Category Archives: Top Five Lists

Nazi Blitzkrieg rolls over Ravenel; Hillary’s Heckler in hot pursuit

1 Reply

Thomas Ravenel’s notoriety is fading on YouTube.

My most popular (among fascists, who seem to be a fairly large constituency on the Web) video of Nazis defending the Confederate flag on our State House grounds has now taken the number-one slot among my most-watched clips. Disturbing, isn’t it? Of course, there was a certain car-wreck rubbernecking quality to the fame of the Ravenel video, so it didn’t exactly put the human race (or the master race, either) in a flattering light.

But wait — my Hillary’s Heckler video is moving up at an unprecedented speed, having passed 6,000 views in only 3 weeks. (What’s faster than Blitzkrieg?) I’m thinking that within a month, that clip of Mrs. Clinton and her detractor at the recent College Democrats’ confab will outpace everything, and put the Nazis in its shadow.

In any case, here’s where things stand:

  1. "Nazi Presidential Candidate Defends Confederate Flag"
    — 3 months old, with 6,862, this was the fastest-riser
    ever before Hillary. It’s resuming the number-one spot it held just before the Ravenel scandal broke.
  2. "The Alpha and Beta of Thomas Ravenel"
    — 10 months old, with 6,850 views.
  3. "Hillary’s Heckler," only 3 weeks old, coming up at Ludicrous Speed, at 6,235.
  4. "Who Resurrected the Electric Car?"
    — 4 months old, still probably my masterpiece in terms of sheer
    artistry (the YouTube critics give it 5 stars), with my first effective
    use of the voiceover technique. 6,054 views and also rising quickly. This is the feel-good hit of my repertoire.
  5. "Nazis Defend Confederate Flag II." My shameless exploitative sequel, shot and released the same day as the first hit, a la LOTR. 4,416 views.

Hillary bumps Biden, quickly makes my Top Five list

1 Reply


My Top Five Videos, that is. She’s not on my Top Five Candidates list. That doesn’t mean she won’t be; I just haven’t composed that one yet.

But in just two weeks of boffo box-office, she has muscled her way to No. 3 among my most-watched video clips on YouTube. Well, she didn’t do it herself. Some credit goes to the star of the clip — the woman who heckled her at the College Democrats meeting in Columbia — and to her cinematographer, moi.

The title ("Hillary’s Heckler") probably helped. Alliteration is a powerful thing. Also boosting it was the fact that there was a CNN clip of the same incident. Still, that one — shot with a better camera and from a somewhat more advantageous vantage point — only got 2,232 hits, while mine had received 5,639.

How could that happen? Well, I’m going to credit the rough style of mine. First, I used the Steven Spielberg/"Saving Private Ryan" hand-held-no-steadicam style, rather than the stodgy, omniscient-viewer, fixed-position technique of the network. This really puts you in the action.

It’s shot from a combatants’ viewpoint. This is what a rapt young Democrat, fascinated by everything Mrs. Clinton had to say, would have seen and heard. The camera stays on Hillary, then there are murmurs and cries of "No!" and you don’t know what’s happening at first. Is the crowd turning against Hillary? Do they not like what she’s saying? But wait! The camera swings in the direction of the sounds, and here’s this nutty lady yelling at her, and (unlike in the CNN clip) you can hear what she’s saying — not that it makes sense, but you can’t have everything.

The jostling, the confusion, the lack of explanation of what just happened, Hillary’s smooth slide back into her speech — all add to a dynamic viewing experience.

That’s my interpretation, anyway.

Whatever the explanation, no video of mine has ever topped 5,000 in less than two weeks. And it makes poor Joe Biden — whose frenetic Rotary performance topped the chart for a time — even more of a footnote. Show biz is hell.

Here’s the list as it stands now:

So we see what sells, don’t we? Cars, cocaine, controversy and Nazis. At least I haven’t stooped to luring y’all in with sex. But that’s just because Ségolène Royal‘s agent has been completely unreasonable.

Ravenel topples the classics

2 Replies

Here’s what a little news can do to your box-office.

