A call to arms - fanboys

Back in the saddle, into the fry pan -

someone, probably.

Internet fanboy-ism is an ever amusing element in the modern times. We all have computers, we all have the internet, and we all... like things? I'm not sure where I was going with that, but you get my point. Now, outside of us using the internet as a collective database of naked bottoms, we also love to use it as a means of bitching. Bitching about things we hate, bitching about things we love, bitching about how other people hate things we love, bitching about how we hate things other people love. 

Now, fanboy is a word we use to describe people who will blindly love and support a pop-culture related something, usually beyond reason, all the while blindly criticising the main rival of whatever that something is. These fanboys are the master bitch-ers. This generally sets up a rivalry between opposing, erm, factions that occupies many an internet forum. You see it with Xbox v Playstation, Star Wars v Star Trek, Lord of the Rings v Harry Potter, hell, you even see it in the three Pokemon Go teams. But the current flavour of fanboyism is the DC v Marvel movie argument. 

Comic books have been a staple of our culture since the 30s, with the two biggest publishers being DC Comics and Marvel Comics (there are others, and they may be big, but I don't care). Now, in case you have been living under a rock this past decade, what was once just a scattered smattering of comic book hero movies with no collective attachment to one another has given way to 'Cinematic Universes'. These create an internal world where series of movies all take place parallel to one another, with all the same characters inhibiting. These type of shared universes have certainly existed in film before (Universal Monsters, View Askewniverse, A Nightmare on Elm Street/Friday the 13th, Alien/Predator etc.) but never quite as ambitious as what we are receiving now. The Marvel Cinematic Universe (MCU) currently has 13 released movies, with a further 9 in development, and a further line of television series. The newer, but no less ambitious, DC Extended Universe (DCEU) has 3 released films with another 10 in development. Both these 'universes' share characters within each film, and follow overarching plots, with each film a piece of that universe's ultimate story. 

Full disclosure, I have never considered myself a fanboy of either (hey, isn't that a cop out!). I loved the first two Superman movies as a kid, watched X-Men: The Animated Series and had a Wolverine toy. When the initial comic book movies came out, I thoroughly enjoyed the X-Men movies, thought Spider-Man was a little overrated, and the Fantastic Four movies were dumb but enjoyable. I still maintain that Batman Begins is the best of The Dark Knight trilogy. I watch all these movies that come out! I want all of them to be good, because if they are not, well I wasted my money, and that sucks. That doesn't mean I don't prefer one of the film series, however, and I'm sure as this post goes on, you will discern which.

So to link my inherent rambling about fanboys and comics is the long term rivalry between fans of DC Comics and fans of Marvel Comics. This rivalry has extended into the film stratosphere, with the growing discontent of DC fans based on the perception of their believed 'unfair' treatment of DC films by film critics. Why is this? Well, as of right now, the films DCEU released have all received lukewarm at best, poor at worst, reviews. Generally speaking, the best way to determine how a film is fairing with the critics is through the use of two sites: Rotten Tomatoes, and Metacritic. Both of these are aggregate websites in that they do not have original reviews of their own, instead acting as a database of other recognised critic's reviews of films, and compiling overall ratings based on this collective. Rotten Tomatoes does this through a 'Fresh/Rotten' system (read: good/bad) whereby they read each individual review, determine whether or not it is a positive or negative, and then present a percentage based on positive reviews. If 60% or more of these reviews are positive, the film is thereby determined as 'Fresh'; conversely, if only 59% or less are positive, the film is considered 'Rotten'. Metacritic takes a simpler approach in that it collates all the reviews that give out the numerical film 'score', and discern the average based on that. As mentioned earlier, the DCEU has 3 released films, none of which have fared extremely well with critics. These films, and their respective Rotten Tomato and Metacritic scores, are as follows:

Man of Steel, Released: 2013. 

Rotten Tomato rating: 55% (Rotten) (based on 301 reviews) 

Metacritic score: 55 (based on 47 reviews)

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, Released: 2016

Rotten Tomato rating: 27% (Rotten) (based on 344 reviews)

Metacritic score: 44 (based on 51 reviews)

Suicide Squad, Released: 2016

Rotten Tomato rating: 29% (Rotten) (based on 137 reviews)

Metacritic score: 42 (based on 45 reviews)

Now, as we can see, Rotten Tomatoes uses a much wider base for its reviews, as not every reviewer feels the need to assign a score to their review. Irrespective of this, you can certainly see an emerging pattern in that these DCEU films are hardly critical darlings. Compare that to the slate of Marvel films below:

Iron Man, Released: 2008

Rotten Tomato rating: 94% (Fresh), (based on 266 reviews)

Metacritic score: 79, (based on 38 reviews)

The Incredible Hulk, Released: 2008

Rotten Tomato rating: 67% (Fresh), (based on 222 reviews)

Metacritic score: 61, (based on 38 reviews)

Iron Man 2, Released: 2010

Rotten Tomato rating: 72% (Fresh), (based on 276 reviews)

Metacritic score: 57, (based on 40 reviews)

Thor, Released: 2011

Rotten Tomato rating: 77% (Fresh), (based on 267 reviews)

Metacritic score: 57, (based on 40 reviews)

