I Believe This
20 million Americans still watched Seinfeld on Netflix in the first half of 2026.
That means the reason folks aren't watching Hollywood films and TV has nothing to do with video games, the internet, or anything else -- it's all content quality.
If I were in charge of Hollywood, I'd fire every executive in town tomorrow and hire random people from the street. They couldn't do worse.
Start Investing In Ourselves Again
In my perception, the US stopped investing in ourselves a long time ago and thought we could succeed by consuming instead of building.
All one needs to do is look at what fields our "top" graduates go into. Hardly any of them build anything except software; Silicon Valley, and that's just one narrow type of thing we use in this world.
The Leftovers
These women supporting the child murderer seem straight out of The Leftovers.
I might need to move.
Sympathy for Arday
Much ink was spilled over how the world mistreated Arday and thus contributing to his suicide. Many folks offer their own accounting of blame. Bravo to them. Curiously, no one did the same over Jeffrey Epstein. Why not? Was not his suicide a similar scenario of intense public shame?
I can hear the retorts - Epstein was a criminal; Arday was but a fraud. Yes, on a moral accounting ledger, there seems to be a difference. But then I see these other things out there - the requests for empathy from therapists and other leftists about this woman who murdered her three children, the understanding and fandom around Luigi, and the comparable *lack* of sympathy for Charlie Kirk's death. And I wonder...are any of these moral questions, really? I'm not even sure they are political. My suspicion is that they are aesthetic.
My sense is AOC might ride her newly found singledom (and suggested availability) into the Presidency and Taylor Swift will never be as popular again. But if AOC were to get fat and ugly, she will lose her popularity and Mandami will take up her mantle.
This Is No Joke Pretty Rad
Kristin Bell shows up at a Savannah Bananas game and does some Frozen song and Dirty Dancing.
This is what Hollywood should be doing. Touching grass, meeting Americans where they are, doing things big and small and fun and silly. I don't know why in the hell we ever thought it was our business to change the social order, comment on politics, or become this vehicle for social change. Who asked for it?
Logging
Film: Miami Vice
While Heat, The Insider, and Collateral are better Michael Mann movies, Miami Vice is his greatest work of art.
I feel like I'm watching an impressionist painting or listening to a master jazz musician play a familiar song in a totally unusual way...you think it's a crime epic, a franchise reboot, a police procedural, or an action film. None of the above. It's an experimental film.
First, the screenplay structure. It has all the components we're familiar with - the undercover cops get their mission (inciting incident), they go deep undercover in false identities (upside down world), an unlikely love story emerges as a B-plot, they uncover a rat, the bad guys get ahead of them the problem, we get an "all is lost" moment when one of their team is taken hostage right before the 3rd act turn, a showdown in finale. But the reason why many folks didn't "like" the film is because all of these major structural moments are completely deemphasized in the storytelling. The moment they discover the rat in the FBI office is basically a throwaway, almost expositional beat. Most viewers probably won't even notice it during the first watch of the film. The "inciting incident" is almost completely buried because it comes right after an intense emotional moment when their old CI (John Hawkes) throws himself in front of a truck. The "all is lost" moment is almost vague, with the shots of the white supremacists holding Trudy in the trailer park - you can't see their faces at all, rendering the situation mysterious and from Trudy's blindfolded POV rather than an emotional crisis for Sonny and Tubbs. None of the structural turns are uplifting or cause "oh shit" moments of reversal that we are accustomed to from "good movies." The movie doesn't care about the plot. I'm not even sure the movie cares about character development or the relationships. What the movie cares about are moments. Moments infused with different types of emotion, each like a moving painting that accumulates into an experience of the artwork, it is these moments that we remember from the film -- the opening impressionistic montage in the club, where we don't get to see any of the main characters head-on; we just get glimpses of them working. The streak of blood on the freeway, the brief interludes of "reality" that