Capital of Nasty Electronic Magazine
Volume II, Issue 37, Year AD MCMXCVII
Monday, September 29th, 1997
ISSN 1482-0471
-------------------------------------------

"The Western countries might invade you one day because of your sun. 
They don't have sun to produce solar energy, and Libya is a sunny 
country and is the best placed on the planet towards the sun. Sand 
is a raw material and the Libyan sand is of high quality. They might 
colonize you for your watermelons, which are excellent because of 
the quality of Libya's sand. Libya has more than 1,200 km (750 
miles) of coast on the Mediterranean. They might colonize you for 
that. The Libyan dates cannot be matched. They might want to 
colonize you for that. The camel is also a reason for them to invade 
Libya. The camel is unique because he can go for months without 
drinking. He also has good milk."
  -- Muammar Gaddafi

-------------------------------------------

Face Value  Accepting that the cat is blue without looking at why 
the cat is blue, or what pigment the blue on the cat is, or what 
kind of cat it is, or where the cat came from, or why the cat isn't 
green.
-- From the Devil Shat Dictionary, http://www.disobey.com

-------------------------------------------

1. Editorial 
2. Asian Flicks 
3. What I understood of an Indian movie 
4. Observations on the Box Citizen Ruth Came In 
5. Book of Profound Things 
-------------------------------------------

This week's Golden Testicle award:

FlyPower: Tapping the energy of Nature

http://www.flypower.com/main2.html

-------------------------------------------

1. Editorial

Welcome to Issue 37 of Capital of Nasty, as we slowly drift into an 
Indian summer. The nights are not humid and suffocating as before 
and the days are getting incredibly shorter, that little bit of sun 
that could shine through the day covered by thick gray clouds which 
promise rain and (not too far from now) snow. It's only September, 
but the stores are already stocked with Halloween material, and I am 
already shivering in fear of the hideous Country-style Christmas 
carols that will follow October, pouring out of the store's 
speakers. Hopefully I will not be there this year for the usual 
brainwashing. No, no Egg Nog. Sorry, long day. 

Rudi Chiarito wrote in regard of the GUI discussion from our last 
Editorial and has a few things to say about the "Privacy on the 
Internet" article, which proves that I am too paranoid and not too 
well informed:

Date sent: 16 Sep 97 14:29:33 +0100 
To: CoN Editorial 
From: Rudi Chiarito 
Subject: Re: Capital of Nasty Electronic Magazine II.36 

The answer to the rhetorical question demostrates that you are 
unsure about the true origins of the GUI. The development at Apple 
were the pioneers of stealing the GUI. Apple discovered the GUI when 
Steve Jobs and company were present for a demostration in 1979 of a 
machine developed in 1973 by Xerox PARC called the Alto.

Sad but true: the folks at the PARC Labs in Palo Alto also invented 
(among the others) laser printers and Ethernet boards (nowadays most 
networks in this world use Ethernet). Apparently Xerox managers were 
only interested in producing copiers, so they eventually got rid of 
those too-bright engineers. 

A video about demented managers worth watching is The Deathbed Vigil 
Party and other tales of digital angst by Dave Haynie, but 
unfortunately AFAIK it's no longer being produced. If you know a 
rabid Amiga user, chances are that you can borrow his copy, though. 

It takes a bright mind and years of work to come up with a great 
idea, but it also takes two minutes and an Economics degree to f*** 
it up. 


Privacy on the Internet

  by Leandro+ 

thought. After I registered the domain name CAPNASTY.ORG with 
Internic, my account in Finland, which is set as my e-mail address 
in their database, started to receive the first signs of spam. I'm 
not accusing Internic of giving my address to some spam 
list,>however I do find it a little strange that suddenly my 
mailboxes (electronic and non) are filled with junk. Microsoft keeps 
on 

Internic databases are public. Not just your email address, but your 
phone number and postal address are available on request (on Unix 
and other advanced operating systems, it's a matter of issuing one 
simple command). 

Leandro Asnaghi Nicastro (CAPNASTY-DOM)
322 (removed) Toronto, ON M4J 1P8 etc.

Billing Contact: Asnaghi-Nicastro, Leandro (LA672)
ordnael@FREENET.HUT.FI
+1-416-469-etc. etc. 

