So hunger games has opened, and is a huge success among fans and general audience alike. To many its no surprise, the popularity of the book was a sure fired, tested property. They could have made a completely shit movie and called it ‘Hunger Games’ and it would have still made its dime.
Some people are surprised though. Since female lead ‘action movies’ don’t have the best box office records. Which brings me to today’s subject. Female action heroes.
I was originally going to do two list, one of excellently developed female heroes, and one listing the shitty side of the coin. But I realized that the majority of the strong female protagonist all have certain things in common, and so do the shitty ones. Which is why I’ve decided to simply voice my opinions, on what makes one good, and another shit.

First, I want to talk about suspension of disbelief.  When you see a talking dog in a movie and you go, “Pfff, Dog’s can’t talk.” Not only are you right about dogs not being able to talk, but your also not suspending your beliefs at all.
Movies are not reality, we all know this. But every film, book, and comic defines its own reality. NO, in reality dogs cannot talk. But in Narnia they can, since the reality of Narnia is animals talk. Now I could wax philosophical and talk about how we all define our own reality,  through beliefs and ideals, but that’s not what I’m getting at. What I’m getting at is, most people, (probably mostly men) don’t like female action heroes because they aren’t realistic.
The fact of the matter is, in reality, if Natalie Portman comes at Dolph Lundgren like a bro, and he cracks her one in the face, her neck would snap. BUT watching them throw down in a movie? Its very possible Portman can pull out a win, because it’s a movie.  
This is actually a double standard, since, news flash, men in action movies do unrealistic things all the time. Its honestly slightly misogynistic to say, that its more believable for a man to dodge an explosion then it is for a woman. Its fiction, there are NO limits, and its asinine as a viewer to be setting them.  
Anyway, allow me to get back on point. What makes a good female action hero, what makes a shitty female action hero.


A quality female action hero, should be, you know… FEMALE. I’m going to hit you up with a little movie trivia. The roles in the film ‘Alien’ were never gender specific. They decided the characters genders during casting. That’s right Riply could have been a dude. And it shows in the first film, there is nothing Gender specific in ‘Alien’ as far as Riply is concerned, but by the sequel, she’s all woman, and all bad ass!
Her, Sarah Connor, Sue Richards (Aka: Invisible Woman) are all uniquely XX chromosome, because they all bring something to the table that no male action hero can… except for Arnold Schwarznegger… They’re all MOTHERS.  
The amount of ‘Fantastic Four’ I've read, is honestly limited. But everything I read depicts Sue Richards as a being a mama bear, with big ass fucking claws! In one comic, a brain washed Wolverine invades the Baxter building to kill the ‘FF’. And who is it that stops the hairy little killing machine? Not Reed! Not the Human Torch! Not the ever love’n blue eye’d Thing! But Sue!
Nice, polite, pretty and petite, she’d never kill… Unless her family is in danger, in which case she’ll put a bubble around your lungs and suffocate you.  Ouch!
These mother action heroes are AMAZING. Not because they are physically imposing, but because their motivation is so strong, and primal. Protect your young at any cost. Sarah Connor and Ellen Riply especially, since there is a transformation between films, from victim, to hero.
Stepping away from mothers, let’s talk about single lady characters. Like teenage Buffy Summers, Kitty Pryde, and bachelorette Black Widow. These characters aren’t mothers. But they are uniquely female, and exhibit famine attributes in their personality. They like typical girl things. They enjoy shopping, and going dancing. When Kitty Pryde and Buffy Summers were teenage heroes, they’d get crushes and experience mood swings, they were self conscious about their body and appearance. They were TEENAGE GIRLS. Fuck, Kitty Pryde was constantly indecisive about what here super hero name and costume would actually be, which screams teenage girl to me.
I’m not saying that we should enforce gender stereotypes with female action heroes. I’m just saying a female action hero should generally be unique to the gender. Otherwise you have what a I consider a shitty female action hero.  


