Home » Blog Subscribe to RSS Feed

Yes, I have decided that Hollywood needs another award. The Oscars, Emmys, Peoples’ Choice and Golden Globes just aren’t enough. (We haven’t even touched yet on B-level fame-fawning like the MTV Golden Popcorn and the glory of an actor getting himself slimed for a Nickelodeon award.) But the HAMIs are going to be better than all that. There isn’t a red carpet or even a show. Wait, let me take that back. I’m sure there will be a show, lots of coverage and all the reporters asking about what all the other actors think about it. The thing is, with the HAMIs we’ll never know when the show is going to happen.

Let me explain. The HAMIs will go to actors (actresses, too, but in the tradition of virtually all languages on earth except English I’m going to use ‘actor’ as gender neutral here. Besides, the first HAMI is more likely to go to an actor anyway.) OK, that aside was too long. The HAMIs will go to actors who gain and lose weight for various roles.

There are three ways to change weight – bet you thought there were only two, but no. First, the obvious – lose a lot. For a truly overweight person shedding 30-40 lbs is a good thing, but a lot of these actors are way down in the single digits on body fat to start with. Their BMI is often in the area that makes your Wii Fit go “Oh no!” in that cute little voice that means you are toooo low. So for one of these uber-fit Hollywood types to lose 30-40lbs, even the big guys, is a big deal.

Next, there are two ways to go up. One is buff. Think muscle, think Christian Bale in “Batman”. Some reports put him at gaining a solid 100 pounds for the role. (If only it hadn’t damaged his vocal chords. So sad.) The other way up is sclub. Goo. Love handles. This should call to mind Renee Zellweger’s Bridget Jones or Charlize Theron in “Monster”.

The problem is that these actors are yo-yo-ing. Zellweger went up 20-30lbs for Bridget Jones. How much she gained depends on what you read, but just check the photos, it was quite noticeable. The thing is, she next went down to super-svelte for “Chicago”, then back up for the Bridget Jones sequel, then down again.

Tom Hanks has ridden the yo-yo himself: first up for “A League of Their Own” then down to near-emaciated for “Philadelphia”. After that he returned to normal weight, but a handful of years later took off 40-55lbs for “Castaway”. Want more? Edward Norton put on a mere 35lbs for “American History X” but on his frame many said it rendered him unrecognizable. Charlize Theron also lost a lot of weight to play a cancer patient in “Sweet November” and that movie didn’t even perform well.

Where is this all headed, you ask? The HAMIs. The HAMIs are the direct result of serious weight shifting. Yo-yo-ing is a huge health risk. Aside from the immediate problems it poses, there is a lifelong risk of heart attack (or MI: Myocardial Infarction). (Get it? H-eart A-ttack, MI, HAMI? Don’t I think I’m clever.)

Let’s talk first about “normal yo-yo dieting”. This is when a person gains and sheds a handful of pounds a handful of times. Want to make it dangerous? Don’t just go to a normal weight, lose enough to become crazy skinny. Like fainting, size 0 is so baggy, can’t-remember-my-lines skinny. Want to make it more dangerous? Be sure you go overweight at some point and underweight at another. Then make sure you aren’t talking 5-15lbs. That’s child’s play! Go for 40 or 60! Then, just to up your game, do it super-fast! That’s what these actors are doing.

Now let’s talk about the dangers: increased blood pressure and cholesterol. But those are small potatoes. How about cardiovascular disease? Stroke? Death? (Personally, I like that a handful of the articles just put it there in the list, like ‘death’ is just a side effect.)

This is how an actor will win the first HAMI: get put in the hospital for something life altering – never talk again, hey-is-this-the-ICU, can’t-feel-the-left-side-of-my-body big.
In fact, the HAMIs are most likely to go to someone who has done all or most of the weight loss/gain no-nos.

In our house we have a pool for who will go first. I know that sounds morbid but . . . OK, it’s just morbid, but these actors have access to all the info I have, so if they want to harm themselves for a movie that may or may not get them an oscar/make a ton of money/go straight to DVD, then I am going to bet on it.