It's part of the standard procedure, which was agreed upon when men 
were real men, women were real women and Billy Boy didn't own the 
entire world yet. 

You might be a bit upset about it, but such data are vital when 
there are any problems with your domain (i.e. one of your machines 
gone crazy, someone from your domain attacking other hosts on the 
net, etc.). In such cases, the fundamental question is "who're you 
gonna call?" 

various Intranet solutions. Not only all of these have my name on 
it, but the words "President" or "CEO" are right after. My office e-
mail account, and now my account in Finland, receive spam of all 
sorts. I don't want to receive this stuff, I don't want companies to 
know about me, I don't want to find my mailboxes full of garbage. 

Don't register your domain, then. You have to face the music 
somehow. 

Don't get me wrong, I don't want to give the impression that I am 
another Unabomber that wants to break all links with society, and 
live in my little hut up in the mountains. It's just that I wish I 

What's wrong with that? I mean, as long as you have a leased line.. 
;) 

Cookies allow companies to invade your privacy and access your 
>phone number, credit card number, address, and other sensitive 

False. 

personal information and preferences. The next time you enter that 
website, they will know that you've been there before, what you've 
been looking at and perhaps what advertising to throw at you. 

That's the only true thing about cookies. What's wrong with them 
knowing where I have already been on their site?!?!? This way, e.g. 
they already know I'm a computer geek, so they won't bother me with 
diaper advertising. 

There is no such thing as the word "Private" on the Internet. Even 
your e-mails, have you been wondering who else is reading them? 

Oh, that's simple: my system administrators, every now and then. I'm 
simply amused. They even check my files: and I often download lots 
of worthless stuff, just to make them waste some time figuring out 
what the hell that new "sp-1.1.1.tar.gz" file is. Plus, it must be 
tough, when they have to browse through the >100 emails I receive 
every day. It serves them right :) 

Anyway, straight from Seneca's Letters to Lucilius: "No thing is as 
good as keeping silent, talking as little possible to others and as 
much as possible to themselves."


-------------------------------------------

2. Voting

In our last issue we had inserted a question in our signature file. 
The question asked: 

Who would win this fight? A Rottwieler, or a Rottwieler's weight in 
Chihuahuas? Now keep in mind that the Rottwieler is covered in steak 
sauce... please send in your vote.

Two votes came in claiming that the Chihuahuas would win, however 
the following reply was probably the best entry ever: 

Date sent: Tue, 16 Sep 1997 01:00:42 +0000 
To: CoN Editorial 
From: William 
Subject: Dead Rottweiler  

Rottweiler ain't got a chance. The first couple rats are going to 
die bloody deaths as the powerful jaws crush their ugly little 
skulls, but it won't take long for one to go for the balls if the 
rott's a male. If it's female, they take out the legs until she 
can't stand and rip her throat out then dine on the results. 

Those little rats are nasty in numbers. One on one, the rottweiler 
gets a crunchy little snack. 

Of course, if you catch them in the right mood, you might get a 
really weird orgy. Lot's of pain, or nobody feels a thing. Kind of a 
snow white and the dwarves type of thing. Except the dogs don't wear 
skirts to cover up the butt sniffing in front of the kids. 

And just how did some kinky story about a sexy chick and her seven 
sex slaves become a kids story? Maybe that's why I keep seeing 
searches for screwing midgets on Metaspy. It's probably a bunch of 
kids fresh from the family vacation down in mouseland wondering why 
their daddy kept looking at dopey that way. No, I didn't find 
anything interesting when I tried it. 

This started out as a vote, didn't it. The dwarves win. 

William


-------------------------------------------

3. Asian Flicks (not to be confused with "Asian Chicks")

  by IMPROV

Okay...so I've been watching a lot of Hong Kong made movies lately. 
Y'know Jackie Chan, John Woo...that kinda martial arts stuff. 
They're good, some are even great, but I have a few observations 
about Asian cinema I'd like to share with you: 

  Why do all Asian towns have chickens running around in the 
streets? 

  How much does a sheet metal shanty cost?...two, three million Yen? 

  If one can only afford to live in said shanty, how come there are 
really expensive speed boats (that are easily stolen) near by? 

