“You are listening to a machine. Do the world a favor and don’t act like one.”

Computers and the internet revolutionized our society from an efficiency standpoint like no other invention since perhaps indoor plumbing. Everyday human transactions have been made simpler and quicker for everyone with access. Online banking, ordering take out sans translator, and buying books minus the snide remarks from the aficionados at Barnes and Noble, can all be accomplished from the comfort and privacy of your home without interacting with anyone at all. But as we all know, all good things should be taken in moderation.

This week we learned how that idiom applies to technology. Our over-reliance on computer advances has come back to bite us. One of our most sacred traditions, a beacon of hope for a few minutes of fame and a small sum of money for trivia geeks and the bookish among us, has been tarnished by machinery. If you haven’t already heard, IBM has developed a computer named Watson that can defeat humans on Jeopardy!   

But, aside from potentially destroying one of the longest running shows on television, this type of computer based efficiency brings up other issues. Eliminating human interaction from daily life, obviously, dehumanizes it and removes all the quirks that go with it. While perhaps making decisions more proficiently by relying on hard facts, it eliminates some of the so called softer realities that we as humans face making for a less robust and, in many examples an unjust, outcome.

Further, how do we know that “trusted” sources haven’t been hacked into or that those sources can really be trusted to begin with? Some argue that our current economic crisis was caused by some investment modeling that turned out to be wrong, that people – individual investors and professional bankers alike – were fooled, or blinded, by misleading data. President Bush presumably launched the Iraq War on what he and others now consider flawed intelligence. It is these two examples that are most troublesome, much more so than a misquoted academic paper or an algorithm procured date gone wrong. 

There is one fictional man to blame for all this: Professor Stephen Falken.

I know what you are thinking. Hey Josh, what about that episode of Superfriends where Professor Goodfellow built the G.E.E.C. machine that allowed humans to do away with physical labor? Or the episode of the Jetsons when George made that robot mad and he turned all the computers against him? Or the HAL 9000 from 2001: A Space Odyssey going haywire? Well, dear reader, those are the warnings that have so far kept us from completely giving into a fully computerized world. That is not how Professor Falken wanted it.

If you are not familiar with the 1983 film War Games starring Matthew Broderick and Ally Sheedy – shame on you, it’s brilliant – here is the low down: A teenage outcast named David Lightman (Broderick) mistakenly hacks into the military’s war simulation computer, the WOPR (big miss there on product placement, Burger King). Believing he has reached the digital catalogue of a company that makes gaming software, he begins to play a simulation game called Global Thermonuclear War that was initially developed by Professor Falken. The WOPR begins to run the simulation on the computers at the NORAD headquarters where, at the behest of one of Falken’s disciples, the military brass has adopted this program to manage and strategize the launch sequence of America’s entire nuclear arsenal, while, and here is the funny part, removing the men who turn the keys from the silos. Needless to say, the US Commanders believe we are under attack – unprovoked mind you, during the era of MAD – and bring the world to the brink of nuclear war. In typical 80s film style, the world is saved at the last minute after some minor intervention from David and the Professor (more on this later).

So why not blame Falken’s former assistant, McKittric (Dabney Coleman), since he is the one who actually argued for the removal of the men from the silos? He seems like an obvious choice, no? But blaming him would be like blaming Stalin for creating communism, when it was Marx and Engels who proposed it. He simply carried it out, even though it was somewhat corrupted from its original version. And like Stalin, McKittric doesn’t act because of some altruistic motive; he is out for personal gain – in his case career advancement and his own pride in the system.

Professor Falken, on the other hand, is an avowed scientist – we see him wearing a lab coat, so he must be – and created computer games in the early years of their existence. His focus was on games of strategy, and his work with the Department of Defense led him to develop the Global Thermonuclear War simulator. By his own words, his system was developed, “To find a way to practice nuclear war without destroying ourselves. To get the computers to learn from mistakes we couldn’t afford to make.” Essentially, to let the computers learn to think and remove that burden from us. Sound familiar, Watson?

