Dan Culberson

Dan Culberson

(0 comments, 102 posts)

This user hasn't shared any profile information

Home page: http://dan-culberson.com/

Posts by Dan Culberson
Abraham Lincoln Vampire Killer

“Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter” Just a Ridiculous Concept

0

“Ridiculous Concept”

“Hotshots” looks at a movie!

 

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter is one of those movies with a title that gives away the whole story.

On the other hand, some people might be so intrigued by the title that they just have to go see the movie anyway.

Spoiler Alert! The story is about the 16th president of the United States, and the premise is that he hunted vampires as a secret passion.

Early in the movie we learn why, and later we learn how, when Lincoln meets a man named Henry Sturgess in a bar and Sturgess says to him, “A man only gets that drunk when he wants to kiss a girl or kill a man. So, which is it?”

You see, Sturgess is a professional vampire hunter, Lincoln wants to kill one particular vampire for personal reasons, and so Sturgess agrees to teach Lincoln how to kill vampires, but for a price.

Because Lincoln had been a rail-splitter when he was younger, and as he tells Sturgess that he hasn’t had much luck with shooting, Sturgess helps Lincoln cover the blade of his ax with silver, which has to do with the lore of killing vampires in this movie, and the ax will help Lincoln in his quest in more ways than one.

Sturgess also tells Lincoln that he can have no family or friends as long as he is a vampire hunter, but of course Lincoln acquires both.

We see Lincoln meet, woo, and wed Mary Todd, we see him debate Stephen Douglas when he rises in politics, and we also see him enter the White House when he becomes president, even though each and every night, he goes out hunting vampires.

Now, there are many scenes and shots that were designed specifically to be seen in 3-D, and some–if not all–of them are just plain ridiculous.

And then comes the Civil War, and we learn that the vampires in the country are siding with the Rebels, because they want a nation of their own, which puts a different perspective on the battle scenes, doesn’t it?

Well, we all know how that turned out anyway, but you might be interested in the end of the movie, which puts a whole new perspective on what might be going on today.

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter is still just a ridiculous concept.

I’m Dan Culberson and this is “Hotshots.”

Related posts:

Abraham Lincoln Vampire Killer

“Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter” Just a Ridiculous Concept

0

“Ridiculous Concept”

“Hotshots” looks at a movie!

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter is one of those movies with a title that gives away the whole story.

On the other hand, some people might be so intrigued by the title that they just have to go see the movie anyway.

Spoiler Alert! The story is about the 16th president of the United States, and the premise is that he hunted vampires as a secret passion.

Early in the movie we learn why, and later we learn how, when Lincoln meets a man named Henry Sturgess in a bar and Sturgess says to him, “A man only gets that drunk when he wants to kiss a girl or kill a man. So, which is it?”

You see, Sturgess is a professional vampire hunter, Lincoln wants to kill one particular vampire for personal reasons, and so Sturgess agrees to teach Lincoln how to kill vampires, but for a price.

Because Lincoln had been a rail-splitter when he was younger, and as he tells Sturgess that he hasn’t had much luck with shooting, Sturgess helps Lincoln cover the blade of his ax with silver, which has to do with the lore of killing vampires in this movie, and the ax will help Lincoln in his quest in more ways than one.

Sturgess also tells Lincoln that he can have no family or friends as long as he is a vampire hunter, but of course Lincoln acquires both.

We see Lincoln meet, woo, and wed Mary Todd, we see him debate Stephen Douglas when he rises in politics, and we also see him enter the White House when he becomes president, even though each and every night, he goes out hunting vampires.

Now, there are many scenes and shots that were designed specifically to be seen in 3-D, and some–if not all–of them are just plain ridiculous.

And then comes the Civil War, and we learn that the vampires in the country are siding with the Rebels, because they want a nation of their own, which puts a different perspective on the battle scenes, doesn’t it?

Well, we all know how that turned out anyway, but you might be interested in the end of the movie, which puts a whole new perspective on what might be going on today.

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter is still just a ridiculous concept.

I’m Dan Culberson and this is “Hotshots.”

Related posts:

Moonrise Kingdom

“Moonrise Kingdom” a Weird Piece of Crap

0

“Weird Piece of Crap”

“Hotshots” looks at a movie!

