Category: Blogging

I’ve been watching stop motion animation films since I was a kid, and it dawned on me recently that there isn’t a single stop-mo film that I actually like.

The work that goes into stop motion is incredible. It’s admirable that someone would do it. But it always turns out, in one word… creepy. The choppy movements are something out of a nightmare. Is it a coincidence that so many ‘dark’ and ‘scary’ scripts, such as Coraline, Nightmare Before Christmas, Tool’s Sober video, and others use stop motion? If anything, stop motion should only be used for relatively ‘scary’ films.

Anyway, there are many people who LOVE stop motion and I won’t fault them for it, but I just had to vent that many people also HATE IT.

My article, “Stop Motion Animation Sucks,” was submitted to Digg. I rolled my eyes. I knew that if it somehow got popular, I’d get destroyed in the comments, and it would be buried off the front page. I was correct.

The funny thing to me was that most of the comments simply disagreed, along with calling me a bad name. No one offered any clear reason that it is ‘cool,’ or ‘awesome,’ and said that my calling it ‘creepy’ was just my opinion. No duh. Even better, some people linked to ‘artistic’ stop motion videos and said something along the lines of, “If you think stop motion sucks then obviously you haven’t seen this.” Then I watched some of the weirdest, creepiest animation I’ve ever seen in their linked video. Even other users replied and said “What the f@$# did I just watch?” And yes, other users agreed with me that it sucks, but it’s always the haters who are more vocal.

So there you have it. Some people love stop motion, and others think it is virtually unwatchable. I speak for the later. But I’ll keep watching it, as I always have, in hopes that one day, someone actually gets a good script and doesn’t make the characters look like a walking turd.

A plea to filmmakers out there: stop making stop motion animated films. They are creepy. The stories are awful. They scare children, who are initially attracted to these films because of the animation, only to later have nightmares about a choppily-moving pumpkin-headed creep of a character with jagged-edged hands and unnatural flexibility.

Relative to other types of animation, there haven’t been that many stop motion animated films (only 11 full-length ones made in the past decade in the US), because they are costly and time-consuming to produce, and they generally don’t make anywhere near the amount of money other animated films make. Otherwise, studios would churn out more of these films, don’t you think? Would Shrek be the success it is today had it been made in stop motion animation? Not a chance. It would’ve made half its revenue (which would still be considered a success) and not been green-lit for three sequels. Imagine any of the Pixar films as stop motion animation. They would NOT have been as good, nor would they have made as much money, whether critics liked them or not.

Tim Burton realized stop motion animation is creepy enough to compliment his already dark and murky filmmaking style, so he embraced it. For Burton, it worked, and he made the ‘classic’ Nightmare Before Christmas, which found a huge cult following of people who cut themselves. He followed that up with Corpse Bride. Then came the equally creepy Coraline (which was Burtonesque but not his film), which sent kids screaming out of the theaters (and became a hit due to the 3-D). So, three highly successful stop motion animated films are dark and disturbing (keep on the lookout for Burton’s Frankenweenie which is destined to be in this same mix), which lends well to the argument that stop motion animation in general has a creep-factor about it.

Chicken Run was a cute film about a farm where they kill chickens. It made lots of money. But I’d bet my bottom dollar that if it used computer-generated animation, and didn’t have the boring British voices (or Mel Gibson) in it, far more people would’ve seen it. Wes Anderson lovers ate up Fantastic Mr. Fox, but the movie-going public didn’t, and it barely regained its budget at the box office. Quite a gamble to give an acquired-taste director a shot at directing an offbeat stop motion animated film meant for adults. Let’s see Anderson get the budget to make another one for his hipster fans.

Stop motion animation lovers who are appalled by these arguments should answer these questions: If stop motion animation is so good, then why aren’t there more of them being made, as opposed to traditional or computer animation? Why are there so many ‘scary’ ones made that aren’t meant for children? If stop motion animation, which has been around since the 1920s, is so good, then why hasn’t there been a billion-dollar franchise yet, like Pixar did in just a couple of decades?

While it’s true the amount of money a film makes doesn’t necessarily reflect its quality, it’s fairly typical in the world of animation that the good films make money and have merchandise that children demand. Way too much time and effort goes into production of these only to turn out a film that is loved by the critics but ignored by the public. So after years of analysis and being creeped out by these films, I can only conclude that stop motion animation sucks in general.

My mother brought me to the theater to see this when I was a kid. I would much rather have seen Bambi’s mother get shot or the wicked queen try to poison Snow White.