By the time we meet him in the film, he is living as a recluse on an island in Oregon, his identity changed by the Department of Defense to protect him from potential Soviet espionage. He has survived the tragedy of his wife and young son being killed in a car accident, but has faked his own death and his life is now spent studying dinosaurs in what seems to be an obsession with extinction. You know that song about people who need people. Well, it’s not on Falken’s playlist I can assure you. He has no use for humanity and believes that its annihilation, by its own hands, is inevitable.

David, having researched him extensively, has tracked him down and tries to convince him to come to NORAD with him to explain to them that what they are seeing is not real. But Falken is reluctant to go, almost wishing that the military’s destruction of humanity is carried out, even saying that they are only a few miles away from a prime target and would be instantly vaporized, being “spared the horror of survival.” He adds, “Humanity is planning its own destruction – that a phone call won’t stop,” before completely scaring off David and Jennifer (Sheedy).

Falken decides to “help” and flies David and Jennifer to NORAD in his private helicopter (why this man has his own helicopter is beyond me. Plus, does he even have a license to fly it?). I put that in quotes because I don’t believe that Falken cares one way or the other if the world is destroyed and this is the crux of the case against him. His interest in this situation is strictly one of a scientist with a bit of a God complex, to kind of stand to the side and test his theories on a grand stage. He just wants to see if man will destroy himself because a computer tells him he should, as he theorizes he will. If the world is destroyed, great, his computers would be the survivors and he the creator of the new world. Should the world not be destroyed, that’s fine too. It was only a failed experiment anyway. I offer two pieces of evidence to support this: his words to the General Beringer immediately before the film’s climactic sequence and his attitude during it.

As he enters the military command center on the brink of war, he jokes with McKittric, his former assistant (“I see your wife still picks out your ties.” Ha!) as if he is totally oblivious to what is about to happen. Then, approaching the general who is hell-bent on winning by launching the missiles, tells him, “You are listening to a machine. Do the world a favor and don’t act like one.” In other words, let my little experiment continue. This is a red herring and counter to Falken’s stated goal: that the computer would learn futility and eliminate the need for inferior human interference. He actually wants him to intervene and prove him right. But, if the General were to act like this particular machine, we find, he would have avoided war just as well as the computer eventually does, similar as to if a person were to act like Watson, he would win on Jeopardy!

During the entire game sequence, Falken just stands there, not a worry on his face. In fact, he appears to be mildly amused that in everyone else’s minds, the world is about to end. It’s as if he doesn’t really care about the safety of the world or the fate of the millions outside NORAD. Like many academics he just cares about teaching the lesson whether the practical outcome is favorable or not, and testing his theories. He’s been down this road before with his experiments as he is quick affirm David’s suggestion to have the machine play Tic Tac Toe to learn that sometimes there are no winners, followed by his knowledge that to have it play itself he would need to enter players ”Zero”. Notice he did not offer this solution and only provided it when asked – all part of his scientific approach.

Watching the scene unfold, we see there is nothing the human players can do to stop the computer from running the course of the game. Everything they do is futile and really does nothing to stop or help the situation except for General Beringer taking us to DEFCON 1, a necessary variable for launching the missiles. He is duped by what he sees on the screen into taking that drastic step. Surprise, humans are fallible.

The computer runs simulation after simulation, with the threat looming that missiles will actually be launched. Game after game ends in a draw. Faster and faster we go, watching the world destroyed multiple times in a variety of strategic attacks. Finally, after all strategies have been exhausted and none produce a winner, the computer stops. Addressing his creator and the military brass, he exclaims: “Strange game. The only winning move is not to play.” (Seemingly, computers don’t have the same attitude about Jeopardy!) The crisis ends and peace wins the day with the return to DEFCON 5. 