Unique to the gender, is what makes a good female action hero. What makes a shitty female action hero is a woman, defined by her boobs. I’ve only seen two of the Resident Evil movies, but you perform a double mastectomy on Milla Jovovich , and shape her vagina into a cock, and her character hasn’t changed a bit.
A shitty female action hero, has a personality that may as well be a mans. She is a hard as nails, stone faced, bad ass. And NO there is nothing wrong with this archetype, its just boring, and kind of offensive to woman, since essentially they’re fan fair.
Typical action movies have your bad ass male lead, with a sexy female love interest. ‘Resident Evil’, ‘Aeon Flux’, ‘Tomb Raider’ cut corners by fusing these characters together. Their stories could play out the exact same if they were dudes. This actually goes both ways, since obviously male stories can play out the same with female leads. But when one in ten action movies, stars a woman, then why not make it worth it? Give the girls out there a respectable hero instead of a sexual vessel.
I also hate the wardrobe of shitty female action heroes. If its a sword and sorcery story, the female fighter is wearing chainmail on, and only on, her lady parts. Like a woman's breast a labia are their only vital organs.
Then their is female super heroes. How does showing off your mid drift help you fight crime? Is running in those heels make you faster or something? Does your thong dig in much?   
Even worse though, is this archetypical female action hero who is defined by the fact that she ISN’T a man. We see this character all the time. My first thought of this Eyown from ‘Lord of the Rings’. She’s as good a fighter as ANY man, but she can’t go to battle! She’s a girl! Actually what is her big line? You know at her triumph? Oh yeah “I AM NO MAN!”
God has that story arch run dry or what? “I’m just as good as a boy!”
“No you aren’t!”
Achieves X goal (becomes a warrior, joins the boys wrestling team, bowls a perfect game ect.)
“You’re right! You’re our equal!”
The end.   
That story arch doesn’t need to die, I’m fine with it. But those female protagonist only claim to being a woman, is the fact that they aren’t a man... Which is retarded. A character needs more depth than  being defined by what they aren’t. Give them some substance for crying out loud. 

In the end, when trying to think of female action heroes I liked,  and ones I hated, I noticed how small the pool really is in general. But when you look at the movies coming out, you can see there is an upwards trend of ladies who kick ass. And for me, I’m interested in this, as long as the characters are of substance.
I have no opinion of the lead of ‘The Hunger Games’ since I haven’t seen the movie, or read the book. And I don’t really plan to. Not because it has a female at the helm, or because I’m attempting to step away from the popularity of it, but because I just don’t have an interest. The premise just doesn’t grab me. I’ll probably catch it later on, when it’s on DVD, but not right now.
Right now, I’m just happy to see that there is female action hero who can grab an audience’s, attention. Maybe when I finally watch it, I’ll be happy to see that she has some depth, and is uniquely female.   


Okay. Going to hit you all with piece of news, about the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles. Then a big'ol piece of criticism.

"When you see this movie, kids are going to believe, one day, that these turtles actually do exist when we are done with this movie. These turtles are from an alien race and they are going to be tough, edgy, funny and completely lovable."

-Michael Bay

Wow is that retarded. Michael Bay really kind of misses the point of Teenage MUTANT Ninja Turtles. Changing them to Aliens is pure retard, no two ways around it. Its retard, I know its retarded, and you all know its retarded. So I'm not going to waste much time painting a picture of how retarded it is.

What I am going to do is blast the majority of the criticizers of this news. People are using, a turn of phrase that annoys the shit out of me. “They're raping my childhood.”
Why do I have a problem with this? Well first off, I have no qualms about joking about rape, or using the word 'rape' to express hate. I do have a problem with people faking a love something from their childhood, when they REALLY only care about it in a shallow superficial level.
I get that its nostalgia, and nostalgia by nature is shallow. I understand that lots of people loved TMNT when they were a kid. But what do you actually remember about the Turtles? Sure you can remember the main casts names, and the general idea of the cartoon, but what else? When was the last time you sat down to watch the show? If it was more then ten years ago, then how in love can you really be?

And to truly look closer at what that Shit Head Bay said. He could mean they will be 'alien' in the sense that the mutiagin ooze, is created by TCRI... which is run by Alien's. Which would actually be true to the source material, the original Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles comic. In which April isn't a reporter, there is no Krang, and the turtles kill people. They also don't eat pizza, or wear different colours, they all wear uniform red, that is when the started appearing in colour... original comic was black an white. Oh, and Shredder also died in the first issue. Wow, that cartoon really did rape that comic didn't it? By changing it from being something for adults, and into something for children.