There is a sequence in The Empire Strikes Back when the Empire uses gigantic four-legged robot walking machines to attack the Rebel Alliance. In Lord of the Rings: Return of the King, the Dark Lord Sauron uses gigantic, four-legged elephants in the Battle of Pelennor Fields.

The Lord of the Rings was written long before Star Wars, but Star Wars came to the big screen long before Lord of the Rings, so we can sit here and argue over who ripped off who, but that’s no fun. Instead, we’ll take this route: Who would win in a fight: the AT-AT, or the mûmakill? First, the cases for each.

THE MÛMAKIL

The Tolkien Wiki defines the mûmukil this way:

From within the jungle of Far Harad, the mûmak emerged. To most cultures, the mûmakil, or oliphaunts, were creatures of legend, as fabulous and fearsome as dragons, and to them were ascribed all kinds of strange powers. Oliphaunt was another name for them given to them by the Hobbits. Mûmak resemble elephants, except they have four tusks, instead of two.

Here is the video of the attack in Return of the King, which is not embeddable.

Legolas is the hero who takes down a mûmakil (to the theme music from a different movie he’s in).

Analysis of the Mûmakil

Mûmakil Pros: It is mobile and fast, and has four tusks to ram things.

Mûmakil Cons: It is living flesh and therefore can’t take a shot from the AT-AT’s blasters. It gets tired and hungry. It needs to piss and crap a lot. Maybe it can piss on the AT-AT and cause it to malfunction.

---

THE AT-AT

Wookieepedia defines the Imperial Walker like this:

The All Terrain Armored Transport (AT-AT) walker was a major part of the Galactic Empire’s army. It was one of the most heavily armored land vehicles in the Imperial Army, but was also known for its relatively slow speed.

Here is the sequence in The Empire Strikes Back with the AT-AT, including the scene in which the hero, Luke, takes one down.

Analysis of the AT-AT

AT-AT Pros: It has guns. It’s metal. It doesn’t tire.

AT-AT Cons: It’s electronic and can malfunction. It is relatively slow and can’t make sharp turns.

---

MÛMAKIL VS. AT-AT FIGHT ANALYSIS

The first thing the AT-AT is going to try to do is shoot the mûmakil, and the battle would be virtually over. However, the mûmakil is quick, and may be able to dodge the blast because the AT-AT telegraphs its intended target with the slow turn of its head. Once the mûmakil jumps to the side of the blast, it’ll charge to the AT-AT’s side and try to knock it over with his tusks. The AT-AT will be walking in circles but the mûmakil will stay to its side and keep ramming it. But IF the AT-AT doesn’t go down, the mûmakil will eventually tire, then the AT-AT can finish it off. But only IF the AT-AT doesn’t go down. So, we ask the question:

Who would win? Mûmakil vs. Imperial Walker

The voting is complete and the AT-AT won by an insane margin. Thank you, Star Wars fanboys, for stuffing the ballot.

We love sports and society wouldn’t be the same without them. However, each sport has things about it that annoys even the most die-hard fan. Certainly there are rules that frustrate players, fans, and even referees, but then there are other things that are simply part of the game that make people hold their breath and tolerate.

It’s called the TV time-out. It’s perhaps the most ludicrous delay for any sport. Each team gets an undeserved break simply so the viewers at home are forced to watch another beer commercial.

Beyond that, each sport has other annoying things, and we’ll break them down.

NFL

Football is the most popular sport in the United States, despite the fact that we’re sitting around and waiting for each play the majority of the time. While a hurry-up offense certainly has its downside, it’s great for fans who’d rather see more plays than a quarterback waiting for the clock to wind down. Also, the longer those guys wait on the line, the more likely there will be pre-play penalties, like offsides and false starts. I don’t know about you, but I’d rather see a play than watching the refs enforce some of the most unforgiving rules in all of sports.

Football didn’t always have instant replay, but now that we’ve got it, it seems that games are held up for ten minutes while the refs try to determine the best angle to see if the player’s fingernail was between the ball and the ground. This is the price we pay for wanting the correct call to be made. As Mike from Masters of None suggests, how about play the commercials during the challenges? When they come back from commercial, then show the audience the best angle of the replay.

Fans, players and coaches pull their hair out after yet another offsides or false start penalty. Two players can get into a shoving match and both teams get 15-yard penalties, which ultimately means… nothing. A great play can be washed out by a holding penalty that wasn’t anywhere near the play. Roughing the passer. Defensive pass interference. Again, this is just the way it is and football is popular despite these strict rules, but certainly everyone finds them annoying at times.