Last time I mentioned my most popular blog videos, this Thomas Ravenel clip — last seen at 662 views had fallen off my Top Five most-watched on YouTube. But the classic of Grady Patterson talking about Ravenel, which for the first few months it was up had been my all-time most popular, was still hanging on.

Well, now that cocky pup Ravenel has bumped Grady again. First he took his job; now he’s taken his place in screen history. Both still trail the Nazis, though, and I’m gratified to see that my critically-acclaimed "Electric Car" video has climbed to second place. Still, my first Nazi video is far ahead, approaching 4,000 — remarkable in such a low-budget vehicle.

Nothing like a little publicity. Ravenel’s sudden notoriety has zipped him up to over 1,500 views, placing him solidly at the number five position. And with Biden’s presidential hopes pretty too small to measure, I expect "The Alpha and Beta" to be in fourth place before long. Grady is still stuck in triple-digits.

Anyway, here are the latest tallies:

  1. "Nazi Presidential Candidate Defends Confederate Flag" — 3,961 views
  2. "Who Resurrected the Electric Car?" — 2,283
  3. Nazis Defend Confederate Flag II — 2,137
  4. Joe Biden at Rotary — 1,926 views.
  5. The Alpha and Beta of Thomas Ravenel — 1,590

Is there a serious point in any of this? Yes, in a way. As I suggested yesterday, and at least one first-time viewer mentioned to me today, looking back at Ravenel’s breezy cockiness during the campaign has an extra punch for the viewer now. It’s hard to say exactly why; it just does.

Worst recent war movies

7 Replies

Tell you what: To relieve the tension a bit (there’s a lot of angry back-and-forth in the last few days, and poor Mary keeps reposting her deleted posts, and is increasingly COMMUNICATING IN SHOUT MODE), let’s take a frivolous digression.

bud attaches great importance to Joe Lieberman having been seen cheering and pumping his fist when the Americans strike a blow against the Serbs in "Behind Enemy Lines." He sees this as reflective of a deep character defect.

Rather than our getting into a really angry back-and-forth about whether one should cheer for Americans or not (I come down on the "yes" side of that), I’m looking for common ground. bud says I don’t see flaws in my heroes. I say that cheering at any part of a movie as bad as "Behind Enemy Lines" is at least indicative of lousy cinematic taste.

Unlike the characters in Nick Hornby’s High Fidelity; I don’t consider tastes unlike my own to reflect a deep character defect.
But I do unconsciously give extra points to people who appreciate the "good" stuff — "good" as define by my own proclivities.

So let’s make like Rob, Dick and Barry and construct a Top Five Worst War Movies (post-Vietnam era only, just to limit the field):

  1. "Behind Enemy Lines" — This was done so very much better in "BAT*21," so you know we can’t blame Gene Hackman, since he was in both of them. I was about to blame John Woo, but he didn’t direct this one. It just looks cheesy enough to be one of his.
  2. "The Thin Red Line" — Such a horrible disappointment, by comparison with James Jones’ novel, that I wrote a whole column
    about it.
  3. "The Great Raid" — Another disappointment from a perfectly good book. Hollywood tried to turn a remarkable, true story about rescuing hundreds of Allied POWs from the murderous abuses of the Japanese into a sappy romance. Why, I don’t know, but it failed on all levels.
  4. "Pearl Harbor" — More sappy romance, but that wasn’t the worst thing (you want romance done right, see "From Here to Eternity"). The worst thing was the use of special effects for special effects’ sake. In fact, it seemed the entire excuse for the film. Worst moment: When two fighter aircraft, locked in a dog fight, fly between two one-story buildings, turning onto their wingtips to negotiate the narrow alleyway.
  5. "Enemy at the Gates" — This one almost didn’t make the list, but it did for a reason it has in common with Nos. 2, 3 and 4: Sheer disappointment. Finally, I thought, Hollywood was going to pay proper, respectful acknowledgement to the horrors of the Great Patriotic War. Up until then, you’d have thought the Americans and British won the war by themselves; talk about ethnocentric. But the titanic, genocidal struggle between Teutons and Slavs that was the Siege of Stalingrad was reduced to the level of a personal feud between Ed Harris and Jude Law (Jude Law! As the emblematic New Soviet Man!) Really, really disappointing.