Captain America: The First Avenger, Released: 2011

Rotten Tomato rating: 80% (Fresh), (based on 245 reviews)

Metacritic score: 66, (based on 43 reviews)

Marvel's The Avengers, Released: 2012

Rotten Tomato rating: 92% (Fresh), (based on 317 reviews)

Metacritic score: 69, (based on 42 reviews)

Iron Man 3, Released 2013

Rotten Tomato rating: 79% (Fresh), (based on 291 reviews)

Metacritic score: 62, (based on 44 reviews)

Thor: The Dark World, Released: 2013

Rotten Tomato rating: 66% (Fresh), (based on 247 reviews)

Metacritic score: 54, (based on 44 reviews)

Captain America: The Winter Soldier, Released: 2014

Rotten Tomato rating: 89% (Fresh), (based on 258 reviews)

Metacritic score: 70, (based on 47 reviews)

Guardians of the Galaxy, Released: 2014

Rotten Tomato rating: 91% (Fresh), (based on 288 reviews)

Metacritic score: 76, (based on 46 reviews)

Avengers: Age of Ultron, Released: 2015

Rotten Tomato rating: 75% (Fresh), (based on 309 reviews)

Metacritic score: 66, (based on 49 reviews)

Ant-Man, Released: 2015

Rotten Tomato rating: 81% (Fresh), (based on 271 reviews)

Metacritic score: 64, (based on 43 reviews)

Captain America: Civil War, Released: 2016

Rotten Tomato rating: 90% (Fresh), (based on 320 reviews)

Metacritic score: 75, (based on 52 reviews)

Now that we've gotten through that long list of numbers (that I am sure most of you skipped over anyway), we can discern the fact that critics are indeed more favourable to MCU films over DCEU films. What does this mean? Well, if you are a DC fanboy, it means that obviously film critics are biased, have an agenda, and are being paid off by Disney. If you are grounded in reality, however, it just means that critics haven't taken to DC films as warmly as they have Marvel films. This could be for a number of reasons. It should be noted that, based on Metacritic's scores, the difference between the universe's average film scores is not even too vast: 66 for Marvel, 47 for DC. Yes, clearly Marvel is still faring better, but it paints a better picture than the 81% vs. 37% for their Rotten Tomato rating. But why? As it stands, the DCEU is still in its infancy compared to the MCU. The MCU is currently in it's third 'phase', and has seen dozens of characters introduced, evolve, and interact with the other characters. Comparatively, the DCEU has barely started, with one solo film, and two ensemble films. If you were to compare the first 3 Marvel films to the first 3 DC films, things don't look as dire. 

I don't want to divulge into a bunch of reviews for each of these films, but I will try to justify their significance in the "bigger picture" of the universes as a whole. Iron Man was a big gamble for the newly minted Marvel Studio, the character being a relatively second-tier comic book character in terms of recognition from the general public. But, I think we can all agree, they knocked it out of the park. The casting of Robert Downey, Jr., an up-and-down actor who had had several drug-related issues throughout his career, was an inspired choice, and the man is now synonymous with the character. But the next two released films? The Incredible Hulk and Iron Man 2. Neither of these films were bad, but certainly not to the level of quality that the first Iron Man was. The first Iron Man was fresh, with a gentle approach to the world-building attitude of the cinematic universe, but it's sequel shamelessly tried to shoehorn in elements of future MCU films, whilst presenting a relatively formulaic plot with some fairly shallow character additions. But the goodwill of the first film managed to gloss over a lot of the flaws present, and it was largely forgotten. The Incredible Hulk, on the other hand, was a generally bland affair, and suffered a bit of an identity crisis in what kind of film it wanted to be, a serious character reflecting one, or a romp-a-stomp Hulk-smasher, a general reflection of the difficulties of the character itself. However, being so closely released to the far superior Iron Man, in conjunction with the eventual reshuffling of Hulk actors, The Incredible Hulk too has managed to be largely forgotten in the franchise. So what does this say about the MCU? Well, despite a blockbuster initial entry, the MCU certainly suffered some growing pains on its way to becoming the behemoth it currently is. 

In comparison to the MCU, which opened with a relatively untouched (at least in the cinematic sense) character, to kick-start their cinematic universe, DC chose the longtime fan favourite in Superman. Now, Man of Steel was the third iteration of the Superman character, and, as noted, has been a very well known commodity for decades, so his selection could be seen as a relatively 'safe' choice. Yet, as this version of the character was entirely removed from that of the other version, we once again have to engage in an origin story, and justify this version of the character. What we eventually got was a more sombre re-imagining that eventually descended into a relatively formulaic, bad guys try to take over the world film. It wasn't bad, but it wasn't an out-and-out success either. It couldn't use goodwill from past films because, well, somewhere after The Quest for Peace and Returns, that dried up, but at the same time, it didn't hold a candle to both the first two Reeve-led films, either. So it sat oddly in the middle, with it's mixed reviews reflective of that. Sometime after that, it would appear as though Warner Bros (DCEU's distributors) hit the panic button, and decided to put all their eggs in one basket by announcing Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice, a singular film that tried to act as a sequel to Man of Steel, whilst introducing a new Batman, but also provide the inspiration for the creation of the Justice League. What we eventually got was a 3-hour mess that simply collapsed under the weight of its own expectations. A director's cut released post-cinema does manage clean up some of the mess, but the damage was already done in it's cinematic release. If DC had chosen to parallel the slower build-up of solo character films that Marvel had, this misstep could have been forgiven. But this wasn't a quiet film about the Hulk's internal quarrels or Iron Man's drinking problems, it was the match up between two of the most recognisable comic book characters in history, Batman and Superman. It's failure as a film caused massive ripples because of the significance of the film it was.