What we find at the end, because of Falken’s callousness, is that computers can make correct decisions solely on logic and humans more or less can’t because of emotion, knowledge of history and the other quirks that make every day life what it is. But Falken created a world where computers can do all the thinking and come up with all the right outcomes by turning those softer realities into hard facts that the computer can understand, such as futility. This is more or less the same thing we are seeing with Watson, except we are now witnessing the destruction of the world of game shows. Perhaps, Watson will one day learn the futility of such games. After all, what is a machine going to do with all that money and those parting gifts anyway?

What’s the big deal? So there will be one less platform for advertisers to try to sell you things you don’t need, right? Well, yes. But by creating such a program he, and now IBM, has allowed us to think that the machine would correct itself, and has allowed us to let down our guard; to allow us to think less and become less intellectual overall. Take for instance the aforementioned computer modeling of financial instruments. A non-thinking public spent itself into bottomless debt, often because this computer modeling and projections gave banks the go ahead to lend more and more money to people who could clearly not afford it.

So thanks to Professor Falken, we have computers like Watson, not to mention Deep Blue, that aim to remove the thinking man from humanity and are at DEFCON 1 in the attack on game shows. We can only hope that Are You Smarter Than A Fifth Grader? is next on the list of Watson’s targets. But maybe it will all be okay. If it’s one thing I learned from Double Dare, it’s that you can always take the physical challenge.

Do you have a real world problem that may have been caused by a fictional character?  Feel the need to defend a fictional character that has been erroneously charged with causing one?  Let me know in the comment section or email me your suggestions.  I’m ready to believe you.  

We have all been, at one time or another, victims of poor customer service. The idea that “the customer is always right” seems to be something of the past although many companies seem to be getting the message that the customer will vote with their wallets if they don’t get what they want. So while things may be improving in some areas, there must be some reason why customer service was allowed to get so bad for so long.

For this I turn your attention to the 1988 film Big, starring Tom Hanks.If you are not familiar with the plot (I can’t take this for granted since I only recently found out that my wife never saw Ghostbusters – we are seeking counseling) it goes something like this: A young boy named Josh Baskin, after a series of abuses due to his shortness, makes a wish on a fortune telling Zoltar machine. His wish is “to be big”. Instead of just making Josh taller, Zoltar turns him into a grown up (played by Mr. Hanks) who goes on to dance on a larger than life piano and becomes an executive at a toy company, before tracking down Zoltar to fix the mistake months later. 

Here is the case against him. Zoltar is a man of unknown origin. Like many of today’s customer service representatives, we have reason to believe he is not from the US. (He may even be on any number of terrorist watch lists. What kind of name is Zoltar anyway?) He is clearly suspect for the existence of poor customer service – at least that since 1988.

A review the recorded transaction for training and quality control purposes brings us further evidence…Sure Josh’s request is kind of vague – he could have said “taller” and that would have ended the movie right there – but he clearly wasn’t asking to become a grown up. I mean, didn’t we already learn that there is some need for interpretation in the “Greg Gets Grounded” episode of The Brady Bunch, where Greg is forbidden to drive the family car after a near collision, so instead borrows his friend’s car to go on a date? Just going by the customers “exact words” doesn’t always work. You need to be able to think. And that is what is lacking from many customer service calls. The companies they work for provide the script and deviation is either frowned upon or simply impossible. Apparently, in Zoltar world “big” only has one meaning and that meaning is being an adult. Something is lost in the translation. 

Not only that, but there is no accountability since many of these customer service representatives use aliases, fake names that aren’t even common in their country. Their deceit not only goes unpunished, but is rewarded. This lack of accountability can be traced back to Zoltar’s managers. Even after Zoltar’s massive mix up he still kept the job, although he was shipped from carnival to amusement park to warehouse. How many others were harmed in this obvious cover up?

