On a new episode of VICELAND'sHATE THY NEIGHBOR, comedian Jamali Maddix heads to Oklahoma to meet members of the Ponca Tribe, whose reservation has been deteriorating for years as massive oil companies continue to pollute their tribal lands. Jamali tours the reservation with environmental activist and tribal leader Mekasi Camp-Horinek, who's convinced it's not a coincidence big oil has been contaminating Ponca territory—but environmental racism.
On Tuesday, Adult Swim dropped a new trailer for FLCL (pronounced Furi Curi), officially announcing two new seasons of the wonderfully weird early 2000s anime.
The reboot comes 18 years after writer Yōji Enokido and director Kazuya Tsurumaki's coming-of-age series originally aired in Japan, and 15 years since Toonami brought it to American audiences. Season two is called FLCL: Progressive and season three is called FLCL: Alternative. They're new stories following mostly new characters, but the show's blistering, dreamy visuals are still intact.
The original plot of FLCL is hard to get a handle on without multiple viewings and a Pepe Silvia-style organizational chart, but basically 12-year-old Naota Nandaba discovers he has a giant robot inside his head when a mysterious woman named Haruko (Kari Wahlgren) drives by him on a moped and hits him with a guitar. He then uses the giant robot to fight an evil nuclear power plant, while dealing with multiple love triangles between his mysterious attacker—who moves into the spare room in his house—his best friend, and his single father. The plot is less important than its portrayal of weird feelings and surreal moments that would be impossible to pull off in any other format. This video essay by Kristian Williams explains the appeal really well.
Adult Swim has recruited Wahlgren and the original anime company, Production IG, which worked on the 1995 Ghost in the Shell anime and Studio Ghibli classics like Howl's Moving Castle, for the reboot. Here's how the network describes the plots of the new seasons.
FLCL: Progressive tells the story of 14-year-old Hidomi, her classmate Ide, and two otherworldly beings, “Jinyu” and “Haruha Raharu,” who are determined to unlock their hidden potential. Mixed up in this is an all-powerful force known as “ATOMSK,” a gorgeous vintage car… and a certain Vespa Scooter...
FLCL: Alternative, which hands the series over to a totally different team of young creators who will redefine the meaning of “sequel.” The series centers on the misadventures of 17-year-old Kana, a high school junior who spends her days hanging out with her besties, Mossan, Hijiri, and Pets. They live unremarkable lives, until the day a Mecha falls out of the sky, along with a strange woman named “Haruko.” Her plans for Kana and her friends involve the force known as “ATOMSK.” Kana will have to risk everything to decide whether or not to help… like she really has a choice!
There is anime about cooking fights, possessed penguin hats, and feline pizza samurai, but FLCL really is one of the weirdest TV shows the genre has to offer. Now that its characters have grown up, maybe the show will visualize millennials' emotional reaction to crippling student debt, joblessness, loneliness, and waiting for Rick and Morty season four.
New episodes air on Adult Swim Saturday, June 2 at 11:30 PM (ET/PT).
In the immediate aftermath of the Florida school shooting earlier this month that claimed the lives of 17 innocent teenagers, I was struck with two very grim premonitions. First, that the NRA social media manager would take a nice long six-day weekend (sure enough, they stopped tweeting on February 14, the day of the shooting, and didn’t post until February 20), and second, that the conservative media machine would soon mobilize to do what even a few years ago seemed fairly unthinkable: outright attack the underaged survivors of the brutal massacre. To my disappointment (but not my surprise), that second one has also come Extremely True. It’s not that I’m Nostradamus or any shit like that, it's just that the conservative script for these things has become just that depressingly predictable.
Way back in 2012 when the Sandy Hook shootings happened, everything felt strangely similar yet very different. Having a president capable of demonstrating even a basic level of empathy went a long way, but outside of Alex Jones (who was a vastly more fringe character back then) and some anonymous online morons, there wasn’t much of an effort to malign the survivors of the shooting or their families. To be honest, after a year of the 2016 campaign and another year of the Trump presidency, that low-ass bar feels like some Andy Griffith–style nostalgia.