I'm being sarcastic. For anyone to care about the numerous changes between the comic, and cartoon, would mean that they would have to love the comic... Which lots of people do, but who cares about them! Most people 'love' the cartoon, and thus it is the definitive source of the turtles, and should never be strayed from EVER!... Except in the original movie series which acted as a perfect fusion of the cartoon and comic. I'm done being sarcastic now.

Anyway, I get that it was a long time ago. I can't expect you to remember every little detail about the show, and movies. But come on! are YOU a fan of it, or is YOUNG you a fan of it? There is a difference between 'loving' something, and something you 'used to love'. Just like there is a difference between your current girlfriend, and your ex-girlfriend.
I understand you don't want anything bad to happen to your ex, but really, they're your ex for a reason. You grew away from it. But that's the beauty of it, your childhood is always there in the past for you to re-visit. Just like your ex is always a viable booty call... er, maybe not the most perfect analogy.

Don't be afraid to go back and watch these cartoons you loved, maybe you'll view them and your love will be reignited, or maybe you'll hate it, and learn that your love is long dead. (This happened for me with 'He-Man and the Masters of the Universe', man was it gay.)
Really though, the fact of the matter is, no matter what shitty re-boot they create for the turtles, there will always be the comics, the cartoons, and the original movies. So please, everyone relax, and take a step back in time. Your child hood is unrapable, because its long gone. But you get to create your second childhood, and its ass hole is locked up nice an tight, in your buns of steel. You have complete control over what gets in, and what goes out. Use that wisely, and just ignore pricks like Micheal Bay.


"Fans need to take a breath, and chill. They have not read the script. Our team is working closely with one of the original creators of Ninja Turtles to help expand and give a more complex back story. Relax, we are including everything that made you become fans in the first place. We are just building a richer world."

I've talked about adaptations before with the 'Walking Dead.' And I just want to say that this guy, doesn't get how a great adaptation works. Especially since TMNT already has a perfect adaptation, with plenty of depth, humour and edgy action. Its called 'Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: the movie'.
As I mentioned before the Comic and the original Cartoon are very different. Thing is, I still enjoy both. Despite the differences there were changes in the cartoon that were very much improvements.
Like giving the Turtles more distinct personalities, and individual colours. In the comic you can't really tell who, is who, unless you can see their weapons, and I enjoy April as a reporter instead of a lab assistant to Baxter Stockmen.
And when they went to make the first motion picture, they amalgamated the gritty comic, with the colourful cartoon and made an excellent movie out of it. Probably one of my top five comic book movies actually.
Back in the early 2000's when the remade the cartoon, the did the same thing, pieces of the original comic book, were combined with the original cartoon. Honestly it was as good as, if not better then the original series.
Then when they went on to make TMNT the fourth, computer animated film, they said to themselves. 'We can try to retell the origin story, we can do a full blown reboot, and have everyone hate it. Or we can do a direct sequel.' Which is what they did... Was it good? Not really. The main plot sucked, but the subplot between Raph and Leo was excellent. The main plot was so contrived.
Now going ahead and making a complete reboot is a huge mistake, especially since it was already done perfectly, and no matter what, Bay's TMNT will pale in comparison. Its a dumb idea. Like I said before, retarded. On SO many levels.


