To tell you how my brain works, I remember the hoops we had to go through to get you unbanned (ultimately with you, what, making a new Google account?) much, much more than I remember most of the commentaries. That and, like, the usernames of people on Twitter I kept making new graphics for.

If that song wins anything, I'm going to projectile cry acid tears at the nearest completely defenseless woodland creature.

Do the Wachowskis go on the "greatest American directors? list?

Wait, first?

What's your David O. Russell thing?

Goddamnit Phil, you're alive, you're dead, you're alive... you're a bad-ass, you're a wimp, you're a bad-ass... pick a thing.

...

I said Hufflepuff on the show, what has just happened here is the result of the wine I have had tonight.

Merry Christmas, everybody!

Damn, BBQ. I like your dialogue.

Okay, I'm not convinced of the following, but it's been a wee thought in the back of my head for a couple days, and Doc's post makes the wee voice just a little louder:

I [almost] think what we're seeing here is an art piece - one that he's doing, if not with Clowes, with Clowes' awareness. And I [almost] think he's making a poorly-communicated statement about why piggybacking on someone else's art to prop yourself up is bad. [IE, he and Clowes colluded on a quest to make a point here, hence picking the thematically-related "film critics are just standing on the shoulders of actual artists to attract attention to themselves" Clowes story and rolling it out in such a way that it was a safe bet the world would do exactly what it did.]

Now, like I said, I don't actually think that yet, nor may I ever, but I have gotten a couple whiffs that smell from some of how this has played out.

If you put on your fun-time conspiracy goggles for a second and imagine this whole thing - film, release, internet blowback, incredulous commentary from the world - as a premeditated statement instead of a PR meltdown, it makes a kind of sense. We've been saying for days that it's not like he couldn't have predicted this. He absolutely should have known it would take the internet two seconds to realize he was cribbing Clowes. Well, for funsies, imagine if he did? What would be going on there?

Well, a comic book nobody otherwise cared about was very faithfully adapted to the screen and released to the massive publicity and benefit of its original creator, and aside from how much shit he's getting right now for the roll-out plan, the film itself has been widely lauded artistically and folks have been impressed by Boof's direction. Shia's been desperate to prove himself as a creative individual beyond Transformers for a long time, and it could make sense - to someone, in some universe - that a good way to embed that idea in people's heads is to be involved in a high profile prank with a beloved comic artist, making a point about artistic integrity, that he dropped on the world after stirring up the shit for a few days to get attention. And then what are we left with? Clowes got his name way out into the otherwise-wouldn't-have-heard-of-him-world with a well-received film adaptation of one of his forgotten stories that wouldn't have been adapted otherwise, Shia looks all clever-like and Jimmy Kimmel-ish for making the whole world think he was a giant doofus before he clonked them on the head with his point about... criticism and piggybacking, I guess ... and folks now associate him with Franco-y "artfag" cred and solid direction, instead of Transformers.

...

Do I believe any of that? Nnnnnnnnnnnot really, no, that's just retconning the world around me because I'm tired and bored. But I could see that being a thing, hamfisted or otherwise, a couple of high profile creative dudes came up with while smoking a bowl.

And it's not like the truth makes any sense either, shit.

Just looked at a page from the comic, and - ha. Yikes. Alrighty.

Paulou, being just such the badass he is.

Negative.