Posted on

WHO – Louis Isn’t the Problem. You Are. 1-4-19

Time to dust off the old typewriter for another ‘Will’s Honest Opinion’.

To begin, let me state that I am not for sexual misconduct, school shootings or shitting on transgender people, but in today’s overly incensed, irate, and entitled internet community; for whatever reason… I need to make that abundantly clear so that I can proceed. Moving forward, let me state quite plainly that what Louis CK said about school shootings, and transgender kids… was… get ready… A FUCKING JOKE. If you take umbrage with that, but enjoyed his material up until now, you’re a hypocrite. Being a faux racist and bigot has been his schtick  since he hit the scene. Does this joke really surprise you?

There are a bevy of “points” people seem to love bringing up when trying to back their own thought process on the subject. I’d like to address and squash those points.

To begin, attaching Louis’ prior behavior to a joke he was testing for new audiences; is conflating two issues into one, for the purpose of his direct negative portrayal. It serves your argument, and nothing more. It’s guilt by association, and it’s dangerous. If Bill Burr made this joke, would have it had the same outcry? And if you’re answer is “probably not” then you need to reevaluate what exactly it is your judging Louis CK for.

“But, Will, Louis did sex things to women.”

Good job. Here’s a cookie. What the fuck does that have to do with a joke about a school shooting? It seems obvious to demonize and point fingers at someone for prior acts of poor decision making or sexual misconduct when judging their work. It’s also lazy. Art (when separate from a criminalized act) must always be separated from the artist. Obviously this doesn’t apply to snuff films or something of that nature, where the act is art; but as a basic rule of thumb, you can’t allow prior or future deeds to dictate the relevance of that person’s work. Why? Because then you allow society to dictate what type of work is or isn’t acceptable due to possible out-of-date behavior. Society’s rules change gradually. What was acceptable 300 or even 50 years ago, could come into vogue suddenly, and vice-a-versa. Did you know Einstein married his cousin? I guess that didn’t matter because the ‘Theory of Relativity’ was too important to let go…

“Oh but, Will, he didn’t apologize.”

Here’s a news flash. He doesn’t owe you an apology. And most of the time, public apologies feel: rehearsed, coerced, or planned as a clear public relations tool. This is why we have courts and jail time. Our legal system judges him. Not you. The court of public opinion is fickle and biased, and therefor; unless you’re looking to chastise someone, useless.

Also incase you were wondering… he did actually apologize in a New York Times expose in November of 2017. Amazing how people forget what they want when it’s convenient for them at the time. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/10/arts/television/louis-ck-statement.html

“What he said was offensive.”

Grow up. The only person who can offend you, is you. Stop blaming other people for your problems. Louis is guilty of nothing more than trying out new material. All comedians do this at smaller shows, to see what works for their bigger televised events.

“I just didn’t find the joke funny…”

Great… no one cares. You don’t have to. I personally think Kat Williams is terrible. I’ve tried multiple times to listen to his stuff and I never laugh. I don’t waste time online commenting about how bad he is on other people’s posts. It’s because my ego and identity aren’t wrapped up in whether or not his jokes and thoughts appeal to me and my lifestyle choices. No one gives a shit about your 2-cents if you’re going to use them to actively engage in a flamewar with them. Predictably, those 2-cents are almost always worthless.

As far as the joke in question is concerned, I did find Louis’ jab at today’s self absorbed, Tik-Tok trancing high-schoolers, humorous.  I thought it shined a true light on our society’s values, and the entitlement demanded by some youth for accomplishing nothing; while also demanding they’re taken seriously. He’s not making fun of school shooting survivors. He’s pointing out society’s tolerance of it and how it’s seeped into mainstream culture; indirectly creating a reactionary base who can’t take a joke. In fact the entire outcry of the joke is a prime example of what he’s referring to. Those who argue against it are replacing the intended subject of the joke with a victim for the punchline. Saying “I don’t think it’s funny to make fun of transgender kids or school shooting victims” is actively missing the point he’s trying to make. He’s not poking fun at kids. He’s bemused by the larger systemic issue that those kids are involved in.

“He’s appealing to the Alt-right crowd.”