Christian Bale is really high up in our odds. He has the most recorded gains and losses and some of the biggest. He was extremely buff for “American Psycho”, but got down to 121lbs for “The Machinist” (Yes, all five of you who saw that can admire his will power, even though they spliced that movie together because he couldn’t remember his lines.) When you check out any website with Bale’s weight-change photos, the pictures will be the most disturbing thing. But the second most disturbing will be all the chatter in the random posts that trail along like sad ducklings. Everyone seems to admire Bale’s dedication and mad acting skills. No one pointed out that this is bad, really really bad. It would probably be safer or him to actually cut his leg for a film. No fake blood, real emotion. At least then his biggest worry is likely hitting a nerve, although those (and arteries) are buried pretty deep. But that would be crazy, right? No, Bale’s biggest concern now should be that he’ll just drop dead before he hits fifty.

Other major contenders for the first HAMI are Matt Damon and Jared Leto. Damon went super-thin for mere minutes of screen time in “Saving Private Ryan”. By most accounts he was on medication for about three years after that to undo the damage he did to his heart. (Hey, no waiting for side effects there!) But even though he swore never to do that again, he has since gained weight. And Damon has managed to hit both the ‘buff’ and ‘schlub’ categories! (The Bourne movies for ‘buff’ and “The Informant” for ‘schlub’)

Leto has done the rail thin thing in the past (“Requiem for a Dream”), but his real step into HAMI contention came with his weight gain to play Mark David Chapman (the man who killed John Lennon) in “Chapter 27”. By his own account he gained “About 67 pounds” (See the video on YouTube) for the role. During the shooting, his weight gain gave him what might have been thyroid problems and even put him in a wheelchair. Yup, that’s a HAMI in the making.

All of this is unfortunate. The commentary always seems to be “Wow”, rather than “That was dumb!” People are far more interested in how Leto lost that 67 pounds so fast or how Bale managed to stick to a ‘can of tuna and one apple a day’ diet than thinking about how this affects the actors’ health both while they did it and in the future. Heart damage doesn’t just undo itself guys.

Look, I like movies just as much or more than the next person, but I don’t think actors should be killing themselves for roles. That’s not dedication, it’s an eating disorder. And more actors are joining the ranks every day: Taylor Kitsch (“Wolverine”s Gambit) is reported in Entertainment Weekly to be dropping 30lbs for a role. Colin Farrell went too-thin recently, too. At this point, the next time I see a super-skinny celeb I’m going to pray that he’s sick. That would be healthier.

In the meantime, if they are going to do it to themselves, then I (and my friends) are going to put money on it! Keep your eyes peeled for the HAMIs.

Subscribe to my podcast SMART CHICKENS in iTunes -

Tweet This Post  Digg This Post 

I recently wrote about the new and not-improved version of the game of LIFE. Maybe it is sentiments like mine that have led to a different attempt at making old games new again. The latest installment of re-tooled games are in the pinkified boxes now on display at ToysRUs.

One of the pink games is “Mystery Date”, which isn’t surprising. But this game makes me want to vomit just by its mere existence. When we add in that I have a young daughter of my own, well, it’s surprising I haven’t gotten myself thrown bodily from the toy aisle. The stores all carry “girls” games that involve shopping in the mall and keeping points on a credit card reader (Ages 5 & up). Excuse me while I hug the porcelain god for a moment.

I am not against ‘girl’ things. I figure if anyone - boys included - wants a pink softball glove, let’em have it. There’s also neon orange, blue, green, standard brown, whatever. But ToysRUs has gone girly on some old classics. And it’s not just the mystery date – style games that are in the pink: It’s LIFE, Monopoly, Scrabble, etc.

Why aren’t the standard games good enough? I know that most sociology studies still show boys getting called on in class slightly more than girls, but will females really never learn to spell without a pink board covered in flowers? (Because we all know that’s what girls like!) Though the game is the same, the picture on the front spells out the word “Fashion”.

The vapid nature of teenage girls is quickly becoming a ‘chicken or egg’ question for the ages. But, thanks ToysRUs for making sure my daughter knows that nothing is expected of her, and my son knows he shouldn’t play with her when she gets the pink board out.

