He spoke to Sarah Ball:

What are you doing in Thailand?
I’ve been in the cutting room all night, working on a new film I’m directing called “Full Love.”

How ‘ s it coming?
Good. You go through that certain depression because the actors are all leaving, but they’re there now with me in the cutting room.

Why did you want to make a film that comments on your own life?
I made this just to show some of the internal side of J.C.V.D., in a way. He’s a guy, a normal guy from Belgium with dreams, and I did well in that type of path. At the age of 47, to take chances and go back to Europe and be talking to some studios there, I’m showing them that I believe I’m good quality.

There ‘ s a monologue in the film about being a washed-up action star. Did you improvise that?
I like structure—like driving: go past the school on the street, stay on the right side, no hitting the car, go in right, you’ll see a big church, stop and take a left, and you’ll have it. By doing this I’m giving a structure of life, a path of light, and showing what happens between me and me, which is something very beautiful.

Beautiful? Why?
I really opened myself up in “JCVD.” I peeled back the skin of the fruit, cut the pulp and then took that very hard seed. In this film I cut that hard seed, and inside that seed was a kind of liquid cream substance of the man I am, or the woman you are.

OK —
It was like being naked—I would love to be naked in front of you.

Well, I —
Not being naked being naked. I say such things in Hong Kong and they thought I was being a crazy Frenchman. Being naked of protection.

So you ‘ ve no regrets at all?
Believe me—I’ve done very good stuff and very crazy stuff, and I don’t regret the crazy stuff. So are you in New York?

Yes, I am.
And are you 27, or 32?

I ‘ m 22.
Oh, f–––. That is very young. Will you come to the premiere?

I don ‘ t know. When is it?
I don’t know. You will wear all black, a black dress and high heels?

Uh —
You can come find me, I will be the one with the very broad shoulders, dark hair and a simple suit. We can have some champagne, you and me.

Why Are Taxpayers Paying Lavish Bonuses to Retain the People Who Screwed Up AIG?

American International Group, the insurance giant that has swallowed $152 billion in federal subsidies in just a few months, “plans to pay $503 million in deferred compensation to some of its top employees, saying it must tap the funds to keep valuable workers from exiting the troubled insurance giant,” Carol Leonnig of The Washington Post reported a few days ago. I suspect all the gold being shoveled to AIG is a colossal blunder by the George W. Bush administration. Money to reinforce Fannie Mae or to buy stock in banks may or may not be a wise decision, but at least there is accountability regarding where the funds end up. The money being shoveled to AIG is simply vanishing — AIG isn’t even telling the Treasury Department what the money is for. When the General Services Administration buys pencils, many layers of auditors check the deal. Isn’t it a tad naive to think $152 billion can be entrusted to a firm with a demonstrated track record of financial mismanagement and that money is not going to be looted? The Treasury Department’s handling of AIG appears to be spectacular irresponsibility with public money.

The people who work here give away your money to the Wall Street rich. But they ask tough questions! Such as, “How much do you want?”

Now, about the $503 million in tax-subsidized bonuses to prevent “top employees” from “exiting the troubled insurance giant.” The top employees of AIG are the ones who drove the company into the ground by making crazy deals, taking on bad debt or promising to insure bad debt when they knew AIG lacked adequate collateral. Those “top employees” at AIG are either cheats or incompetents — we want them to leave! They haven’t demonstrated any financial expertise. Yet the same AIG top managers who did a terrible, terrible job are set to receive huge bonuses: an example of the problem that corporate bonuses are awarded regardless of performance.

Management-suite types often rationalize huge bonuses by threatening to jump to another job. What job exactly would a top AIG employee jump to? The financial services industry is contracting; lots of well-qualified people with strong résumés are out on the street; no financial firm in its right mind would hire a failed manager from AIG over the fully qualified financial managers looking for work. AIG top employees have no career options right now; it is inconceivable any other financial firms are offering them lavish raises to hire them away. So “retention bonuses” aren’t necessary. But either the Treasury Department is too dim-witted to realize this or it doesn’t care and is merely trying to redistribute wealth from the middle class to the rich by allowing tax-subsidized bonuses that the giveaway team at Treasury knows perfectly well are not merited.

Side note: You might think, “How could the fancy-degree top people at Treasury possibly be that completely, utterly stupid?” But Treasury officials have a self-interest in maintaining the assumption that financial managers should receive gigantic bonuses regardless of performance. Almost everyone at the top of Treasury came from the firms being bailed out, plans to return to such firms and wants to pocket gigantic bonuses regardless of performance. So not only is the Treasury Department acting irresponsibly with tax money but its top executives have a personal stake in irresponsible action.