Next Friday the film adaption of the popular book 'The Hunger Games' is being released in theaters. Its my understanding that it is a film, featuring something we all love, a strange and horrific future. So today I'm talking (writing I guess), about dystopia.
When I was in college, yes I was in college, with my awful grammar and spelling, I had an elective called 'Dark Days Ahead.' The class can be summed up as 'Studying dystopia and time travel'.
Every week we discussed the end of the world, and the degradation of society. With the question always being raised, 'Why are we as a species so obsessed with the end?'
Its a paranoia we all share, some of us are worse then others. People worry about 'big brother', 'natural disasters', and 'terrorism' to no end. Actually it goes beyond that, some worry about 'God', or 'Aliens', and the most delusional of all people are convinced our end will come at the hands of people of a different race or creed.
Some day, the government will just out right enslave us! Or some day we'll be ruled by a religious fanatics! Or the Aliens will descend from the stars and take our resources!
Something is always out to get us, someone always has an agenda, there is ALWAYS a new witch to burn. It is our pattern as a species. We are largely ruled by fear, and NO its not all fear produced by the media or government, its fear produced from within ourselves.
I think its a evolution thing. We never really got past the point where we stopped fearing for our lives at every turn. It is a fact, that those that didn't fear Sabertooth tigers... didn't live long. The future is a our greatest predator. We have no idea how its going to get us, but we're all worried about it. Some day, this world, is going to be worse then ever... Or is it?
We all know, that stats show a decline in crime and war. The world is actually the most peaceful its ever been, even the threat of nuclear war isn't as big as it once was. And anyone with a brain knows the hadron collider isn't a threat, and that killer bees aren't coming up from the south. The shortage of food? That’s slowly being eradicated by GMO's. There is no proof of 'hostile aliens' or 'angry gods' and the hole in the Ozone is apparently shrinking.
The reality is that the future is probably nowhere near as bleak as we like to think it's going to be. But... What if we get lulled into a false sense of security, and we let everything we've developed (Out of fear of the future) fall apart? Then what? I think, strangely, that the scariest future we can imagine, is a future without fear.
Regardless, to shoot back on topic. We can't help but think about what kind of horrors are in our future. We find entertainment in the thought of it, through books and movies, such as 'The Hunger Games'. And today I'd like to present you with, my top five dystopian movies.

5. Mad Max trilogy (soon to be quintet)
Mad Max (1978), Road Warrior(1981), Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome(1985). And in development is Mad Max Fury Road and a untitled sequel.

Mad Max is the classic dystopia. After the world has been destroyed by nuclear war, all that is left is a desert wasteland called... um Australia.
We see that there is a society formed in the first film, a society that is attempting to hold onto the world as it once was, with some form of hierarchy. What we also see, is that not everyone agrees with the ideals of the past and have embraced the harshness of the world. A society that is lead by Tina Turner enjoy a classic piece of entertainment. Mortal Combat in the Thunderdome. They also dress bizarrely.
This is the world we could have been in if the cold war had ever truly heated up, a planet scorched, with natural resources used up in the war machine. With no nations, mankind has banded together in small groups, each with their own agenda, all at odds against one another. Its all very clique.

4. Terminator (Quadrilogy)
The Terminator(1984), T2:Judgment Day(1991), Terminator 3 Rise of the Machines(2003), and Terminator Salvation(2009).

The terminator dystopia is caused by our own natural development of technology. Some point in the future of... 1997 um. Oh wait, it like most apocalypses, got pushed back a few years. It actually ended up happening in 2003... The date isn't important.
What happens is we become so reliant on technology, the United States puts a computer known as “Skynet” in charge of its defenses. Thing is they make the computer to smart, and it becomes self aware. The operators where kind of wigged out I imagine, when their Mac turned on, and asked, 'Where am I? Why do I feel?'
So they quickly attempted to shut off the system. 'Skynet' in self defense... did this.

Over reaction much? In the end, mankind rose from the ashes, only to find that 'Skynet' had decided all of mankind was a danger to it, so we must be terminated.
This future shows mankind united against the horrific machines. Life is a terrible struggle, we have no time for love, and man, women, and child are all Soldiers. If you think Kony is bad? You should be going after John Connor.

Interesting, the paragraph I wrote for 'Logan's Run' pretty much mirrors the trailer perfectly.

3. Logans Run
Logans Run (1967)

Imagine a future, where we're all living together in a single domed city protected by the radiation of the outside world. We're happy, and free, plenty of food. More orgies then Caligula could shake his dick at. And there isn't a single catch... Except for something called Carrousel.
In this world, you have a little diamond implanted in the palm of your hand that keeps track of your age, and when you turn 30 you must show up, and partake in the event, Carrousel.
If you're lucky you may walk out of Carrousel 'renewed' meaning you get to continue to live in this cute little utopia we've built for ourselves.
Thing is, has anyone ever actually been renewed? Some people don't buy into Carrousel and attempt to run. Its then up to men called Sandmen to catch the runner and vaporize them. But the truth is the world outside the dome isn't irradiated, and the atmosphere isn't deadly.
This is a terrifying dystopia, well the movie isn't scary at all. Its very brightly coloured and, NOT the point. The point is that dystopia made up to look like utopia is a scary idea. But really whats the possibility of a government, lying to its people about false dangers, so they can control them more easily... right?