I love this one. This is pure tribalist labeling. Categorizing what someone is thinking, without evaluation, only makes the accuser feel better about their own ill-thought out stance. It doesn’t reveal the root cause or motive behind the act. When the news broke, the story was posted across multiple sites online. Yahoo had one of the more biased headlines: ‘Disgraced comic mocks school massacre survivors.’

If that doesn’t suggest your opinion for you, I don’t know what would. Any news outlet attempting to call him out like this, is clearly pushing their own agenda. Here, they’re actively trying to appease an ultra liberal base for the benefit of their own bottom line. Spinning any story past facts, lessens the credibility of the organization. With headlines like this, they’re no better than Fox. You have to be careful how you phrase things, because these types of headlines deliberately try to develop the same opinions for the audience clicking on them.

During Louis’ set, the crowd laughed and no one booed. If the internet is going to react the way they did, that shouldn’t be the barometer for what’s considered the mainstream definition of “offensive”. When that happens, anything could be considered offensive eventually. This goes back to the idea of separating the art from the artist.

Bill Maher made on obvious observation about 911 and got kicked off of CBS because he wasn’t part of the group think machine. Is it ok to make 911 jokes? Plenty of comedians have. That’s not an issue with the comedian. It’s an issue with a self serious reactionary crowd who hasn’t yet come to terms with the reality they live in.

“There are somethings you just don’t joke about.”

Wrong. You can joke about anything you want. The whole point of comedy is to push limits and reveal the irony and unfortunate cynicism that lurks in the underbelly of our society. Jokes make people think, and reveal insecurities about themselves. Self deprecation is the only way to truly evolve sometimes. If you can’t laugh at yourself… you’re full of yourself. Let go of your assumptions of how the world works (for you) and explore that ego backlash that’s putting you on the offensive. If you don’t like him,  don’t watch him. George Carlin never told a “joke” in his life, but his observations and insights rang true for an entire generation of people who hadn’t yet found someone to capture their voice so pristinely. And sometimes the world needs people to take those chances and say what’s not nice as a way to reveal the toxicity that we sometimes come to accept. Saying “you can’t joke about a thing” is a form of censorship, and nothing ever improved by keeping it off limits.

There are no boundaries in comedy. There are only boundaries in our own thinking. Break that thinking.
-Will Valle

Posted on

Will’s Honest Opinion – Too Hot To Handle – 2-20-18

A week ago I came across one of those dumb Facebook apps that change your face into something “cool”.
We’ve seen it before. You can be a cutesy animal, a french expressionist painting, a cartoon, or now with the onset of magical future tech, a member of the opposite sex. I had seen a few outputs floating around FB, and the website that hosted the app didn’t require a log-in to check it out, so I figured: “I’m bored and doing nothing, so let’s give this a whirl.” What began as a joke turned into an existential crisis as I had to seriously ponder the outcome of my life living as a man, and couldn’t help but be bogged down by the exuberant possibilities of what my life could have been should I have grown-up to be the girl that the app portrayed me as. I did it a few times, wondering: “is this a fluke?”  After 3 attempts, I realized… “ok… fuck… I’m a better looking female than I am a male.”

Needless to say, I was hot.

Each version looked like a female version of me, but also varied a bit from attempt to attempt. Lighting and shadow accentuated certain features over others, and I kept coming to terms with the idea that when I was single, these were the types of woman I was into. I guess it’s true, we do all have a type, and there’s a reason we see so many pairings out there that look like brother and sister couples.

Suffice to say, I was elated to be the sexiest girl on DT. So naturally I decided to make this my profile pic. It was pretty hilarious, and Sammy had the great idea to make a segment out of it on the show. Korey joked about how I should start a Go-Fund-Me for a sex change. I remember laughing, thinking: “that shit would break records”. The Children of the Toast had many “flattering” comments, but the scariest thing that happened was when I started to receive actual messages… In the coming days, I would start to undergo what could only be described as the weirdest experience I’ve ever had while being a member of Facebook in the past 11 years.

“Slipping into DM’s like it’s a guys job or something.”