  There is always a dieing uncle or father, an old man of some 
sorts. He gets killed. The nephew or son of this poor old bastard 
finds it neccessary to avenge his death. Why? The way I see it the 
murderer has done the old guy a favour...put him out of his misery. 
As for the nephew/son, he should be happy, do you know the costs of 
keeping old Asian men alive? Well I don't know the exact figures but 
I'm sure it can't be cheap to hire a young, attractive, helpless 
nurse (that screams a lot) to take care of him. If I was the 
nephew/son, I'd take the killer out for a Sapporo or some Saki to 
thank him for all the Yen he's saving me. 

  When dubbing an Asian martial arts flick, whose genius idea is it 
to use British actors? Not just that but British actors in a room 
that echoes. I don't know for sure...but it's a pretty safe bet that 
all of Asia dosen't echo. 

  As for sub titled movies...Why is it then when I'm watching a sub 
titled movie the voices are still dubbed? I mean couldn't the North 
American distributors get their hands on a version of the movie that 
hasn't been dubbed from one Asian language to another? Because I 
want to hear the intonation in Chow Yun Fat's voice as he blasts 
away at thirty or forty victims. (By the way Chow Yun Fat is the 
greatest). 

  One last question: How many rounds does a .9mm Glock have... 
because if I was going to use these movies as a guide, I'd have to 
say at least 50-60.


-------------------------------------------

4. What I understood of an Indian movie

  by Leandro Asnaghi-Nicastro

The other day my girlfriend brought me to see an Indian movie titled 
Pardesh, by director Subhash Ghai. Entering the movie theathre is 
not that much different from anywhere else I've been. However it's 
the little differences that make you realize you are not here to see 
the latest Batman flick. Although you can still order coke and 
popcorn, I was given Indian tea and Somosa, some sort of croussant 
with vegetables inside (kind of like a Spanakopita, if you like 
Greek food) all covered in Chatnee, a sweet-and-sour kind of sauce. 
I have to say, it was better than having popcorn. 

Hour 1:

The movie starts: for a minute I was worried if it was going to be 
in Hindi or Punjabi, but the actors were all speaking in English. 
Luckily, that was not for long, since right after that it was all in 
Greek for me.. or Hindi in this case. Fortunately once in a while 
someone would say a word in English (ie. "shit!" when something bad 
happened or "ahhhhh!" when scared or "hello?" when picking up a 
phone). This allowe me to get a general idea of what was going on. 

  Anyway, this old man returns to India, after having left many 
years ago as a poor young man, and now having returned with milions 
of dollars. He meets his old friend who takes him to his house 
placed in the middle of his fields. In the distance we hear the 
voice of a girl screaming: "Daddy! Daddy!" 

  At this point, series of strange events start from here throughout 
the 3 hour (15 minute break) movie. 

  First strange thing: the two old men look off-screen, where the 
camera picks up this beautiful (apparentely) girl who is running in 
slow-motion towards them. The rich american guy is looking at the 
girl with obvious interest although the audience is left unclear of 
his intentions. 

  We learn afterwards that he wants his son to marry the above 
mentioned girl, so that she can bring that touch of culture that is 
missing from them in America. 

  In the mean time we get to meet the whole family, mother, father, 
daughters, kids, comedy relief, aunt, cows, dogs and the incredible 
amount of goats that are scattered all over the place. In fact there 
are so many goats, one has to think that someone accidentally 
spilled Kuleshnov1 all over the place. 

  While everyone is laughing and making patties out of cow dung for 
the fire, the neighbours (who wear purple suits and have their hair 
dyed blonde) freak about this uncle from America arriving. They 
don't want the above mentioned girl to marry the son of the above 
mentioned rich-uncle-from-America. Fortunately they tell them off 
and everybody is happy, the girl looks at the picture of the guy and 
finds him one hell of a stud and is happy too, and the little kids 
are so happy that they start dancing and singing to convince his 
uncle in bringing them to America. 

  Something weird happens here: as the kids are singing, the uncle 
is dressed with a sports outfit, but quickly disappears into the fog 
and returns wearing a kurta (long white pants, long white shirt on 
top) and starts singing "I love my India". The movie turns into MTV, 
with people dancing, women flying accross fields waving long strings 
of fabrics, and the American uncle singing right in front of a 
cliff, so close in fact, that if he takes two steps back, the movie 
would be over. 