2. Class of 1984
Class of 1984 (1982)

Again, in the horrible future of 1984! Where the youths of a Toronto, disguised as New York are revolting! Drugs and violence are ramped among teens! Kids fear for their lives in graffiti filled hallways of inner city schools! Metal detectors at every entrance, due to the fear of guns being snuck into the class room and used on other students!
This dystopian future was... reality, that actually happened. When this film came out, people criticized it as not being realistic. But about ten years later, it was a reality. There was shootings in schools, metal detectors were installed, and people were afraid of their teens. This is a dystopian future that became real!... Sort of.

1. They Live
They Live (1988)

They Live is known for two things. This line:

And its 8 minute long fist fight that serves no other reason then to be, a 8 minute fist fight.
The story of They Live, REALLY isn't for everyone. John Nadda, played by Rowdy Roddy Piper discovers a pair of sun glasses allow him to see the world as it really is. I'll just show you.

If you're to lazy to watch that video at least to the 3 minute mark, then I'll give you the break down. The government, and the rich, are controlling us through the media, to be consumers, that don't question authority, and just obey.
This controlling portion of society are actually Aliens, who have quietly taken over the world and enslaved the human race. Which is really the most genius way to make someone a slave, you convince them that they're free!
This dystopia takes number one, because its a satire of the world we actually live in! John Carpenter was making a point with this movie. He was calling us all slaves to the media. He was trying to get us to swap our rose coloured glasses, for a bad ass pair of shades! This IS our world.


I haven't watched last nights episode yet, but I'm aware of what happens. I've read the comics, so I already know the gist of whats going to happen in the series as a whole. So I'm fine with spoilers for that reason. Plus, I want to know the spoilers, so when I watch it, my annoyance is lessened by having prior knowledge of the changes they've made.

Lets take a break from all the seriousness out there, and have a talk about something we all love. ZOMBIES. To be specific single zombies. All to often we lump these undead creatures together. We see them as a shambling horde, apposed to what they are. An undead army made up of individuals! So today I'm going to recognize some undead that really stand out from mob, as zombies of great distinction and class. Here is THE TOP FIVE ZOMBIES!

(This is purely my opinion, but if you disagree go a head and comment on you're own personal favourite zombie)


This is really important, this is serious, they are doing something insanely noble. BUT! There is a few things people will have to realize and accept if they are to capture Kony.

1. Capturing him wont mean peace. Capturing Kony will mean violence. A military force wont just knock down his door and arrest him. There will be a fight, cause Kony has an army. An army that does include children. Which brings the next point.

2. Capturing Kony will mean killing child soldiers. These kids are highly damaged individuals, they are not like any children you've ever seen before. They aren't going to recognize salvation, they are going to shoot at who ever is sent to capture Kony. Its important that we all realize, and accept this. Because in any other conflict we'd turn on the soldiers that kill children. And we cant its a harsh reality.

3. War crimes will be committed BY both sides. The moment a soldier is captured and mutilated by one of Koney's men, is the moment that the “good guys” will earn their quotations. Of course whatever crimes are committed by the “good guys” will probably be wiped away by victors justice.

4. Capturing Kony will not be the end, its just the beginning. His capture wont mean a magical ending, it'll mean YEARS of conflict. Because chances are they wont be able to capture all of Kony's senior officers. Plus there is the children, what about them afterwords? Is the situation simply going to be “Ok we cut off the lump, walk it off. What? Stitches? Be a man!” Cause these kids are going to need a very different type of aid in the end. Maybe send in Psychologist without Borders?

At the end of this all, I was left with thoughts of Romeo Dallaire. He has a similar program called 'Zero Force'. I'm curious to see if 'Zero Force' will work along with 'Invisible Children'. And if, or when, The Canadian Government will get involved. Because like Mrs. Lovejoy always said.

I keep seeing this goddamn picture of Adam Sandler in drag crushing a fucking horse. And in reply to that I offer up a cliche' “ Oh How the mighty have fallen.”

What the fuck is going on in Sandler's head? Does he have brain tumour, or growth on the interior of his skull that is putting pressure on the part of his brain that produces humour? When I showed my girlfriend the trailer to 'Jack and Jill' she replied to me, “Adam Sandler is dead to me.” And this made me question, how long exactly has he been a shambling corpse?