As has been covered on many occasions by writers more journalistically inclined than I, there is now a pretty well-trodden path from the online fringes of the far right directly to the cable news network our demented big boy in chief spends 60 percent of his waking hours watching. Hell, if the conspiracy theory about an antifa rebellion can make it to Fox & Friends, who’s to say what won’t break through? What starts as trolling and genuine dumbass credulity in the darkest corners of the web all too often makes this journey to the mainstream, and watching this occur in the weeks following the Parkland shooting has ended up being a pretty great, and terrible, case study.
While the first to jump on any “crisis actor/false flag/soros plants” sort of theory always ends up being a MAGA mondo-weirdo on Twitter, they are usually joined by fringe right-wing sites like realpatriotnewseagle2016.info or some URL like that. From there these theories make the leap to the right wing’s most beloved blue checkmark accounts, who lend them just enough air of legitimacy to be discussed by real people.
Last Friday, actor James Woods—who once sued an anonymous Twitter user for calling him a cocaine addict, and continued the suit after the user died—tweeted out a photo of teen activist and Parkland survivor David Hogg, comparing his anti–gun violence armband to that of the Nazi SS, and suggesting he don a brownshirt and jackboots to complete the look. Putting aside for a second that this is a child—one who saw 17 people gunned down mere weeks ago—the comparison is absurd on its face. But since nothing matters anymore and tribalism is our new law, the post did bigass numbers in the form of 14,000 retweets. And though Woods seems fringey, he's followed by lots of people, including Donald Trump, Jr.
Woods’s post is far from an aberration. Former CPAC keynote speaker and convicted campaign finance fraudster Dinesh D’Souza celebrated the failure of a Florida gun control bill with taunts like, “Adults 1, kids 0.” Last week, a Republican candidate for the Maine House of Representatives named Leslie Gibson said of Parkland survivor Emma Gonzalez, “There's nothing about this skinhead lesbian that impresses me and there is nothing to say unless you're frothing at the mouth moonbat.” The right-wing cartoonist Ben Garrison published a cartoon that smeared Hogg as a ventriloquist’s dummy controlled by CNN, which was in turn controlled by the “Deep State.”
This is what the conservative media machine is built to do, so much so that I doubt anyone could really stop it at this point even if they wanted to. A political alliance that is built solely around “triggering the libs” and vicious (usually fact-free) attacks on political opponents is really only capable of a single play in the playbook. Engaging on a factual level about the roots of gun violence in America is a losing game for conservatives, so the only course of action is to vacillate between pompous rhetoric about the Second Amendment and slandering anyone who might disagree. Fox News hosts in the days since have brought on such mainstream conservatives as Ben Shapiro (who was a televised commentator and pro-virginity activist at the age of 17) to claim that these kids are being manipulated by the DNC. This is the GOP now.
I am by no means saying that because the Parkland teens are minors they are beyond reproach. If conservatives and gun lovers want to engage in a debate with these kids, I fully support that—but engage with them on the issues, the facts. Instead, the dominant trend online and even on TV is to impugn these survivors’ credibility—to say they are Soros puppets, doing it for their 15 minutes of fame, doin' it for the Vine, or whatever else. Discussing common sense ways to lower gun violence across groups that all (hopefully) abhor is one thing, calling a group of children dykes or Nazis or agents of the Deep State is uh, entirely another.
While Trump is primarily a symptom of the GOP rot rather than its cause, his ascension to power has undoubtedly accelerated this decline. He is after all the man most responsible for the birther movement, a thoroughly baseless and vitriolic campaign against a black president he hated with a passion. Vitriol against his enemies in the face of facts is his MO: In 1989, he took out newspaper ads calling for the deaths of the “Central Park Five,” a group of black and Latino teens who were later convicted of rape—then, during the 2016 campaign, he insisted they were guilty even though they had by then been exonerated by DNA evidence and released.
This kind of mindset is mirrored in the Republican Party and its supporters today. Show them statistics about how gun control ended mass shootings in other countries. They will say it didn’t. Nothing matters.
