Showing posts with label Regis Philbin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Regis Philbin. Show all posts

Saturday, May 29, 2010

Make That Period A Comma

I seem to be at the part of the wheel where I can only faintly-sorta-kinda point to verifiable references by others to me/my material, as opposed to, say, my references to the "Simpsons" season finale (my blogs of May 18th and 23rd), where you would have to be partially stupid to feel no real evidence of Steinhoff inside-references was offered.

Oil Painting Leak
In the very beginning of my May 23rd blog ("Can't Say For Certain Whether Or Not Oliver Twist Would Have Wanted More Of This"), I build upon what I construed as a possible inside-reference by Paul McCartney to the Beatles song "Paperback Writer", a song which I was an influence on. Evidence that I was reacting to the idea of the song "Paperback Writer" on May 23rd may be found by going to my YouTube posting of May 23rd, "Notes From The". The video there relates to too many pages to read in connection with McCartney. As we all know, "Paperback Writer" contains the line, "It's a thousand pages," meant to express the idea of too many pages.

We then see that just three days later on May 26th Paul McCartney gave an interview to the Telegraph, wherein he discusses well known artists in connection with his purchase of their works. Should you at this point take the trouble to go to my January 10, 2010 blog (also posted/copyrighted at archive.org in Volume 3 of the collected texts of my blogs), in the section entitled, "The President, Terrorism and Baby Oil?", you will see that I bring up "Paperback Writer" specifically in connection to Paul McCartney's purchase of the works of artist Francis Bacon. I should or should not perhaps add that the May 26th McCartney interview includes someone saying that, in telling anecdotes, McCartney isn't good at self-editing, which I believe could possibly be there to bring to mind endless pages/a thousand pages.

His Master's Void
This one is for those who recall evidence presented in previous blogs that Russell Crowe movies are sometimes found to contain inside-references to me/my material. On this basis, I consider it legitimate to ask people to take my word on something difficult to prove to the public-at-large. And by "difficult to prove to the public-at-large," what I mean is, people only started posting videos in 2005 (evidencing in 2005 at least something regarding how long ago such videos were made), so videos I made before 2005 cannot be proven to the public-at-large as having been made before that, as I didn't post them until 2005, and they received no theatrical release. (As for those who saw my videos prior to 2005, you do have proof of their being made before 2005 - perhaps someone needs to give you a calculator?)

Specifically, my "Gosk 1" video (1994), which can be found at archive.org, has Clerp all excited about a threat to the spacecraft that he sees on the monitor, a meteor in the distance. After dramatically steering around the perceived (by Clerp) threat, Jerp expresses that he didn't see anything at all, but Clerp replies with, "Oh yeah, it was coming right at us." In the 2003 Russell Crowe movie, "Master and Commander," someone sees a threatening ship through a telescope, however, the Russell Crowe character sees nothing through the telescope, and expresses this to the person who said he saw it. The person who said he saw the threatening ship reaffirms his assertion, he is sure he saw something.

In and of itself one would not have to regard this as a reference to "Gosk 1", however, one's perspective should be informed by the context: there are a number of significant references to my material in Russell Crowe movies (particularly the ones he made with Ridley Scott, and also Ridley Scott movies that don't have Russell Crowe acting in them, though this Russell Crowe movie was not directed by Scott).

Am I Read
Without going into endless detail, I believe that, following my making a reference to Don Rickles in a comment to a Huffington Post article (as JonathanDS), he in turn made an inside-reference for my benefit in his Letterman appearance several days ago. It tied in with the inside-references for my benefit whenever Philbin is on Letterman in relation to a woman I knew to whom Philbin once introduced himself. Further on this same subject, while eating lobster today in a restaurant, I saw someone who brought a certain JH to mind, which is someone I think of in connection with a certain LW, which connects back to the whole Philbin and Letterman thing, and to lobster.

Hickery Dickery Tusk
I seriously do not know if that was Kiefer Sutherland who drove by me today, wearing sunglasses in an expensive silver car. This could be most significant, it being that my May 26th blog suggests, at least to those who have been paying me serious attention, that the final seven or so "24" episodes, which were about Jack Bauer's emotional involvement with a woman possibly causing him to cease to be the ultra-responsible Jack Bauer, began with my Jack Bauer suggestion for "SNL". As mentioned, I cannot say it was necessarily he, however, if it was and I were to make no acknowledgment here of any kind of having possibly noticed him, it would be an act of omission, or whatever that form of irresponsibility is called.

Real Time Is On My Side
And finally, I believe Bill Maher has on his past several "Real Time" shows been making little references to little things I've included in HuffPost comments. It is nothing new for Bill Maher to include me in some way, but I don't know if I need to go into detail each time.