  In the mean time, the girl, Ganga, becomes a good friend with 
Rahul. Now Rahul is the best friend of the son of the American 
uncle, and he's got it all: looks, honour, smile and can play the 
guitar. But don't worry, they are just friends (or are they?) 

  Since the movie has three hours to play with, the director tool 
this chance to show how the son of the American uncle is too 
americanized by having him react weird, and not understand half of 
what is going on during the engagement festivities. He also despises 
the culture, making (ironically) racial comments about the Indians. 
Fortunately his friend Rahul is there to help him out of a whole 
series of culture clash that occurs between the two families, the 
engagement works well and the two love-birds move to America. Rahul 
decides to stay in India for a while, probably to recover from all 
the hard work. 

  Actually before they go to America there is a weird fight where 
everyone runs around acting like gorillas and saying something that 
sounded like "cuppa-tea". I'm not sure how, Rahul wins, saves the 
girl from the above mentioned purple-wearing folks and everyone is 
happy. 

  These were only the first 60 minutes. I could go on, but I don't 
think I'd have enough space in this issue to tell you the whole 
story. 

  What scares me here is to see that they make the little old 
grandmother understanding, wise and more open minded then the girl's 
parents. This makes no sense, since my girlfriend's grandparents 
look at me with the same love, affection and understanding that a 
.45 would have while ripping through my skull. I guess this was to 
symbolize how age is comparable to wiseness. 

  Another thing: the credits started to roll up, so I start getting 
up and I notice that the lights are still off and nobody else got 
up. I ask my girlfriend why, and can you believe, the movie is not 
over yet! The credits are rolling by, and you can still see the 
actors doing things on the screen, in this case Gangha and Rahul 
kissing, looking   at flowers, laughing a lot and all that other 
mushy stuff love-birds do before they grow sick and tired of each 
other. 

  There is only one special effect: Gangha and the kids are riding 
bycicles and singing (of course). You notice a cliff dead-ahead of 
them, and everyone stops. Everyone except Gangha, who keeps going, 
goes over the cliff and keeps on peddaling towards the sun while 
waving back at the happy little kids. 

  "What's going on here?!" I asked my girlfriend. "Why is she 
flying?!" 

  "To symbolize," my girlfriend answered with a can't-you-tell-by-
yourself? type of tone, "that she is leaving them to go to America." 

  Of course, I should've known. 

  What I found interesting to observe was to see how other parts of 
the world see "America" ("America," by the way, looks more like BC 
(no, not DC, BC It's different). Apparentely wherever the story was 
taking place in the New Continent, it would be rappresented by a 
large bay with a few cargo ships, and several houses in a relatively 
quiet neighbourhood. LasVegas is a nice quiet city that has very 
tiny rooms with people betting on an tiny table. Truckers drive 
small 4 wheeled trucks on a Toyota chassis. They also give a ride to 
the first Indian woman that comes running towards them. 

  Anyway, the movie follows the typical Indian Bollywood standard: 

Girl meets guy, guy meets girl and they get to know each other. 
For no apparent reason everyone starts singing happily. 
Girl/guy get more sentimentally involved with each other. 
Yet another musical so that both characters can express their joy. 
Something happens, the two lovers are separated. 
Sad song as hero sings and images of his love appear where the moon 
should be. If he holds on to a tree or rips her picture on top of a 
bridge right before driving away in some remote and unreachable 
place, the better. 
Something crucial and dramatic (yet expected) happens changing the 
whole plot around. Good people turn bad. Bad people turn good. Hero 
saves the girl, the day (and his face although he just got the 
beating of his life from the bad guy). 
Everyone agrees for the two love-birds to marry. 
More singing, this time everyone is happier then before. 
Credits roll up. Everyone is still happy. 
  If you get a chance, watch this movie. I suggest however you 
choose the subtitled version, unless you have a friend that speaks 
Hindi and is willing to translate on the fly. It's a good change 
from the usual shat playing lately in the theatres. It's got a good 
dosage of humor, love, action (not the type you might expect) and 
the usual poetic justice at the end. Worth the Chatnee that spilled 
on my pants.