As of right now, I have not seen Suicide Squad. Most reviews note similar issues to BvS, however, in that it's narrative is all over the place, and it lacks fluidity. I will be able to talk on this later, hopefully. 

So why are these films being attacked so much more than any of the Marvel failures? I don't want this to simply come down to an argument of genuine quality, because in the eyes of fanboys, well, that is pretty irrelevant. As a franchise, the comparison of current DC films and current Marvel films is unfair to the DC films. They are still trying to find their feet as a collective unit, and Marvel has been operating for the last 8 years with a relatively strong vision throughout. Yet who is making these comparisons? Marvel fans, I can guarantee you, don't. As it stands, Marvel fans can smugly look down without even having to say anything. The films are more commercially and critically successful. But not a comment goes by from a DC fan without the inevitable comparison to the Marvel films, and the criticisms as to why it's not as good as it's made out to be. The chip is on the DC fans shoulder, whether they want to admit it or not.

One of the chief criticisms from DC fanboys of the Marvel franchise is the lighter tone of the Marvel films. Even in the quote unquote darker films in the Marvel universe, there is still lighter moments, which DC fanboys generally deride as campy humour aimed at children, further suggesting that if films are to have elements of humour in them, they must be aimed at children. Now dictionary.com gives the following definitions for the adjective 'camp':

1. (of a man or his manner) ostentatiously and extravagantly effeminate.
"a heavily made-up and highly camp actor"
2. deliberately exaggerated and theatrical in style.
"the movie seems more camp than shocking or gruesome"

Having seen all the Marvel films, I can categorically state that none of them contain humour in this sense, so such criticisms are either hyperbole, or commenters don't know what campy humour actually is. I would generally lean towards the former, which would go hand in hand with the silly scepticism associated with the critics general honesty. In contrast to these criticisms is that DC films are too smart and tonally dark for casual movie goers, which (once again, I have not seen Suicide Squad), judging from BvS, I can only assume they mean literally dark, because it is certainly a very dreary looking film, with a strong grey colour palette. As for the actual tones, well, thus far, the DCEU has taken a mostly humourless approach to their opening two films, but being humourless doesn't automatically translate to it being a darker story. Iron Man as a character was kidnapped by terrorists and forced to come face-to-face with the by-product of his weapon genius in the opening Iron Man film. There has been plenty of films in the MCU dealing with the moral dilemma of  the usage of weapons of mass destruction, and also that of external authority and accountability. Furthermore, to automatically attribute Batman v Superman as a film that was simply too smart for the masses because of how confusing its plot was at points is just wrong, and the release of the extended version of the film further points to that because its sole purpose was to clean up those confusing elements by re-adding expository scenes. To clarify, the extended cut is much less confusing in this manner than the theatrical release, although Lex Luthor's ultimate plot is still very convoluted.

Thus far, I think the biggest thing missing from the DCEU is charm. Robert Downey Jr. injected so much charm into the Iron Man series, and each lead thus far has had it in various helpings, be it Chris Hemsworth, Chris Evans, Chris Pratt (so many damn Chris'!) and Paul Rudd, with the only notable exception being Edward Norton in what was a terrible miscast role (a mistake that was quickly rectified). This charm can ultimately paste over some flaws of the weaker entries in the MCU (as well as the previously mentioned goodwill of the stronger entries). Of the DCEU, two of their three films have been ensemble films of which there is no clear lead, and the third, Man of Steel, seemed content with portraying Superman as an incredibly boring character (which is, admittedly, kind of in line with his general character). No one character is particular endearing to the audience, certainly not in the way Robert Downey Jr. was for the MCU. Will that change in the coming films? Maybe. We've had some footage shown of the upcoming Justice League movie, and whilst there seems to be a stronger emphasis on humour, is Ben Affleck and his grumpy Batman the right person to be leading that? Time will tell...

If you liked it, then you should have put a #hashtag on it

Fashion is a peculiar beast. For some reason, people really care about what other people are wearing. I mean, I usually keep half an eye on fashion trends to see if anything vaguely resembles
So I was bumbling around Instagram the other day as I usually do when I am so bored, and I looked up the people option in the search function. However, the vast majority of "people" I found were not actually people, but instead clothing brands, and would be designers and models advertising these clothing brands. What? It feels as though the true purpose of Instagram has been lost. It is rather disappointing that Instagram has become such a vehicle for shitty clothing brands who can't market themselves properly in a real format, so they instead clog up picture feeds with their usually trash products, hoping to attach themselves to the socially slower members of society who need to garner their fashion sense from 2 square-inch images on social networking sites. What's next, believing those legit Facebook shoe ads?

