I have an intelligence test that I give most people I meet. If they like Disney, they are absolute imbeciles without the possibility of redemption. If they don’t like Disney, I’ll have lunch with them once.

I apply this test to all people I meet without exception and its results never fail me.

Go Bukowski!

But during the moments Buk talks, all becomes clear. Never liked this film all that much.

Also, I literally laughed when Bukowski told him “you are fucked up”

http://thewildfirecompanion.com/2009/08/art-of-drunken-poetry/

I love his brutal honesty. It’s great to see him get press.

Also, I guess I understand the three finger thing to a degree since whenever I play Lego Starwars I immediately kill the arm-faced people when I see them walking around the bar.

RE: 1 Devophill I think Cory would be conflicted about posting something like this, railing against something he loves as it does.

“Some people never go crazy. What truly horrible lives they must lead.”

And I imagine that he would have kicked the living shit out of anyone who put him “between Jim Morrison and Jewel.”

Although somehow I could see him taking a shining to Jewel, not that this would mitigate the ass kicking.

Consider Bugs Bunny and his nemesis Elmer Fudd; Bugs is a classic, fast-talking smart-alec who, in spite of his inherent disadvantage (he doesn’t have a gun with which to defend himself), is able to play Elmer Fudd time and again and turn the tables to his advantage. By contrast, any Disney villain is almost always more intelligent and well-spoken than his good counterpart– villains such as Scar, Jafar, or even Ursula all have vocabularies that greatly exceed the comprehension of the average 9 year old. Take a little snippet of Scar’s song from The Lion King as an example of such:
“Of course, quid pro quo, you’re expected/ to take certain duties on board… The future is littered with prizes,/ and though I’m the main addressee…”

While I could ramble on and on about the symbolic nature of Looney Tunes animation versus Disney Animation (Warner Bros. draws trees as sticks representing trees whilst Disney takes great care to animate every single detail of a tree), all I really care to say is that Bukowski does have a point about the vacuous nature of Mickey Mouse. The little guy teaches kids nothing that they didn’t already learn by the age of 2 (good is good and bad is bad) and even goes as far as to give kids a really bad impression of how the world works, filling their heads with a strange idealism that would have only made sense to the Puritans of yesteryear.

(Of course, I do not count Pixar as being Disney, no more than I would say that Miyazaki is a Disney franchisee).