Injuries are annoying in all sports but the design of football virtually ensures that a handful of players will injure themselves throughout any game. We want to watch football, not players getting hauled off the field in a stretcher.

Conclusion
Despite the frequent commercials, wait-til-the-clock-winds-down-before-saying-hike, extended instant replay, and strict rules, football remains the most popular sport in the U.S. While rules have changed over the years, further effort to cut some of the delays, and allow more plays, can’t hurt.

MLB

Less happens than any other sport
By design, not very much actually happens during the course of a baseball game. While all sports have down time, the vast majority of a baseball game is waiting. Pitchers take to long to pitch. Batters stepping out of the box to scratch themselves. Pitcher substitutions delay the game. Yankees-Red Sox game taking more than four hours. At the very best the waiting creates suspense in the most important of situations, but at the very worst it makes fans scream in boredom.

Major League Baseball having different rules depending on which League  you play in is one of the things that make it unique, though it would be like getting rid of the ineligible man downfield penalty in football’s AFC, but not the NFC. Purists had to compromise on this, so now we get to either see pitchers strike out pitchers in one league, or designated hitters actually hit the ball in the other. In other words, the American League fans roll their eyes during interleague play or the World Series when the DH sits and their pitcher, who swings like a girl, routinely strikes out.

Baseball has 162 games, yet only eight teams make the playoffs. That means, statistically speaking, a single MLB game has less at stake than any single game of any other sport on any level (college football, per game, has the most at stake). And toward the end, with the divisions locked up and the wildcards all but assured, the vast majority of games played have nothing at stake.

If, 50 years from now, the record books show the Yankees have won another 25 World Series, then I’m unclear on why I should even be a baseball fan at all.

Forget television, how annoying is it to go out to the stadium and wait around for hours, waiting on the weather?

The fact that every baseball game theoretically can last forever is both intense and annoying, particularly when there is little at stake. Though ties are never a good thing, it’s hard to want to stay up for a 15-inning marathon between two cellar-dwelling teams.

The idea that an ump is capable of seeing with his naked eye a ball land in a glove vs. a foot landing on a base at full speed defies the laws of human eyesight. Yet, there is no instant replay in baseball, except for a home run (and even that required some bone-headed calls).

Conclusion
Despite the fact that it’s the American pastime, baseball is an acquired taste and die-hard fans seem to ignore the annoying things about it. And these annoying things are highly credible reasons to blatantly dislike the sport.

NBA

‘Me first’ league
The NBA is league designed for individuals to shine and get preferential treatment by the refs. This might not be a bad thing because fans would rather see Kobe score 40 than see those very same points distributed equally among other players. The problem here is that the rules have turned these players into the most egocentric jerks in all of sports. Also, it’s the same teams in the championship game more than any other league. A single basketball player means more to his team than a single player for any other sport (although a goaltender in hockey may come closest). I don’t know about you, but I’m not big on rooting for guys with massive egos.

The foul in basketball is the most frequently assessed penalty in all of sports. Plus, many are called with little affect on the play. Drawing a foul in basketball is incredibly easy compared to other sports. While this is all a part of the strategy, the game would certainly be more exciting if we were watching more 5-on-5 and less free-throw shooting. Also, the fact that defenders purposely foul for clock management seems to defeat the purpose of the foul. Imagine if an NFL or NHL player could purposely commit a penalty just to save clock time.

There are other annoying rules in basketball, such as offensive goaltending, the ball being advanced to half court after a time out, and the possession arrow in college basketball that many fans don’t appreciate, but the one that makes the least sense to me is the opening tip-off being used to determine possession at the beginning of each quarter. If each team gets equal possessions, then they might as well flip a coin or let the home team get the first and last quarter. However, if they have a tip-off at the beginning of each quarter, there will at least be something at stake. Plus, the tall, skinny bench warmer will get a bit of playing time as the top-off specialist.

Basketball also seems to have the most number of time-outs and television time-outs available. This slows down the pace of the game, particularly at the end of a close game.

Conclusion
The NBA seems to get a boost every decade or so as a new superduperstar comes to the forefront of the league, or by rivalries between two big stars. That’s when the NBA gets hot again and the league is in good shape. It’s rarely done anything to curb the annoying things about it (though it gave a slight boost to scoring by moving the 3-point line), but at the end of the day, it’s ultimately the same as it’s been for the last few decades.