If I were defending Zoltar instead of blaming him, I would point to a rash of age and body shifting comedies that came out around this time – Like Father, Like Son (which starred Kirk Cameron and whose title now seems to take on another meaning in light of Mr. Cameron’s more recent projects. Was the Holy Spirit not available as well?), Vice Versa and 18 Again!. Perhaps Zoltar was just caught up in the moment and, being a shrewd Hollywood type, he hedged his bets that his story would be the best of this particular sub-genre. He was right.

So, Zoltar, your personal gain became everyone else’s annoyance. You managed to create an atmosphere in which poor customer service and a misunderstanding of the needs of the customer were, if not acceptable, simply expected. The lack of thought asked of these brave men and woman, sitting in a far off land, trying to make sure that the customer’s order of commemorative Civil War coins is shipped to the correct address was caused by your inability to think about what was being asked of you.  

Perhaps we are entering a new period, thanks to the internet and a more vocal customer base, where your misdeeds are being corrected. Bet you didn’t see that coming. Some fortune teller, and customer service professional, you are!

“No-one’s gonna really be free until nerd persecution ends.”

Many Americans do not live healthy lifestyles, leading to an obesity epidemic. I know this because there is a featured story on it on the nightly news just about every week and there are a bunch of shows on basic cable covering it, not to mention The Biggest Loser. Since this is all happening on TV, we can’t honestly blame real live people for this problem. So where do we start? Ronald McDonald, Burger King and that demon-haired Wendy are on the list to begin with. Not to mention the militaristic Colonel Sanders, rounding out our usual suspects. But those characters have all taken steps to clear their names and have cleaned up their menus as best they could, for the sake of public opinion. Thorton Mellon, would be a good candidate since his Big and Tall Stores take advantage of the overweight (“If you want to look thin, hang out with fat people,” his TV ad prescribes.) But his athleticism on the diving board should, and does, exclude him from blame.

No. It’s Lewis, Gilbert, Takashi, Booger, Wormser, Poindexter, Lamar and the rest of the Tri-Lams of Adams College, heroes of The Revenge of the Nerds movie franchise, that are our villains here. (What were they getting revenge for anyway? Being forced to “live” in the gym? Doesn’t seem like a bad idea for a nation on the brink of a collective pants splitting.) In their victory in the eternal struggle between brains and brawn, the Tri-Lams took down the hyper-athletic Alpha Betas, and with them the idea that being physically fit is good. Even Stan Gable, Adams College quarterback and Alpha Beta, in a rare moment of intelligent reflection states, “Those nerds are a threat to our way of life.” How right he was.

Not that the Tri-Lams were completely adverse to exercise and a healthy lifestyle. The Tri-Lams themselves were not obese, though the same could not be said for their Sorority friends, the Omega Mus. In fact if you look at each of the Tri-Lams physically, maybe only Booger has a few extra pounds around the gut. Most of them were just out of shape bean poles.  

You may also point out that several of the contests in Homecoming Olympics involved some form of athleticism. But the case against them begins with the fact that they did not win these contests fairly.

Example one — The javelin throw. Lamar, who was probably the most in shape of any of the Tri-Lams, since we see him on several occasions doing aerobics, can only win by using a javelin that has been modified to account for his limp-wristed throwing motion. This hardly seems legal, but apparently the rest of the Greek system at Adams College was too drunk or stupid to appeal.  

Example two — The Arm Wrestling Contest. While going up against a girl, Booger, true to his name, picks his nose right before the contest is to start, basically grossing out the female contestant into submission. Not exactly a show of physical strength, or good sportsmanship for that matter.

Example three — The Tug of War. In the contest that would require the most use of energy (aside from the drunken tri-cycle race in which the Tri-Lams, again, cheat to win), the Tri-Lams simply give up without a fight. They simply let go of the rope. 

At the end of ROTN, the nerds win Homecoming, and take control of the Greek Council. Lewis steals his dream girl away from the captain of the football team, and the football team is banished to live in the gym, where they belong. It is all a neatly packaged Hollywood ending and we probably would have been fine except for the fact Revenge of Nerds 2: Nerds In Paradise was released a short time later further pushing the anti-fitness agenda.

