I was lying on the couch tonight watching TV, as I am wont to do, and an advertisement for the newly released on DVD “Accepted” came on. It proclaimed the movie to be “this generation’s ”˜Animal House’.”
First off, there’s only been one “Animal House” and that’s all there ever will be. “Sorority Boys” is not “Animal House;” “Van Wilder” is not “Animal House;” And “PCU,” regardless of the hilarious shenanigans of the irascible Jeremy Piven, is not “Animal House.” “Animal House” ranks right behind “Blazing Saddles” and “Dr. Strangelove” as one of the greatest comedies of all time, so let’s stop comparing sub-par movies to it in a futile attempt to excite movie-goers, shall we?
Secondly, I think it’s time to retire the line “this generation’s,” as in “this generation’s Woodstock; this generation’s Vietnam; or this generation’s Black Plague.” It’s a meaningless phrase used by PR assholes that have no creativity of their own, and therefore they have to look to the past to describe events or objects of the present. Don’t let their inherent stupidity fool you, because as we all know, fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life.
Sounds like the dems mantra.
at least as far as stressing everything in terms of the sixties.
I don’t know that they have no creativity, but they are appealing to a rite of passage. There are certain things people do when they go to college. Listen to U2’s “Joshua Tree”. Binge drink. Have sex. And watch “Animal House”. It’s just part of growing up. So those poor PR guys might not be creative, but they are appealing to a fundamental requirement for joining the adult population. Is that really wrong?
But, is “Animal House” really that good a movie or does it just connect with a feeling of nostalgia. Do we all wish that we could go back to our college days (or what we wish were our college days were like). How many of us have been to a toga party that failed to deliver the goods. Why, because somebody saw “AH” and they try to achieve the same greatness, but failed. There is not the social commentary that can be found in “BS” and “Dr. S”. I’ll give you that it has affected society (ie the toga party), but these are juvenile attempt to buy into to some one’s PR campaign. Now set me straight, if you can.
By the way, I really liked “Van Wilder”. I think it is the sarcasm.
I liked Van Wilder, too. Any movie where a group of people unknowingly consume dog semen is fine by me.
And I really do think Animal House is that good of a movie. I get what you’re saying about rite of passages and all, but I do think think A.H. lives up to the hype. In some ways it is simply the movie equivalent of a Harlequin romance book for prepubescent boys, but that doesn’t change the fact that it is a well-made film. And I could probably write a decent paper exploring the social commentary of Animal House just as easily as those other films.
Oh, it’s not that I dislike the other movies, because I don’t. In fact, PCU is one of the movies that will make me drop whatever I’m doing to sit down and watch it.
Have you seen the ads of “The Rise of Taj”? It looks kinda funny, but it can’t be as good, maybe. I am still in doubt that Animal House delivers the goods. Its in the category of films that could be edited to about 30 minutes and then it would be great. And the parade part somehow fails to be a satisfying climax to me. (Amy says you are stupid and so is the movie. She says that the only good part is the parade scene, but that still sucks balls. I am being free with the transmitting of those comments. She made me write that last part. She also wanted to say something about TomKat, but I told her that they suck and I didn’t care so she couldn’t. The day she logs in on her own is the day she gets to comment freely. She says I have completely made up her words, but that is a bald faced lie!)
Amy also said that you are a geek for using the word shenanigans and irascible. I however know that you will take that as a compliment so I would rather call you a Nazi for attacking our great culture!