Without spending much time thinking about it, I'd say Geico has the most varied television commercials of any company. Case in point: here is a list of YouTube links for dogs chasing cats, a guinea-pig-powered computer, that announcer guy from the movies, a gecko with an English accent, inappropriately timed good news, and a commercial made in 15 minutes. For a company, this is a good thing. They're attacking the human public from many angles and therefore growing their audience. It won't affect losers who don't drive (me), but being varied is, ultimately, beneficial for business.
I did not include the Geico Cavemen commercials in that previous list because I find them absolutely abhorrent. There's a point at which a joke becomes tired; the Geico Cavemen joke, at this point, has not only become tired, but it has died of exhaustion and is decomposing before our very eyes. The newest atrocity is the series of commercials starring Washington Redskins' All-Pro linebacker Brian Orakpo (if you're a football fan, you've seen these commercials approximately 4,294,967,295 times). No one actually knows who Brian Orakpo is (or, at least, no one recognizes the man) because Geico feels the need to mention his name twelve times in each commercial in which he stars.
It is because of all of this that I've taken the liberty of scripting (hopefully the last) Geico Caveman commercial with Brian Orakpo (and, again hopefully, the last caveman commercial):
Setting: A room painted burgundy with the words "Brian Orakpo" painted in gold on it. A blinking neon sign with the words "Brian Orakpo" and an arrow pointing at Brian Orakpo is present. Standing next to Mr. Orakpo (obviously in his "Orakpo" shirt) is the Geico Caveman (in a shirt that says "I'm with Brian Orakpo ->" (à la "I'm with Stupid ->") with the arrow point at Mr. Orakpo).
Caveman: Brian Orakpo?
Brian: Yes, I'm Brian Orakpo.
Caveman: The Brian Orakpo?
Brian: Yes, The Brian Orakpo.
Caveman: Brian Orakpo
Brian: Brian Orakpo
Caveman: Brian Orakpo
Brian: Brian Orakpo
Caveman: Brian Orakpo
Brian: Brian Orakpo
Caveman: Brian Orakpo
Brian: Brian Orakpo
Caveman: Brian Orakpo
Brian: Brian Orakpo
Caveman: Brian Orakpo
Brian: Brian Orakpo
Caveman: Brian Orakpo
Brian: Brian Orakpo
Announcer: Brian Orakpo, I mean Geico: Fifteen minutes could save you up to 15% on Brian Orakpo. I mean car insurance Orakpo.
29 January 2012
22 January 2012
Complaint #020: Fascination with Celebrities
[We're going to pretend that missing last week was my version of a SOPA/PIPA blackout, but I won't be complaining about SOPA/PIPA here.]
This post is likely going to be incredibly hypocritical because even I find myself fascinated with the lives of people who are more famous than I (read: pretty much anyone). I find people's fascination with celebrities fascinating....and depressing.
We, as humans, are given one life on this Earth (as a fleshy meatbag; we're going to have something a lot bigger on which to focus when we return as souls). The fact that we would spend any time entranced by someone else's is almost laughable. Let me first qualify by saying that our lives should be spent focused on others. This is not a contradiction: we need to be spending our lives making others' lives better, not sitting around looking at others.
Let me make a distinction as to what I mean: celebrities are people we don't know (to a large extent; some people actually know celebrities, but my focus is on people who are fascinated by people they've never met). I don't think anything positive can come out of focusing our time and energies on lives we cannot affect. We should be using those resources on positively affecting someone's life (or, secondly, our own). Kim Kardashian is not going to have a positive turn in her life because you watched the television show detailing her life. Spending that time to feed someone, fellowship (that's a nice word for "hang out") with someone, do work, worship, pray, etc. will definitely have a positive effect. It's no wonder that celebrities are often called "idols" because they certainly are idols in our lives.
What's worse is that contemporary celebrities are often famous because they simply exist. At one point in time, I'd like to think famous people were men and women of valor, courage, and determinism (by that I mean they are determined (focused on a goal), not that they enjoy probabilities of 1). When we look at people like the aforementioned Ms. Kardashian (whether she's "Miss" or "Mrs." is non-deterministic), we see a person who is famous simply because she exists (or because she had a sex tape, but do we not realize how many people have sex? (and sadly, how much of it is available to view?)).
We are living out our fantasies through these people. We subscribe to their twitter or facebook feeds (or Google+ if celebrities are on there and subscribable, I'm actually not sure). So I say, live out your own life and focus on making that as good as it can be; anything preventing you from doing this is not worth it. I think this is what we're scared of: that our life isn't what we want it to be.
Now please don't feel like this is a personal attack on you or even a specific group of people. It is a problem with all humankind. The person writing this blog watches Jersey Shore (funniest show on television) and spent a lot of his time, back in the day, playing The Sims (which is living out your fantasies in a digital life, even more pathetic). This is something we all need to work on.
This post is likely going to be incredibly hypocritical because even I find myself fascinated with the lives of people who are more famous than I (read: pretty much anyone). I find people's fascination with celebrities fascinating....and depressing.
