Kagemas: Spicy fun

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is fe6ig-zxoaoxaw5.jpg
Me trying a chocolate 7 pot. One of the hottest peppers in the world.
A gift given to me 12/24/21

So the above photos are to give some background to this short Kagemas review. I have been eating hot peppers heavily since I was about 17. This would be 2003. Although I did try some in the 1990’s, I wasn’t overly enchanted with a lot of spicy stuff. Anyways, the point is I have a pretty high fuckin’ tolerance after nearly 20 years of eating hot shit.

Let me start with Steve O’s hot sauce. I watched Jackass as a kid. It had it’s moments, but it isn’t high brow by any stretch of the imagination. Steve O is a fuckin’ idiot, so when I was given this hot sauce, I actually had high hopes that it would be stupid hot. That wasn’t to be. While it smells and taste great, it is, overall a mostly meh sauce. You can get one that smells like, but taste slightly different than this one, if you buy Badia’s Ghost Pepper sauce or Melinda’s Ghost pepper sauce. Both are far cheaper than this stuff is and probably comparably hot. Granted, it will probably be hotter if you’re not a “expert” like I am at peppers or eating hot sauce, so a rookie might think it is too hot. Overall though, it’s good and I could be inclined to keep a bottle around every once in a while.

3 1/2 stars out of 5.

The next product is not to be underestimated. It only has the scoville rating of a Jalapeno, which, for me, is like eating a bell pepper. So I had a bowl, sans the stir fry part and boy did this fucker kick. You would of thought I was a rookie at eating hot stuff, but nope, as I assured you above, I have been an hot sauce idiot aficionado, for quite some time. I can see why so many people didn’t make it through the Youtube challenges. It’s price is decent, but not the cheapest ramen. If you try it, make sure to have milk, because it doesn’t fuck around.

4 out of 5 stars.

The Wrong Missy, David Spade Revival Theater

INTRODUCTION

Well, it seems Netflix decided what the world needed after nearly two decades of absence was another David Spade flick. Oh joy!

CHARACTERS:
Shit! All the same BS these movies are known for, simple archetypes, if you can call them that.

ACTING:
None have ever been horrible actors, so, unlike this flick, its tolerable.

VISUALS:
Fantastic, which is more than I can say for the rest of the movie.

WRITING:
Shit! Fuckin’ stupid premise, horrible jokes, terrible story overall.

DIALOGUE:
Same as above

MUSIC:
None that I noticed.

SUBTEXT:
Devoid of it

CONCLUSION:
They couldn’t be bothered to make a movie, I can’t be bothered to do much of a review as I have said before. This piece of shit is unfunny. Happy Gilmore is nothing but a group of aging boomers that never grew up and the subject matter shows in this movie. I would say they are attempt to recapture their “glory years” but you would have to have had glory years for that to be true. It’s sad and pathetic group of people that are now stealing money from companies like Netflix, whom will see no fucking return, just to keep their dipshit friends employed within Hollywood. They’re not actors, they’re over glorified welfare recipients. David Spade sent his career to finally visit Chris Farley and after this outing, maybe he should consider doing the same.

0 out of 5 stars.

Fashionably Late Movie Reviews: Friday The 13th 2009

INTRODUCTION: I saw this movie in 2009 when it came out. I wasn’t hugely keen on remakes and especially not Platinum Dunes taking the lead and even though I tend to like Michael Bay flicks, which I know it isn’t hip, cool, edgy or intellectual of me, but you know what? Fuck the pretentious cucks that hate him. He has made some fun movies and Friday the 13th remake seemed like one for the ages. So how good is it after ten years?

PLOT: This makes retro Jason movies seem like they took good care to create plot.

CHARACTERS: Cliché Jason fodder, but that is pretty much the point. It takes a whole group of WB tv show rejects and gives them a movie. Personally, the douche leader is the most interesting, followed by the Stoners. Oh and the blonde girl the douche bangs, she really was stupendous, who was acting in that scene? No one!

ACTING: Surprisingly good from everyone but that one dude from Supernatural, who normally is a better actor, albeit, dry. Must not have been feeling it in 2009.

FX: It is Friday the 13th. Everything is practical and looks good.

LIGHTING: Retro, but works.

STYLE: Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2003. It works here, but the faux dated shit is old.