In ROTN2: NIP, the Tri-Lams embark on their journey to Fort Lauderdale for the United Fraternity conference. The Alpha Betas, who are once again pitted as the natural enemy of the Tri-Lams, have proposed legislation that not only do all member fraternities need to uphold a certain level of academic standards, they must also have a minimum requirement of physical standards as well. In essence, they would need to stay in shape and be healthy. Of course, this doesn’t sit well with the Tri-Lams because the standards will be determined by the Alpha Betas in an obvious attempt to have the nerds kicked out of the conference. Proposition 15 is a faulty piece of legislation by any standard, but it may have been for the greater good in this case. 

The Tri-Lams counter by throwing a party at their hotel and perform a full on rap show imploring the crowd to vote, “No on 15” (We could also blame them for the farce that politics has become, but that’s an article for another time). The next day, the proposal is shot down, striking a blow for libertarianism, and the nerds are allowed to continue to live their unhealthy lifestyles. Not only that, but in the end, Lewis once again gets the girl, proving that it pays to make bad choices.

So what, you say? The Tri-Lams were simply the better men, using their minds to conquer their foes. But while striking a victory for the intellectual, they made it seem as if it were almost evil to be in shape. Perhaps we should be blaming the Alpha Betas themselves for being such meathead douche bags. And maybe the overall message is about moderation in both the physical and mental sense. But the Tri-Lams offer no real evidence in their favor. Even at the end of ROTN2: NIP they welcome Frederick Pawlowatski, aka Ogre, the former Alpha Beta, into their fraternity. While we do see him working out in the first film, he is probably the Alpha Beta with the most girth. Real world implications would follow. 

What happened in the real world after the defeat of the Alpha Betas was this: the proliferation of the internet, highly advanced gaming systems like the Playstation and X-Box, video on-demand and a million other inventions that keep us from exercising (the Nintendo Wii notwithstanding). Who’s to blame for these inventions? That’s right: Nerds.

I’m not suggesting that laws should be passed to force people to live healthy lifestyles. That is too intrusive and over reaching. But perhaps if we persecuted nerds a little more aggressively, we wouldn’t be as fat a country. Freedom and pocket protectors be damned.

Some films you can just watch over and over again.  You’re not sure why, because they are not necessarily the best films ever made.  But clearly there is something that resonates. One of these films for me is Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory.  Perhaps because it always seems to be on cable, or because Gene Wilder is a genius, I have viewed this movie several times recently and have come across some disturbing things that spill over into real world problems, namely poor corporate governance. 

 The question we all should be asking: Where was the Wonka Corporation’s Board of Directors during all this nonsense? They have a CEO who is clearly off his rocker who, while apparently doing decent sales in light of some heavy competition from Old Slugworth and launching a successful Golden Ticket marketing campaign, is putting the company at risk and upping the potential to destroy shareholder value along with the company itself. Here is someone who, when faced with his own mortality decides that if he wants to view paradise, he will simply look around and view it, no matter that the company may be crumbling around you. Needless to say, it’s not exactly the kind of strategic thinking you are looking for from the modern CEO. Let’s take a look at some of Mr. Wonka’s offences: 

Access to facilities

According to the film, the Wonka factory, an aging hulk of a building that looks like a relic left over from the early years of the Industrial Age, was on lock down for a few years in which no one was allowed in and no one ever saw anyone come out. The public, and the government (Where were they in all this? Was he even paying taxes?) has no way of knowing what is going on in there in terms of safety standards. How could a well informed parent even think about letting their child eat anything that came out of that place? Problem: A PR nightmare to say the least and perhaps the subject of future recalls and government action. 