Cleaning my desk I: Clemson list

65 Replies

Trying to clear the decks a bit as we draw close to the end of our endorsement interview marathon (both Mark Sanford and Tommy Moore today), I ran across the several blog-worthy items that had been lying around on my desk. Here’s the first:

Recently, Clemson President James F. Barker spoke to my Rotary, and he told us about "five things you don’t know about Clemson." Well, by the time I got a chance to take notes — about 45 minutes later — I could only remember three. I suppose they were the most interesting three. They were interesting to me, anyway:

  1. It has the largest collection of plant genes in the world. I mean, I knew they were into agriculture, but that’s quite a statistic.
  2. Athletes graduate in a higher percentage than at any other ACC school — a category that includes Duke and UVa.
  3. It runs the largest free public transit system in the world, serving 13,000 in the town of Clemson.

Around here in Gamecock country, those are not the kinds of items you normally hear in a list about Clemson.

We need a new axis of evil

71 Replies

Ahmadinejadthin_2Kimthin_1Saddamthin_1
The President didn’t send me a copy of his speech today, so I haven’t read it. (What? You want me to go look it up? I’m way too lazy for that; just ask Mary.) But Joe Biden was kind enough to send along his response, and one phrase particularly grabbed my imagination.

Among a litany of what he sees as the administration’s faults, he said "five years after 9/11, each member of the so-called ‘axis of evil’ is more
dangerous."

I got to thinking about it, and he’s got a point — about two out of the three, at least.

Well, the likes of Bush and Biden might talk about this stuff, but I’m a man of action. If things haven’t worked out with this Axis of Evil, I say let’s chuck it and get us a new one. The one we’ve got has been ornery and uncooperative, and with the whole world to choose from, I think we can do better. Yes, the current members will likely protest — indeed, Iran and North Korea have put a lot of effort into being evil lately, and they won’t think they deserve to get sent back down — but the country needs an Axis that we can unite behind and feel better about.

Our new Axis should consist of nations that are irritating enough to make the list, but less likely to cause so much trouble. They should be countries that we could take if we had to, but less likely to let things get to that point.

Just to start the ball rolling, I hereby present my Top Five candidates for the New Axis of Evil. Maybe y’all can suggest other likely objects of vilification, or at least help me winnow this one down:

  1. France. They hate us already, and we don’t much like them. They won’t fight, but if they did we could finish it pretty cleanly. You can trust them — when they surrender, they really mean it. They already have the bomb, but they only use it to get a rise out of Greenpeace. I think we could do business with these guys.
  2. Argentina. The Brits took Argentina all by themselves, when they were way past their prime. It has a temperate climate. If we need an excuse to invade, we can always claim that they’re still hiding Nazis. If we don’t find any, we can said they sent them to Chile just before we got there. I’ve always felt bad that the U.S. doesn’t pay enough attention to South America, so this would address that problem as well. (Sure, we could go with Venezuela, but Chavez wants in so badly, and I just wouldn’t want to give him the satisfaction.)
  3. Russia. You might say we’d be biting off a bit much — they are much heavier hitters than any of the current lineup. But think about it: Back when they were a superpower, we stood toe-to-toe for 40-plus years, and it never came to blows (not directly, anyhow). And Putin’s been a real pain lately. Besides, they’ve got oil.
  4. Switzerland. The whole civilized world has been fighting for a century, and these slackers have sat it out. What makes them so special? I’ve had it with them doing nothing but making cuckoo clocks and sitting on all our money. Sure, their Army has the benefit of some highly advanced pocketknife technology, but that doesn’t stack up so well against an F-18.
  5. California. It thinks it’s a country already, even to the point of making treaties with our allies. Most Americans don’t like it any more than they like France — or not much more. Mainly, I just think Ahnold would be a much more fun to demonize than Dear Leader.

That’s my list so far. What do y’all think?

Chiracthin_1Putinthin_2Ahnoldthin_1

Dances with Pretension

40 Replies

Yes, Mark, of course we despise "Dances With Wolves!" It’s pretentious, silly, boring, condescending, tedious and intellectually offensive. The worst thing about it was that Hollywood thought it was profound, and that just confirms so much about Hollywood, doesn’t it?

