Archive

Monthly Archives: April 2012

This is old. But, I can’t stop picturing this in my head. That stupid gray cat with
the pop tart body farting out rainbows. Yes. Nyan Cat. It went viral a couple years ago on
YouTube and got some negative and positive responses. I’m sick of it, but somehow I
always get sucked back into the cat’s little song “Nyan nyan nyan nyan” … You get the
deal. It zooms across the sky with sparkly rainbows shooting out of its rear. Who comes up with
these sorts of things?

As far as weirdness goes, this definitely should be on the list. Now, whenever I
think of YouTube, I can’t stop thinking of that stupid cat. Cat. Oh no, now it’s stuck in
my head. No! I refuse to listen to that stupid song on loop. Someone help me before I do
something stupid. Oh, wait too late. I’m now just listening to that cat. Nyan.
Jenna Marbles the entertainer and blogger on YouTube wore a Nyan Cat costume for one
of her videos. Now, I’ve seen everything.

No, I’m not looking for the costume on Amazon…yet. Why did I succumb to this?

Hannah Yang is a stringer for Campus Staff. Can’t get the Nyan Cat out of your head? Email her at hy135010@ohiou.edu.

By Nathan Gordon | ng312310@ohiou.edu | @GordonRises
The Five-Year Engagement | Directed by Nicholas Stoller | Rated R


First Words

When I see the combination of Nicholas Stoller as director, Jason Segel as lead actor and writer, and Judd Apatow as producer, I instantly have an idea of how the movie will play out (at least from a comedic perspective). As the movie’s poster tries to hint at, I assume I’m going to see a movie with a similar type of humor and story as Bridesmaids.

Well I was wrong, but sometimes it’s okay to be wrong.

Plot

After Tom (Jason Segel) proposes to his girlfriend, Violet (Emily Blunt), the couple’s wedding planning gets put on hold after Violet receives a job at the University of Michigan. Tom agrees to give up his blossoming career as a chef in San Diego to follow his fiancé to Michigan until the jobs duration is over. As the couple begins their new life with a wedding looking bleaker as each day passes, tension builds between them, leaving them wondering if they will ever get married.

Positives

No, this movie is no Bridesmaids, but The Five-Year Engagement gives you a reason to laugh throughout. The film takes a different approach when compared to recent R-rated comedies when it comes to its humor. Yes, it still had its share of raunchy jokes but the overall tone of the humor felt like it wanted to get laughs in ways that different people with different tastes would all find funny. The cast is full of actors willing to take turns bringing the laughs, whether it be from Segel to Chris Pratt (Alex) or even from Chris Parnell (Bill).

The Five-Year Engagement did a great job ending on a high note. Although the film is, unfortunately, very predictable, the filmmakers were able to add a spin to it with a cool idea. It’s not the most shocking ending ever, but just a simple idea that completely worked.

Negatives

With a movie being named The Five-Year Engagement, you would think time change would be something that is easily noticed. That’s not the case here. There is no heads-up that the film moved forward in time. You have to wait a little into a scene to notice that the film is now in a different year. From the way the characters act and, for the most part, look, you wouldn’t know that a year or two has passed from the previous scene.

Although the film is funny throughout, the level of humor begins to drop as it gets closer to ending and there isn’t that one scene you will walk out talking about how funny it was. The film begins to drag because the humor drops off at the end, leaving me wondering if there is a way they can make the films 2-hour running time a little shorter.

Other issues I have with the film are how it approached parts of its storyline. The movie should have paid more attention to more specific problems that could add problems for a couple in an engagement that long. Also, Kevin Hart was underused. If he was given more screen time and opportunities to show his comedic abilities, the movie might have had that memorable funny scene. It’s just hard to go from seeing how he was in Think Like A Man just a week ago to see how he was in this movie.

Last Words

The team behind The Five-Year Engagement creates a bit of a surprise with some elements they threw in this film, most notably being the tone brought to the humor. While that was successfully implemented, other elements of the film were not properly handled. This movie is still able to do what comedy is supposed to do, though, and that is bringing plenty of laughs.

One more thing I must quickly mention, if you’re a fan of NBC’s Thursday night lineup, this cast might include a few bright spots.

RATING: 3/5

By Nick Harley | nh632010@ohiou.edu | @Mick_Marley

Today brought about the release of the brand new single from The Gaslight Anthem.

Hailed critical darlings early on in their career with the release of their sophomore album, The ’59 Sound, The Gaslight Anthem have gotten back in touch with their jersey punk bravado on the sweltering new track “45.” The song, which features a huge, soaring chorus that allows lead singer Brian Fallon to experiment with the upper end of his range, will be featured on their new album Handwritten, which is set for a July 24 release.

In interviews, Fallon has suggested that the album will be a more raw return to form for the band musically, while stating that his lyrics will be more personal and derived from his own experiences, unlike the story-telling, character-driven work showcased on previous albums. Regardless, expect big hooks and heart-on-your-sleeve crooning on July 24, just in time to be the soundtrack to your summer.