So where do we go from here? Will there be a breaking point where conservatives finally say that they have gone too far? What would that even look like, if not the young survivors of a mass shooting? To be honest I have no earthly clue, and I am not particularly hopeful that it will get better any time soon. Conservatives, who constantly are crying to allow the free marketplace of ideas to win out, are unwilling or unable to simply allow these kids to voice their own beliefs. They also seem genuinely convinced that no sane person, even one who just lost 17 friends to gun violence, would ever be pro-gun control. Or maybe they’re full of shit. Who knows. But if we ever emerge from this collective fugue state we have found ourselves in, I hope we never let these assclowns forget what they said about these kids.
There are so many action movies out there that the original version of this list contained 43 titles. That’s when I realized: You’ve seen every Batman movie including Batman and Robin. You've slashed your way through both Kill Bill Vol. 1 and Vol. 2. You've blasted your way through all four Lethal Weapons. And you know every superhero from Captain America to Rocket Raccoon. (If you don’t, you have no business reading this list.)
In the past, I've written Netflix lists about everything from the streaming platform's best horror movies to its greatest shows to watch when you're stoned. For this rundown of the most underrated action movies, you should pay special attention to how I skillfully avoid using the cliched terms “taut” and “pulse-pounding." Ranked from oldest to newest, here’s what I found:
The Daughter of Dawn (1920)
I’m not even sure Netflix knows they have this one: As the story goes, an original copy of this silent film from 1920, once thought lost, miraculously reappeared in 2004. After its restoration in 2007 by the Oklahoma Historical Society, Comanche composer David Yeagley was enlisted to score Norbert A. Myles’s thrilling take on an American legend, starring over 300 Native Americans amid the breathtaking Wichita Mountains. While a silent film isn’t what you’d expect from a list of action movie recommendations, check your heart rate while seeing the bison-hunt scene and get back to me.
The African Queen (1951)
Right up until Raiders of the Lost Ark, John Huston’s tale of a missionary (Katharine Hepburn) and a hardboiled steamboat captain (Humphrey Bogart) braving the East African wild was arguably the greatest action-adventure film the Western world had ever produced. Obviously you should watch Casablanca first if you’re a Bogart initiate, but then watch this one. It's the film that earned him his Oscar.
In Like Flint (1967)
A feminist plot to overthrow the patriarchy and take over the world amidst the swinging 60s? Not on international super-spy Derek Flint’s watch. “Hey! In Like Flint, that’s my favorite movie!” said Austin Powers. Now you can know what he meant.
Young Tiger, a.k.a., Police Woman, a.k.a., Rumble in Hong Kong (1973)
There are at least five different titles that you can find this Hong Kong crime film under, but that’s not what matters. This is one of the few films in which Jackie Chan plays a villain.
Khoon Khoon (1973)
Dirty Harry’s not on Netflix? That’s cool, just watch the Bollywood remake.
Battle Royale (2000)
This cult favorite didn’t receive a full theatrical run in the United States until 2011, but since then it’s been a mainstay for fans of hyperviolent Japanese cinema. Before Saw, The Hunger Games, and The Belko Experiment, 42 students wearing explosive collars had three days to fight each other to the death. It’s no wonder Quentin Tarantino called this one his “favorite movie of the last 17 years.”
Way of the Gun (2000)
After The Usual Suspects writer Christopher McQuarrie won the Academy Award for Best Original Screenplay in 1996, he made his directorial debut with this smokin’ badass tale of two drifters, played by Ryan Phillippe and Benicio del Toro. The duo decide to kidnap a surrogate mother from under the nose of a wealthy money launderer. There are unforgettable threats, hailstorms of bullets, and even Janeane Garofalo.
Hostage (2005)
This understated Bruce Willis film was a box-office blip, mostly for featuring an understated Bruce Willis as a hostage negotiator. But what Florent Emilio Siri’s action-thriller lacks in praise, it makes up for in just being really fucking cool.