You see, this "epic" — which I believe lasted about 14 hours, but it may have been longer — was intended to teach Deep Lessons to us hicks out here in Flyover Land all about the Noble Red Man. It seems that Hollywood had just discovered the American Indian, and learned that he was treated badly by the white man, and was going to teach all of us about it, because of COURSE we couldn’t have heard about it out here.

Never mind that the theme of the Noble Savage had been done to death in the early 19th century by James Fenimore Cooper, as any literate person (a category that, as near as I can tell, does not involve anyone in Hollywood) would know.

Or that the theme had become so passe that Mark Twain brutally satirized it later in the century. And remember, Twain was a very liberal, free-thinking sort, but he could not abide pretension.

Or that Hollywood — John Ford, no less — had decades previously given the subject serious, respectable treatment, in a way that might make even John Wayne feel guilty about the white man’s role.

Or that Hollywood, in a more thoughtful era, had even satirized that. In fact, let’s consider "Little Big Man" for a moment. It had fun with almost every Western cliche you can think of, including that of the noble, mystical Red Man (and yes, that was, is, and always will be a cliche, which is my point here — the people making "Dances with Wolves" were not sophisticated enough to know that; they actually thought they were breaking new ground, and that is what is so embarrassing and offensive about it).

"Little Big Man" paid the American Indian the compliment of treating him as a human being, rather than as a stereotype, positive or negative. Director Arthur Penn had the good sense to give his Indians — who, appropriately enough, referred to themselves collectively as "the Human Beings" — the full range of human attributes. They were brave, silly, wise, stupid, tragic, comic and so forth.

The best bit in the whole movie was when Chief Dan George, the wise, earthy Grandfather, decided it was "a good day to die," and went out and lay down to do just that. Of course, the viewer thinks, "Wow, Indians can really do that? I guess it’s because they’re just so much more attuned to the universe than we are." A few moments later, raindrops hit his apparently lifeless face. He opens his eyes and asks Dustin Hoffman whether he is dead yet. A relieved Hoffman says no, so Grandfather gets up with the younger man’s help, shrugs and says something to the effect of, well, maybe some other day would be a better day to die. Or so I remember; I don’t have it at hand to check.

It was so down-to-earth, real, fallible and human. And for those reasons, Grandfather actually is noble — unlike the cardboard cutouts of "Dances With Wolves."

Do you see what I’m saying?

As for "Apocalypse Now" — I’ll deal with that, at least in passing, in my next post. As it happens, my thoughts on it are sort of the opposite of Dave’s.

Such excellent bad cinema!

18 Replies

Ow! Ow! Those are some awful ones! As Count Floyd would say, "Really, really scary! And in 3-D!" In fact, y’all have reminded me of so many wasted hours, and raised so many bad-movie vistas, that I’m going to have to think awhile, and maybe come back tomorrow with my own list. (Besides, I just got in after 10 hours on the road driving back from Memphis.)

How will I ever narrow it down? In fact, I’m wondering — should we have two categories? One could be, "movies that you would expect to be awful," such as "Plan 9" or anything from Ed Wood. I think "Night of the Lepus" and some like that would fit in that category. (I mean, as opposed to those Bruce Campbell vehicles that should have been bad, but turned out to be such classics.)

Second category would include such big-budget, much-anticipated flicks as "Dune," "Waterworld," and AAAUUGGHHHH "Dances With Wolves." I had forgotten some of those movies, they were so bad. Those are some great suggestions. In fact, I can see a whole wonderful SUBcategory of "books you liked or even loved, and looked forward to the movie for years, but were excruciatingly disappointed." "Dune" would by no means be alone there. Think, "Bonfire of the Vanities." (I’ve got a really bad feeling Tom Hanks may be about to repeat that mistake in "The Da Vinci Code." You know who should have played the lead in "Bonfire?" Kelsey Grammer. He has the chin, the accent and the precise pompous air that the character needs.)

Oh, and in a whole other field, here: Extra points to Uncle Elmer for coming up with "Pi." Excellent choice, my friend. It shows an excruciating dedication to seeking out the worst in cinema.