occur in the shower, their criminal contact (Nicolas) on his couch, a thunderstorm in the deep, deep background. Jose Yero watching Isabella and Crockett dance, with "cuts" of other people passing the frame, of Montoya's back of his head, the speedboat to Havana, the private jets floating in the sky, the Haitian gangster waving Crockett and Tubbs to the basement meeting, Gong Li in the yellow light of the limo driving away, the FBI agent exploded by .50 bullets through a car, the Chinese man carrying a USB through Ciudad del Este. These are all moments that leave a mark on us - they capture paranoia, fear, envy, horror, peace, freedom, fury, longing...elemental things about our existence and our universe. Because that's the other thing I think Mann is after in this film - he's not trying to find a structure to the story, but rather to explain the structure of our world. There is an underlying order to this universe, an order that transcends people, cities, nations, bureaucracies, or even morality (good vs evil)... and that order is commerce. Trade. Money. Transport. That's it. That's the order. Morality and love, they are brief, momentary respites that exist within and perhaps on top of a completely different order altogether. That's what the film is trying to capture. That's why he loves the depth of field of the digital cameras, because WE (the humans, and the characters) are not the focus of the structure. The structure is elsewhere - the structure is the long shot from the front of the go fast boat - the ocean on the way to Cuba, it's the depth of the shot into Miami from the freeway right before Hawkes steps onto the road. It's the final shot...the back of Crockett stumbling back into the hospital to re-join his team, a tiny little speck within something much, much larger and elusive. Just consider how that shot compares to the opening of Heat. A slow mo shot of DeNiro, also entering a hospital...a shot that says: pay attention to this character, he's important to this story. Versus Crockett...the shot is of the building, the structure which towers over him.
And more thoughts. Just think about the dialogue in this film. Is it even dialogue? Do you remember any actual exchanges between characters? Do they sound like how human beings talk? Do they match the rhythms of speech or conflict? They are snipits. Lines. Fucking haikus. "I'm a fiend for mojitos." "Time is luck. Luck run out." "She mine now." "Because you live a life of crime." "I ain't playing." "Ships move, that's why they called ships. I need a vector." "I run it. (for emphasis) I run it." "Don't shine me on, slick." "But you got your tan in Miami." "They are wrong." "Which way is up." "We can get down if the play calls for it." "Smooth, that's how we do it." It's like the opposite of Seinfeld where the situations are paramount -- they are describable and recognizable. The dialogue are little meditations, fortune cookies...
This movie is so awesome.
The "I'm Against Israel" Guy
Last week, he was on Andrew Sullivan and dropped this super odd line. This week, he's fired for being a serial plagiarist.
What's up with all these "writers."
This Surrogacy Story
A woman is hired to be a surrogate; the couple finds out the kid will have a bad medical condition, and they want to abort the child. But the surrogate decides she can't allow it and flees to Texas...
Pretty bonkers and quite a moral conundrum, actually...Richard Hanania thinks the lady should be charged with kidnapping. What an outrageous idea! To acknowledge kidnapping is to acknowledge personhood, which is to acknowledge that abortion is murder. Are we going there?
Some questions to consider:
What if the unborn child didn't have a medical condition? But the biological parents still wanted the abortion? Would that change the scenario?
Who will raise this child? Who will pay for his/her medical care?
What happened to the pro-choice argument about "her body, her choice." Does this apply to the surrogate? Or to the biological mother? The biological parents?
Does the biological mother here get more say over the situation than the biological father (as they would if she were carrying the baby)? Or, does the mother get less say since she's NOT carrying the baby?
That is to say, what if the father sided with the surrogate and wanted to keep the baby and the mother didn't?
This case is truly, truly difficult to square across numerous dimensions.
Hollywood Troubles
An underrated aspect of why Hollywood struggles: tabloids and reality TV offer more fascinating mysteries and narratives these days - for instance, did Usher hire a body double or possibly clone himself to perform at Met Life?
Or, will they won't they, John Hinkley Jr and Jodie Foster.