We, as humans, are given one life on this Earth (as a fleshy meatbag; we're going to have something a lot bigger on which to focus when we return as souls). The fact that we would spend any time entranced by someone else's is almost laughable. Let me first qualify by saying that our lives should be spent focused on others. This is not a contradiction: we need to be spending our lives making others' lives better, not sitting around looking at others.
Let me make a distinction as to what I mean: celebrities are people we don't know (to a large extent; some people actually know celebrities, but my focus is on people who are fascinated by people they've never met). I don't think anything positive can come out of focusing our time and energies on lives we cannot affect. We should be using those resources on positively affecting someone's life (or, secondly, our own). Kim Kardashian is not going to have a positive turn in her life because you watched the television show detailing her life. Spending that time to feed someone, fellowship (that's a nice word for "hang out") with someone, do work, worship, pray, etc. will definitely have a positive effect. It's no wonder that celebrities are often called "idols" because they certainly are idols in our lives.
What's worse is that contemporary celebrities are often famous because they simply exist. At one point in time, I'd like to think famous people were men and women of valor, courage, and determinism (by that I mean they are determined (focused on a goal), not that they enjoy probabilities of 1). When we look at people like the aforementioned Ms. Kardashian (whether she's "Miss" or "Mrs." is non-deterministic), we see a person who is famous simply because she exists (or because she had a sex tape, but do we not realize how many people have sex? (and sadly, how much of it is available to view?)).
We are living out our fantasies through these people. We subscribe to their twitter or facebook feeds (or Google+ if celebrities are on there and subscribable, I'm actually not sure). So I say, live out your own life and focus on making that as good as it can be; anything preventing you from doing this is not worth it. I think this is what we're scared of: that our life isn't what we want it to be.
Now please don't feel like this is a personal attack on you or even a specific group of people. It is a problem with all humankind. The person writing this blog watches Jersey Shore (funniest show on television) and spent a lot of his time, back in the day, playing The Sims (which is living out your fantasies in a digital life, even more pathetic). This is something we all need to work on.
07 January 2012
Complaint #019: The English Language and Other Related Topics, Part II: "I Could Care Less"
This is meant to be more of an informative post, rather than a complaint (although I will complain because it is warranted). For those of you who fall victim to its grasp, consider this a friendly, informative post (or reminder) because I myself, yes I, was once in the same place as you and freeing myself has made my life exponentially better (OK, that was a bit overdramatic).
I, of course, am talking about the phrase "I could care less". Without exception, whenever someone says this phrase they actually mean "I couldn't care less" (you know, the exact opposite). I don't know who started the trend of dropping the "n't", but the phrase makes very little sense without it. If you haven't figured out why by this point, let me explain: when someone says they "could care less", they mean "I don't care at all". However, if they can care less, they have some amount of care (because there is some amount that can be subtracted from there care (could care less)). When people say the opposite of what they mean (and aren't being sarcastic), words start to have no meaning. This is why pancake unequivocal box fetter yesterday leader.
Alright, now it's time to complain: over the last week or two, I've heard this phrase several (hundred) times. The solution is not always as easy as informing the speaker of their mistake. Remember those podcasts I told you about two weeks ago when I complained about Tim Tebow (the headline)? You remember that I listen to three sports podcasts a day? The people on these podcasts are theoretically professional radio personalities. They most likely have a degree in Communications. These are the people that should have a better grasp on the English language than me. However, they seem to have some sort of infatuation with the phrase. I find this egregious.
So, yes, I could care less if you read this post and comment...because I do care (even if it's just a bit).
I, of course, am talking about the phrase "I could care less". Without exception, whenever someone says this phrase they actually mean "I couldn't care less" (you know, the exact opposite). I don't know who started the trend of dropping the "n't", but the phrase makes very little sense without it. If you haven't figured out why by this point, let me explain: when someone says they "could care less", they mean "I don't care at all". However, if they can care less, they have some amount of care (because there is some amount that can be subtracted from there care (could care less)). When people say the opposite of what they mean (and aren't being sarcastic), words start to have no meaning. This is why pancake unequivocal box fetter yesterday leader.
Alright, now it's time to complain: over the last week or two, I've heard this phrase several (hundred) times. The solution is not always as easy as informing the speaker of their mistake. Remember those podcasts I told you about two weeks ago when I complained about Tim Tebow (the headline)? You remember that I listen to three sports podcasts a day? The people on these podcasts are theoretically professional radio personalities. They most likely have a degree in Communications. These are the people that should have a better grasp on the English language than me. However, they seem to have some sort of infatuation with the phrase. I find this egregious.
So, yes, I could care less if you read this post and comment...because I do care (even if it's just a bit).
01 January 2012
Complaint #018: Celebrating a New Year
The time surrounding the start of a new year is one filled with hope and enthusiasm for great things to come in the oncoming year. Hope and enthusiasm are great things. Celebrating a new year, however, is fairly irrational. I'm all for the looking ahead to a brighter future, but what does January 1st have to do with this?
