I hate when a classic food product becomes a bastardized franchise.

I hate when a classic is bastardized into something ridiculous and hardly related. But lets leave George Lucas out of this, because here I'm talking about food - specifically thinly-related food items that bear little likeness to their namesake.

If you go to Nabisco's website and look at their Oreo products page, there are 51 results. Yes, many of these are different size packages of Oreos, or even the less offensive direct variations (Mini Oreos, Golden Oreos, etc.). But it's the real unrelated cash-ins that perplex me. In the photo above, I would hazard a guess that a taste test of Oreo Ice Cream Sandwiches, Oreo Cereal, and least of all Oreo Wafer Rolls wouldn't offer an experience anything like that of eating an Oreo.

Oreo does seem to be the worst offender among a list that includes:

Cocoa Krispies Cereal Straws - how does something that's not small and crunchy bear any relation to a "Krispie?" I give you that a straw may "snap" and "crackle," but how can it pop? Notice the forced smile on poor Pop's face, like a has-been It Girl forced to do porn. I must say the whole cereal straw phenomenon is beyond me.







Pringles Stix - I have to admit, these are pretty darn tasty. Like Pocky without the frosting, but then again I've always enjoyed bland crackers. Still, their existence baffles me. It is a cracker-ish crispy stick, in no way related to potatoes or any sort of chip. Why, then, the Pringles name? What is next? Pringles Breadcrumbs? Pringles Popsicles? Pringles Personal Lubricant?





Starburst Fruit Twists - These are essentially Starburst flavored Twizzlers. Now I've gotta hand it to Starburst - they do jellybeans right! Their jellybeans have a great taste that truly evokes the original Starburst tang. These Twists? Waxy and flavorless. Another gimmick gone horribly awry, though the results are less disgusting and more of just a blah "why?"

Moral of the story - stick to what you know. Even if you succeed in your own brand-rape and manage to produce something tasty, I still secretly hate you.

I hate painful roller coasters.

I hate roller coasters that cause you physical pain, especially when it's non stop from beginning to end! And this one hits home especially hard because I love roller coasters!

Honestly, let me rewind a bit because this is really one branch of a larger "I hate Six Flags parks" sentiment. I won't spend too much time on it, because this surely won't be the last time it comes up, but I do hate Six Flags parks. They are corporate monsters, poorly run, poorly maintained, anemic in customer satisfaction skills, and both lacking the family/traditional appeal of a park like Hersheypark or Cedar Point or the sheer wow factor of a Disneyland or Busch Gardens. Six Flags parks exist, for me, simply as a place to ride some rides. Me visiting a Six Flags park is like a vampire who drinks rat blood to sustain - a necessity, but not satisfying.

More to the point of this post: I hate poorly maintained rides. You can cram in coaster after coaster to wow people and inflate statistics, but if the coasters suck, the equation comes up short. Some rides are uncomfortable neck-breakers just because they seem designed to kill - Sidewinder at Hersheypark; Batman at Great Adventure; the defunct Drachen Fire at Busch Gardens. However, I offer The Great American Scream Machine (pictured) at Six Flags Over Georgia as an example of a coaster where something just went wrong along the way. A classic 70's-era out-and-back woodie, GASM was designed to evoke the simple pleasures of the woodies from the 20's-40's - big drops and fast bunny hills. As I ascended the lift hill of neighboring Ninja yesterday at Six Flags, nervous about the impending neck-breaking loops and corkscrews, I looked at GASM with restful longing. It looks massive but tame; classic. Minutes later I was ascending the lift hill of GASM, arms already up for a thrilling drop. The moment we began to descend, I regretted it. The rest of the ride became a horrible gamble - will I suffer less damage by bracing myself or by letting go altogether? I can't remember which I did, but it didn't work. Foot after endless foot of the damn wooden beast was shuttering, sending pain down my spine, and inflicting an instant headache upon me. Yes, I'm getting older. Proof positive: One ride on the tame Rodeo, a carnival type ride at Hersheypark, practically did me in a few years back. But my brother and I agreed that GASM was hands down the worst coaster we'd ever been on. It was as if the cars didn't have wheels and were somehow "rolling" on square blocks, or just sliding along.

The sad conclusion we came to is that it couldn't have always been this way, and that proper TLC probably could have made it the best ride in the park (unfortunately, not a lofty goal, since we were disappointed by coaster after coaster throughout the day). Happily, I don't think I need a chiropractic appointment after all. But that was another nail in the coffin of my fondness for Six Flags.

I hate Jake Gyllenhaal's ugly face.

There will probably be a lot of posts about ugly faces here. But seeing Jake Gyllenhaal so much lately in promotion for the woefully miscast Prince of Persia just has his ugliness on my brain a lot recently. The interesting thing is he's not nearly as ugly as I think of him being...not, say, Gary Oldman ugly. In fact, it was difficult to find a picture that I thought adequately conveyed Gyllenhaal's ugliness. I think the key is in the looks he gives. When he's trying to look brooding or thoughtful, he just looks like a retarded child that no one wants to play with. His eyes are too big, but not nearly expressive enough, only really mastering that annoying and frequent puppy-dog look (See photo, which - true story! - is actually of a girl dog nursing puppy-dogs. I'm just sayin'.). His nose is long, like a cartoon character (or, say, a collie). He has no upper lip. And, as is often the case, my distaste for his face is only exacerbated by the unanimous gushing about how cute he is, especially among the homos. (Sorry, playing gay in a mainstream movie may be admirable, but it's only as sexy as the guy playing it.)

His casting in Prince of Persia only annoys me further. First of all, I hate it when dorky boy-next-door types get buff for big roles (Part two of this might be on Tobey McGuire, eh? - not ugly, but I might hate him.). People think it's sexy - dork turned stud. I think it's weird and kind of gross. I'd cast the guy that played Aladdin in the Disney movie instead of Jake Gyllenhaal, except Aladdin wasn't live action and he wasn't really an actor. He was cute, and he was a cartoon...not just cartoonish, like Jake. He also happened to be ethnically relevant, since Aladdin was Persian, or at least close enough to play Persian. I guess Jake looks ethnic next to Gemma Arterton, though, since the only thing whiter than American is British...with freckles, no less. And I suppose the long hair is supposed to be hot and edgy in an vaguely ethnic sort of way...or like a collie.

I hate blogs.

Blogs are for self-important people who think anyone should care what they have to say. The only useful blogs are porn blogs, and that's only if there's a lot of pictures. GOOD pictures.