DSA
It doesn't matter that Hong seems to have barely lost Wisconsin. She got 36% of the votes. This means a totally retarded DSA candidate can automatically get 36% of Democrats in a purple-ish state. I used to think we had 15-25% communist-types in the Democrat party. Now, it's at least 36% and probably closer to 50-60% in big blue cities. We're cooked as the kids say.
A Good TV Show Idea
A beautiful, newly single woman in her late 30s gets elected President and must balance her dating life with running the country as her biological clock is ticking. Sex and the City meets The West Wing.
Go.
Bad Business
LA Times: how a 200K ADU dream turned into 600K reality.
Believe me, I can relate, but I think this article is a bit of a horror story.
Firstly, the end result is a beautiful, built ADU that they rent out to cover the cost. You read that correctly. You build a beautiful thing, but someone else gets to enjoy it. Insane! Second, you just bought yourself a roommate. Now you've got people living in your backyard. Doubly insane! Thirdly, you're 100% thinking all the time: god, I hope they don't fuck up my nice place. Triply insane!
Wouldn't they have been better off remodeling (down to studs if necessary) the old house and making it beautiful to live in - and spending considerably less than 600?
"I'm Against Israel"
Didn't get to the paid portion of this, as it seemed like Andrew Sullivan was getting to my own question, but I find it fascinating how this guy just casually drops into a discussion that "he's against Israel."
I just don't understand what this means. How can one be "against" a country? It would be like saying "I'm against China" or "I'm against Egypt." It's so weird.
If You're A Token
You'd be smart to appreciate the grift you've got, not make the lies too egregious, be a decent and friendly person, and maybe even just keep working at the thing you're supposed to be doing, and who knows...one day you might actually just become good enough at it to not be an embarrassment. This is how the rest of us do it.
Burrito Take
To be with the times, I feel obligated to come up with a burrito take. I love the damn things. It's the staple of Southern California more so than even the sandwich. However, I have several core principles when it comes to them:
-I won't eat them on road trips.
-Bean and cheese are terrific and underrated
-Grilled tortilla shell = thumbs up
-California Burrito = the ingredients seem odd, but try it. Double thumbs up
-An excellent burrito is rare, but so is a bad burrito
-Breakfast burrito should be modest in size and tends to be better with fewer ingredients
-At chipotle I get the bowls
-If in doubt, go with chicken, carne asada, or veggie
-I have never regretted adding guac but I don't always do it
Jason Arday Thing
People keep asking why they didn't catch this fraud before, and folks seem to think it might have something to do with DEI. While I don't dismiss it, I also consider the possibility that academic fraud is a widespread practice used by 50-70% of academics and therefore impossible to stop/catch unless you want the entire infrastructure to crumble.
Peak Retard
I thought we reached peak retard the other day, but nope, we have found a new peak retard.
In total, Francesca Hong has spent $300,598 on anything related to paid media, from online ads to graphic design to newspaper ads. The GOP has spent 12x more on her behalf, to boost her candidacy - $3.6 million.
So somehow we've become a country where the Democrats fund the most radical Republicans and the Republicans fund the most radical Democrats. I don't know what to say.
Logging
TV: Your Friends and Neighbors
I'm sort of hate watching the show. My wife overhears and asks, "Is Jon Hamm a good actor?" Never really considered the question before; I think his main skill as a leading TV man is that the audience is willing to buy that hot women will throw themselves at him, thus fulfilling a fantasy crucial for the drama to function.
My big problem with the show is the meta-message seems to be: don't hate the rich, they're really miserable too and really only need gobstoppers and a little trampoline bouncing just like you and me to be happy (how the episode I just finished ended). I'm sure the showrunner wouldn't characterize it quite this way, but that's my read. At least Entourage had the decency to be like: this fucking world rules. This show tries to make you believe this world sucks. What ideology is beneath that representation? I think it functions as a perverted way to justify useless privilege. If I can make myself emotionally miserable, people will sympathize with me. Is that not the chief governing ideology in blue regions today that holds us together? In the show nobody seems to have any purpose in life beyond money and fucking. No one builds anything. People "work" in finance and money management but seem to have no philosophy or purpose in doing so. They waste money investing in retarded toilets. They are therapists to underprivileged kids but don't help them at all. The only noble people play music of questionable quality. The crime in the show is a cry for help, a desperate attempt to feel alive. Maybe I just talked myself into liking the show...