Oh, one other thing: As a golfer, I must defend Mr. Costner for having made "Tin Cup," and for his goofy turn in "Silverado." And I enjoyed "The Untouchables," although the largest credit for that belongs to Sean Connery (AND Charles Martin Smith AND Andy Garcia). But "Dances with Wolves" pretty much threw away any merit those performances got him. I’ll bet that one made more sense in German, Herb, nicht wahr?

In fact, let’s kick him again for one nobody mentioned: "Robin Hood, Prince of Thieves."

New category! Top five lists

5 Replies

So I was reading our special section last week on this year’s "20 Under 40," and thinking what a fine, upstanding groups of youngsters this was, when I got sidetracked — I started checking out what they listed as their "favorite movie," and suddenly the popular-culture snob in me came out for a romp, and I started looking only at that criterion, and began to judge them much more harshly.

Note that I realize full well that what this illustrates is shallowness and misplaced priorities on my part, rather than reflecting negatively upon our 20 honorees. Obviously, these folks spend their time and energy on more serious matters. This is why they are on a "20 Under 40" list, and I never was.

But indulge me here (which, come to think of it, is something you do every time you waste valuable time reading this blog). I mean, don’t get me wrong; I enjoyed "Red Dawn." I’m not one of those left-wingers who dismiss it as mere right-wing Cold War paranoid propaganda. (Of course, it was right-wing Cold War paranoid propaganda, but that was part of its charm; it wasn’t afraid to be what it was.) But favorite movie of all time? I don’t think so. Still, this young gentleman should get points for taking a risk with his pick (something I utterly fail to do with my own list below, I’ll admit), and that’s worth something. But risky choices need to be defensible.

Far more impressive was Mary Pat Baldauf‘s esoteric selection of "A Face in the Crowd." Now there’s a film buff. I mean, even though I’ve heard great things about it, I haven’t even seen it myself (although I just got it from Netflix and hope to watch it this weekend), but it’s got great snob appeal. Think about it — Andy Griffith, before he was famous, shining in a serious, dark role. And don’t forget it’s got Patricia Neal in it. So way to go there, Ms. Baldauf. And please note, she dared to list "old movies (especially from the 1950s and 1960s)" as a personal passion, which raised the bar on the discriminating reader’s expectations. So this was quite a high-wire act, and she pulled it off beautifully.

I would applaud Cynthia Blair‘s choice of "The Usual Suspects" (although, being more obvious, it’s not as cool as Ms. Baldauf’s), but it’s listed as "last movie," rather than "favorite," which just doesn’t count for as much.

So where am I headed with this? Well, as an ardent admirer of Nick Hornby‘s masterful High Fidelity — and as one who also thoroughly enjoyed the film adaptation (in spite of their having moved the setting from London to Chicago, it was rescued by a stellar cast, with Jack Black turning in a mind-blowing performance as Barry) — I have been tempted for some time to start a "top five" category on this blog.

What’s stopped me? Well, fear, I suppose — fear of being savaged by the real pop culture snobs, because I know my own tastes are fairly pedestrian, truth be told. There are an awful lot of Barrys out there ready to tear into my picks the way the original Barry dissed Rob’s and Dick’s. But ultimately, as a reader-participation exercise, this could be fun. So let’s do it.

I had wanted to start this with something less obvious, such as "top five movie endings," or "top five cover songs that feature the original artist singing backup," or some such. But since I just got on the under-40 crowd about favorite movies, let’s start with that very vanilla sort of list:

1. "It’s a Wonderful Life."
2. "The Godfather."
3. "Casablanca."
4. "The Graduate."
5. "High Noon."

Or maybe number four or five should have been "Saving Private Ryan" or …

Yes, I know. I’m stretching the concept of "vanilla" until it screams. Barry would call that list "very …". Well, never mind what Barry would call it, since this is a family blog. But hey — the best movies of all time are obvious, if they’re really the best. I could have thrown in "Life is Beautiful" or "36 Hours" or "Office Space" or something that had a little individuality to it. But I had to be honest.

I promise to do something a little more intriguing the next time I visit this category.

Meanwhile, I’m anxious to know what y’all think — not only your own "top five movies," which I’m sure will put mine to shame. I’d also like your suggestions for future lists.

Assuming, of course, that you dare…