Moonrise Kingdom is the latest film from acclaimed writer and director Wes Anderson, and if you thought his previous films were weird and offbeat, get ready for this one.

To say that the films of Anderson are an acquired taste would be an overstatement. Each of his films is an acquired taste, and this latest one left a bad taste in my mouth.

The cast doesn’t lack for fame and talent, and it includes Bruce Willis, Edward Norton, Bill Murray, Frances McDormand, Tilda Swinton, Jason Schwartzman, and Harvey Keitel, but all of them play supporting roles in the story, which is about two 12-year-old misfits who fall in love and decide to run away together.

Now, if you think that is quirky, even the location of the story is quirky. It takes place in 1965 on an island off the coast of New England.

We learn that a year earlier Sam Shakusky and Suzy Bishop had met when she was appearing in a pageant and he went backstage where Suzy was in makeup and asked her, “What bird are you?”

They took a liking to each other, apparently because they were both troubled kids without any friends, and they became pen pals, writing to each other regularly for the past year and making plans to escape together.

Now, remember that they are both 12 years old and living on a small island, and so you can see some ready-made flaws in their plan, right?

Anyway, they meet on schedule and take off to a small cove where they plan to hide out. The adults discover that the kids are missing, and so they start searching for them.

There is also a storm coming that is going to turn into a hurricane.

We see many scenes of Sam and Suzy swimming and dancing around in their underwear that are uncomfortable to watch, especially when Sam paints a picture of Suzy lying down that is a direct copy of the painting scene in the 1997 Titantic, except for their ages and their underwear.

Also, everyone–including the adults–acts deadly serious, which must have been the director’s choice for comic effect, but it just comes across as stupid.

And just when you think it couldn’t get any weirder, it does.

Moonrise Kingdom is just a piece of weird, stupid crap.

I’m Dan Culberson and this is “Hotshots.”

Related posts:

Hysteria Movie

“Hysteria” about the Singular Most Popular Sex Toy

0

media

“Singular Most Popular Sex Toy”

“Hotshots” looks at a movie!

 

Hysteria is about the invention of a device that is widely used, but not commonly discussed, and when it is, usually there are snickers and Monty Python nudges of “Know what I mean? Know what I mean?”

And I am not talking about the candy bar.

The word “hysteria” comes from the Greek word meaning a woman’s womb, and in the 1800s when it was used to mean a psychoneurosis marked by emotional excitability and disturbances of the psychic, sensory, and visceral functions leading to behavior exhibiting overwhelming or unimaginable fear or emotional excess, doctors in England believed that behavior in women was caused by their uterus, and the way to treat them and to cure that behavior was to apply stimulation to the woman’s organ.

What I don’t understand is why any woman paid a doctor to treat her that way for the all-purpose catchword of hysteria would go back to him and pay him again for treatment when she could just treat herself at home for free.

All puns intended.

The story begins in 1880 in London, and Hugh Dancy plays Dr. Mortimer Granville.

Dr. Granville interviews for the job as assistant to Dr. Robert Dalrymple, who asks Dr Granville, “But tell me, Doctor, what do you know of hysteria?”

Dr. Dalrymple says that the work of treating women for hysteria is tedious and boring, but Dalrymple is London’s leading specialist in women’s medicine, and his waiting room is always full of women waiting to be treated by him.

Know what I mean?  Know what I mean?

Dr. Dalrymple has two daughters, Emily and Charlotte, who is played by Maggie Gyllenhaal, and they, too, are doctors. Emily lives at home and is a phrenologist, or a scientist who feels the bumps on someone’s head, which determines the person’s mental faculties and character.

Charlotte, however, is at odds with her father, because she is always borrowing money to keep her Settlement House in the East End open, where she treats poor people and many women and children. When we first meet Charlotte, she is having an argument with her father and storms out of his office, slamming every door behind her.

Hysteria takes too long to get started, could use some good editing, but eventually gets around to the discovery of the singular most popular sex toy.

I’m Dan Culberson and this is “Hotshots.”


Related Videos

Related posts:

darlingcompanion

“Darling Companion” a Shaggy Dog Story

0

media

“Shaggy Dog Story”

“Hotshots” looks at a movie!