NHL

The NHL is a league that has changed its rules over time based on how the game has evolved. The high-scoring 80s are long gone, and the low-scoring 90s are gone as well. The league got rid of the ho-hum tie games and instituted a more exciting 4-on-4 overtime and a shootout, bringing fans to their feet. Purists are disgusted, but the rule changes have created an atmosphere with potential to grow like no other sport today. But, how good is a sport that has to keep changing its own rules?

Like with extra innings in baseball, a hockey game can last forever during the playoffs. The longer it goes, the more likely it will end on a fluke goal. Using the regular season rules is best for the playoffs, but there’s something to be said for getting to bed at a decent hour and not drifting off during the third overtime. Yes, to a large degree this is the most exciting, intense moment in sports, but when a sport is designed to only last a couple of hours, that’s all most fans are prepared to watch.

The biggest beef people have these days? It’s that places like Phoenix and Nashville have teams. The NHL over-expanded. But time will likely correct that as no one wants to lose money in bad markets.

Conclusion
There is virtually no time during a hockey game that lacks excitement, aside from poor play by an undetermined team. Games generally last two and a half hours from the time the first puck drops to the final horn, and the only waiting around is when the plexiglass comes loose, which rarely happens. There are many hockey haters out there who are in love with other sports and dismiss hockey for no other reason than because ‘it’s hockey’ or ‘it’s boxing on skates.’ These are the most close-minded, obnoxious sports fans who dismiss an entire sport without even giving a respectable answer as to why. I completely understand why someone would say that golf is boring, and baseball, too, but I’ve never heard even the slightest credible reason as to why hockey sucks.

Soccer

According to most international fans, there is nothing wrong or annoying with soccer. But it hasn’t caught on in the U.S., and here are those reasons.

A single goal in soccer is the most valuable type of score in all of sports (with a single free-throw in basketball being the least valuable). Therefore, there is no score in sports more exciting than seeing a goal scored in soccer. But it’s hard to convince a relatively impatient nation to respect a sport where only one goal will happen in 90 minutes of play. Hearing that a 2-0 lead is ‘insurmountable’ gives people reason to tune out.

This has been mentioned a million times over. It makes no sense to have only the refs know how much injury time there is and not the players or fans. Some find this to be a delightful mystery, while others throw their hands up in disgust and can’t imagine how anyone can take the sport seriously.

During the 2010 World Cup, particularly after the U.S. was robbed of a goal by the referee, it’s been made clear by international pundits that the ref’s decision-making process is part of the beauty of the game. Americans don’t buy that. They do not want to hear that a single game may have turned out differently depending on who judged it. Though it’s true that all sports are susceptible to different rulings by different refs, hearing that it’s an accepted part of soccer is like hearing that a coin flip can determine the winner.

Offsides, match disqualifications, and limits on subs are rules that annoy certain people. It’s something the Americans complain about once every four years when they actually watch soccer.

Conclusion
One thing that generally gives a sport a spark is a superstar. Considering that the best leagues in the world are overseas, the United States is unlikely to even see an American star play if he’s not playing here. While Americans complain about certain rules in soccer, it’s likely that those would be overlooked if we had a Pele to root for. Another thing that will increase soccer’s popularity in the United States is immigration. Import more fans and soccer could be the number one sport in the U.S. in the next few decades!

So for Father’s Day this year, I republished an article I had written last year called “Top Ten Athletes With Illegitimate Kids.” Like with everything I’ve ever written, I wrote this article because I thought it was funny.

Yes, I missed Antonio Cromartie, and I’ll add him in the future (that is unless Larry Johnson has any more kids.)

Anyway, this article got poplar on Digg and got more than 10k 17k page views (pat myself on the back), but then I read the comments and realized what I unintentionally did. Because of the anonymity on Digg, people can say virtually what they want. In this case, some started making racists statements, and those statements got the ‘thumbs up’ from others.

While it’s true I didn’t include any white athletes on the list, it was only because I limited the number to ten, and I was basing it off of the number of kids, particularly by multiple women. Perhaps if I made it a Top 15 or Top 20 list, Scott Skiles would be on there, and maybe some others. Race had absolutely nothing to do with who made the list. The fact that they are all black is at the very best a coincidence, the very worst an awful stereotype. But I promise you, the very moment a white athlete knocks up a bunch of women, he’ll get a spot.

So, with this article not only did I give a forum to racist idiots, but I also got complaints about there not being any white guys on the list. Ugh.