It started out slowly but as the week progressed it became an almost hourly occurrence to receive multiple messages from someone complementing me. Usually it was just something simple like: “Yo, you as a woman is hot AF!” or “I’m not saying I’d smash but I def wouldn’t pass.” Now if this was just a bunch of comments on my post, I could understand it more because people are trying to be funny, or whatever. But these were direct messages. Why on earth would you tell me that? On top of the fact that, YOU KNOW WHO I AM! There’s no chance I’m not actually Will Valle. Wilma does not exist! And God, if she did, I hope her name wouldn’t be Wilma. The entire experience made me realize how fucking miserable it must be for some woman online dealing with this on the regular. It also dawned on me the almost impulsive like Id some guys act on, and feeling the need to literally “fuck anything that moves”. Even when it’s fake, in some realm, it’s real. And in a way you can’t blame people for being people. There’s virtually no difference between a real photo of someone online you’ve never met, and a fake one; whether they be on Facebook, Instagram. TV, porn, or an app rendering.


At this point I sent the photo to my friend, Luke, who remarked: “Wow they really rounded up, huh?” That’s when I knew I should be expecting more comments/compliments down the pike. The funniest part to me was when my girlfriend saw the pic and became jealous, asking if I wanted to have sex with the girl in the photo. As I’m thinking about how ludicrous the question was, I told her: “It’s a fucking computer composite!” But the more I thought about the question… the more I wanted to change the topic. The truth was, is the odd hypothetical started to fester in my brain. I didn’t want to wrap my head around it at the moment. And suddenly movies like ‘Blade Runner’ and ‘Spotless Mind’ had a deeper meaning. Was the true meaning of happiness within myself? The obvious answer is ‘yes’, but being a hot white girl in a digital universe answered questions I hadn’t even asked before. Like why people catfish, or go into chats as someone they’re not. The whole concept seems to fill a need in all of us. It’s why we Instagram selfies, or drop our 2¢ on topics that really have nothing to do with us. It’s about more than playing to the crowd. It becomes self congratulatory, and fulfills a momentary void.

Wanting what you can’t have isn’t a human condition though; it’s an animal instinct. A few years ago a story was reported in western Australia about a certain type of Jewel Beetle that is known for it’s attraction to, and attempted copulation with large brown beer bottles. The reason being, the bottles resemble a more attractive version of other female beetles sought out during mating season. Even when the female beetle (beer bottle) is unresponsive, or an infestation of local scavenger ants that will literally eat the male beetle alive while in the act, threatens the beetle, the beetle can not be dissuaded from it’s mission. Whether or not the bottle is real has no bearing, because at that moment it’s just enough to entice the male.

Draw whatever conclusion you want from that, but the simple truth remains; the digital age of acquisition is only getting broader. A week ago sites like PornHub actually banned fake celebrity porn videos from softwares like DeepFakes from being uploaded. This suggests to me that as the line between real and fake becomes more and more blurred, and the internet has become so many people’s only outlet or form of communication; who’s to say who the lower lifeform is; the man or the insect. At least those beer bottles were real.

-Will Valle

Posted on

Will’s Honest Opinion – The Movie Faux Pas – 1-9-17

In what appears to be a case of something being way too good to be true, MoviePass has hit the scene like a bat out of hell (on it’s way to the latest Marvel flick). In instances like these, the question inevitably arises about the longevity of such an endeavor. I remember when Netflix came out, and it almost seemed like the business model itself was unsustainable. Netflix now boasts over 99 million subscriptions; and to follow suit, MoviePass announced today that they have over 1.5 million users. A monthly subscription that pays for itself after only one use seems a bit like a scam to many; as well it should. But is it? I’ve been using the card for over two months now with the new locked in $10 a month rate, and these are my findings.

Less then a month after I signed up I received an email from MoviePass offering a discounted rate with a one time annual fee of $70 instead of the $10 monthly expense I previously agreed to. I found this to be highly suspect. What if they’re not around in 6 months? Then I would have forfeited over possibly $40 or $50 bucks instead of only being charged for the months I used it. It made me question MoviePass’ projected earnings and future success; that is until I realized who was truly benefiting from this. Hint: It’s not MoviePass directly…

To begin, this may actually be a better deal for studios than their consumers. Imagine the service is akin to a gym membership. I bought my Planet Fitness membership 8 years ago for $10 a month. I go maybe 4 months a year, but it’s nice knowing I can go whenever I want. To me the service is worth the price due to my infrequency of use. Now if I was to spend on average $75 a month on a gym membership, I feel I would need to move into that place to make my subscription worth that price. I don’t go every single day, so such a high entrance fee is anything but nominal.