Darling Companion is a pleasant little movie about a simple little subject from the beginning to the end.

Written and directed by Lawrence Kasdan, this movie can be added to his other movies, such as the 1981 Body Heat, the 1983 The Big Chill, and the 1991 Grand Canyon, among many others.

It stars Diane Keaton, Kevin Kline, Dianne Wiest, Richard Jenkins, and Sam Shephard, and it is about a lovable dog that goes missing and all the problems that causes.

When the movie opens, Beth and her daughter Grace are returning home from the airport when Beth orders Grace to stop the car on the freeway, because she saw something on the side of the road.

What Beth saw was a dog, and to make a long story short, after a veterinarian says there is nothing wrong with him that a few good meals and a bath won’t fix, Beth decides to keep the dog and names him Freeway.

Beth tells her reluctant husband, Joseph, “He’s not mine. I’m just going to find him a home.”

Well, you can guess how that works out, can’t you?

Sure enough, a year later, everybody is at the vacation home in the mountains of Beth and Joseph, where Grace is getting married, and Freeway is still a part of the family.

So, Joseph is out in the woods taking Freeway for a walk when Freeway spots a deer and runs off after it.

Freeway doesn’t come back, Beth blames Joseph for losing the dog while Joseph was talking on his phone, and this disrupts everybody’s plans for going back to their homes after the wedding, because now they all decide to stay until Freeway can be found.

Everybody includes Beth and Joseph, Joseph’s sister Penny, Penny’s grown son Bryan and her new boyfriend Russell, a young woman who “sees things,” because her mother was a gypsy and her father was a yogi, and even the local sheriff.

Well, now the story isn’t so much a story about a missing dog, but a story about the relationships of three sets of couples, some good and some not so good.

Darling Companion is like a shaggy dog story, which means that you either enjoyed all the details as it gets to the end or else the end itself was just as enjoyable.

I’m Dan Culberson and this is “Hotshots.”


Related Videos

Related posts:

Snow White and the Huntsman

“Snow White and the Huntsman” an Expensive Piece of Nothing

0

media

“Expensive Piece of Nothing”

“Hotshots” looks at a movie!

 

Snow White and the Huntsman is the second movie about Snow White to come out in two months, and the title indicates that Hollywood is running out of variations on how to make each one different.

Instead, the filmmakers should be concerned about how to make each one better, because this one isn’t.

This time, the evil Queen is played by Charlize Theron, and she even gets a name, Ravenna.

The Huntsman is played by Chris Hemsworth, whom you will recognize as the actor playing Thor in some other action movies, but he doesn’t get a name, just a back story.

And the grownup Snow White is played by Kristen Stewart, whom you will recognize from a lot of other movies.

Once again, we see how it all began, and after Ravenna becomes the stepmother of young Snow White, Ravenna tells her, “I could never take your mother’s place.”

And once again, Snow White is placed in prison by the Queen, high up in the north tower of the castle.

My comment was “Boring!” even before the movie got one-third of the way through.

So, the variation this time is not that the Queen has the Huntsman take Snow White out into the woods to kill her, but Snow White escapes from the castle and the Queen has the Huntsman go into the woods to find Snow White and bring her back.

Now, Charlize Theron chews the scenery as Ravenna, the evil Queen, and that is not easy to do when the scenery is made out of stone walls.

By this time the movie has become a swords and sorcery story, and the woods contain all sorts of menacing things and even a monster.

Finally! About two-thirds of the way through, the dwarfs show up, but right away you notice that there is something strange about them, and the camera doesn’t stay on all of them long enough for you to count them.

Sure enough, you were right, and later in the story an explanation solves the mystery.

Another weird thing about the dwarfs, however, is that you get the nagging feeling that when they are shown in closeup, you think that you recognize the actors playing them, but those actors aren’t actual little people.

Snow White and the Huntsman is an expensive piece of a nothing movie.

I’m Dan Culberson and this is “Hotshots.”


Related Videos

Related posts:

culberson-thumbnail-2[1]

Cleaning Up the Dirty Words

0

Here’s what gets me.

I’m going to write every filthy, disgusting, dirty word you have ever seen or heard right now: abcdefghijklmnopqrstuvwxyz.