KILLS: Not the most over the top, but solid and cool.

TITS: Only that one blonde. The other woman need to sue their plastic surgeon for malpractice. I’d rather see real A cups than fake DD’s any day.

MUSIC: You couldn’t tell there was any, but Sister Christian, am I right?

SUBTEXT: STUPENDOUS!

CONCLUSION: I’m not really sure why this movie was made. I mean, it doesn’t even know what decade it is in. Retro Budwiser cans that are dated between 1970-2000 ish and retro 70s/80s clothing mashup. It looks like the 03 Texas Chainsaw Massacre remake, which sucked balls and this wasn’t much better. Even the lighting was very 70s in some scenes. How the fuck could you do a movie when you can’t even figure out what decade the original series is from? Still Jason runs and is super aggressive again, which was much needed and different from Kane Hodder’s and Friday the 13th needed that, very much. Derek Myers very much deserves one more flick, he was a fun Jason. The ending was a major let down, but it had some cool jump scares, but nothing new or original. If you just want something that is retro cool to drink and chill with, this is your flick and in that case, it is very good, but if you were expecting a really good movie, then find something else. This serves as nothing more than a kill count movie and sometimes, that is all it needs to be.

3 out of 5.

Sympathy for the Devil: Review of Netflix’s Lucifer.

INTRODUCTION: Lucifer has always been my favorite biblical character. He was so many things and the devil has always had the best domains that he oversaw from science to classical and hard rock music. He was absolutely the hero of the bible and the most interesting of them all. So a TV show that is based a DC “version” of the character that barley changes the original source material of the bible, well, it seems like a recipe for disaster, but with the right casting, potentially hopeful. So is this show worthwhile?

CHARACTERS: Well rounded, albeit a tad bit cliche. Over the current four seasons you really get to know the characters well and develop an attachment for them. I enjoy all the characters for the most part, albeit I’m here for Lucifer as much as the next person.

ACTING: Fantastic all around. It really seems like these guys and gals all enjoy working together and this is never more noticeable then season three when Tom “Smallville” Welling joins the cast and is supposed to be a sort of foil to Lucifer. Unlike when the rest of the actors engage, sometimes to the point where a scene looks like it almost became a blooper reel, the acting falls super flat when it turns to his character. It’s never seemed more awkward at all. The fact this is so easily discernible is a testament to the casting director with his choices. Never been more impressed at casting.

WRITING: Tad trite and formulaic. Still very good over all, albeit a tad lazy at times.

DIALOGUE: Fantastic. No big cringe moments.

STYLE: Late 90s/early 00’s cop show style. Its retro, but a much needed break from all the bleak looking shows on tv right now.

FX: Very surprising for a TV show. I expected worse and it is quite good.

MUSIC: Excellent soundtrack!

SUBTEXT: I think at its core, Lucifer is really about humanity. Lucifer may not seem it, but he is audience character. He may seem larger than life, but for being the devil, his choices are all too human and very relatable. Who hasn’t wanted revenge but had to thwart temptation?

CONCLUSION: This show is amazing, even though it is slightly formulaic and trite. I mean, season three was weakest when the whole thing is essentially a rip off of a major Buffy the Vampire Slayer storyline. If you’re a fan of that show, you’ll be familiar with the Angelus aspect. Still, it is nice to see it get a final season at least. Netflix did a good thing here and who knows, perhaps if season five goes over well, this will get another season. It one of the better shows I’ve seen in years and still adds some freshness to the tired old cop show clichés. Well worth giving a go!

4 out of 5.

Woke Before it was Cool Movie Reviews: 007 GoldenEye

INTRODUCTION: It’s all the rage to bitch about Hollywood and its sudden “woke” culture that seems to be shoved down all the throats of the emasculated alt-lite. Annoying, efte men and the woman who love sleep with those guys male friends. So whenever I see a retro movie that was “woke” by today’s standards, I am going to do my best to make sure I review to see if it just these “men” or if there really is a problem. So here is our first flick, GoldenEye.

SYNOPSIS: A whole bunch of boomers wrote a movie, that is about the fear of the soviets intentionally beating us in the digital age. A movie that was dated in 1991, when the USSR fell. Oh and James Bond is back at it, beating villains like a mutha fucker!