Inside Man (2006)
Some people are surprised to learn that Spike Lee directed this elaborate heist movie starring Clive Owen, Jodie Foster, Christopher Plummer, Willem Dafoe, Chiwetel Ejiofor, and a stellar Denzel Washington. The box office hit really shows off the wide breadth of talents wielded by the director of Do the Right Thing.
Next (2007)
Imagine Nicolas Cage taking on Julianne Moore in a sci-fi nuclear disaster movie version of That’s So Raven, written by Philip K. Dick, and you’d still need to watch Next to believe it.
Defiance (2008)
Daniel Craig, Liev Schreiber, Jamie Bell, and George MacKay star in The Siege director Edward Zwick’s brutal dramatization of the Bielski brothers’ valiant efforts to save thousands of Jews from execution in 1940s Belarus. Don’t watch this one for historical accuracy, watch it for James Bond, Sabretooth, and Billy Elliot killin’ Nazis.
Ip Man (2008)
The incredible tale of the Wing Chun master who taught Bruce Lee spawned a pretty successful international franchise not only for its compelling true story, but for swift fight scenes choreographed the legendary Sammo Hung. The entire quadrilogy is on Netflix, so after you enjoy Ip Man, binge-watch the other excellent films in this series.
Fighting (2009)
Channing Tatum and Terrence Howard star in A Guide to Recognizing Your Saints director Dito Montiel’s surprisingly passionate street-fight film about a down-on-his-luck hustler who pulls himself out of the New York City gutter by beating the shit out of people with his bare hands. It’s worth remembering that Tatum wasn’t always as buff as he was in Magic Mike, but he was still every bit as charming.
13 Assassins (2010)
Audition and Ichi the Killer superstar director Takashi Miike attacked Eiichi Kudo’s revered 1963 black-and-white film head-on and the result is a blood-dripping samurai revenge story about legendary swordsmen who decides to take the law into his own hands. Seriously, what more do you want?
Wind River (2017)
Sicario writer-director Taylor Sheridan trekked deep into the wilderness of Wyoming for this slow-burn murder mystery wherein, as Peter Travers wrote, “action is character.” What this film lacks in explosions, though, it makes up for in suspense. With a creeping vibe akin to Seven and Insomnia, this is one killer-on-the-loose film you won’t soon forget.
From teen dealers selling fake Xanax bars on social media to addicted college kids using the benzos to help with panic attacks or comedowns, VICE UK is investigating the rise of Britain's counterfeit Xanax use. Read more features in this series here and watch our new film about mental health and fake Xanax, 'Xanxiety in the UK', here.
The effects kick in after around 20 minutes. You'll start to feel relaxed, maybe a bit sleepy. Depending on how much you've taken, you might notice changes in your perception. A bit of visual fuzziness, maybe. The effects peak around an hour later. With higher doses, you might have problems with coordination. If you’ve taken a lot, you may well blackout. While you'll still be able to function, your memory will be completely blank.
If you've ever taken Xanax, you know this already. But what's actually going on inside your brain while all this is happening?
Xanax is a brand name for alprazolam, one of a group of drugs known as benzodiazepines, or benzos, which are typically prescribed for anxiety. Like all drugs taken orally, it's absorbed into the body through the stomach, passing through the mucous membrane and entering the liver. From there, it enters the bloodstream and works its way towards your brain. The drug then passes through the blood-brain barrier, a membrane which filters out dangerous substances. Benzodiazepines, like other drugs, are able to pass through this barrier.
It’s in the brain where things get interesting. Benzodiazepines work on parts of the brain known as GABA-A receptors. Think of receptors like switches – with different switches responsible for producing different effects. GABA-A receptors are responsible for producing sedative effects. These receptors have to be switched on by neurotransmitters, which are chemicals used to carry messages around the brain. GABA-A receptors are switched on by the GABA neurotransmitter. Val Curran, professor of psychopharmacology at UCL, describes the GABA neurotransmitter as "sort of like the brakes on the brain. It calms everything down."