---
1) Kuleshnov effect: the adding of too many goats to a movie. 

-------------------------------------------

5. Observations on the Box Citizen Ruth Came In

  By Jason MacIsaac 

I just watched an amazing movie called Citizen Ruth. I was going to 
write a rave review here, but then I realized that this was 
pointless, since the movie's already on video, and maybe me and 
Laura Dern have heard of it (Laura Dern plays the lead character). I 
was going to use all sorts of cool reviewer phrases like "Ruth is 
the main character, but she is only articulate when she is swearing 
in rage. We are only given tantalizing glimpses at what her 
character is like, feels deep inside, and what happened to make her 
life such a mess." I also had "subtle to stinging barbs" and shit 
like that all ready to go. But let me get right to the point. 
Citizen Ruth is particularly unforgiving satire on the abortion 
issue, giving it to Pro-Life and Pro-Choice (whatever you want to 
call them) right up the ass. It would have been easy to pick on one 
particular side, but the people behind this move realize that 
sometimes, neither side of the issue makes a whole hell of a lot of 
sense. Oh, shut the fuck up whoever I just pissed off with that last 
statement. We'll save that debate for another time. So let me 
conclude the review with this: it's a great movie, Laura Dern is an 
incredible actress, go rent it. Now let me move on to what I really 
want to talk about. 

  If you're going to take my advice and rent that movie, you might 
want to hold off reading this, because there are lots of spoilers. 

  I was just looking at the cassette box the video came in. I rented 
it from Rogers Video. As we all know, there used to be a billion 
video stores, all run by different people. Convenience stores, gas 
stations, whatever. Now there is only Rogers Video, or Blockbuster. 
These stores are great for stocking 4,500 copies of the latest comic 
book movie that was in the theatre for two showings, but they're not 
so hot if you want to watch something other than a summer 
blockbuster of the past five years. 

  Usually, video stores would put their videos in blank, plain 
plastic cases, sometimes with the movie franchise logo all over it. 
Then they put the box they came in on the shelf, with a little 
plastic tag or something to indicate whether the video is in or not. 
Rogers goes a little further than this. They put the empty cardboard 
shell on the shelf, with the video in a plastic case behind it. But 
they actually write a description on the back of their plastic box. 
At first I thought it was the usual bullshit with the description 
lifted from the back of the distributor's box, with the usual quotes 
from whatever media source they can dig up ("Three thumbs up!" -- 
Pickering Nuclear Power Plant Newsletter Film Cavalcade & Review). I 
actually sat down to read the Rogers box of Citizen Ruth, and 
discovered that's not what's there at all. They actually took time 
to rate the content themselves, and provide a quick breakdown for 
parents. They cover the sex, the drugs, the violence, the 
swearing... Here's the breakdown, verbatim: 

STORYLINE 

Citizen Ruth  319864 

After she accidentally becomes pregnant, an indigent, substance- 
abusing young woman (Laura Dern) finds herself at the centre of the 
abortion war. 

Parent's Guide: 

Sex/Nudity: In the opening scene, Ruth has sex with a man, mostly 
clothed. 

Drugs/Alcohol: Ruth drinks too much, sniffs from spray bottles, and 
smokes from a bong. 

Violence/Scariness: The scenes depicting Ruth's drug habit will be 
disturbing to youngsters, as will the issue of abortion; Ruth hits a 
little boy. 

Objectionable Words/Phrases: About 55 

Lesson to Learn: In the abortion war, both sides manipulate the same 
woman they claim to protect. 

Drama, 1997, Approx. 106 min., Release Date: 06/97, CC, Rating 
Pending 

  For some reason, I find this wonderful. Like a bookstore, I can 
spend a whole day in a large video store/rental outlet, checking out 
obscure little movie, Grade Z slasher movies, and just how many 
sequels can be made out of a kickboxing movie. Now I don't know if 
Rogers has done this for every video in the store, but I can't wait 
to go back and find out. It blows my mind that someone had to be 
paid to sit down, go through this movie, and list the content. I'm 
pretty confident that someone did sit through most of the movie. 
Sure, you can determine some things about a movie just by looking at 
the poster (Hey, I wonder if there's violence in the latest Jackie 
Chan movie? There is? Well bugger me), but no press kit I know of 
lists "Objectionable Words/Phrases." It blows me away that someone 
is paid to sit there and count how many "motherfuckers" are in a 
movie, even if it is a rough estimate. Or play with the frame 
advance to determine if you can see Laura Dern's breast. Do they get 
confused when you can see her nipples through her bra? Does that 
count? And what is an objectionable phrase anyway? This movie has 34 
objectionable phrases, 35 if you count "Suck my armpit." 

