So I see this commercial on TV for "Air Delight."
It's a chocolate bar, apparently. I don't know who makes it, but in the commercial, there's like hundreds of people made of chocolate dancing around on a chocolate field like it's the second coming of jesus christ and everyone is in rapture. So then they finally show the candy bar. It's a chocolate bar with lots of air bubbles in it.
Doesn't anyone think about this? Instead of chocolate, you're getting AIR. Usually, you don't have to pay for air. But wrap some chocolate around it, and now you do. Brilliant way to charge you for nothing, isn't it? Think about it. Instead of a bar made up completely of chocolate, that delicious, wondrous thing made of cocoa beans, you're eating AIR. It's probably about half the chocolate you'd normally get, by my reckoning. So it's lighter, sure, because there's less chocolate. I mean, if you're watching your weight and you want to eat air, having half a chocolate bar and saving the rest for next time is probably better than buying an "air delight," and much more satisfying. Of course, i imagine they had to do it like that, and are probably not only charging you more for the air-filled candy bar, but you really think you're getting more out of it. Because if they just gave you half a chocolate bar for the same price instead of marketing it up as AIR, well, you might be upset. Then again, if you're dumb enough to pay for edible air in the first place, you probably wouldn't notice.
It reminds me of those funky yogurt things. I think they're called "whips." They're basically just yogurt as far as I can tell. You know what the difference is? it says in big text on the side of the container "for best results, do not stir." So. it's yogurt. That you don't stir. No, it's a WHIP! Which is pretty much what a yogurt is anyway. Only you stir it. My niece was thrilled with whips when they first came out. I bought one and tasted it. It was yogurt. I've had yogurt before, i know what it tastes like. I tried to tell her and she just didn't get it. I'm not really sure why. She has a job with a lawyer's office and seems like a reasonably intelligent individual. But just can't grasp the concept that someone might be lying to her to get her to pay more money for something that's exactly the same thing. And she works with lawyers?
So the season finale of Grimm was done much more nicely than the other season finales I watched. Yes, there was some pretty intense action and a lot of major changes to the characters, and yes, crazy shit happened in the last few minutes. But no major characters died, you were never left wondering what happened to them, the bad guys got it in the end, and everyone was safe. No worries! Bring on next season! See, now that's decent writing. If you come back because you like the show, that's the important part. Even if Grimm gets cancelled now, it's okay, because I know the characters on the show will be safe. And yes, i know they're just fictional characters, but that's not the point. Of COURSE they're fictional characters, but if you don't care about what happens to them, then why the hell did you watch the show in the first place? It's a writer's job to make the characters real enough for you to care about them, so me caring about the fictional characters is just normal. Also, I don't have to remember what happened last season by the next time season 2 gets here because it can pick right up where it left off without any major explanations!
I also saw X-Men: First Class last night. Now something occurs to me, as X-Men is now showing on another channel today. The first scene in BOTH movies is Erik Lensher (magneto) losing his parents to the nazi slaughtering of the jews during WW2. The year was listed as 1944, and Erik appears at least about ten years old here. Now here's something I don't get.
Mutants are described as "children of the Atom" and are a result of radiation, right? I mean that's pretty much the whole explanation of their existence. So. If radiation causes them to be born with superpowers due to a genetic mutation in their DNA from the radiation caused by atomic weapons detonations, then... how did little Erik Lensher get to be born with mutant genes at least TEN YEARS before the invention of atomic weapons? Even atomic weapons testing didn't begin until they'd actually almost perfected the thing, soooo... if the first one was actually detonated in 1945 and the tests were only done in maybe 1944 or so once they'd figured out how to do it (nowhere near europe, I might add), then how did the radiation go back in time to infect the conception of little Magneto? Oops! That would mean someone would have had to be playing around with atomic radiation around 1934, and frankly, I don't know of anyone who could possibly have been doing that. For most people, cars were still new back in 1934.
And if you're wondering if it's only magneto they made a mistake with... X-Men: First class clearly shows Professor Xavier having his mutant telepathy around the same time Erik gets his. And they also show Mystique around that same time. Flash forward to 1962 when "First class" takes place. There's mutants running around like mad. Sure, you can say "well the bombs went off in 1945 so that's plenty of time to have little mutant babies everywhere." Is it? Do the math. 1952 would be ten years previous. 1942 would be 20. So assuming 1944 would be the cutoff point for radiation exposure, and nothing before that would work (even if there was a tiny amount of background radiation around before then), and even if all the current crop of mutants were born in 1944, that would mean the absolute oldest mutant could be 18 years old. And yet there's dozens of them of various ages, including emma frost, who certainly doesn't LOOK 18 when she's prancing around as a mercenary prostitute, and the bad guy she works for is apparently very old, so old that he was old when he met Magneto when magneto was only ten.
So where the hell did they all come from? Yea, I don't know either. Oh well, mutants are still cool, just not enough thought given to the back story.