Cool Hunting

After reading William Gibson's Pattern Recognition and watching David Cronenberg's Videodrome, I am almost certain the next big thing is going to be profoundly sexual. But that may be a warped standpoint. My hopeful guess is that the next big thing is going to be an interest in human alteration. The only thing stopping us now seems to be ethics, but as soon as some twisted underground scientist gets his black rubber gloves and circular eye protection ready, the world will be ready for that kind of thing. What kind of thing exactly? Well, I have a few thoughts on the matter.

First and foremost, we find ourselves wanting to look younger and younger and live longer and longer. This is a bizarre dilemma, as youth enhancing products end up making a person look older when compared to their younger looking peers. Some people seem to fall into the uncanny valley, looking almost human enough to be human, but just a hair too un-human to be real. Even robots are looking more convincing these days! (Warning, video is terrifying.) So what's next? Well, we could all be robots. Or we could master the art of gene manipulation. Harvard Scientists have already reversed the gene that makes us age, and my guess is that they'll eventually have to try it on humans.

If that isn't the next big fad, I think we'll probably still be a pretty entertainment based culture. Entertainment has always taken a stranglehold of everyone, dating back as far as written language will tell. Those next-gen graphics look pretty amazing. I've read somewhere (though I can't find the link for this) that 'they' are in the talks of making fully immersive gaming systems, dwarfing the Xbox Kinect in quality and fluidness. Maybe instead we can just download our mental selves into some new persona, like in James Cameron's Avatar. And if we're more interested in movies by that point, I'm sure Cameron will come up with some way of keeping us awed in just the theatres. I wouldn't be surprised if both scenarios end up together. (Suppose for a moment an Avatar video game in 2020 could completely and physically immerse any player. All those depressed internet kids might never have to leave Pandora! )

Really though, who knows what the next big thing is? 2012 is just around the corner, and if we're not going through a rebirth of knowledge, then we're probably going to all be fried in some crazy electrical field, or the like. That would be just my luck. Graduating college then getting punished by the earth itself just for being born at the wrong time. Why me?

How to Read a Book like a Film

I have read David Marnet's screenplay Glengarry Glen Ross. Some thoughts:

My ideal cast:

Shelly Levene is the most normal character in the book. He is a bit older and is sort of forced to steal in order to help his once mentioned sick daughter. Seeing as how this is a common use of the Heinz dilemma, Shelly should no less be played by the fictitious Heinz himself. It would be perfect. Or if you need somebody real, why not the psychologist Lawrence Kohlberg, famous for creating the scenario?

Ricky Roma, the dirty, sneaky, ambitious (and often victorious) salesman of the lot. He'll do anything to win, and he knows just how to hook an unsuspecting fish, so to speak. Because of his obvious talent in con-artistry, he should be played by George W. Bush pretty much any president Ronald A. Katz, inventor of automated call centers and those stupid automatic messages you're no doubt used to hearing. Hello, your call is important to us. Now, if you could please listen to this irritating music for 20 to 30 minutes, that'd be juuust super.

Dave Moss, the conspirator who plans to steal the client list that will get him and Levene rich. Loud-mouthed and obnoxious, selfish and cunning, he should be played by Canadian actor Robb Wells, who plays Ricky in the show Trailer Park Boys (a fantastic show about the moronic and violent life on a trailer park). The titular character is more or less the same person.

John Williamson, the manager of this agency, is a cruel and petty sort of tyrant. Playing the role of the greedy doctor in the Heinz dilemma, he should probably be played by Sam Walton, president and CEO of Wal-mart Stores, Inc. For those of you who haven't heard, he's kind of a despicable human being, and I use the latter term very generously. Much like Williamson, the characters of the screenplay would like nothing more than to see writhe in torment and agony for all eternity pass away peacefully in his sleep sooner rather than later.

George Aaronaw is passive, petty, aging, and filled with complaints in his life. He tries not to get caught up in any risky business, but despite his effortless attitude and fear that have him stuck as an incompetent salesman in the first place, he just might get caught up anyway. I can only see myself playing this character in the 40 years down the road. Maybe it would be a role suited for Stephanie Meyer or her diluted mirror image Bella Swan, if George were a girl.

Enough of them, I'm also going to suggest, in order to enrich the plot of this piece, that the plot be more... cruel than it already is. While it's magnificently written, I think that the biggest idea with this play is that cheaters always win, and winners always cheat better than losers. So, let's switch up the characters some.

I want Levene to be lying about his sick daughter. And I want him to ham up the lie as much as possible (dead wife, unsupportive parents, behind on mortgage too, etc). I think that the company should be larger in scale. Much larger. Have it be a chain or realtors, and have Williamson at the top. Dissociate his character some more from the employees, make him really hungry for money, and make him have it. Ricky Roma could be next in line for the top spot at this branch, and that would make the plot even more competitive and dirty. By the end of this all, have the guys who attempted to steal the leads get arrested (as they have) and have them be replaced by a few up-and-comers shortly thereafter. Roma could be expanded upon if he were already the boss of his sect, and could be gunning for Williamson's job, but this is probably pretty needless. I want to get the sense in there that this business is like the womb of a tiger shark. That's sort of how it is in real life!

Film and Literature

Steve Oedekerk's Kung Pow: Enter the Fist was not a movie that defined its audience, nor a generation. It was not a movie that changed America, nor the world. It was little more than nothing in the eyes of the media, and was commercially a box office flop. But there's something about it that has always appealed to me, and it has been my favorite movie since its inception in 2002. Looking into its context, I find it really is a striking marker of genre and pop culture, and I believe the primary reason for its failure was a severe lack of advertising. That in itself is very interesting when you compare it to other heavily advertised films of 2002 (Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, Spider-Man, and xXx, to name a few), all of which are arguably less watchable than Kung Pow. Realistically, just about everything is arguably less watchable than this cinematic triumph.

To elaborate, if you haven't seen it (for shame), Kung Pow was conceptualized after Oedekerk's earlier productions, namely those short thumb lampoon series, with particular attention being paid to Thumb Wars, which you can go ahead and watch on YouTube for free. You won't be sorry (probably). His unique approach to editing key facial features onto thumbs and the like would spark his unique interest in putting things where they just don't belong in a parody setting. Footage taken from the classic 1976 film Tiger and Crane Fist was edited, replacing scenes containing Jimmy Wang Yu with Oedekerk himself. This takes the initial genre, which was unmistakably action/kung fu, and turns it into a parody of itself, becoming a comedy, though much of the footage (and even many of the original lines of dialogue!) remain the same. To this end, it's most defined by the limited selection and appeal of comedy kung fu movies (Shaolin Soccer, Kung Fu Hustle).

Where the film is constrained using a limited budget and technology, using very basic green screening techniques as well as limited 3d animation, it makes up for what it lacks through clever(ish) writing and an overall goofiness not replicated (or appreciated?) anywhere else in the world of film. For example, it's approach to in-film advertising, an example of which can be seen here, is in my opinion, pretty daring, and has undoubtedly influenced television shows like Arrested Development (have a look here for Burger King) and I'm sure a number of other programs scripted by the equally bold. It's effective, and ditties like that stuck in your head, to be assured.

While it's obvious this film is not for everyone, it has a reasonably large die-hard fanbase still waiting for the promised sequel who still enjoy the first film in its entirety, line for memorable line. It may not have set any real standards for film, but its place in film can't be ignored, though it is only on a small scale. I'm sure the sequel were to be made today, it would follow a similar low budget formula and be met with the same sort of (mostly negative) reaction. It was made in 2002, but I think even now, it's really a movie ahead of our time. You'll see.