WATCH:
Benzodiazepines are agonists, meaning they amplify the GABA-A receptors' effects. Other drugs, such as alcohol and sleeping pills, work in the same way, albeit with different effects. They do this by attaching themselves to the GABA-A receptors and increasing the effectiveness of the GABA neurotransmitter. So, when you take a drug like Xanax, the switch (or receptor) is flicked on to full power. GABA-A receptors are concentrated in an area of the brain known as the hippocampus, which is important for memory, and is believed to be the reason why these drugs can cause blackouts.
When prescribed by a doctor, Xanax is typically intended to treat anxiety, which can be caused by an imbalance of chemicals in the brain. In those cases, Xanax is used to correct the imbalance. That experience can be very different from that of a recreational user.
Dr Cathy Montgomery, reader in psychopharmacology at Liverpool John Moores University, says: "If somebody's experiencing high levels of anxiety they have an increase in chemicals like adrenaline, which would normally make you feel more alert and awake, and a deficiency in GABA. High levels of adrenaline and low levels of GABA have a double impact of increased excitation in the brain, which people experience as anxiety. When they take Xanax, they won’t necessarily get the same type of heavy sedative effect."
Of course, if you’re taking Xanax recreationally, a heavy sedative effect might be just what you’re after. And because you don’t have a chemical imbalance to start with, that’s just what you’ll get. Effectively, you’re creating an imbalance in the brain – the same kind of imbalance Xanax is prescribed to correct – just in the other direction. (All this without considering the fact that in the UK Xanax is not prescribed, except privately, and black market Xanax can contain whatever active ingredients the person making it wants, as Pfizer pointed out in their statement to VICE.)
Broadly speaking, your body will try its best to maintain equilibrium in the brain. "Whatever you take, your brain will try to regulate it. It may release adrenaline to try and combat this," says Montgomery. While you're on Xanax, this won’t be noticeable, because the drug is powerful enough to overcome your brain's efforts to rebalance things. "When you’re taking the substance, you have enough GABA being released to prevent you experiencing anxiety," says Montgomery.
Xanax takes several days to leave the body completely. But the noticeable effects will wear off after a few hours. The drug first detaches itself from the GABA-A receptors in your brain and is broken down by enzymes and the liver, then eventually excreted from the body.
It's the point at which the drug detaches from your brain's receptors that potential problems start to arise. The sedative effects will start to wear off, but your brain is still trying to maintain equilibrium. That can lead to a fairly horrible comedown. "It’s really the flip side of why you’re taking it," says Montgomery. "You get a sudden increase in brain activity, which could make you feel quite anxious. You can start to feel quite agitated, insomnia – some people experience fearfulness."
Those feelings are part of the reason why Xanax users can build up a dependency on the drug quite quickly – and if they didn't have problems with anxiety before, they may well do now. Montgomery says: "For regular recreational users, the reason they might keep taking it is for withdrawal symptoms that would be characterised as dysphoria. That then perpetuates use. You are then taking it to self-medicate."
Tolerance to the anti-anxiety effects of Xanax tends to build up quite slowly, but users chasing its sedative effects can start to need higher doses within just a few days. Dr Tony O'Neill, clinical senior lecturer in psychiatry at Queen’s University Belfast, says: "Benzodiazepines are supposed to be prescribed for a short time. The problem is you need to use larger and larger doses to have the same effect." Recreational users, who may take the drug in large doses for sustained periods of time, can store up significant withdrawal symptoms. "Those can be horrendous," says O’Neill. Potential symptoms include insomnia, anxiety, panic attacks and nausea. Stopping suddenly has been known to cause seizures.
If you are going to take a drug such as Xanax, it’s important to know that repeated use can lead to withdrawal symptoms in a very short space of time. Curran says: "I would always recommend people not to take a benzodiazepine more than three days running, whether it’s prescribed or not." However, as with all drugs, the only way to avoid the risks is to not take it at all. One of the most significant dangers of Xanax is that studies have tended to focus on use in prescribed doses. As for recreational use, as Montgomery says: "A lot of the answers, we don’t really know."