There. That wasn’t so bad, was it?

“What?” you say? “That’s just the alphabet,” you say?

Correct, but it contains every dirty word ever written and every dirty word that ever will be written. You just have to string the improper letters together, assuming you didn’t stop reading when I announced what I was going to do.

Now, what is it with so-called “dirty” words that causes such an uproar? We have all heard them, and many of us have used them. Then, why is it we make such a stink about them when we see them in print or hear them in movies, radio or television?

The reason is that somewhere along the line we made an unwritten agreement that certain words are “dirty” and out of place in “polite” society, and people who use them anyway can get into big trouble.

Lenny Bruce, the controversial comedian who died in 1966 at 40, got into big trouble for being “obscene” on stage. What did he do? He offended society.

Now, what is the problem with dirty words? Is it the content or the form that is offensive?

Well, it cannot be the content, because if one word for the human anatomy or a physical act is considered to be offensive, another word that means exactly the same thing is not. Why is that?

We won’t allow the most common word for the act of love, but we will allow “sexual intercourse,” “coitus,” “copulation,” “hiding the sausage” and “dancing the horizontal mambo,” among many many others.

Why? Because the one word that is shortest of all and has no ambiguous meaning in that context has been banned by “polite” society.

Also, we don’t allow certain slang words for various parts of the human anatomy, but “penis,” “vagina,” “breast” and “anus” are perfectly acceptable. Why?

Although “Saturday Night Live” once got into trouble for saying the word “penis” 23 times in one sketch, after Lorena Bobbitt sliced her husband’s sausage and made all the newspapers, network news programs and late-night talk shows, using any other word would have made the speakers look prudish and foolish.

Wait a minute, however. It cannot be the form that is dirty, either. “Cock” is perfectly acceptable when it means a rooster. “Pussy” is perfectly acceptable when it means a cat. And “tit” is perfectly acceptable when it means in exchange for tat.

So, what’s the big deal with dirty words if the offense is neither in the content nor in the form? Could it be the intent? Do we get offended by certain words only because we believe that the speaker or writer intended to offend us?

But that’s not being fair, nor is it being logical. If we take offense by what we believe was someone’s intent, then are we saying we have the power of knowing what people want to do before they do it? Is that what we are saying?

We are proud of the fact that our Constitution guarantees us the right of free speech. And yet we don’t allow everyone to practice free speech. We censor free speech. Why?

Well, now you’re going to say that something I might say might offend you. But, wait a minute. Something that might offend you will not offend somebody else.

Therefore, are you saying that you are better than those unoffended people and know more than they do? Is that what you are saying?

Hold onto your seats. I am going to offend you. I am going to write the common, four-letter word that means the supreme, gentle, tenderest, everynight act of love. Here it comes: f—. Were you offended?

You have seen that before, haven’t you? People are offended when they see all the letters, but not when the newspaper substitutes hyphens for some of the letters.

What sense is that? You know what it means, I know what it means and the newspaper knows what it means. But somewhere along the line we agreed that we won’t be offended when we see symbolic hyphens.

Why don’t we just agree that we won’t be offended by any word, no matter how s—- it is?

After all, a word is only another symbol for an object or an idea, and we all have the power to make a symbol mean anything we choose.

Now, isn’t that silly?

I rest my case.

Related posts:

Chernobyl Diaries

“Chernobyl Diaries” or, Attack of the Chernobyl Zombies

0

media

“Attack of the Chernobyl Zombies”

“Hotshots” looks at a movie!

Chernobyl Diaries is a horror movie that takes place at the site of the 1985 Chernobyl disaster of the meltdown of the nuclear reactor.

And of all the horror movies that take place at the site of a nuclear meltdown, this is one of them.

Would you be surprised if I told you that there were six young people involved in the story?

Paul is an American living in Russia after having had some sort of falling out with his family.

Chris is Paul’s brother, who is traveling in Russia to visit Paul, and with him are Chris’s girlfriend Natalie and Natalie’s best friend, Amanda.

And then there are Michael and Zoe, who are tourists from Australia, and who join the group when Paul arranges an “extreme tour” for him and the others to take.