Originally MoviePass offered unlimited movies for $40 a month. But is “unlimited” truly unlimited? If the average ticket price is $10, this averages out to one movie per week. But that price is still a bit steep. Cinephile or not, frequenting a theater once a week for non-critics and casual movie-goers isn’t realistic. But with the price lowered to $10 a month, that’s a guaranteed $120 annual profit that the studios get a cut of regardless of audience attendance. Will the average consumer spend $120 a year on movie tickets? Maybe, maybe not. But those who go, make up for those who don’t. And for those who go possibly once a month or so, it’s still worth having the MoviePass for the convenience of going whenever they want.

Right now, it’s not hard to find a million articles telling you how to use your MoviePass to it’s full potential, or how movie studios are shaking in their boots because of possible revenue loss incurred by the red plastic card. The Verge posted an article last month with the headline: “Theater Chains are Terrified of MoviePass Because of People Like Me.” To cut to the chase, this is total bullshit. These theaters thrive off of articles like these, because they want their consumers to think they’re gaming the system. What they won’t tell you is that once through the door, with a minimal entrance fee, patrons are now more likely to buy popcorn, soda and candy on site because of the perceived ticket discount. This is a revenue stream not shared with studios. That’s now all cash being directly funneled into AMC, and Galaxy, etc etc. Movie theaters are not movie theaters. They’re candy stores.

Let’s also be real for a minute. Yes you can go to one movie a day for a month, but will you? Could you even do it? The terms and conditions state that you can’t see more than one movie per day. So the possibility of abusing the system becomes difficult because on average no more than three new movies are released per week; so even at full force, you wouldn’t be able to see 30 movies in a month unless you wanted to see the same ones over and over. Which brings us to our next point; the issue of timing.

It’s no secret that January is a dumping ground for studios. It’s when they unload their shelved garbage and begin to prep for their summer lineup. MoviePass making it’s big foray into public consciousnesses now is an odd choice. It doesn’t have the backing of a guaranteed knock-out summer programming schedule to rely on. Granted, I purchased my card early enough that I was able to see ‘Thor’, ‘Justice League’, and ‘The Last Jedi’ with it, but even for studio blockbusters, those were all oddly timed releases. Historically those three movies would be guaranteed summer fare. This month so far I’ve only used it to see ‘All the Money in the World’… and maybe I’ll see ‘Downsizing’..? Neither movie I could in all honestly tell you I would have paid to see in theaters in the past. Those are both by definition, a Netflix/HBO offering to me. But I went because I could. Meaning what exactly? For the consumers it’s not a great time to purchase the card but it’s money in the bank for the studios.

In fact, you could make the argument that MoviePass is the win the studios need right now, and desperately so. The line-up for 2018 is bleak. Now this doesn’t take into account the possibility of sleeper hits lying dormant until their release date. We’re all waiting with baited breath for the next ‘Get Out’ or ‘Baby Driver’, but as far as anticipated big budget blockbusters go, there’s like 4 in the queue? Maybe? This is a pretty paltry offering compared to the last few years.

It’s no secret the overdue Superhero Film Franchise collapse is closing in. DC doesn’t have anything really interesting coming out this year. I mean ‘Aqua-man’ might be tremendous, but I would never consider paying to see it. ‘Justice League’ soured me so badly that it made me want to swear off all new DC films. And I liked ‘Batman vs Superman’!!! And this is why MoviePass is the right service at the right time…for the studios; not for general audiences.

People are just not going to the movies like they used to. And with VOD and DTO, why would they?

Recently we had to play the world’s smallest violin for the film industry as another report surfaced that Hollywood had it’s worst fiscal year in over two decades. 2017’s ticket sales were the lowest anyone had seen since 1992. By 1994, the film industry would begin to find a way out of it’s rut. It also had one of the biggest human interest stories ever to hit households. As a way to break the ice with it’s millions of viewers, TV stations brought the Tonya Harding/Nancy Kerrigan rivalry directly into their living rooms. Now, in 2018, as a way to get assess back in seats, the same story is being told over a quarter of a century later with: ‘I, Tonya’. The comparison may seem silly, until you realize that the only reason a huge subset of movie goers even saw “I, Tonya” was because they used their MoviePass to do it. Begging the question, who’s really the ones getting their legs snapped here?

-Will Valle