Though the album is a ways away, you can pick up the new single on iTunes on May 8, or enjoy it for free, streaming on RollingStone.com.

By Austin Stahl | as506610@ohiou.edu | @AustinStahl24

Ohio University has prided itself in being a green campus, and it is living up to that reputation.

Perhaps the two single biggest things we are currently doing to be green are the adoption of the school’s Sustainability Plan and, more recently, the release of the first draft of the Climate Action Plan.

Sustainability is a very broad term. It is defined on dictionary.com as “the quality of not being harmful to the environment or depleting natural resources, and thereby supporting long-term ecological balance.” Moving towards a more sustainable way of living is imperative if we hope to continue to enjoy the quality of life we have now. The finite resources we depend on will not last forever, and dependence on them could even threaten our future existence, not just way of life.

Currently, the university is not sustainable. No universities right now are, and very few large organizations, if any, are truly sustainable. But many like us are working to get there. Ohio’s Sustainability Plan focuses on three main areas: citizenship, stewardship and justice.

Citizenship tackles the challenge of incorporating sustainability into the curriculum through more majors and classes, and engaging students to be part of the solution by their actions. Participation from students will be key if the school is to meet its goals. For more suggestions on what you can be doing now, check my earlier post titled “The emergence of sustainabiity: what you can do to help.”

Stewardship includes taking good care of our environment and tackling the biggest issues, such as reducing our institutional greenhouse gas emissions, energy use, and waste; sourcing renewable energy; and increasing recycling rates.

Justice — perhaps the most intriguing of the three — focuses on investing in corporations that make sustainability a priority, increasing resource accountability on campus, and reallocating surplus resources to local communities in need.

In addition to the Sustainability Plan, the school released the first draft of our Climate Action Plan last week. This is a similar initiative, but different because it specifically addresses Ohio University’s stated goal of carbon neutrality by 2075.

To reach carbon neutrality, the university must reduce institutional greenhouse gas emissions to zero. Energy is the main focus of this plan because it represents the vast majority of our emissions. Last year purchased electricity resulted in 88,165 metric tons of carbon dioxide emitted into the atmosphere, primarily from burning coal. That’s nearly 75 percent out of a total of 118,788 metric tons emitted by the institution.

Other areas of attention include waste reduction and recycling, land and resource management, transportation and construction. Like the Sustainability Plan, education and outreach to create behavioral change among students and faculty is considered crucial for the plan’s success.

The university is taking sustainability seriously. It’s now up to us to participate and be part of the solution.

The Sustainability Plan was adopted last summer. A full report on its implementation will be available in June.

To view the Sustainability Plan, click here: http://issuu.com/alcadmus/docs/ohio_university_sustainability_plan_tracked_change?mode=window&backgroundColor=%23222222#222222

The first draft of the Climate Action Plan was released last Tuesday and is awaiting approval from the Board of Trustees.

To view the draft of the Climate Action Plan, click here:
http://issuu.com/sustainableou/docs/ou_cap_draft?mode=window&pageNumber=1

By Austin Stahl | as506610@ohiou.edu | @AustinStahl24

Here’s today’s environmental news.

1. “The Folly of Big Agriculture: Why Nature Always Wins”
http://e360.yale.edu/feature/the_folly_of_big_agriculture_why_nature_always_wins/2514/

Vast fields of monocultures and heavy subsidies for these commodity crops mark the U.S. system of industrial agriculture. This creates many problems, one of them being pesticide resistance. Read this article describing why we cannot outsmart nature.

2. “Would you like a bad farm bill — or a terrible one?”
http://grist.org/farm-bill/would-you-like-a-bad-farm-bill-or-a-terrible-one/

Speaking of big agriculture, here’s a breakdown of the latest farm bill. The draft of the bill was released April 20.

3. “White House Promotes Bioeconomy”
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/26/business/energy-environment/white-house-promotes-a-bioeconomy.html?_r=2&ref=earth

Lastly, the White House might turn to biology to spark innovation in the nation’s economy by promoting what is called a “bioeconomy.”

Yes, another Post Pick about an HBO show you may have never heard of. But this one’s important.
When I’m asked what my favorite television show of all-time is, without hesitation I reply HBO’s The Larry Sanders Show. And without hesitation the responses come back: The what? What’s that? Never heard of it.

I’m tired of this innocent ignorance, so I write this to set the record straight about perhaps the most groundbreaking and probably the most influential American sitcom ever made, and certainly the most under-appreciated.

If you like Community; if you enjoy Seinfeld (and Curb); if you are into The Office (both versions); if you love Arrested Development, 30 Rock, Extras, any or all of Judd Apatow’s (who got his start on Sanders) works; and a plethora of other sitcoms in the past 20 years are hilarious, you have Garry Shandling’s The Larry Sanders Show to thank. It’s no overstatement to say all of these shows have one thing in common — they all owe a great deal to Larry Sanders as the antecedent and spiritual father of them all.

