shut up and jam!
yesterday, i went to see the new talkie stranger than fiction in the moving picture theater. in case you can't recall, here's the poster:
whether or not i enjoyed the film is irrelevant (alright, i'll tell you that i did enjoy the film, but only because all you reeds are so nice), the important part was the trailer i saw for the new will smith movie:
hmmm. "happyness," i thought, is misspelled.well, i didn't so much think it as i angrily turned towards kristen-reed, proclaiming "what the hell?!? they misspelled happiness! what, did they not spellcheck their movie title?!?"
so, today i went on a little research binge, and found out via imdb.com that the misspelling was intentional. furthermore, i discovered that it was first an ol' fashioned bound memoir by chris gardner. npr.org was nice enough to give me the reason why:
The misspelled "Happyness" of the book's title comes from when Gardner was looking for daycare for his son so Gardner could pursue his career. He rejected one facility because it misspelled "Happiness" in its name, but gained insight into what happiness meant to him personally when he explained the literal meaning of the word to his curious son.this turned my feelings of anger into feelings of joy. gardner rejected sending his son to a daycare center that misspelled "happiness."
(npr.org, "http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5443651")
amazing.
so kudos go to you, chris gardner. i know i'd do the same, and i hope all you reeds would too. let's break free from ignorance and demand nerdy satisfaction!
oh, what a wonderful segue into learn-a-little saturday! today's topic: fame.
being famous just means having a widespread reputation, or that a large percentage of the general public (or whatever demographic said person is famous in) knows the person exists. most of the time, this also means that the public acknowledges said famous person as performing or doing something that has given them notariety.
most commonly, people become famous for these actions which they have done, whether liked or disliked: mother theresa is well known for being a saint-like kind missionary; tom hanks is known as an american actor. when disliked, it is also called infamous: john wayne gacy, jr is infamous for being a serial killer.
there is a third case which also exists, which is perhaps the strangest one: people will become famous, and the general public doesn't even know why that person became famous. many times, this is due to being related to another famous person. think about why the hell anyone knows paris hilton. once she started doing anything that may have made her famous (television shows, merchandising, main-stream music), she had already been famous prior to that. it is just that enough people have spoken about said person, and they've infiltrated enough common media sources that the details of their rise to fame become blurred in their already-gaining notoriety.
with that said, one doesn't actually need to have done anything superb to get him or her into the spotlight--even if it is just for a short while, or for "15 minutes of fame."
15 minutes may be all i need to show reese witherspoon how awesome i am. so start getting my name out there! spread TDN love everywhere: discuss it by the water cooler at work, write rave-reviews for it to media sources, get TDN tattooed across your back, etc.
well, that's enough self-promotion and reese-infatuation disguised as learning for one day. let's move on, shall we?
CBS4boston.com, the aptly titled website for boston's local CBS station, reported on this spicy piece of news:
(cbs4boston.com, "http://cbs4boston.com/local/local_story_314094750.html")can you reeds believe that we're all alive for, and able to experience firsthand, the great burrito debate? we'll be telling our grandkids about this, that's for sure.
then there was a neat little poll which asks you, the reader, if you believe a burrito is a sandwich. i'll tell you in confidence that i voted amongst the many for "Of course not." the 29% who voted for "Yes, bread plus filling equals sandwich" are brave, but incorrect, i felt. i don't know about you, but i've never seen a burrito wrapped up in bread. it's called a "tortilla."
according to the story, panera bread got all huffy-puffy when a mexican restaurant opened itself in the same shopping center as a panera bread location, after the owners of the mall had given panera "sandwich exclusivity."
then, like burrito-filling, things got heated. they went to court, and this ridiculous story was born.
In his ruling, [Worcester Superior Court Judge Jeffrey A.] Locke cited Webster's definition of a sandwich and explained that the difference comes down to two slices of bread versus one tortilla: "A sandwich is not commonly understood to include burritos, tacos, and quesadillas, which are typically made with a single tortilla and stuffed with a choice filling of meat, rice, and beans," he wrote.you think judge locke was smiling when he gave out this ruling? i don't know how often in your career as a judge you'd be expecting to read aloud webster's definition of a sandwich.
(cbs4boston.com, "http://cbs4boston.com/local/local_story_314094750.html")
"before coming to my verdict on this case of rock v. paper, i will first read the wikipedia article on 'rock, paper, scissors' to clarify this misunderstanding."
"choice filling of meat, rice, and beans" still makes me laugh. sounds like he's trying to advertise mexican food with that one. and who can blame him? that's one tasty area of eats.
that's all for this saturday's installment of tiny damaged notions. now all you reeds can finally get back to planning your saturday. it is saturday when you're reading this right? you didn't wait until you were bored later on in the week because you had "better things to do" did you?
DID YOU?!?
good, i thought not. enjoy your saturday everyone! and save a burrito for me.
No comments:
Post a Comment