Paul knows a former Russian soldier named Uri, who is now an extreme tour guide, and Uri is going to take the six young people to visit the abandoned city of Pripyat, which used to be the home of the workers at Chernobyl and their families before the nuclear disaster.

Regarding the abandoned city, Uri tells his clients, “Nature has reclaimed its rightful home.”

Would you be surprised if I told you that the abandoned city is not totally abandoned?

After being turned back at the official checkpoint entrance to the city, Uri drives his van and its passengers around the back to his special entrance.

Uri says that the radiation levels are low enough to be safe now, and besides, they are going to spend only one day inside the city.

Would you be surprised if I told you that they end up spending more than one day there?

Okay, they hear a scary noise inside one of the abandoned buildings, and they see something that Uri says he has never seen before on his previous trips to Pripyat.

Now, would you be surprised if I told you that when they get back to Uri’s van to leave that it won’t start?

Would you be surprised if I told you that when darkness falls, bad things start to happen to seven people one by one?

Chernobyl Diaries could have been called “Attack of the Chernobyl Zombies,” and I’m not surprised that I didn’t find it scary and I didn’t like it, either.

I’m Dan Culberson and this is “Hotshots.”


Related Videos

Related posts:

The Dictator

“The Dictator” a One-Joke Movie

0

media

“One-Joke Movie”

“Hotshots” looks at a movie!

 

The Dictator is Sacha Baron Cohen’s latest film and is not to be confused with the 1940 Charles Chaplin film, The Great Dictator, nor any of the many other films based on Mark Twain’s 1881 story, “The Prince and the Pauper.”

Yes, the story is about a leader of a country who tries to pass himself off as a commoner, either by choice or force, and in this case, force.

Admiral General Aladeen is the dictator of the North African nation of Wadiya, and he has the extravagantly long beard to prove it. He is also so egotistical that he changes the names of many words to “Aladeen” to honor his glory.

He is also so stupid that he doesn’t see the problem in changing the Wadiyan words of both “positive” and “negative” to “Aladeen,” especially when a doctor asks his patient, “Do you want the Aladeen news or the Aladeen news?”

Ben Kingsley plays Tamir, Admiral General Aladeen’s second in command, and your first question should be “What is Academy Award winner Ben Kingsley doing in this piece of crap movie?

Apparently, just as there are no small parts, only small actors, there are no big actors who aren’t willing to prostitute themselves for a small paycheck.

Tamir finds a double for Admiral General Aladeen whose only real job is to be shot in the head, because the people of Wadiya want to live in a democracy, not a dictatorship.

The job requirement for being the double of Admiral General Aladeen is to be stupid, and because Cohen also plays the role of the double, he can act even more stupid than he usually does.

Of course, the story moves to New York City, where Admiral General Aladeen is to give a speech at the United Nations, of course there is a kidnaping plot, of course the admiral general’s beard is cut off while he is being tortured, of course he escapes the kidnaper, and of course the rest of the movie is about the beardless Aladeen trying to exist on his own in New York City.

However, not of course, the movie takes a turn of events when Aladeen meets Zoe, a radical socialist played by Anna Faris, and he takes a job working for her.

The Dictator is a one-joke movie worth two chuckles, tops.

I’m Dan Culberson and this is “Hotshots.”


Related Videos

Related posts:

thebestexoticmarigoldhotel

“The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel” All Right in the End

0

media

“Everything All Right in the End”

“Hotshots” looks at a movie!

The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel is about a hotel in India of that name, but ending in even more words of “For the Elderly & Beautiful,” it is a beautiful, lovely, and funny movie, and it just might be the best movie you will see all year.

Based on the 2004 novel These Foolish Things by Deborah Moggach, the movie follows seven British pensioners who accept the offer from the hotel’s new owner and manager to travel there and kick-start its business.

In fact, the brochure that persuaded the seven strangers to go to India for a new adventure was Photoshopped to look like what the young manager hopes it will look like, and after they arrive, he adds “Now with Guests” to the hotel sign.

The manager’s name is Sonny Kapoor, he is played by Dev Patel of the 2008 Slumdog Millionaire, and when the new arrivals complain about the hotel’s condition, Sonny assures them with his optimistic philosophy, “Everything will be all right in the end.  If it’s not all right, then it is not yet the end.”