I'm thinking of other movies I've seen and wondering with glee what 
Rogers has written on the back of the box: 

Showgirls -- Sex/Nudity: There is all of five minutes of people 
wearing clothes. I've seen pornos that had more wardrobe than this. 

Reservoir Dogs -- Objectionable Words/Phrases: About 5,542,678 
objectionable words and phrases. There are about 20 non-
objectionable words and phrases. 

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Kahn -- Lesson to Learn: Uh...don't fuck 
with Captain Kirk? 

Fatal Attraction -- Violence/Scariness: Both Michael Douglas and 
Glen Close overact a storm. Douglas threatens to remove his clothes 
on more than one occasion. Close boils a bunny. What a bitch. 

ET -- Drugs/Alcohol: There is no alcohol or drug use in this movie, 
but Drew Barrymore turned into a real lush about five minutes after 
this movie stopped filming. I could use a good spliff right about 
now myself. 

  Another thing that intrigues me about this system is the complete 
lack of critical appraisal. True, whether a movie is any good is a 
subjective thing, but so is an objectionable word. Personally, I'd 
find it much more useful to know whether a movie is a carefully 
concealed piece of shyte rather than whether Eddie Murphy gets to 
use the "F" word and "H-E-Double hockey sticks." Of course, if a 
movie is a complete travesty (see Can't Stop the Music review, 
CapNasty Volume II, Issue 23) and the box lets you know it, you're 
not going to rent it. On the other hand, if you're told that you can 
see Laura Dern get it on with some guy, that might get you to rent 
it, even if it is a piece of garbage. There is also, I'll admit, a 
wider divergence of opinion on whether Natural Born Killers is an 
original and thought-provoking movie than whether "fuckface" is an 
objectionable phrase. Incidentally, Natural Born Killers spanks 
major goat penises. Even the original script by Tarantino blew. The 
one by Ollie Stone's lads is a billion times worse. Oh, shut the 
fuck up whoever I just pissed off with that last statement. We'll 
save that debate for another time. 

  Of course, the danger with this appraisal is that it doesn't tell 
you whether the movie is any good. I think that kids should see 
movies with sex and violence, provided that there's a larger issue 
on hand, and an adult to guide them through it. This rating system 
doesn't tell me if the movie has a brain in its head or not. It 
doesn't tell me anything truly useful. All I know from reading the 
back of this box is that Laura Dern apparently plays a low-life. 
Even the Lesson to Learn doesn't really help me. I don't know if 
there's a skillful handling of some extremely sensitive issues 
(there is). I don't even know if the movie is good for a wank or 
two. People are going to rent movies or not, based on these words. 
You can't summarize a truly good or even a bad movie in so short a 
space, with so few words. People are going to be mislead by these 
ratings, and maybe miss something good, or pick up something crap. 
That really bothers me. 

  I'll end this thingee with a few comments on the box's appraisal 
of Citizen Ruth (it even fails on its own terms at times). I'll be 
spending more time at Rogers, because I have to know what the Lesson 
to be Learned is for Slave Girls from Beyond Infinity. 

Parent's Guide: 

Sex/Nudity: They missed a couple couplings. A young girl gets hot 
and heavy with her boyfriend. A woman kisses another woman. There 
are a number of scenes were Ruth wears very little clothing, and 
poses in a very seductive fashion. The sex act at the beginning of 
the movie is actually unerotic; Ruth looks bored out of her skull. 
Is this category supposed to be "sexual content?" What about the 
vibrator Ruth finds? There is at least one very sexual act referred 
to, as well. 

Drugs/Alcohol: What, cigarette smoking isn't covered? There's a lot 
of this. 