Now, I am obviously aware of women and the asinine love of telling people of their "outfits of the day" (and maybe some men too, but none that I know). I don't really understand this practice. When I step outside, looking great and feeling like a million bucks, I sure as hell don't want Blinky Bill the Instagram chump to try and steal all the hard effort I went into finding a great combination of shirt AND shorts by then just aping it without all the hard effort I put in. And let us be honest, no one quite pulls off an outfit like I do, so the practice in of itself would be quite useless. Furthermore, by constantly updating my adoring Instagram followers (hey, I hit triple digits!) of my day to day look, I destroy the allure of people actually seeing me personally every day and constantly being surprised by what amazing outfit I pull out. I really have a deep bag of tricks. No, I did not wear this shirt yesterday, I have no idea what you are talking about. But women seem to not think like me, strangely enough. Their outfit of a the day just seems to be a way of showing off a selfie under the pretense of guiding people towards an enlightenment of which is their far superior fashion sense.



Outfit of the day: Free Willy

Unfortunately, most people don't have good fashion. Following trends blindly does not equate to having a good sense of style. So instead, I am subjected to shitty 'outfit of the day' posts that I do not care about, from people who are wearing outfits that don't even look good! I cannot help but laugh when people then tag the brands of the clothes they are wearing too, like, plebs, I am wearing a Billabong bikini. Yeah, Billabong. A brand created on the Gold Coast, the doofus capital of the world. Hey, maybe if I was still a 12-year old loser who thought Billabong was a relevant brand I'd give a flying shit about your Billabong bikini, you dumb girl. But instead, I, like the rest of the world, think surf-related brands are no longer cool, essentially making the Billabong label absolutely "worthless" (http://www.theage.com.au/business/earnings-season/billabong-brand-worthless-as-loss-blows-out-20130827-2smxx.html). So if you are going to hashtag your clothing brands like someone gives a shit, better make sure it is a brand that is worth more than a used handkerchief. And even then, just don't. #MyCalvins? Well isn't that riveting. You are wearing an incredibly ugly pair of underpants that I imagine Mormon parents give their kids to scare others away from trying to disrobe them.


Protecting kid's virginity since 1968

"But Rhys, you wear Calvin Klein underwear, you silly nitwit LOL". Well yes, I do. I don't wear them because they look cool though. They go under my pants, you see. I wear them because they are comfortable! And not even the cotton ones, which are still as balls awful as your cheap shit Bonds underwear. I wear micro-weave pairs, because my nethers deserve a more gentle touch. And as far as I am aware, I have yet to make an Instagram post about #MyCalvins, so...

I think the point I am trying to make here is... I hate what Instagram has become. A tool for the arrogant and the socially needy. I don't want to see how you look today. I want to see what you are doing today. I don't want to see what you have eaten today. I want to see where you have gone today. I like to use Instagram as a vehicle to showing you some of the zanier things I do and think throughout my days. My life isn't inherently exciting, but sometimes something just happens that perfectly encapsulates the kind of day that I am having. And hey, sometimes I like to show off my mug too, just to tease the fans a little bit. But I want my photos to feel natural, like a spur of the moment, this is a bit of fun kind of way, not manufactured like some 'outfit of the day' post that definitively has a lot of people hanging off the edge of their seat for. "What is Rhys wearing today? Oooh #HisCalvins? How exciting! Just like yesterday!" Maybe I am alone in all this vitriol aimed towards outfit sharing. Maybe people really do care what other people are wearing that day. But irrespective, I shall endeavour to continue using Instagram for what it is truly meant for: pictures of my sister's dog.

#Rhys

P.S. I said Instagram nine times in this post. Ooh, ten!

The girl with two breasts.

"Personalities are the framework to a women's breasts." - Rhys van Beurden

I don't even know what that means. But I do like me some breasts. And do you know what I hate? I hate it when an attractive lady takes a photo of themselves, and it isn't at some ridiculous angle designed to give me (and my fellow internet perverts) a glean of their magnificent mammaries. Isn't that what cameras were designed to do? Who even cares about anything else? Do women have faces? I feel as though they sure don't want us to know that they do, not when they have those two melons attached to their front. I know absolutely nothing about photography outside of the fact that my phone has a camera attached to the back of it that I use to take photos of women's breasts. But I have been lead to believe that there is a particular camera model currently on the market that in named the GoPro. I assume that it is named as such because the girls who use them (what guy would use one?) are attempting to go professional in their soft core porn career. What better way to audition then by highlighting your wares with a cheap, yet high quality camera? You go, girl!

I love a bit of variety in my breasts as well. I mean, there is always plenty of regular lingerie photographs being taken (thank you, Victoria's Secret!), and hell, a short trip down the M1 will give me access to dozens of women wearing barely-there bikinis. However, with there being a steady upswing of people absolutely, 100% legitimately interested in going to the gym, this has given rise to the gym selfie, which, naturally, occurs when the girl is in a sports bra, because, BREASTS! Lorna Jane, I salute you. And sometimes a girl will just forego the usual B.S. and simply go to the gym in a bra because, you guessed it, BREASTS! Let's be honest here, a man's life is centered around his getting a peak at as many breasts as possible, and all I can say is ladies, you are doing a fantastic job and leaving no one disappointed.


I'm thirsty.