Sunday, March 28, 2010

Simmer, Cool, Simmer Again, Whatever

Julie, Julia, Clerp, Jerp, and Amy
The following videoclip, which includes our first introduction to Amy Adams' Julie character in the 2009 movie, "Julie and Julia" (now available on TV for the first time on "Starz On Demand-Early Premieres"), should be filed under my March 21st blog (two blogs ago), in the section, "Pavlov's Chef":




Out Of The Frying Pan, Into The Fire

A person I've referred to here and there in previous blogs, Kiefer Sutherland, again drove past me. It was while I was on my way to work Friday, March 26th. I am nearly certain it was he, despite the sunglasses and semi-upbeat expression.

His face divulged nothing about a bombshell that was about to be dropped on the world later that day, not that the explosion would have been preventable even if I had foreknowledge: "24" has been canceled. Jack Bauer will not live forever - at least in terms of new episodes of "24" (after this season). I also read that there may be a movie. I think back to the expression on his face for some indication of exactly how dead Bauer might be for Sutherland, but as I find myself unable to visualize ketchup splattered about, it is difficult for me to envision death and Jack Bauer next to each other to the extent that it is now so.

We have been left with a serious void on the landscape of our shared, common focus on matters related to terrorism against the U.S. Do not underestimate the value of a singularly iconic fictitious character of this variety at this point in the history of the world, particularly when one considers the degree to which we as a society have come to use the medium of theater to digest events that would otherwise be too difficult, perhaps even impossible to wrap our hearts and minds around.

We can come together over nobody in particular when we say here comes the sun, we may never need a sun king to say "here comes the" about, but we are not so good at not having a human to focus on when real events turn us towards this side of reality, and occurrences that could conceivably lead to the end of reality itself. I don't see anyone coming close to a Jack Bauer, just a whole lot of James Bonds, Sherlock Holmeses and what not.

On the bright side, Sutherland is now free to do a sequel to "Dark City" - though I have the feeling I'm alone in thinking along those lines.

It's Just Another Vote

Several days ago on my way home from work, at about 5:30pm, about 30 minutes before the final reconciliation vote on healthcare reform (after the House passed the healthcare legislation and after the Senate then passed the agreed-to reconciliation amendments and then the amendments went back to the House - I believe this was Thursday, March 25th), "Daily Show" host Jon Stewart may or may not have driven past me. The show has been on vacation this past week, so it was definitely possible for him to be in Southern California. Also, as occasionally referred to in previous blogs, over the years I have occasionally been an influence on his and Colbert's show, sometimes to no small degree. He appeared very serious. And his hair was not slicked down as one normally expects when looking at Jon Stewart. I don't think his was searching his mind for a punchline just then. Then again, it could have just been someone whose job it is to bring Jon Stewart to someone's mind at the precise right moment. I get a lot of that.

One On One
Ben Stiller, whose appearance at the recent Oscars was largely in relation to my "Gosk 2" video (see my March 13th blog), drove by me yesterday (March 27th), while his two recent late-night talk show appearances made no inside-references for my benefit (of which I am aware). I think that puts things where I'm supposed to.... no, can't say I know exactly.

The late-night talk show appearance in February by Helena Bonham Carter, Tim Burton's wife, on Craig Ferguson's show did make inside "Gosk" references for my benefit. These references to "Gosk" were not even close to being as clearly delineated as Burton's "Gosk" references in "Alice In Wonderland" (see my my March 16th and March 21st blogs). I do not feel that husbands and wives should be considered contractually obligated to be identical in the degree to which they make references to "Gosk", nevertheless, I will not permit Carter's references to dilute the intensity of Burton's references, and will therefore confine myself here to this general a description of her action.

Regis Philbin's recent late-night talk show appearance on Ferguson made absolutely no inside-reference for my benefit of the variety I have come to expect, though Ferguson isn't Letterman, which is where/who this normally can be relied upon. Is this non-relationship over? If so, I do not yet feel the void, and for now will make no assumptions.

Face To Face
Immediately after I emailed someone (a fellow CalArts alumni, aka a "CalArtian") asking what gives with Tim Burton and his Steinhoff references in "Alice In Wonderland", where's my $11.23 (I did the math and decided I was at least entitled to enough money to purchase 9.2 chocolate bars), I received an invitation to be the Facebook friend of someone else, someone I hadn't spoken with in about 30 or more years, and a non-CalArtian. Adding this person as a Facebook friend required that I logon to my Facebook page for the first time in about half-a-year. This caused me to see that another CalArtian I knew (different CalArtian) had visited my Facebook page, indicated to me by way of that privacy-violating way Facebook has of showing Facebook users this like it or not. This led me to feeling inclined to look up that particular CalArtian on Facebook and the listing of her Facebook friends - which included Tim Burton. I suppose it is a given that when Tim Burton uses your material in a big way in "Alice In Wonderland", trails of breadcrumbs are headed your way. Now send me a trail of breadcrumbs I would want to follow more directly, please.