Use of slave labor

Ok. Let’s get down to brass tacks on this one. Mr. Wonka fires all of his paid workers and brings in these Oompa Loompas from Oompaland under the guise that their lives were so terrible there. Nevermind the threat to national security in that he smuggled these people in from some unknown locale, the truth is he essentially enslaved a whole race of people. And then makes them perform the equivalent of minstrel shows. Sound familiar? Heart of Darkness, anyone? Who are the real uncivilized ones, Mr. Wonka? Problem: PR nightmare and potential ACLU, Local Union and government action.

Plan of Succession

Mr. Wonka’s succession plan certainly leaves much to be desired as it plays out before our eyes on screen. Luring five children with serious developmental flaws and their idiot parents to the factory with the promise of a lifetime supply of candy is no way to choose a successor to a multinational corporation. And forcing them to enter into an illegal contract (they were under 18 and not legally able to enter into one), and then basically putting them through mental, and in some cases physical, torture isn’t exactly going to play well in the media. Couldn’t leave it to a grown-up, as Wonka claims? No, because a grown up would be responsible and would have come up with a solid succession plan, perhaps grooming the creepy guy who poses as Slugworth or perhaps one of the Oompa Loompas to take over. Problem: Exposes the company to potential charges of child endangerment. 

Poison Pill

So, instead of developing a solid plan of succession, Wonka develops the ultimate Poison Pill that will destroy not only his company, but in theory could take down the entire confectionary industry: The Everlasting Gobstopper. It’s basically the Nuclear Option for the candy industry. Wonka claims that he is making it for poor children with little pocket change. But how would he prevent rich kids or even kids with a moderate amount of pocket change, from buying it?  I mean, rich people generally are rich because they are good with money, right? So why would they continue to allow their own children to waste money on frivolous candy, when they can just pay for it once and be done with it?  Problem: Potential destruction of business and entire industry.

But, perhaps that’s the answer. This is the reason why the Board of Directors has done nothing to oversee this maniac. He has a gun to their heads. It’s his way or he destroys everything. Even if he does some pretty dangerous things on behalf of the company, he has the power to destroy it. 

The problem in the real world comes about because Wonka’s gamble pays off, as far as we know. Against all odds, he finds that one kid (albeit a criminal himself; he stole fizzy lifting drinks) who can run the company and, in our world, the Everlasting Gobstopper is distributed in a less potent form, lasting only about 20 minutes or so. So now CEOs and Boards of Directors think that any harebrained scheme they come up with or any sort of lavish spending at the shareholders expense will simply work. I mean, is looting the corporate coffers for gaudy parties or getting a golden parachute deal for a job poorly done any different than luring unsuspecting children into your big freaky factory with the promise of a lifetime supply of candy?

So, Mr. Wonka, a hand well played. But it is you that I blame for the rise of bad corporate governance. I’m sure because of this column that you will be hearing from Bob Monks and Nell Minow real soon. Lucky for you, your golden parachute is probably an actual golden parachute and with the price of gold today, that will be worth a pretty penny, you weirdo.

In Brewster’s Millions, Richard Pryor’s character Monty Brewster was given the challenge of spending $30 million in 30 days. If he was successful, he would get a $300 million inheritance from a long lost rich uncle. If he failed, he got nothing. The catch was that after 30 days, he could not have any possessions bought with the $30 million, and could return to the lawyers’ office with only the shirt on his back. (That shirt, coincidently enough, was a Chicago Cubs jersey.) The point, his deceased rich uncle told him via a pre-death recorded video, was to teach him to not squander money by making him so sick of spending money that he would think twice before doing it.

Apparently, the previous administration, as well as the current administration, have seen this movie and have subscribed to this method, hoping that if they spend enough money, a rich uncle — Sam? Mao? — will come up with the cash prize. Spend a whole bunch of money on failing banks, money that you will not see any returns on, and have no tangible assets once you are done (sure the government now owns parts of these banks, but 40% of nothing is still nothing). Same goes for the auto bailouts. Yeah, we own a bankrupt General Motors, America!