CHARACTERS: All original characters are there but M is a woman now and Money Penny is younger. Clearly there was need for outrage, right? This is the only thing I found in a search and it’s written by, presumably, a woman named Janet.

DIALOGUE: Fantastic! But woke as fuck! I mean, M calling Bond a misogynistic dinosaur? How about Money Penny saying he was sexually harassing her,while enjoying it.

ACTION:Hokey as fuck! I mean, the cold opener doesn’t seem to understand the concept of 3 minutes. The whole thing clocks 10 minutes. It’s almost like a parody of the old Bond flicks, masquerading with the name. What was the point of Austin Powers then?

VISUALS: Dark, but very, very good looking. Some of the
best looking of he series.

SUBTEXT: OK BOOMER!

CONCLUSION: These woke movies are nothing new, but few complained back in the 1990’s, in fact, quite the opposite and while this movie isn’t nearly as good as it was in 1995, it is still a solid, albeit a slightly intelligence insulting flick. It has no good grasp on anything, from Tech to Russia. It’s only real finger on the pulse happens to be its awkward and woke moments. It is a very OkBoomer movie, but still enjoyable and it created an amazing game.

4 out of 5.

Kagemas: Dicken’s A Christmas Carol

INTRODUCTION: A Christmas Carol is one of my favorites of Dicken’s novels, but that doesn’t mean that it is perfect. In fact, quite the opposite, but still, this book has its charm and it is pretty much his most iconic novel ever made. Innumerable movies have been made from it, including my favorite, A Muppet’s Christmas Carol. So, what can we say about this book 200 years later?
SYNOPSIS: a cranky old miser finds himself on Christmas Eve being visited by three ghost whom are there to get him to change his wicked ways.

PROSE: As much as I love this novel and others of Dickens, here he isn’t at peak form. He has one too asides, that while iconic, are just not needed. I refer to things such as “Marley was dead, to begin with.” This is one par with a “It was a dark and stormy night.” He shows a bit but relies too much on telling from some nonexistent narrator. He doesn’t tell us much about what the other characters look like, but Scrooge gets the most emphasis. I know we need to “hate” Scrooge, but he could have described the other characters better. Dickens was better than this, but his uneven prose here, especially for such an iconic book, is annoying.

DIALOGUE: Excellent! A hell of a lot of iconic lines.

CHARACTERS: The only really developed character is Scrooge. The rest are only kind of developed at the end of the book, during the hauntings. Scrooge is a fantastic character, though and a way writers should be building characters and something I like to do myself. Much like Bram Stoker, the dialogue reflects who the character is, his core being, if you read between the lines. Fred for instance is really a horrible character and worse than Scrooge could ever be. He hate people, but parades around like a mirthful little shit who loves people, but really he is fake as fuck. Scrooge may be a misanthrope, but with lines that suggest he thinks his workers are horrible and that Christmas is the one time they can stop acting as if they’re (upper class) are better than his workers and a few other horrible lines, suggesting he is no better than Scrooge, it really shows the subtlety that is in Fred’s character and that he is just pretending to be something he isn’t.

SUBTEXT: Most people put the subtext as Scrooge being an analogy for Dickens himself, but I disagree. I think the movie “The Man Who Invented Christmas” nailed it as Scrooge being England and other cultures at the time whom had banned Christmas until about the mid 1800’s. I did notice though, that while it seems shallow of more subtext, the second ghost, seems to be an analogy for god himself. He even mentions that humans put blame on them, but I cannot recall a time period in history in which ghost were so senselessly victim blamed. Only the heavens seemed to get that. So perhaps there is more to these “ghost” than just gravy.

CONCLUSION: This book still shines in spite of its flaws, that it is almost like Scrooge himself, who, despite the flaws is redeemable and while I doubt that was Dicken’s intent, it still adds character to the novel. Still, there are stronger versions of this book and we never got it, but it is still a testament to Charles Dickens that even a weaker version is still so iconic. Personally, Scrooge is one of my favorite characters ever and I am glad this book gave birth to him and his iconic persona. Christmas truly is a bah humbug and even though Scrooge was eventually redeemed, someone had to mention it and while Scrooge has never put a dime in my pocket, I say, he has done us good and will do us good, so I say God bless him.

This book gets 4 out of 5 and isn’t a poor excuse for hogging up a man’s time every 25th of December.