I Stepped in Dogshit Today

Yup. The title says it all. I stepped in dogshit today. I was walking into the bank, fumbling with my keys and then the ground suddenly felt mushy. They're ought to be a law about that. Oh wait, there is. Fucking assholes. I was disgusted....and angry. That's an interesting combination of emotions. Like when you're eating out at a restaurant and find a hair in your food. Or something worse. The only solace I can take from this experience is that I was wearing my old work shoes and not the white running shoes I bought last month. I know what I would have felt if that had happened: Disgust and rage. Fucking assholes.

Uninteresting

Wow, I really haven't blogged much in the last few weeks. To be honest with you, outside of my sister having a baby boy (which I blogged about....did you enjoy?), there hasn't been anything interesting to write about. It's not that I don't want to write something. I think the fact that I'm actually blogging about how uninteresting these last few weeks have been attests to that. It's just that I need something interesting to write about. Who wants to read anything uninteresting?
I've thought about a few things to blog about, then realized that while these events seem semi-interesting to me, they would likely bore the hell out of anyone who had the misfortune of reading about them. For example, the other day I took my winter jacket to the dry cleaners. They told me it would be 2 days. Then as I was leaving I remembered that I had a button that I wanted them to sew back on the jacket. The woman behind the counter told me that we had better make it 3 days. Is that interesting? Not really. It is a tad strange how it would take an extra day to sew a button back on. Not really blog-worthy material though.
Here's another example. I went to The Book Peddler the other day to get rid of a bunch of books which I am never going to read again. (To be honest with you, some of the books were ones I had started and had no intention of finishing.) One of the books was 'A Man in Full', by Tom Wolfe. (Really good book. And yes, I read the whole thing.) The woman working there refused to take it because it is unsellable. Apparently, people have been pawning this book off on her and nobody wants to buy it. So here I am, watching her check out all my books as she tries to determine how much store credit I am going to get (I would have preferred cash, but I just wanted to get rid of the damn things more than anything), and my eyes wander down to the book shelf beside the till. I am standing beside the fiction section, with the author's whose last name begin with W right there. I see all of the Tom Wolfe books she has. There isn't a single copy of 'A Man in Full'. Not one. Before I could say anything, I notice a copy of his book "The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test', which I have been looking for for years. Years. So i walked out of there with over $20 in store credit and a book I've wanted for a long time. And 'A Man in Full'. Which is now back on my bookshelf.
Now is that an interesting story? Is it blog-worthy? I actually think it is. I should have blogged about it that very day now that I think about it.

Cohen

I am an uncle again. Wait, that sounds weird. I've been an uncle for almost 2 years now. What I should say is that the number of people who can call me Uncle Scott has doubled. I have a nephew. On Thursday October 1st my sister Rachel gave birth to Cohen Trevor Smith. He weighs 7 lbs, 9 oz, is healthy and is adorable. I love his name too. Rachel says she and Trevor got the idea from watching 'The O.C.'. Seth Cohen was constantly referred to by his last name and they thought it would sound good as a first name. And it does.

December 31st, 1969

Yesterday afternoon I had to add some more minutes to my phone. They expired on Saturday. Whoops. It happens every once in a while. I'm kinda careless like that with my phone. I always go to the Telus website, where I have a personal account and just add them with my credit card. So as I'm topping up the minutes I notice that my minutes were previously topped up on July 15th, 2009. Nothing strange about that. Sounds about right. I renewed them for 60 days. Then I see that the minutes are due to expire on December 31st, 1969. Which was odd. Because it's September of 2009. 1969 was 40 years ago. 1969, when talking on the phone meant dialing and being anchored to the phone by a chord. 1969, when every phone made the exact same ringing sound. 1969, when you couldn't set your phone to vibrate, couldn't text, couldn't take pictures, couldn't really do anything besides talking on the damn thing. Three thoughts entered my head:

1. That is seriously fucked up. That can not be right.
2. How is that even possible? I'm pretty sure cell phones weren't around back in the '60's. In fact I am 100% sure they weren't.
3. I have travelled back in time and am not only in the 1960's, but in an alternate universe 1960's, one in which cell phones had been invented. Groovy.