When we add this to recent marketing strategies, we see a bigger picture emerging. When Mattel had its annual internal marketing launch two years ago, a good friend of mine was there. He, too, came away wanting to hurl. The first half of the meeting was spent on boys products and how to market to the age group. The second half was on girls products. It’s disturbing enough that the two are so sharply divided (he recalls no gender-neutral nor family games/toys getting discussed.) But he vowed never to work for the company again when the marketing discussion for girls’ products became all about how to get each age group to buy the products for the next bracket up . . . i.e. how do they get the 10-12 bracket into dating? How to get the 8-10 bracket into makeup? And the 6-8 bracket to notice boys?

Yeah, I’ll be glad to wait a moment while you toss your cookies, too. I’d do it again, but I’m all yakked out.

Perhaps the most startling new pink ‘toy’ is the Ouija Board. I question humanity at this point. (And I know a good number of you are saying “Really? What took you so long?”) But the only thing I see coming from the pink Ouija board are things like the following: “I contacted my dead grandmother and she said I should definitely wear the purple sweater on my date with Jeff!”

Or maybe it comes with a list of suggestions? The Ouija stands ready to answer such pertinent girl questions as “Do these jeans make my butt look fat?”

Actually, ToysRUs, it’s not so much that it makes your butt look fat. That’s just a side effect, in actuality the pink games make your brain look small.

Subscribe to my podcast SMART CHICKENS in iTunes -

Tweet This Post  Digg This Post 

I just got a Blackberry. I haven’t had one before as I am one of ‘those people’. Do I need to stay in constant contact with everyone who ever spammed me? I didn’t think so.

But then my phone contract came up. And since I had dunked my old phone in hot chocolate recently . . . (it was an accident, don’t ask.) Well, there was the new Blackberry Storm looking all shiny and new. The screen has similar touch capabilities to an iPhone, without being, well, an iPhone. I know, I’m a hater. Let’s just say I was smitten.

The kind lady at the store walked me through setting up my email accounts – yes, she patiently set me up for four email accounts on three different systems with four different passwords. Immediately my little green-cased phone began chiming at me pleasantly. I had email. In my hands!!!

The touch screen took a few days to learn how to navigate but very quickly I was able to keep it from attempting to spell correct my last name. (It initially suggests ‘Scum’ or ‘Scudding’ but about six letters in it just gives up.) I began sending messages tagged by ‘sent from my Verizon Blackberry’.

Then I began sending missives, long paragraphs and novellas. All typed with my thumbs on a keypad that isn’t really there. It had all gone so horribly awry. I was answering emails all day. And swearing at the little chime that was no longer so cute, but often a harbinger of yet something else that required my attention.

The issue with email is this: It should bring us closer together. It allows for an almost conversation-like correspondence with those who are far away. Unfortunately, this also happens with those who are close.

How many of us have looked over our shoulder and said to the person at the other desk “I just sent you an email”? I get the idea that we want it documented. Email keeps track of things quite nicely. But the days of actual conversation are slipping rapidly away. And it’s not just because we are emailing when we could speak, it’s because we are interrupting the face-to-face conversations that we have with that stupid finger. No, not the middle one - the index finger. The one that lies and says “Oh, don’t mind me, I’m just going to take this call/text/spam that will just take a moment.”

That’s the lie. It doesn’t take a moment. And the other issue is that it sends the message that the call/text/spam is more important than anything going on with the person you are face-to-face with. Now I don’t deny that there are people out there that are less important than whatever might be popping up online, but I see people doing it to their kids. I think future therapists will coin a term for kids who were e-abandoned. “I mean, Mom was always there when I was growing up, she just never did finish a sentence.”

While I still love my Blackberry, I am trying to make better decisions about when to use the finger - the first finger. I also sometimes use the middle finger, but more often than not, it’s aimed at the chirpy thing that wants me to know I just now, right this moment, got another series of cute dog pictures.

Two days ago I had the most pleasant day. No one from work melted down, needed me to sub for someone in twenty minutes or got the plague. It was a great day. I didn’t even sit at my computer and hop online, because anything important would have made my Blackberry chime! It wasn’t until the following morning that I realized I’d missed a ton of emails. Apparently, I’d turned the sounds off two nights before for a movie and forgotten to turn them back on.