I'm sure you have all seen the above image; it has been floating around for a while now. I think it perfectly highlights the broad distinction between societal standards from the time I was born to the present. Caitlin Stasey, some Z-grade actress who was once on Neighbours or something, recently opened up a website designed to empower (volunteering) women by literally showing off photographs of themselves naked. I'm not even joking. I mean, I usually miss the point of feminist related complaints and rants and stuff because I don't care, but let's face it, it piqued my interest because there was boobs involved. Doing some vague research that amounted to me mainly looking at the pictures on the website, I was confused to learn that the entire point of the website was women empowerment, mainly the reclamation of the female body. I can't help but feel as though this is a very backwards way in which to get this message across.

As I have so eloquently put it across throughout this post, men like naked women. I understand that the point of the website is to put across this sense of empowerment of womanhood with wonderful tales from several women, but that message becomes so muddied when it is surrounded by pictures of these women then naked. Is the message that women have become objectified by men throughout the ages, so let us show them by being naked? Isn't that why men objectify women, because they love looking at them naked? I don't even know! The more I think about it, the more in circles I feel I am going, and the more confused I get. Let's be honest, would anyone give half a toss if this didn't have pictures of Stasey herself, primarily because of Australia's odd fascination with Z-grade celebrities? Furthermore, could the girl come across as any more petulant throughout her interview? Just whining about some imaginary slight against her from men the world over. Girl, grow up. Stop picking fights with Bindi Irwin and every man ever. And put some clothes on. Or don't. Whatever.


xoxo A Man

The technocalyptic cybergeddon.

Opinions are like arseholes. And my arsehole is right. But you also have an arsehole. It smells like shit, and I don't care about it, but you keep the shit flowing. Why? I don't know. Because people care? No, they don't.

Politics is a massively divisive element of society. Everyone has an opinion about politics, even if they don't care about politics, because not caring about politics is an opinion in of itself. And unfortunately, people really like to talk to about their opinion of politics for some reason. "OMG, I DON'T EVEN CARE!". Yeah, okay, maybe not you. Our opinions can be informed, uniformed, biased, self-developed, or family driven. Look, I have a political leaning, I'm not gonna lie. I like to look at the flaws of one party under a microscope, and turn a blind eye to more questionable actions of the other party. But I don't think politics should come down to a, "I chose this party for life!" kind of thing, but choosing a party that CURRENTLY best represents your opinions and thoughts of the path in which your country should follow.   It just so happens that every time I have had the great honour of voting in a member of my electorate, it so happens I have chosen one party in particular. It speaks to me that weaknesses of the other party that they appear so inept. But I digress, that is not why I hear today, to beat my political chest. No, this is far removed from that. Instead, I come to do my usual rant, and complain about everything.

In my days, I have witnessed many an arguments over politics. I have witnessed the dissolution of friendships over something as silly, and personal, as political opinions. And for what? A dick measuring contest over politics? Please. Why do people feel the need to constantly tell other people about their political opinions? Those people who will constantly link you to VERY biased articles that support "their" argument, constantly shoving it down your throat. I don't very often bring up politics. It creates more tension than a person-less bag on a train. BAGS WITHOUT PEOPLE DON'T MAKE SENSE! So why does everyone else like to do this? I don't want to argue with people over freakin' politics, and hearing me mumble noncommittal responses surely can't be fun for you? Are people trying to create arguments? Have a hearty discussion about how right they about politics? "Convert" someone to their politics? What is it? Obviously, we live in a digital age. This enables a further platform for these political junkies to beat the dead horse of politics. Linking opinion articles that totally reflect the "right" opinion, all the while making outlandish statements like Politician X is the new Hitler, and we have to fight the system.



Fight the system, yo!

These articles only serve to stroke your ego. For some reason. You are not informing people of anything. They don't create discussion. The internet is now solely used for pornography, photos of cats, and people yelling at each other about things from behind a keyboard. By posting these articles, you are attracting two different kind of people: people who agree with you, and people who don't (duh?). The former are gonna high five you over how awesome that article is and totally represents the truth, and the latter are gonna bitch and call you an idiot about how wrong you are. Why are either of these outcomes desirable? And yes, I do realise the irony in bitching about people posting about opinion rants, as I write an opinion rant. But this blog is mainly for me to bitch about things that annoy me, and I don't care for healthy discussion on it. It is what it is, SO DAMN THE HYPOCRISY! I just think, if we are gonna truly discuss something, discuss it without the aid of some obviously biased article totally backing up your point. You can't whine about the media being unfair as you post links to it. For every article that you find that argues one point, is another article that totally argues the opposite point. Think about it, you dick. Reading these articles is fine, and hey, having discussions on the comments of said article is fine too. The people commenting there are there for a reason, not windows shopping on their Facebook and catching a glimpse of the opinions of others. So having said that, if people want to have a healthy discussion with me on this, comment below (hey, I did say damn the hypocrisy...).

Xoxo Kony Rubbott, Leader of Laboral

My day can beat up your day.

"Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people." - Eleanor Roosevelt
"Really small minds discuss how their day was better than mine." - Rhys van Beurden

Corona's are garbage. I used to think it was all that and a bag of potato chips when I was first getting into beer drinking, but have since acquired other tastes. But as far as beers goes, it is a fine beer, and if someone offers me one, I will certainly take it. I don't, however, like Corona's ad campaigns, mainly their "From Where You'd Rather Be" campaigns. Why? Simply put, I don't like being told, unequivocally, that I desire to be somewhere I am not, when, in fact, I don't desire to be there at all. I'm perfectly fine where I am right now, in my cramped cave in my parent's basement. If I wanted to be somewhere else, I would go there. And I don't really want to go to Mexico full stop. It's never been on my radar. I mean, Mexicans are always trying to leave the place, and Corona are trying to convince me that I WANT to be there? Puh-lease.

Furthermore, why are all the ads set in the afternoon with a setting sun? Is the rest of the day really boring in those places? Because I am pretty sure the sun doesn't set ALL day in these places. It has to rise and stay risen, and set and stay set at some point too. The things people are doing in these videos is always really dull as well. Like sitting around doing nothing and looking at the sun isn't all that fun. I can do that here, except it doesn't cost me a lot of money to travel around the world to be in some place where I'll probably get shot. It just ain't worth it. Also, that would require me to go outside, and that notion is scary.

I didn't actually come here to talk exclusively about Corona though. My main grief is that people are using that template to brag about their own day. Taking a photo of yourself at the beach coupled with the tagline "My day is better than yours" is just a wankfest. I don't care about your day, any less than I care about going to the beach. Don't presume going to the beach automatically scales you above whatever I am doing anyway. Look, you may be having a fun day, and I may be having a shit day. But that doesn't mean I want to here you trumpeting on about your bloody tip top day on your social media account. To be perfectly frank, if it ain't happening to me, I don't care. And really, is being at the beach that bloody great? Because I can go to the beach if I so choose to, but I don't choose to. The beach bores me. And no matter how many times you convince yourself there is going to be a whole heap of beach babes in bikinis to ogle, it's usually mothers with their kids. No one wants to see that. Sorry mothers. Also kids I guess?

I honestly don't know when the phrase "My day is better than yours" or other iterations came into public usage, but it should piss off to that hole it came from. It feels as though it is another one of those terrible internet tags that came into public usage for no apparent reason other than to see how far people can push it before other people started kneecapping them over it. Do I even need to mention YOLO? Yet, I think believing that people are trolling is giving them too much credit, and that people use those terms in a genuine way. Which I just find sad.

Xoxo TED

No points for originality.

Ahhh, mothers. Perpetually retarded, ignorant and self important. Is there anything more annoying than a woman who thinks being a mother is a unique accomplishment? I get it, it's nice for you. You had a kid, something that may not ever happen again in your life, and if it does, it won't be very often. But for everyone else on the outside looking in (or just me, I don't know), don't care. Do not give a shit. I don't care about your kid's first smile, any less than I care about your kid's first time picking his nose. There have been 100 billion people ever to have lived on this planet, so yours is not special to me. If, for some bizarre reason, I actually do care about the first time your kid shit his nappy, I'll ask you about it. Because sometimes people do care. But one person is not every person.

Social media has really mucked up my latent inability to give a shit about other people because it constantly puts those people IN MY FACE. And I am not critical of that, because that is obviously the point of social media. But it also gives those people a platform to throw the things they think are important my way, and frankly, they are very rarely important to me. Scrap booking your kid's life is a noble and fine gesture, but it is should also a private one. I don't want to see a picture of your son's swollen testicles the moment after you gave birth to him because that is none of my business. I don't need a reminder of the fact that you are a mother over and over. I don't like condescending posts about how no one knows true hard work until you have been a mother, because I am pretty sure I am handicapped in that respect. I don't appreciate being told I will forever be incapable of understanding true hard work. Just because I can't do what ANY WOMAN CAN DO (not withstanding those woman who are incapable of having children, of which I do apologise to) doesn't mean I work any less hard than those woman with functioning reproductive organs. I work two jobs and I go to university, but because I don't wipe the boogers off've the nose of a kid I accidentally had means I am some lazy person. It's an unfair assessment. Who made you king judge over who works hard? Tell me, are you looking after your kids ALL THE TIME? Do they go to childcare? Are those childcare workers not hard workers because even though they look after YOUR kids, they are not THEIR kids? Give me a break.

And another thing. Don't refer to yourself in the third person as 'Mummy'. It's not cute. You aren't my mother so unless you taught your infant how to access Facebook, it also doesn't make sense. Mummy is tired you say? Point me in the direction of someone who isn't tired and I'll ask them their secret. Perhaps if you didn't send your kids to bed at 5 in the afternoon they wouldn't be up the next morning at 4, and you wouldn't find your own sleep pattern so royally screwed to the point where you are always tired. Being a parent is exhausting? Teach your kids to behave better and stop being uncontrollable shits so that you don't feel the need to follow them around everywhere to ensure they don't break something. Babies sleep, shit, cry or eat. Figure it out! You put them in a pram when you want to go somewhere, or you leave them in something to sleep in when you are at home. And speaking prams, why do you all feel the need to get THE BIGGEST PRAM EVER?! I'm serious. Your infant is tiny. You don't need a tank to push through a food court. There is not mortars going off in the background. You will survive with a much smaller pram taking up much less space.