Let us first look at the date itself. January 1st, so far as I know and having done absolutely no research, has no significance whatsoever. Sure, it begins a new month, and this particular month has been deemed the first of our Gregorian calendar. Save for that latter fact, I find January 1st no different from March 1st or July 1st or December 1st (and any of the other months I left out). So the only thing that makes this day special from eleven others is that some guys, thousands of years ago, said January was the first moth of the year. Also, the thing that sets these twelve apart from the other 353 days that appear in every other year seems to be the same: some dudes a long time ago wanted to divide up a solar year to twelve approximately equal parts (for easier tracking of days, I assume). I don't know about you, but I try not to listen to anyone older than fifty years old, so why should I listen to something people said thousands of years ago? I kid, of course, but it all seems incredibly random.
Now, I'm not one to complain and not offer solutions/alternatives (except for all those times I do). In this case, I will: if we are going to base our system of dates on how our planet travels around our sun, why not start the year on a day with significance in respect to that? What I am, of course, referring to are the equinoxes and solstices. Why does our year start twelve days after the winter solstice? Why can't the winter solstice be the first day of the year? It seems logical. Also, the length of sunlight each day would increase until the middle of the year and then would decrease as the year comes to an end (Unless you live in that magical upside-down world known as the "Southern Hemisphere"). (Somewhat related tangent: We should also throw the leap day at the end of the year (or the beginning) because there is no reason to randomly insert it into the middle of the year.)
The one good thing that New Year's Day has going for it is the way people respond to it. People feel a sense of hope for a brighter future in the coming year. They see it as a chance to better themselves. I love that people look forward to a better future and I love that people want to better themselves (and sometimes they actually do it), but why do we need an excuse to do this? Why do we need a special day to tell us to do this? We should have this attitude daily. There is a brighter future ahead; you should better yourself every day (I should, too). If we absolutely need a day in the year to remind us of this, we already have the perfect day: Easter. Easter is the celebration of new beginnings and a new creation (also, bunnies and hidden, brightly-colored eggs). This is the perfect representation of the things we try to attribute to that random day that starts our calendar year.
If you've also read my entry on birthdays, you may be sensing a bit of a theme. I don't like celebrations. This is true........for random, fairly meaningless events. And do you know why? We should be celebrating every day of our lives. Every day we get an opportunity at a brand new day to make our lives better than they were yesterday. When we accomplish this, we should find joy and happiness in that, not when we turn a page on a calendar.
Additional side note: New Year's celebrations also suck for single people who are fairly happy with their lives, but are taught to be miserable because they didn't kiss someone after some lighted sphere descended on a pole in New York City (I will not use the phrase "ball drop" so as to squelch any immature testicle jokes).
Let us first look at the date itself. January 1st, so far as I know and having done absolutely no research, has no significance whatsoever. Sure, it begins a new month, and this particular month has been deemed the first of our Gregorian calendar. Save for that latter fact, I find January 1st no different from March 1st or July 1st or December 1st (and any of the other months I left out). So the only thing that makes this day special from eleven others is that some guys, thousands of years ago, said January was the first moth of the year. Also, the thing that sets these twelve apart from the other 353 days that appear in every other year seems to be the same: some dudes a long time ago wanted to divide up a solar year to twelve approximately equal parts (for easier tracking of days, I assume). I don't know about you, but I try not to listen to anyone older than fifty years old, so why should I listen to something people said thousands of years ago? I kid, of course, but it all seems incredibly random.
Now, I'm not one to complain and not offer solutions/alternatives (except for all those times I do). In this case, I will: if we are going to base our system of dates on how our planet travels around our sun, why not start the year on a day with significance in respect to that? What I am, of course, referring to are the equinoxes and solstices. Why does our year start twelve days after the winter solstice? Why can't the winter solstice be the first day of the year? It seems logical. Also, the length of sunlight each day would increase until the middle of the year and then would decrease as the year comes to an end (Unless you live in that magical upside-down world known as the "Southern Hemisphere"). (Somewhat related tangent: We should also throw the leap day at the end of the year (or the beginning) because there is no reason to randomly insert it into the middle of the year.)
The one good thing that New Year's Day has going for it is the way people respond to it. People feel a sense of hope for a brighter future in the coming year. They see it as a chance to better themselves. I love that people look forward to a better future and I love that people want to better themselves (and sometimes they actually do it), but why do we need an excuse to do this? Why do we need a special day to tell us to do this? We should have this attitude daily. There is a brighter future ahead; you should better yourself every day (I should, too). If we absolutely need a day in the year to remind us of this, we already have the perfect day: Easter. Easter is the celebration of new beginnings and a new creation (also, bunnies and hidden, brightly-colored eggs). This is the perfect representation of the things we try to attribute to that random day that starts our calendar year.
If you've also read my entry on birthdays, you may be sensing a bit of a theme. I don't like celebrations. This is true........for random, fairly meaningless events. And do you know why? We should be celebrating every day of our lives. Every day we get an opportunity at a brand new day to make our lives better than they were yesterday. When we accomplish this, we should find joy and happiness in that, not when we turn a page on a calendar.
Additional side note: New Year's celebrations also suck for single people who are fairly happy with their lives, but are taught to be miserable because they didn't kiss someone after some lighted sphere descended on a pole in New York City (I will not use the phrase "ball drop" so as to squelch any immature testicle jokes).
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)