But not all the money is thrown away on bad investments. Some money is spent on pure spectacle — Monty stages a ballgame between the New York Yankees and his former minor league baseball team; Barack sends Air Force One to scare the crap out of New Yorkers. And the cost of those Teleprompters, paying off Hilary’s campaign debt, and keeping Joe Biden’s mouth shut, while well worth it, doesn’t seem to be producing any tangible results. 

Conversely, just as in the film some of Monty’s purposely long shot bets paid off — he bet on some college lacrosse game that he was sure he would lose but won; he bought stock on some hair-brained scheme involving icebergs that wound up making him a lot of money; he won the New York City mayoral race as a third party, no party candidate — maybe, just maybe some of these things that the government is doing will benefit the taxpayer instead of leaving us with nothing but the shirts on our backs. But again, there is the catch. Since Monty made this money from the $30 million he had to spend, he was still obligated to spend it within the specified amount of time. I’m looking at you Social Security and Medicare.

Monty’s story ends well. He, at the last minute, is able to rid himself of the $30 million and wins his full inheritance. The obvious difference here is that we are the ones spending and not leaving an inheritance. The rich uncle may well turn out to be our grandchildren. Monty is the example our wishful-thinking government is following — that all this Keynesian spending will prop up the economy and eventually pay for itself and then some.  Maybe it will, maybe it won’t. We may not know for another generation or more. Until then, I’m voting for None of The Above. 

Watching the news of a sit-in at NYU last week got me thinking about how lame today’s college students are and, of course, what fictional character can be blamed. Sure, it would be easy to point to the men of Delta house as the example to which some collegians aspire, and fail, to emulate by wearing t-shirts that read “College.” But, that’s not quite accurate. The culprit behind the decline of modern education is actually even less subtle.  

Our man is Thornton Mellon, from the film Back To School, one of the most underrated films of the 1980s. I say he is less subtle because he has the unique distinction of being the only fictional character that I can think of that is actually accused of in the film what I am actually accusing him of. In an early part of the film, Mellon’s economics professor and romantic rival, Dr. Phillip Barbay — a stuffy middle aged man with some sort of British accent, whose fetishes includes having women dress up as Wonder Woman and tie him up with the golden lariat and force him to tell the truth — sums it up: “That… is Mr. Thornton Mellon. The world’s oldest living freshman… and the walking epitome of the decline in modern education. The stupid clod thinks he can buy his way out of the gutter,” he quips to Sally Kellerman’s character, who is the love interest of both men. (I mean, Sally Kellerman? As Rodney Dangerfield said in another movie — “She must have been something before electricity.”)

People of a certain age always complain that the kids today aren’t as smart as they were or don’t take school as seriously as they should.  We all knew people in college who basically did nothing for 4+ years and probably would have been better off going to a technical school, or just joining the work force, as far as career prospects are concerned. Basically, despite the belief of some in government, a college education is not for everyone and this has nothing to do with money. Much like that of the government, it is the driving, and false, belief of Mellon, who is told as a young boy by his father, that “a man without an education is nothing,” that fuels his behavior. While statistics on compensation may back up this claim, there are many successful people without formal training who are considered successful in the world, Mellon himself being a prime example.  He conveys this idea to his son, who is also a terrible student, at least when we first meet him, in order to keep him in school. Neither of these clowns are college material from what we can tell. But he continues to fund his useless education, even attempting to have his astronomy homework done by NASA, and joins him, taking up a seat that should be given to a more deserving student.

Like Bluto and D-Day and the gang, he is a lovable screw-up who makes good. But unlike the Animal House crew, who were underdogs and used their wit and humor to be a thorn in the side of college administrators, Thornton is not really that clever. Fun, yes. A guy you want to be friends with and party with, probably. But clever is not what really comes to mind. Most of what he does — buys his way into school by donating money for the new business school; renovates his dorm into a full fledged bachelor pad; hires Oingo Boingo for his mid-term bash; has Kurt Vonnegut write a paper about his own work (which gets a failing grade) — takes only a truck full of money to attain, and not really a scheming mind to procure. He is not an underdog, at least not at this point in his life. He is, as Dr. Barbay says, “a stupid clod.” 