Logging
Film: Blade Runner, director cut
Every time I see this film, I feel like I'm watching something different. How many cuts are there? I'm watching scenes I don't ever remember seeing here and there. Is it my memory? Or on every new DVD release, are they issuing somewhat new versions of the movie? The strengths of the film are the first act and finale (in the directors cut), but the movie does slow down in the middle section and maybe explains - at least partially - the cold reception to the film initially. But god, that first act, the whole time I'm watching and just thinking to myself - how did they do that? How did they build that? Etc, etc. I don't often have a similar feeling watching big-budget films today - like Marvel, etc. It's because the world feels physically built and the actors are actually moving through the spaces. Some other things:
-Spare dialogue. Has any character felt more substantial with less dialogue than Edward James Olmos in this film? Most of his actual lines are unintelligible until his famous "It's too bad she won't live, but then again, who does?"
-Good plot strategy for "the hunt" where Deckard hunts Replicants while the Replicants are searching for more life.
-The non-critical casting in this film is just...chef's kiss...M. Emmitt Walsh, William Sanderson, Brion James, James Hong
-Less is more. "If you're not police, you're little people." What does this line mean? Is this a threat? Does M Emmitt Walsh mean to say Deckard will be killed if he doesn't take the job? Not sure we are meant to know. I love it.
-This time around I have to admit I felt like Rutger Hauer was chewing a bit of scenery. Probably blasphemous to say. Whatever.
-One of the huge benefits of noir (and this is a tech-noir) is how you can get away with quite a bit of murkiness in both plot, character reasoning and motivation, and meaning. One of the dangers is you can't go to this well too much. But noir dances with the mysteries of the subconscious and human nature and thus some of the lack of clarity actually ends up adding to the atmosphere and mood of these films.
DSA Movement
The funniest thing about this whole DSA thing - so we all know this is a movement centered around college graduates. These are folks who cannot quite excel in the hyper-competitive global economy but expected to. They see no hope. But these are not working-class or poor folks. So they come from means. They might *feel* like they don't have means, but their families do. At the very least, they have houses. I think part of their fears and frustrations are feeling like they aren't going to achieve even those middle-class things like their parents - owning homes, stable jobs, etc. I can understand all this. But here's the irony. They will inherit these things one day. It seems long off to them. It seems irrelevant because they're just trying to start their lives. But if their political movement succeeds, around the time they actually a) figure out some way to make a living, get some progress in their careers b) get married and settle down so they, in effect "double" their resources and c) stand to inherit quite a bit from the prior generation(s) is precisely when their redistributive policies will start to really kick in. So the people they will actually end up robbing are themselves.
Huh
This Yale Law Professor says children are hostages of their parents, and younger people, like college kids, have a better idea of what's best for future generations than their parents do. What a lunatic! On some level, I think he's close to getting at an interesting point but then totally loses it at the last minute. He says the family's priorities come before the children's. Does he fail to recognize these children are part of the family!?!
NYC Communist Grocery Stores
Prediction: even if they were well-run, they'd still be inefficient and bad, but in practice they will almost certainly be poorly run, super inefficient, and terrible.
The irony is that if they are good, they will simply be exploited/used by the folks who live nearby and paid for by the folks who don't live nearby. Hilarious.
Even Handed
The rarest of rare things: an even-handed, sober outlook on foreign affairs.
Yes, it would be entirely within reason to rebalance how the US deals with the Islamic world, especially in light of having a rival state on the world stage now.