The most well-known actors playing the pensioners, who are all there for different reasons, are Judi Dench, Tom Wilkinson, Bill Nighy, and Maggie Smith, and although it is difficult at first to keep them and their stories straight, just sit back, relax, and let them all be as wonderful and enjoyable as the sights, sounds, and colors of India itself.

One of the pensioners has been forced to sell her London flat, another one lived happily in India 40 years ago and is returning to settle a matter that has been bothering him all that time, another one doesn’t like foreigners, but requires a cheap hip replacement, one unhappily married couple lost money in a bad investment, one woman is looking for a rich husband, and the final pensioner is a man who is lonely and just looking for some female companionship.

In the meantime, Sonny has his own romantic problems, because his mother doesn’t approve of his girlfriend and has her own plans for his future bride.

And don’t think that the pensioners will find what they are looking for within their own group.

Remember Sonny’s optimistic philosophy?

The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel, when it comes to the end, will leave you thinking that everything is all right.

I’m Dan Culberson and this is “Hotshots.”


Related Videos

Related posts:

Damsels in Distress

“Damsels in Distress” Causes the Audience to Be in Pain

0

media

“Audience in Pain”

“Hotshots” looks at a movie!

 

Damsels in Distress is the fourth movie written and directed by Whit Stillman, all of them have received favorable reviews, but I thought this was the worst movie I have seen in a very long time.

The story takes place at a school called Seven Oaks University, and it begins during new-student orientation at the start of the school year when three girls approach a new girl attending the school and one of them says to her, “We’d like to help you.”

The three girls are Violet, Heather, and Rose, and the new girl is Lily, who is a sophomore and is transferring into the university.

The leader of the group is Violet, and she does most of the talking, which takes place when they are walking, which takes place when they are dancing, and which even takes place when the girls get into bed at night, where they all sleep in the same room.

Violet, Heather, and Rose volunteer at the Suicide Prevention Center, where they help some students to get over their depression with tap dancing.

Incidentally, when Violet herself gets depressed later in the story over a boy she thinks she is in love with, she doesn’t like to use the word “depressed.” She prefers to say that she “is in a tailspin.”

The university has social fraternities on campus, but they make a point of saying that they aren’t Greek fraternities, as there are on most college campuses. These are Roman-letter fraternities like DU, where the girls all go to a party and make fun of the members of the fraternity, whom they call morons and think of their attending as “youth outreach.”

There is no dramatic arc in this movie, just a dramatic plateau. No, make that a valley with no drama at all, because it never reaches the level of a plateau.

I wondered if all the people making this movie were as bored making it as I was watching it. I kept thinking, “Why don’t they just stop talking and do something?”

Violet’s ambition is to start a new dance craze, and the movie ends with a big musical dance number. No, two of them, but by then it is still too late.

Damsels in Distress is so bad that if I never see it again, it will be too soon.

I’m Dan Culberson and this is “Hotshots.”


Related Videos

Related posts:

The Five-Year Engagement

“The Five-Year Engagement” More Like the Five-Year Movie

0

media

“More Like the Five-Year Movie”

“Hotshots” looks at a movie!

The Five-Year Engagement was made by the same people who made the 2008 Forgetting Sarah Marshall, and so it must be good, right?

Well, yes and no. Yes, it is good in some places, and no, it is not good in other places, mainly the scenes that go on for too long and the scenes that should have been cut in the first place.

Jason Segal and Emily Blunt star as Tom and Violet. They met a year ago at a New Year’s Eve party, which we keep seeing in flashbacks at various times throughout the movie.

They get engaged, and during a meeting with Tom’s relatives to plan the engagement party, one of the men comments that the men will all be wearing yarmulkes, of course. Violet says to Tom that he doesn’t have a yarmulke, and he replies that he does and, “It’s in my Jewish drawer.”

The story begins in San Francisco, and you can guess from the title that the engagement isn’t going to go smoothly, right?

Correct. Violet is working on her doctorate in psychology, and she gets accepted to a position at the University of Michigan, which will take two years to complete.

However, because Tom is a chef in a restaurant, he says that he can always find a job anywhere, and so they decide that Tom will move to Michigan with Violet, and they will postpone the wedding for two years.