An announcement by Thai Airways that oversize passengers and parents travelling with newborns could be banned from business class has sparked outrage from both passengers and the Thai public. Prominent Thai activist Srisuwan Janya has this week threatened to take the national carrier to court over the matter, calling the new policy “unconstitutional” and “discriminatory.”
But according to Thai Airways’ director of security and flight standards, Flight Lieutenant Prathana Patthanasiri, the policy is “due to safety regulations” on the airline’s new Boeing 787-9 planes.
The seat design in business class on the “Dreamliner” planes, it seems, can’t fit anyone with a waist larger than 56 inches (142 centimetres). This is because the seat belts would interfere with the placement of the airbag and pose a threat during emergencies, if extended any further, according to the Bangkok Post.
Speaking of planes, watch VICE jump out of a plane with Australia's new Bachelor, Nick "The Honey Badget" Cummins
Unfortunately, travellers flying with Thai Airways who don't fit the restrictions will have no choice but to choose Economy class. The two Dreamliner aircrafts operate on Bangkok to Auckland and Tapei routes.
Thai Airways isn't the first airline to grapple with how to deal with passengers who don't fit in standard seats. Last year, Jetstar began to charge parents an additional $30 to $50 for babies to sit on their lap on domestic and international flights. But for Thai, the backlash comes at a tricky time, with the airline announcing a 30 percent decline in profits last month. The shortfall, it said, was due to fuel costs and an increase in passenger traffic.
Photographer Anton Polyakov was born and raised in the self-proclaimed Republic of Transnistria – a tiny state that's been fighting for formal recognition from the United Nations ever since it declared independence from Moldova in 1990.
Last year, VICE spoke with Polyakov about his award-winning photo series "Transnistria Conglomerate", which aimed to raise the state's profile by showing outsiders what life is like in a country that technically doesn't exist.
The 27-year-old's latest work, "Pioneers Palace", focuses specifically on the challenges young people face in creating some form of collective identity – political and social – in a state that has few established traditions.
Young people sing along to a heavy metal track in a club in the state's unofficial capital, Tiraspol.
The project's name is an ironic nod to the Palace of Children and Youth Creativity – a sort of government-run youth centre that's meant to help children find their passion. But Polyakov tells me that the institution – which most people still refer to by its Soviet-era name, the Palace of Pioneers – offers only outdated activities, such as folk dancing, embroidery and aero-modelling.
"The internet has replaced the Pioneer's Palace in the eyes of young people," he says. "They want to create their own communities and culture; they don't need the state to do that for them. Young people here can see what's going on around the world, and many are trying to recreate global youth culture here in Transnistria."
Scroll down to see more photos from Anton Polyakov's Pioneer's Palace
Fans of local football team Sheriff Tiraspol gather before a match.
This Sheriff fan was attacked by fans of local rivals Zimbru.
Young people hanging around an outdoor gym.
The wall of an abandoned printing company that was hosting a hip-hop gig.
Another Sheriff fan on an away trip
Tanya Dunaevskaya, 21, is a tattoo artist.
One of Tanya's sketches.
Eduard Gotynyan, 18, wants to move to Germany to get better at BMXing.
This post is part of VICE's 15th anniversary series, presented by VANS
If you're a longtime reader of VICE, you might recognise the name Bin Skinor. Not from our website, or our magazine, but from the comments on our Facebook page – Bin's favourite place to hang out. There, he would do his best to rile people up – often very successfully – by being a contrarian, or saying something outrageous, or just taking the piss out of a particularly thin-skinned commenter. He became kind of notorious among that admittedly niche community for his near-daily trolling, and then, one day, disappeared into thin air.
Because it's VICE UK's 15th birthday this week, we sat down to talk about editorial ideas a few weeks ago, and Bin's name came up. Someone said they'd read a comment from him where he claimed to have met his partner – the mother of his child – in the VICE Facebook comments. I wanted to know if this was true, so tracked him down online, found out, to no one's surprise, that his name isn't really Bin (it's Ben) and gave him and his partner, Sophia, a call.
