his class as an elective.

2) There are a ton of people dumping animals at animal shelters. They literally cannot take anymore and there are feral cats and dogs roaming the streets. It's rare to see a dog owner who actually leashes their dog. Most of them keep them unleashed and the dogs harass people walking or even attack them, and the owner doesn't care. I had to help my neighbor who was attacked and bleeding from one such incident (she was screaming in the street for help).

3) Everything is expensive. A lot of the time the things you want are no longer in stock.

4) Road rage is everywhere. In Utah alone there were 6,300 people driving over 100 mph on our roads in 2022. This is double just a few years before that. What the f*ck?

5) There are shootings every night. 

6) Today's young people are fragile as hell. I'd say up to about age 36, I'm finding people who just crumble and cannot cope with anything. They are still living at home, they don't want to go out, and they cancel social engagements with others.

7) People suing other people is flooding the courts. I was actually advised to raise my liability insurance on my car to half a million because if I let a friend borrow my car and they get in an accident, I will need the extra insurance to protect myself against desperate people who want to make money from a lawsuit. Like seriously...this is becoming that common.

8) People are more obsessed with youth than ever before. Madonna (for example) was unrecognizable at the Grammy's. Shania Twain doesn't even look like Shania anymore. And it isn't just celebrities. I have friends who have undergone a hundred thousand dollars or more in plastic surgery and who are extremely lonely because gatekeeping behaviors and ageism is so rampant. I have another friend who is my age who can't bring himself to watch Picard because he doesn't want to watch a "feeble old man." It's weird to watch sixty-year-old men try to chat up teens and twenty somethings by expressing how much they like Taylor Swift. I don't even know what's going on there. I also read about some guy who is obsessed with staying 18 forever. What's wrong with aging?

9) Poor people are using Doordash and Grubhub like crazy. I have a friend/acquaintance who is going to be homeless in less than a month. After telling me her sob story, she used Doordash to order sushi for herself and her son (who is trans) and the bill came to seventy dollars. I didn't say anything, but I was stunned.

10) People with a net worth of over a million dollars are telling me that they feel poor, and they are depressed. I can't understand this mentality, but it feels very strange to listen to a millionaire complain about their money woes.

11) Billionaires who fly to Switzerland on private jets to meet about climate change are eating steak and want the rest of us to cut back on our emissions and learn to eat insects. Like...what the hell?

12) There are homeless people everywhere. I've never seen so many. And the only kind of apartment that seems to be getting built are the luxury ones. And these so-called luxury units are made with cheap materials, and they have cheap appliances in them.

Anyone have any idea what is happening? Anyone else notice how weird things are getting?