Sure he’s just telling us what we are all thinking, but in a sports column? He is also very hard on NFL coaches, which is always music to my ears. For what its worth, extra-heavy mayo is straight-up diabolical.

“Hey, you want $100 for your car?”

“Hell no - it has at least that much gas in it.”

“How about if I offer you…CASH!?” while waving around 50 two-dollar bills.

“Please die now.”

I guess this goes at least as far back as the glory days of the pawn shop. The dusty, poorly-lit establishments where desperate souls would sell anything valuable and/or of a questionable background - for “CASH!” I have only been in a pawn shop once, and the prices did not impress. Some of the old crap was cool - classic video games and old electronics. I also remember thinking that when individuals need “CASH!” to either get their husband out of jail or save their thumbs from Guido, guns and bowling balls are always the first in hock.

I’m thinking of trying that in less traditional situations. Ebay doesn’t offer a separate “Buy it now - in CASH!” option I can use as a seller. But when a company is truly desperate? I wonder how much “CASH!” they’ll take for General Motors?

Now look at this.

The archdeacon in this scene sings about how he must have the Gypsy Esmeralda above all things or he will burn her to death. Irony rings in with the fact that the song refers to multiple types of fire: His own desires for the gypsy, her ability to bewitch men, and the burning of her to death. All of these are topics meant for children to be sure.

Comments Welcome. Enjoy.

Recently, I graduated from college. Before you flood me with golf claps, let me inform you that I have been in and out of higher education for over 16 years. Matter-of-fact the above picture is my graduation announcement - to emphasize my point. Anywhoo, my sad desperation to make up lost time has become palpable. Nay, it has become an absolute driving force in my life. Maybe it is an early mid-life crisis, I may never know. Maybe the fact the schooling is free - nah, that can not be it. Regardless of why, I have started my MBA. This has lead me to attend a marketing class, the first in my long, illustrious student career.

Surprisingly, I enjoyed it and learned a lot. One thing the professor emphasized was the cost of a marketing campaign. I built my theoretical one around The Lunch Game, the best Facebook application ever. As far as I was concerned this innovation, handed down to my friends by the grace of Zeus himself, could be pimped successfully with whatever I could dig out of my car seats. But alas, my arm was twisted behind my back to force me to spend hundreds of thousands of hard-earned yet simulated cash.

So I can relate when I see the Pepsi logo redesign madness - and the cost. But let me assure you that rolling out a new branding for a huge corporation is nothing to be taken lightly - so if the logo is a worthwhile expression of the corporate identity then…

Wait…that’s it? Jeezus. Hundreds of millions of dollars for that? Holy crap. Maybe the entire campaign will make sense if you see the marketing video presentation:

Find more videos like this on AdGabber

Or maybe not. Apparently, the economy is going to hell in a handbasket but bloated, overkill marketing screwjobs are still alive and well.

*********

Speaking of economical hell, I can not express strongly enough how surreal it is reading business rags in this day and age. It’s a lot like reading christian magazines if the apocalypse was dragging out for months and months. I imagine article titles would include “Why That Handjob in the Back of your Dad’s Pontiac in ‘87 is Coming Back to Haunt You” and “Pitchfork Proof and Loving It - The Fourteen Homeless that Knew”. I came across yet another article about how General Mills is saving bundles by “optimizing” their Hamburger Helper products. Specifically, they are minimizing the number of pasta shapes. I know I have expressed in the past my distaste in these particular foodstuffs, and the fact it still sells billions sickens me. “You are killing yourselves and your kids” might not be a strong enough argument. In this day and age of watching your budget, I am trying another approach: the actual frugality of the ghastly boxes of salty doom. Check out my math (all prices from Albertson’s online as I write this):

Box of Hamburger Helper = $2.99

1 pound of ground beef, being conservative = 2.99

2 cups of milk = 1 gallon/8 = 3.99/8 = .50

Total cost = $6.48/2 servings = $3.24 per person

—————————-

Now compare this to something way more tasty, way more convenient, and with probably a lot less sodium and fat:

Stouffer’s Frozen Lasagna with Meat Sauce family size = $8.99/3 servings = $2.99 per person

—————————-

You may wonder why those serving numbers don’t match the boxes. Well, if those boxes had asses, you know they would be flat-out lying out of them. In the history of Hamburger Helper, a box has never been split between more than two hungry people over the age of four. Also, Stouffer’s goes down pretty easy - especially if it has had time to coagulate in the refrigerator, then brough to luke-warm before devouring. In conclusion, I’m pretty sure if the apocalypse does come, it will commence with a Hamburger Helper Beef Stroganoff hailstorm.