I know what you’re thinking. You’re thinking, couldn’t they get married in San Francisco before moving to Michigan, or couldn’t they even get married in Michigan?

But if they did that, then the filmmakers would have to change the title of the movie, wouldn’t they?

Well, you can guess from the title that the two-year plan isn’t going to go smoothly, either, right? Violet’s work at the University of Michigan gets extended, and I don’t want to spoil anything, but at one point the situation gets so bad that it looks like there won’t be any wedding at all.

Now, you know how the DVD version of some movies contains deleted scenes? Maybe the DVD of this movie will thankfully be missing some scenes that should have been cut.

The Five-Year Engagement lives up to its reputation of being a comedy, but it is more like the five-year movie.

I’m Dan Culberson and this is “Hotshots.”


Related Videos

Related posts:

Think Like A Man Movie

“Think Like a Man” Is Funny, but Predictable

0

media

“Funny, but Predictable”

“Hotshots” looks at a movie!

 

Think Like a Man has so many characters in it that at first it is difficult to tell who is who and who is dating whom, and then by the time you do figure it out, the movie is over.

The title comes from a real book written by comedian Steve Harvey that became a best seller in 2009 and was titled Act Like a Lady, Think Like a Man and had the subtitle of “What Men Really Think about Love, Relationships, Intimacy and Commitment.”

It was an advice book for women written by a man, and it plays an important part in this movie, which is a comedy, and Harvey himself appears throughout the movie talking about the book on a daytime talk show and then again from time to time giving advice straight to the audience.

The story follows a number of men and women who are dating each other, the men are all friends with each other, and their group also includes one man who is getting a divorce and another man who is happily married.

When one of the men says at the beginning of the movie, “Life is great, Fellows, may it never change,” we in the audience can predict that it is going to change, and it might not be so great for them, either.

You see, the women in the movie discover the advice book, they all read it, and they start manipulating the men they are dating in order to make the men do what the women want.

Now, the men aren’t so easily manipulated, because they are men, after all, but when they discover that the women they are dating are all reading the book and using its advice to try to change the men, the men all read the book, too, and try to use its advice to their own advantage.

And that is what makes this movie a comedy, because things don’t always work out as planned when you try to change someone.

Here are just two of the women’s situations.

One woman has been going out with a man for nine years, and she decides that she is going to require him to propose to her.

Another woman has a son and she is dating a mama’s boy.

Think Like a Man is funny, but predictable.

I’m Dan Culberson and this is “Hotshots.”


Related Videos

Related posts:

superman

Proving a Negative: Superman, Flying Saucers and God Don’t Exist by Dan Culberson

0

The Naked Curmudgeon curmudgeon n [origin unknown] (1577) a crusty, ill-tempered, and usu. old man. naked adj 6: devoid of concealment or disguise. Attempting to cover everything that annoys me, Dan Culberson.

Here’s what gets me.

One of the basic tenets of logic is “You cannot prove a negative.”

For example, you cannot prove there is no God, flying saucers don’t exist or Superman doesn’t exist, according to the philosophers, psychologists and logicians.

Not so, say I!

Of course you can prove a negative, as long as you establish agreed-upon ground rules for the premises, the statements of facts or suppositions made or implied as a basis of argument. For example, “If A equals B, and C equals B, then C equals A.”

If premises “(A equals B) and (C equals B)” are “true,” then the conclusion “C equals A” is also true.

For example, “If (2 times 3) equals (6), and (3 times 2) equals (6), then (3 times 2) equals (2 times 3).”

“If Baby Boomers were born between 1946 and 1964, and if you were born in 1950, then you are a Baby Boomer.”

Now, back to God, flying saucers and Superman.

Can we prove they exist? Sure. All we have to do is get God to appear before us and some corroborating witnesses, coax a flying saucer to land in our backyard and take an irrefutable photograph of it and make Superman take off his glasses and fly faster than a speeding bullet, do something more powerful than a locomotive and leap a tall building in a single bound.

Can we prove that they do not exist? Sure, too. All we have to do is agree to the premises and then prove it with logic.

Now, we know that in one sense all three do exist, because a great deal has been written about them and a lot of people believe in them. One even has his own sequence of films, a couple of television series and a comic book to proclaim his existence.