Hmmmmm . . .

Listen to AJ's Podcast SMART CHICKENS

Because Sometimes We All Just Want to Fly the Coop!

Subscribe to my podcast SMART CHICKENS in iTunes -

Tweet This Post  Digg This Post 

Not only is there bad science fiction out in the world of TV, there’s just a lot of . . . well production that could use a fact checker (or three).

Some of the worst offending shows have – thankfully – gone off the air. Need I even say “Tru Calling”? The show had an interesting concept, but got so many basics wrong it was just difficult to watch.

The second episode had a firefighter who died while rushing into a building to save a little girl. He went with no gear whatsoever. Okay, I can maybe buy that. But he did it with a truck full of geared-up firefighters right there on the lawn. He was maybe half a second ahead of the others into the house. Of course Tru couldn’t save him, it was just natural selection at work, my friends!

This show was so riddled with holes it was a veritable swiss cheese. Yet on TV.com the viewers are consistently rating it superb. Who are you people?

Currently Prison Break is grinding to a halt. Perhaps the show is off the air due to scenes like this: The amazing Kathleen Quinlan (whose character is supposed to be off-the-charts smart) rigs a dental floss contraption, then calls to the woman who is holding her hostage in the bathroom (hence the floss). When she goads her keeper into slamming the door, the doorstop is yanked from the wall giving her a tool (the sharp-ish screw) to cut her duct tape bonds. AAAAACCK! Those things just unscrew! They simply un screw. I’ve had to tell each of my kids not to do it, even though it’s just so easy.

The Mythbusters have made a living constantly de-bunking MacGuyver-like TV stunts – and sometimes actual MacGuyver stunts.
We know that very few ever get it right.

True, there is a sense of unreality to TV and movies. (Notice I’m not harping on Wolverine here.) But I am a firm believer that you shouldn’t have to do something unfathomable – or even incredibly stupid – to drive your story forward. If you can’t get a plausible reason, you aren’t a good enough writer.

Yes, it’s more than possible to shoot a hundred bullets at a stationary man and never hit him. Adrenaline is just funny that way. But why is the good guy always the best shot? It needs a really solid explanation.

Also, no one ever bleeds enough on TV. Somehow a steel toed boot to the head only makes the kickee grimace for a moment before he hops back up, madder and meaner. In the real world, you would hop back up dead.

There ARE special ops guys out there. And Navy SEALs. It IS possible to take on five guys at once and win. But the bad guys don’t come at you one at a time. I find it far more plausible that the man emerging from the handful of bloody street thugs out to kill him was a vampire, than that the crooks saw this fantastic fighter and decided, hey fair is fair, we take him one at a time.

The major problem with these errors – whether they are in TV, movies or books – is that if you don’t see them, you are fine. But if you do, then the whole thing is often ruined. You wonder about the other things in the show. You lose the joy of being caught up in the drama. And since that’s probably what you came for, factual errors or storylines you just don’t buy will make something un-enjoyable.

On the other hand, I have to applaud JJ Abrams and Star Trek. At the beginning of the movie, Kirk gets himself into a barfight with four guys. He starts off calling one of them ‘cupcake’ and ends up bloody and backwards over a bar table. Ahhhh! Now that’s believable.

Listen to AJ's Podcast SMART CHICKENS

Because Sometimes We All Just Want to Fly the Coop!

Subscribe to my podcast SMART CHICKENS in iTunes -

Tweet This Post  Digg This Post 

Science is complex. We all know that. The ragged edges of science today are all about tying all the disciplines together. And, in our world, we believe that they all should. Physics and Chemistry overlap with such a wide berth that much of the two studies are indistinguishable. On the other side of Chemistry, we have biology: chemicals working together within an organism. Within Biology, there is neurobiology, and from there psychology and sociology. Any of the aforementioned sciences branch into others: Ecology, Evolutionary Biology, Geology . . . The list really goes on and on.

And this is a lot of the trouble with Science fiction. Actual scientists are looking for a unifying theory that ties all the pieces together into a cohesive whole – or at least binds a darn lot of the pieces! If any piece doesn’t mesh into the big picture, it tends to unravel . . . Take that whole ‘flat earth’ thing. No one really ever saw the edge of the earth or saw anyone fall off it. Lo and behold, it was wrong. Not really science after all.