When did this guy go from funny man, to cinematic motaba virus? I mean I loved 'Billy Madison', 'Happy Gilmor', I can't tell you how many times I rented 'Waterboy'. And I had a friend who would watch 'Big Daddy' exclusively. Seriously it was the only movie he ever wanted to watch.

I loved those movies. But then some time after 'Mr. Deeds' he lost me. I watched 'Anger Management', and I pushed through '50 first dates', smiling at the end, because my face had cramped up from being so emotionless all the way through. And it needed to stretch.

What the fuck was going on? Why was he being so UN-funny?

Then it dawned on me, that Adam Sandler wasn't suddenly being 'unfunny' I had just grown out of him. He was no longer my cup of tea because I was no longer ten years old. I was maturing. My balls were sporting a crew cut, and pimples had taken root in my face. I was disgusting.

I had no interest in watching another film featuring Adam Sandler until 'Spanglish'. Sandler was hardly the focus of the story though, but the film was still good. It wasn't typical of Adam Sandler, it had its gimmick but didn't rely on it whole heatedly. And this direction he was going, of more “dramatic” roles that he had started with 'Punch Drunk Love' was going to be a good one, his yellow brick road.

Then he did the 'Longest Yard', which I didn't see due to my love of the original. Then it was 'Click'. My opinion of 'Click' is that it was shit, accept the end when he dies, and we get to see him be dramatic again. That dramatic bit at the end was fantastic, really they should have just cut out the gimmick of a magic remote and just had it be a story about life and how quickly it passes. Every day life is full of humour, and a comedian like Sandler could have easily drawn jokes from REAL LIFE, and created a excellent film. But instead we have him freezing time and farting in a witwouds face.

This is a good time to talk about Adam Sandler's gimmicks. Usually a story is built around a premise, but I've always felt Sandler's movies were built around gimmicks. It wasn't “The story about two firefighters getting married so they'd still get insurance.” as much as it was, “Adam Sandler pretends hes gay.” I'm getting a movie to far ahead though.

Before 'Chuck and Larry', there was a film that I just recently saw for the first time. I used it to wash the bad taste of 'Jack and Jill' out of my mouth. It was entitled 'Reign over me.' In it Sandler plays a severely psychologically damaged man who lost his family in the 9/11 attacks. He is full on dramatic, and is great. To think that he went from 'Reign over me' to 'Chuck and Larry' and 'Zohan' is sad. But not the most shocking part yet.

Next Sandler Movie I saw after 'Click' was 'Don't mess with the Zohan'. I was dragged to see it by a friend, who thankfully paid for my ticket. I'm not going to waste my time typing out my opinion of 'Don't mess with the Zohan', I'll simply defer you back to the clip of Nick Cage losing his shit.

After that cinematic mess that was Zohan, Sandler returned with 'Bedtime Stories' which was for children/I didn't see it, so I can't really knock it. But after that he joined up with his long time friend Judd Apatow to make a film called 'Funny People.' I love 'Funny People', its my favourite film featuring Adam Sandler.

I heard two frequent complaints about 'Funny People'. People say its to long, which is true. The length doesn't bother me, but I can see that complaint. The other thing is people say, “Its not funny.” My first complaint about that... complaint... is that first off, it may not be the same type of funny as 'Click', but it is very funny. Second, its not supposed to be funny you clod! The title is ironic. The movie is meant to show you a glimpse at the lives of Comedians, at different periods of their career.

One is Seth Rogen, at the start of his career, trying to find his footing and his comedic voice. The other is the big movie star George Simmions, played by Sandler, who has sold out on his comedy and is making shitty... gimmicky... huh. George Simmions is clearly based on Sandler. He is obviously poking fun at what his career has been reduced to. And that is where it gets fucked up.

HE KNOWS! He made 'Jack and Jill' knowing it was SHIT. He has openly mocked the types of movies hes pumping out, he pretty much says in 'Funny People'; “The people who like this shit are retarded.” And he STILL made 'Jack and Jill'. And people still went to go see it. I'm still forced to see ads proclaiming its DVD and Blue Ray release.

Adam Sandler is a comedic genius. Because he's openly mocked every single one of his fans. He has revealed his greatest joke in 'Funny People', and so many people missed it. The joke is, that he doesn't even need to try anymore. He just needs to make a silly sound or two, scrunch up his face in anger... and laugh all the way to the bank.