The show within a show stars stand-up comic Shandling as the vain, neurotic, utterly self-centered talk show host Larry Sanders, taking us both on the set and behind the scenes of a fictional Letterman/Leno-esque show and recording the daily life of the show’s staff. While Sanders is undoubtedly the star of the show, the talent of the cast behind Shandling is immense — Jeffrey Tambor as his sidekick Hank Kinglsey; Rip Torn as his foulmouthed but loyal producer Artie; Jeremy Piven and Wallace Langham as the shows head writers; pre-Daily Show John Stewart as Larry’s occasion substitute host; and Janeane Garofalo as his booking agent.

This was a single-camera workplace comedy, hilarious but nothing too special creatively; the innovation was the lengths to which the show went to be realistic, and realistic about Hollywood. To this end, the true gold came from the numerous star-studded guests who appeared as self-parodying versions of themselves, allowing us to see their personas both when the cameras are rolling and behind the scenes. Many of the most genius moments of the show’s run came from the willingness of so many celebrities to completely send up their media images. Here’s another example. And another.
A write-up like this won’t do this show justice, you need to watch it yourself (every episode is available on Netflix instant streaming, FYI). And after this already-probably-too-long ode to the show’s greatness, you might walk away a little underwhelmed after your maiden viewing. The reason you do is because so many — pretty much all — of the sitcoms that have followed Larry Sanders have in some way ripped it off (in a good way); we’ve become so used to smart, funny, witty, realistic, cynical, no-laugh track for the punch-line sitcom precisely because of Larry Sanders‘ influence and shadow. The Larry Sanders Show has largely been forgotten today precisely because of its success, because so many shows that followed Larry tried to be just like it, leading us to forget the original source material.

But when Larry Sanders premiered in 1992, nothing on television could touch it, this truly was a different kind of sitcom — go back and sample the sitcoms from that era if you don’t believe me. And after 20 years of every comedic television writer trying their damnedest, in my opinion nothing come has yet to come close to the consistently hilarious and remarkably groundbreaking heights that The Larry Sanders Show reached during its six-season run. So give this show a try, if only as a thank you for spawning many of your favorite modern sitcoms that followed in its footsteps.

Cameron Dunbar is a junior studying journalism and a Slot Editor at The Post. Chat TV with him at cd211209@ohiou.edu.

By Will Ashton | wa054010@ohiou.edu
The Pirates! Band of Misfits | Directed by Peter Lord and Jeff Newitt | Rated PG


After the snoozefest that was Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides, and the messes before it (Dead Man’s Chest and At World’s End), film fans have been yearning for pirate fun at the theater again.

Sure, Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl was a lot of fun.  But that movie came out nine years ago; it has almost been a decade since pirates were fun at the movies.

But finally, dear lads, The Pirates! Band of Misfits has come to save the day.

The new movie from Aardman Animation, the team behind Wallace and Gromit and Chicken Run, this new stop-motion, claymation film follows Pirate Captain (Hugh Grant) and his mismatch crew who attempt to win the prize of Pirate of the Year, despite being the laughing stock of the pirate community.

In their attempt to steal loot from passing ships, the crew stumbled into Charles Darwin (David Tennant), who discovers that the pirates’ pet parrot, Polly, is actually a dodo bird and the last of his kind. Together, they present their scientific discovery in hopes that they will win prizes galore and win fame and the coveted pirate prize after all.

Directors Peter Lord (Chicken Run) and Jeff Newitt are still able to bring their signature charm and energy into their latest effort, particularly inside the animation, for which this film presents some of the best animation the studio has ever produced. Settings, details and sight gags remain top notch as always.

Their usual cleverness, however, is not in top form here. A number of jokes came across as tired, random and, dare I say it, flat. But this doesn’t mean that the film is without its humor. Despite a rather weak opening, it is still able to keep its jokes coming and their sense of comedic timing remains impeccable as always. It’s the script, written by Gideon Defoe, who also wrote the book the movie is based on, that seems less than spectacular here.

As Pirate Captain, Grant finally rids himself of his tired timid gentleman routine in order to play the clueless, ego-driven nature of the character. And surprisingly, he does a great job with it. He sinks himself into the character so well, you’ll completely forget it’s him and grow onto his character.

At the end of the day, though, it’s the Aardman Animation that makes this film work. Their sense of constant energy, charm, earnestness and cheekiness is what makes their films so great. While sadly not as cheeky this time as in past films, it brings twice the earnestness, with room for energy and charm as well.

The Pirates! Band of Misfits does not live up to their work in the Wallace and Gromit adventures, Chicken Run, or even last year’s wonderful Arthur Christmas, but the movie remains comparable to the studio’s other film, Flushed Away — not particularly great on many levels, but still engaging enough to pass the grade. It’s not their best film; in fact, it might actually be among their worst based on their track record, but it’s still good fun and much more worthy of the pirates’ honor than the Pirates sequels will ever be.

RATING: 3/5