I'm not a parent. Maybe I won't understand parents until I am one. But I don't like parents. I recently had a discussion with a good friend of mine who did just recently become a parent for the first time and we discussed this. He appreciated the fact that I hated hearing about people's children, but just said to him, it was different. It was his son. He did, however, concede that whilst everything his son did may seem important to him, others wouldn't care. And that's all I want people to know. Your baby is special. To you. Not to me. Probably not to 90% of the people you know. So don't spend all day telling me about them. I didn't care before, and I won't care after.

Xoxo Oink

2013 through my ears.

2013 was a great year for music. As you probably know, I get pretty passionate about music. I am not overly good at summarising my thoughts on music, as I feel as though it is a thing some people get, and other people don't get. However, I am always the first person to rail on someone else for having terrible taste in music, despite being greatly offended when someone does the same to me. But I don't even care! Hypocrisy bothers me not.This list is unequivocally the best music released this year. If you don't like the music contained therein, you are wrong. I don't want to hear arguments, it is what it is. So without further ado, I present to you...

10. Ra- Critical Mass

Ra have always been a fun band that just exuded melody all the while utilizing a strange mix of exotic sounds. They are the kind of band that I would describe as radio friendly, despite never achieving the kind of success they deserve. Critical Mass is a bubbly album, jumping around with an eclectic mix of different styles. It took me a little while to get into some of the tracks, due to these varying styles, but once I did, I can safely say that their new album (which I also helped to crowd fund) stands up to the quality to with which I am accustomed to from the band. They sound focused and tight, with Sahaj Ticotin using some amazingly soaring vocals, and also some darker, angrier tones. There are some incredibly poppy tunes such as ecstasy throughout, which I swear has a Katy Perry sample at the start, and then Through The Valley and Brutiful are much heavier, raring to go style tracks. Great stuff.
Songs to listen to: Ecstasy, Through the Valley

9. The Dillinger Escape Plan - One of Us Is the Killer

Has anyone ever seen Dillinger live? A perfect representation of the music they perform, their shows are batshit, and often involve blood, fire, and like jumping or something. The music is frenetic and in-your-face, aggro and steam rolling, and yet their latest album contains a much stronger melodic nature to it than previous releases. Look no further than the title track, which actually has some soft croons throughout. Vocalist Greg Puciato is willing to let the nature of the song direct his vocal style, and is willing to quieten down where necessary, only to explode moments later. It shows a stronger sense of control the band now exhibits, and I appreciate their music all the more for it.
Songs to listen to: One of Us Is the Killer, Crossburner

8. Cloudkicker - Subsume

I discovered Cloudkicker a few years back, after the great Devin Townsend mentioned his like for them, and haven't looked back. Written and performed by one man, Ben Sharp, in his own home, it is soft and wandering, progressive and expressive. I often find that vocal-less music gives me an opportunity to ponder my own thoughts as the music creeps on by, the haunting melodies of the tracks being my company. Despite being described as soft, Subsume returns to a less gentle variant of Sharp's music, similar to the first album of his I heard, Beacons, with less of the acoustic sections of some of his more recent work. It's hard to determine what are the best tracks, as there are only four long ones, and they just bleed into the next. It is the kind of album that must be listened to as a whole to be appreciated.

7. Trivium - Vengeance Falls

Anyone who knows me, knows I love Trivium. After enjoying In Waves, despite feeling it was a little bit of a step down of their magnum opus Shogun, I was let down even further with their new release Vengeance Falls. As a whole, the album feels simpler, and less harsh. The production is crisp and clean, and the vocals borderline pop at time. It wasn't what I loved about Trivium! I loved the anger in songs, the harsh vocals, and the interesting themes and metaphors of the lyrics, along with the intricately written music. Their last two albums seem to have been following a simpler path. Why is it still on my top ten albums list? Well, Trivium is still Trivium, despite their differences. I hold Trivium to such a high standard, my first impressions often fall short because of the sheer magnitude of what I was expecting. The songs are still good, just not as good as I want them to be. The Dave Draiman production does sound overly clean at times, but it is still a well produced album with many good tracks, that after my initial disappointment, grew on me. I like the album a lot more now than I did at first, so it definitively creeped up on my list.
Songs to listen to: Brave This Storm, Wake (The End is Nigh)

6. Hacride - Back To Where You've Never Been

I had never heard of Hacride before seeing the recommendation on my most frequented metal website, Metalsucks. With comparisons to fellow frogs Gojira, I figured I'd give their latest album, Back To Where You've Never Been, a listen, and boy was I not disappointed. This is progressive heavy metal at it's finest, with a crisp and powerful production, that avoids being too clean and digital. The members play music that is neither show off-ey nor simple, just interesting and well constructed. At eight songs long, it doesn't overstay it's welcome, and each song sounds necessary to the album as a whole. The intro to album opener Introversion just draws you in for the appropriate amount of time, before spitting you out with some thumping music, and the album just never lets up from there.
Songs to listen to: Introversion, Overcome