Mellon, while the protagonist of the film, is the classic anti-hero if you look at it from the side of the serious academic. And his victory in the end only proves that the academic (Dr. Barbay), who is cooped up with his books and his theories, is no match for the battle tested and experienced man of the world regardless of his actual intellectual capabilities. It is the triumph of anti-intellectualism and the start of the downturn, which would be on full display for anyone touring a college today. Or one would just need to reference several articles written in the past few years which talk about the full service dorms and luxury amenities that some schools use to lure more affluent students. While one could point to the general sense of entitlement that is prevalent in the generation now attending college, it is clearly the influence of Thornton Mellon and the aforementioned renovation of his dorm room setting the example.

All problems have a flash point, where the underlying issues converge and act as a catalyst. Ultimately, Thornton is given the honor of speaking at graduation, the first freshman ever to have such an honor. His rhetoric, not surprisingly, is simple. He talks about how tough it is in the world, and with one quick quip sets in motion the state of arrested development that many post grads live in. He states, “It’s rough out there. Move in with your parents. Let them worry about it.” This virus claims its first victim with the shot of the blond guy wearing the child’s sized Mickey Mouse sunglasses (did this not bother anyone else?) spreading from there the infantilization and the novelization of the graduation ceremony that launches the decline of modern education from which many of our nation’s problems stem and from which President Obama claims he will reverse. But is Captain Hope a match for the Triple Lindy? We shall see.

Do you have a real world problem that may have been caused by a fictional character? Feel the need to defend a fictional character that has been erroneously charged with causing one? Let me know in the comment section or email me your suggestions. I’m ready to believe you.  

You’ve all heard time and again how personal accountability has been thrown out the window and about the emerging nanny-state that is quickly gripping this country.  Since it has also been said that life imitates art, is it not appropriate to completely let the real people who are to blame off the hook and indict fictional characters who exhibit the kind of behavior or ideas that those real people are only imitating?  In this recurring column, I look to find the fake culprits from film, television, literature, etc. who have caused real world problems.   

The Credit and Financial Crisis

J. Wellington Wimpy (of Popeye The Sailor) – Described as intelligent and well educated but lazy and gluttonous, his burger addiction and need for instant gratification showed the world how to live beyond their immediate means, plunging the US into the current credit crunch.  “I’ll gladly pay you Tuesday for a Hamburger today,” easily translates into ”I’ll gladly pay you on the first of each month for the next thirty years, although I have no verifiable income, for this half million dollar home, which only two years ago cost $100,000, in an ‘up and coming’ area of town with no money down today.”  Just like the home that is no longer worth the amount of the loan, a burger has no value once it passes through the digestive system, unless of course it was one of those gilded burgers you see on Fine Living TV.  But I don’t think the kind of places Wimpy was frequenting were serving burgers with golden flakes.

Further evidence against Wimpy was that the way he got away with his many scams was by using false names and placating those he defrauded by promising future payment, then reneging.  The connection to recent revelations about the housing bubble is clear. Replace the aggrieved restaurant owner, patron or other dupe with Lehman Brothers or Bear Stearns and you’ve got the makings of the current credit crisis.  Life imitates art and we all get to suffer. 

Thanks, Wimpy, for plunging us into a global depression.  We all look forward to you paying off your debts, the Tuesday after hell freezes over.

Do you have a real world problem that may have been caused by a fictional character?  Feel the need to defend a fictional character that has been erroneosly charged with causing one? Let me know in the comment section or email me your suggestions at jgoldowsky [symbol for AT] whenfallsthecoliseum.com. I’m ready to believe you.