Violence/Scariness: Ruth drops a heavy piece of porcelain on 
someone's head, and also threatens someone with a gun, but this is 
not mentioned. Also, there are a number of threats issued throughout 
the movie. Nasty ones. In one scene, Ruth awakens to find herself 
bleeding. She's even self-abusive on one occasion. That's scary. 
They describe Ruth's drug habit as "scary" but at times it almost 
seems comical. And what about violence to property? There's a scene 
where Ruth trashes her ex-boyfriend's car. 

Objectionable Words/Phrases: What about political messages? Now we 
sail into some really unclear waters. Nobody with any kind of a 
brain would say that a movie promoting the actions of the Nazis is 
anything but objectionable. But what about a situation that isn't so 
cut and dried? Both sides in the abortion debate take the matter 
very seriously. Neither side is likely to appreciate the picture 
presented by Citizen Ruth. Is that considered objectionable? 

Lesson to Learn: There are quite a number of things you can learn 
from Citizen Ruth, not just the line printed here. Ruth is not a 
heroine. At times, she's a thoroughly rotten person. She is very 
manipulative, at times even succeeding in manipulating the viewer. 
At one point she comes into $15,000. Another character in the movie, 
Harlan, who is supposedly on her side when she tentatively decides 
to about her fetus, listens to her very ambitious plans with the 
money. He tells her that she will blow the money in three days. You 
can't help but feel he's right. Ruth may be unredeemable, something 
neither side of the issue seems prepared to accept. It's not a very 
nice lesson to learn that some people can pass the point of no 
return, but it seems likely that Ruth is destined to die of a drug 
overdose. There's also lots to be learned about hypocrisy, and how 
individuals get lost in the debate of a larger issue. The movie's 
messages are lost on this box, because there's just so much going on 
this movie (much like any movie), that you can't break it down in a 
dozen words or less. This category is where the real injustice is 
going on. 

  I discovered this movie largely by accident. Some people think 
that some analysis of the movie is better than none at all. But I 
can't shake the feeling that very little good can come of this 
system. I'll be checking out more cases at Rogers, so stayed tuned 
for another installment. 


-------------------------------------------

6. Book of Profound Things

  by The alarmingly uneventful Adventures of Rik 

This is something from the unfortunately unknown Book of Profound 
Things (except chat fights). They are soon to be published on my 
website along with Ken the brick and my brothers. All of these games 
(except tumblegit) are created by ME, Rik Hughes. 

Battleshits! A game for 2 players. The two players both get in a 
bath together (preferably covering up the naughty bits with a 
flannel or pair of pants) and crap. The first person to get out of 
the bath loses. 
Stationary eating. The players have to eat pencils. The one who ate 
most pencils after 10 minutes wins. 
Frighten the elderly game. The players must go to a local zoo or pet 
shop and steal something scary (snakes and arachnids are the best) 
then place it in an old persons bed. The player who gets the best 
reaction wins, hoorah! 
The Hospital game. (for 2-4 players) The players go to their local 
hospital and each allocate themselves a ward to play on. They must 
go to this ward and swap around the patient details. The first 
player to cause a death or accident wins, yipee! 
Tumblegit (by Dave Wallace) The aim of this game is to run about the 
streets with a chainsaw cutting off old mens wooden legs and cutting 
their walking sticks in half and timing how long they stagger and 
tumble about for. The winner is the player who makes their old man 
stumble about the longest. 
(these games are highly dangerous and should only be attempted by 
people who have been expertly trained in the art of ear picking with 
a biro) 

Chat Fight. For this game you will need a chat client (such as 
Mirc). Go into some chatroom (preferably in America as the americans 
are a bit stupid) and pick a fight with someone using the action 
commands, eg "bloke pokes a big stick right up yankeetwats nose" 
etc. Continue until they 'victim' leaves or you get kicked out. 
Great fun! Please do try this out. 

Thank you for letting me waste your time with this silly drivel. 

Send your comments to: Rik <Rich.h@btinternet.com> or visit 
http://www.btinternet.com/~weird.stuff1/Rik1.htm


-------------------------------------------

The explorer Sojourner took a tour of the rock Yogi, then headed for 
Scooby Doo. It's pretty obvious -- women are Venus and Hanna-Barbera 
is from Mars.
