i decided to take a scary, healthy approach to life. yesterday i missed my bus home on purpose so i had to walk all the way. i stopped to have dinner (mixed veggies and rice) and spent an hour shopping for blueberry yogurts, donuts, milk, pears and.. bananas. this morning i had a yogurt and half a donut for breakfast, and a banana for lunch. tonight i missed the bus home on purpose again. i plan to walk home and have a can of mintestrone soup while watching buffy. i know. it's disgusting. don't worry. i'll tire. hopefully not before i reach the apartment tonight, though. whining loudly to yourself seem to scare other people a lot. bah. health. bah bah. it's all about the donuts.

so we just watched psycho in my film criticism class and once again i become the defender of teen slasher movies. somewhere in the process of getting to the age of 22, that's a cape i often get to wear in my media classes, and whenever there is a discussion, the same thing happens. teacher hails psycho as the best ever made. teacher slurrs out how he's tried watching slasher-movies over the years but always turn them off after a few minutes because they suck so bad. psycho is a wonder of editing, musical scoring and acting, and terrifies you. slasher-movies suck ass and people who enjoy them do too. my wording, i suppose. so, correct me if i'm wrong, but if you only like one semi scary movie from the 60'ies, and refuse to watch anything from the horror/slasher genre since because it is all crap, where do you get off believing you even GET to have an opinion and refuse to respect anyone with a different one? no, i am not trying to say that a nightmare on elm street part IV is better, or in any way an equivalent to psycho. what i am saying is why is it so hard to recognise that there are things in culture that you don't understand, don't appreciate, and hence do not partake in without mocking those who do? why is my knowledge, interpretations and thoughts on friday the 13'th received with a sneer and shake of the head a la "ah, kids" instead of some serious interest? i realise that a barbara cartland novel is different from a stephen king novel is different from a sylvia plath novel is different from a jean-paul sartre novel. Why does that mean that some subjects are always of lesser value in a seemingly appropriate setting? i won't be talking about barbara cartland novels in a british literature class because it is not the type of literature expected to be discussed in there, and i understand that. i fail to understand why it's not appropriate and even appreciated to hold serious discussions about slasher-movies in a film criticism class. it's a genre. a lot of it might not hold great water against film noir and serious drama's but hello? if we can hold a serious discussion about silence of the lambs or the blair witch project,then why can't we do the same with scream? harf. pathetic. i think he got mad because i dissed the shower scene in psycho. hehehe. big no-no. i know. it's my fault for analysing scary movies too much, i guess. it is NOT my fault that the chick died without any visable cause. no, i know, the knife is there, illusion, snip snip, stab stab, a bit of blood, chick dead. but there are no scars shown in her chest and from the speed she dies at, he would have to have stabbed her directly into the heart or lungs, at which case a WHOLE lot more blood would have splurted out. ghod. i get riled up too easily. really. hitchcock's lucky he shot it in black and white or i probably would have whined about the colour and consistency of the blood as well. ah, kids. :)