I checked my account after and the mistake had been fixed. So all is well. But December 31st, 1969? Weird.

The Future of Law Enforcement

Have you recently seen a movie that you loved when you were a kid? One that you haven't seen since you were a kid? I'm watching Robocop right now. I loved that movie when I was a kid, and I haven't seen it since I was 10 or 11. I've learned 2 things tonight:

1. There is no way a 10 year old should be watching this. Lots of violence. Graphic violence.
2. It has aged horribly.

It was made in 1987 and it is set in the near future. Now, I'm not familiar with how far 'near' into the future the filmmakers set this movie, but it has been 22 years and there still aren't any Robocops out on the streets protecting and serving us.
Special effects were pretty primitive back then, but I didn't care. To a 10 year old, everything looked believable. It was so exciting. This was how the future was going to be after all. This movie was showing us the future of law enforcement.
As I watch it tonight, I find myself laughing at it. The cheesy effects. The bad dialogue. The 1980's-ness of it (apparently fashion stopped evolving after 1987). And Robocop himself. I can't believe they made 2 sequels to this. And yes, that means that there is officially a Robocop trilogy.
Anyway, enjoy this clip of Robocop beating the hell out of Red Forman.

Coach Dracula

I'm watching the Ti-Cats/Argos game and I have noticed that the Argo's head coach is one scary looking dude. He looks like Dracula. Seriously. The Argo's are now being coached by Count Dracula. This guy looks frightening. He's very thin and has jet black hair, slicked back. Just like Dracula. I haven't seen him smile once on the sidelines. Maybe he's trying to hide his fangs. Wow, who knew Dracula was into football?
I'm just kidding around. He's probably not a vampire. He's just scary looking. Besides, the sun is out. However, if this was a night game, I wouldn't be so sure.

0.4

I read a lot of music criticism. I'm always looking for something new, something interesting, something I haven't heard before. It's a great way to get exposed to new music. And I love music. I'll read about bands, have a listen for myself and then make up my own mind. I like to see if the reviewer's enthusiasm for a band matches my own. Sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. Let's face it, seeking out new music on the radio is a total waste of time. Nowadays, every single band on every 'rock' station can be sorted into the following groups:
a) Bands that sound like Pearl Jam
b) Bands that sound like Metallica
c) Bands that sound like Radiohead (circa 1995)
d) Bands that sound like The Ramones
I'm serious. Turn on the radio and just listen. Each band you hear will fit into one of those categories. Only not as good. You're better off just listening to the bands I listed above. I go to Pitchfork.com alot. It's a great site for anyone looking for something different. I've found so much great music there, music I would never hear on the radio. Music that doesn't fit into any of the above categories.
Now, I'm not writing an endorsement here. That's not why I'm writing this. I do have some problems with what they do. You see, I have noticed a pattern with their reviews. And it applies to pretty much every artist. They rate albums out of 10.0. Now, I know critics have to apply a grade for a review, but I really dislike this system. I think it's the decimal which bothers me. If an album were rated a 6 or a 7, I think I would have a clearer idea of what the critic thought of the music. But a 6.1 or a 6.6? What is the difference? Know what I mean?
For an artist's debut album, they love it. It will get a great review. For the second album, a bit more critical, but still a solid rating. Every single album after that? Trashed. Not every time, but most of the time.
Take Weezer. I found a review of their album 'Make Believe'. Pitchfork gave it 0.4 out of 10. That's right, 0.4. Which seems a tad harsh. After reading that I could only deduct three things.
1) The writer clearly did not enjoy listening to this album. That much is obvious. Bad Weezer.
2) Even though it was given 0.4 out of 10, it was apparently better than a 0.3. Nice job Weezer.
3) However, the album was not good enough to be given a 0.5. I guess it was just missing something. Better luck next time Weezer.
Check the site out if you want. If you like Weezer, don't bother.