So, instead of proving they do not exist, we need to prove that they are not real and do not exist outside our imaginations.

Well, we know who created Superman, because they have admitted it, and we have even seen Superman die and be reborn at the whims of his current comic-book owners.

Rather than use a negative in our proof, we need to rephrase the premises and conclusion to allow a positive conclusion.

“If Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster admit they created Superman and everyone agrees Superman is imaginary, then Superman is imaginary.” Conclusion? Superman does not exist, regardless of all the literature about him and all the children who believe in him.

Flying saucers are trickier. We know the date of the first, most famous sighting and who reported it (although some believers claim the Bible even has sightings recorded in it, such as Ezekiel’s “wheel”), and there have been countless sightings since then, sometimes with physical “evidence” and many so-called “abductions.” But we have no physical evidence that when examined by everyone is convincing enough for everyone to conclude “Flying saucers are real.”

“If we admit that many people with vivid imaginations create stories about observed or unobserved phenomena for their personal or financial gain and no one has ever produced any physical evidence of flying saucers that has withstood repeated, scientific examination, then flying saucers are imaginary.”

Conclusion? Flying saucers don’t exist, regardless of all the literature about them and all the people who believe in them.

God is even trickier. We know that primitive societies create a supreme being to worship and shamans establish rules of conduct for society to follow and sometimes to provide for the shaman’s personal or financial gain, we know that all the major religions cannot be worshipping the same God and we know that no one has ever produced any physical evidence of God that has withstood repeated, scientific examination.

“If we admit that anyone can create a story about ‘God’ based solely on belief for personal or financial gain and if everything that has happened in the past and is happening today makes more sense without a God than with one, then God is imaginary.”

Conclusion? There is no God, regardless of all the literature, people who believe and atrocities created in God’s name.

William of Occam, the great Franciscan scholastic philosopher, stated that all unnecessary facts in a subject being analyzed are to be eliminated. In other words, if there are more than one explanation for a phenomenon, the simplest explanation is more likely.

Conclusion? Superman, flying saucers and God don’t exist.

I rest my case.

###

Related posts:

The Three Stooges Movie

“The Three Stooges” Is Soitainly an Embarrassment

0

media

“Soitainly an Embarrassment”

“Hotshots” looks at a movie!

The Three Stoges: The Movie is how the publicist wants references to be made about this movie, which is so bad, it is lucky to have any references made to it at all.

However, speaking of references, what first comes to mind is a parody from the Bible: “When I was a child, I enjoyed the antics of The Three Stooges, but when I became a man I put away childish things and don’t find them funny anymore.”

The second reference that comes to mind is that the story is straight out of the 1980 The Blues Brothers: raising money to save the orphanage in which the title characters grew up.

This story starts off with three babies being tossed out onto the steps of the orphanage, and they look just like the identifiable mugs that we have come to recognize by their haircuts, Moe with his bowl-cut style, Curly with his shaved pate, and Larry, who is half bald and half wild and curly haired.

Incidentally, Moe is still the self-appointed leader of the group, but the grownup Larry is played by Sean Hayes, who is more well known than the actors playing Moe and Curly, and so Hayes is billed as the star of the movie.

Then we see the Stooges 10 years later, and they are doing the same shtick that we enjoyed watching them do when we were children. A young couple choose Moe for adoption, but it doesn’t end well, and they return Moe and choose another young boy instead.

Then it is 25 years later, the boys are all grown up now, and everybody learns that due to lack of money, the orphanage will be shut down at the end of the month.

The orphanage needs $830,000 to be saved, and Moe says, “We’ll do whatever it takes.”

All they know how to do is handyman work, however, and of course they aren’t even very good at that. But the Stooges are pure of heart and dim of wit.

And what follows is a falling out among the Stooges, Sofia Vergara as a rich woman who hires them for some dirty work, and a wasted and tasteless introduction of the reality stars from “The Jersey Shore.”

The Three Stooges: The Movie is not much of a movie and soitainly an embarrassment.

I’m Dan Culberson and this is “Hotshots.”


Related Videos

Related posts:

Dan Culberson's RSS Feed
Go to Top