Science Fiction starts from the basis that one or more pieces of the world are not as we know them to be. Two suns, base camps on Venus, really big bugs in the Mist. But this is the fundamental problem. Changing one piece changes the way the whole thing fits together. It’s like introducing and impurity into a crystal, it doesn’t fit and the matrix won’t work around it.

Now, Science Fiction is near and dear to my little heart – I’d venture that much is obvious. But there are a lot of those loose ends, or crystal lattice disruptions that bother me. With the new / prequel Star Trek Movie riding the airwaves it’s a good time to bring it up.

Any SciFi lover worth their NaCl has to bow down to the altar of Star Trek – even if you don’t like it. How can you fault a franchise that spanned small screen and big? Fantastic characters and storytelling to some of the worst dialogue ever produced? After all, Star Trek gave us such errors in our time-space continuum as Tribbles, Tri-Lithium and Red-Shirts.

Star Trek (in the olden days) was notorious for just screwing with science as we knew it. They would introduce an idea and it if was too big to explain all the issues the new ‘fact’ caused, they would just solve it with some imaginary cure-all (enter Tri-Lithium).

Still, Star Trek is decades old. Have we learned nothing about being better Sci Fi writers, watchers, readers? If the elves talk to the wise old tree, what do they build their houses out of? (I’ve never heard of a brick elf house . . . ) Is there a graveyard of stupid elves who thought they’d chop the Elcrys down for firewood? After all, the wise old tree only talked to a chosen few . . .

And, seriously, I expected better of the good folks over at Fringe! They do a relatively good job of walking the fine line between what we know and what we don’t. But you don’t have to be that smart to figure out this one is a bad idea: capture human (morphed into monster) by shooting it full of tranquilizers, then dump said monster-girl in back seat of car (unattended) and drive around having silly conversation in front seat with eyes ahead. Sorry, Agent Dunham, you deserved what you got and worse. Did you learn nothing in Episode 16?!?!

I get that maybe gravity took a little vacation while Stephen King wrote ‘The Mist’ – after all, any bug that size would crush under its own weight. (It won’t happen, so sleep better, my friends!) But there are still too many cases where the weave of science is so much more than just disturbed. If we discount the ones like ‘Baselisk’ and go for some of the biggies, we still wind up with fundamental issues. And I, for one, believe a lot of it could be solved with just a few minutes of extra thought.

The British hit ‘Primeval’ is a great example. Though it has a lot of fun moments, it goes way off the deep end. I just love when the trained soldiers hand guns over to the boys and girls from the lab, point out what trigger to pull, and step back to let the scientists pass. But, even pushing that aside, there are major violations here . . . And a lot of the science is good, but . . . Well, at one point a soldier (who got to shoot something himself for once) complains that the bullet went off like fireworks prompting our good scientist friends to realize that they had a time-space rip to the oxygen-rich Pre-Cambrian period. (If that wasn’t enough hyphens for you, then you have other problems.) Of course, this isn’t good enough – the doctors go chasing after each other (in the oxygen-rich air) with a BLOW TORCH!!! And somehow they don’t go BOOM! They didn’t even have any Tri-Lithium to provide a magic oxygen shield . . .

*deeeeeep sigh*

It seems our good scientist Steven from Primeval has wound up acting for the Comedy Central show ‘Krod Mandoon and the Flaming Sword of Fire’ (yes, you read that right). Think of it as a ‘Lord of the Rings’ meets ‘Scary Movie’. And sadly, Krod Mandoon requires less suspension of disbelief than any of the previously mentioned shows. At least they are trying to be funny.

I don’t want to be misunderstood, I know there is good SciFi out there. But there is so much that just isn’t right. So go forth and read, watch, believe what you shouldn’t. But in the final tally, keep your facts close. Don’t think you can carry a blow torch into the oxygen rich air from a pre-cambrian time warp or leave your mutant-monster-thing unattended in the back seat. That’s just bad science.

Subscribe to my podcast SMART CHICKENS in iTunes -

Tweet This Post  Digg This Post