5. Mercenary - Through Our Darkest Days

Mercenary's second album after a colossal line-up shift, I was mildly cautious when approaching. Their previous album, Metamorphosis, was neither as well written as their older efforts, nor as well performed. Now full time vocalist, Rene Pedersen (after taking over a split vocal duty role), failed to make the position his own, and struggled with the more melodic singing aspects of the band. Not an issue this time around. Having improved his voice exponentially, he doesn't hold anything back, and the band now seems tighter and more focused than ever as a result of it. The catchy riffs and great vocals lead to many hooky, anthemic choruses, that almost having you fist-pumping along with the tunes. Each song is powerful and uplifting, and makes for a much better product.
Songs to listen to: A New Dawn, Through Our Darkest Days, Dreamstate Machine

4. Soilwork - The Living Infinite

This mammoth two-part album is some of Soilwork's best work to date. A big ol' slab of Gothenburg metal, this is the band's first album since Peter Wichers second exit from the band, but his absence is hardly noticed as the band continues their return to form after 2011's The Panic Broadcast. Starting off with the thrashing track Spectrum of Eternity, this album just does not let up, ripping through tracks such as The Momentary Bliss and Let The First Wave Rise, all the while never getting too far from the melodious moments I have come to enjoy from the band, with both parts of the title tracks being real stand outs. Bjorn "Speed" Strid's vocals are stronger than ever, and listeners need not to look any further than Parasite Blues to see how well the man can truly sing. No autotune here folks! After such an ambitious project, it will be interesting to see how the band intend to top it!
Songs to listen to: The Living Infinite I and II, Drowning With Silence

3. Leprous - Coal

This new album from Leprous was an amazingly perplexing album to listen to for the first time. On the back of their most recent album Bilateral, this album took a much different approach, instead preferring to go for a much more "severe" album, not in terms of music, but in terms of tone. The slower music coupled with some seriously gorgeous vocals creates such a dark sound to the music, with each song being so mellow and dreary. As a listener, I found this very hard to get into initially, but with each listen I was drawn closer and closer into the music. Each song just resonated with me so deeply, and credit must be given to the vocalist Einar Solberg, who seriously puts in one of the most amazing vocal performances I have heard in some time. Some seriously beautiful music.
Songs to listen to: The Valley, Echo

2. Tesseract - Altered State

Just as the above album, the true strength of Tesseract's second album is that of the vocals. Armed with third(!) vocalist Ashe O'Hara, the band has really released a poppier, yet just as heavy, album than that of their debut One, with the album itself being presented as one song, broken into four parts, broken into ten songs. Now, the idea of this being considered as one song seem a little strange to me, considering there is some very obvious pauses and ends to certain tracks, but who am I to argue? It is a very focused album, containing the djent style music that Tesseract helped pioneer, whilst also incorporating strong elements of progressive rock. The vocals weave in and out of the music as another instrument, with O'Hara having mastered the different tones of his voice and how to best implement them into the music itself. Hopefully he stays with the band, because he is by far their best vocalist thus far.
Song to listen to: Resist, Nocturne, Singularity

1. The Ocean - Pelagial

Here it is, the number one album of the year. After discovering The Ocean in between their double albums about Christianity, Heliocentric and Anthropocentic, I find them suitably interesting and also enjoyable to listen to. This was a thinking man's band, with incredibly well written lyrics that made you stop and think. Fast forward two years, and the band began teasing a new release. A little bit of history on the album: originally written and recorded as a single instrumental piece split into 11 parts, conceptualised as mirroring the journey from the ocean's surface to the deepest depths, the music gets continually darker with a more claustrophobic feel to it as it goes on. At the time, the band's vocalist Loic Rossetti had a disorder that prevented him from recording any vocals regardless, hence the decision to write an instrumental piece. However, after they finished recording the music, Loic recovered from his disorder, and the band decided to write lyrics and record vocals for the album after all. This lead to the album being released in two versions: the original instrumental one, and the newer vocalised one. Lyrically, Pelagial is a physiological journey into our own subconscious; following the plotline of the 1979 film Stalker. Main songwriter and band founder Robin Staps describes the topic as below:

In the movie, 3 men are travelling towards the heart of a zone at the center of which one’s wishes are said to come true. But the closer they get, the more insecure they become with regards to what they should actually wish for, and fear arises that even those wishes which they have no control over, which they may not even be aware of, might come true. The protagonists are confronted with their own nature, the true essence of their characters, and this essentially leads them to their own demise. This topic is the lyrical backbone of Pelagial.

An interesting concept to say the last that plays in beautifully with the theme of the music. Some songs are slow and trudging, but sometimes there are sudden temp changes and songs feature quick and unexpected sections, all the while with samples of underwater sounds mixed in between. Sometimes you hear riffs you heard 30 minutes earlier. It's just so well written and complete. I can not stress enough to everyone that they should check out this album, as it is the best release in years.
Songs to listen to: Into the Uncanny, Signals of Anxiety, Let Them Believe

Some honourable mentions include -
Chimaira - Crown of Phantoms
Dream Theater - Dream Theater
Ulcerate - Vermis
Protest the Hero - Volition
Nekrogoblikon - Power
Christian Alvestam - Self 2.0 (not technically an album, hence the miss)
Bruce Soord with Jonas Renske - Wisdom of Crowds
Stone Sour - House of Gold and Bones - Part 2
Hypocrisy - End of Disclosure
Katatonia - Uncrowned and Dethroned

xoxo Rhysy Rhys and Funky Beats