VICE: So your relationship all started in the VICE Facebook comments. Sophia: Yeah, I’d noticed this Bin Skinor guy was commenting an awful lot, and thought, 'He doesn’t mind being a bit controversial – he’s this troll-type person.' I would comment on the same article sometimes, and on one about Justin Bieber getting arrested we were both saying, "I think he’s alright, actually." Ben: Yeah: "That’s made me like Justin Bieber."
It humanised him. Sophia: Yeah, exactly. We didn’t really talk much after that, until the Bill Cosby sexual assault allegations. Everyone was getting all down on old Bill, and Ben said, "Why would you believe a big successful guy like Bill Cosby would do something like this?" And I disagreed with him. I said something like, "You usually make sense, but this time I’m actually going to disagree with you." And that was it – you were completely smitten.
That was the moment, Ben? Ben: No, that was when she said she worked in a sex shop [laughs]. No – what did it for me was I liked her; she looked nice and she had some funny things to say. Sophia: Looked nice and had bants. Ben: Yeah. So I Facebook-stalked her a tiny bit. Sophia: A lot. Ben: A lot. And in her pictures there was a photo of Bhagavad-Gītā, the main Hare Krishna book, which I’ve been into for quite a while, so I was like, 'That’s it – she's the one for me.' I friend requested her, and it's history from then on.
Were you local to each other? Sophia: No, I was in Bangor in North Wales, Ben was in Leeds. But we just got chatting on Facebook and realised we had a lot in common. Ben: Yeah, we’re both quite subversive politically – we both don’t like money, and all that kind of stuff. Sophia: We kind of see the world in the same way. We love complaining about things.
WATCH: Werner Herzog Explains the Internet to Us
And what was your first date? Sophia: It was the 26th of February, 2015. I knew my family would think I was crazy for going off to Leeds to meet some random guy off the internet, so I said I was going to visit a friend. I told a mate where I was going – [Ben] might have been a murdering psychopath for all I knew. Ben: Yeah, and your friend made me send her a picture of my bank statement so she knew where I lived. Sophia: And you thought I was a cop! Ben: I thought she was an undercover cop, sent via VICE to take me away for inciting— well, all sorts of things. I was smoking a lot of weed at the time. Sophia: I remember asking him, "Where are you from?" and that sort of thing, and he wouldn’t tell me, because at this point he thought I was an undercover cop. Ben: I was like, 'This is going way too smoothly, something's not right.' Sophia: You had this idea you were going to take me to this nice place in Leeds, and when we got there it was shut. Also, bizarrely enough, the second time we tried to go to that restaurant someone was pelting us with dried muffins as we were trying to get there.
Sounds like a good bonding experience. Ben: It was, yeah. The first weekend we spent together, you came to Leeds, we got really stoned and then went to bed. Sophia: Yeah, we went back and I spoke too much; it kind of blew your mind how much I was talking. Ben: She nearly made me whitey. She put me in pre-whitey. But by that point we were speaking pretty much all day, every day, so it was only going to go one way, really.
Ben, you were doing a lot of trolling of the VICE comments at the time – what was your motivation there? Ben: My motivation was: I used to be a recruitment consultant. When I started it was out of necessity, because I had a big coke habit and I needed a lot of money, and I just kind of enjoyed it and was really ruthless. But the more years that went by I got less ruthless, I got rid of my coke habit – I had a daughter, which mellowed me out – so I really didn’t need the money. But it meant I was in an office for eight hours a day with these recruitment bell ends. I could kind of do the job with my eyes shut, but I hated it, so as soon as I got into work, I’d open VICE up and try to get into arguments and stuff.
What was your strategy? What was the easiest way to provoke somebody? Sophia: You just seemed to take the opposite view to what everybody said, whether you believed it or not. That whole Bill Cosby thing – you didn’t really believe he was this good, stand-up guy. Ben: I did! I grew up with The Cosby Show – I couldn’t believe that Dr Huxtable would do such a terrible thing. But I know the error of my ways now. But I didn’t just used to take the opposite stance; I’d choose my articles quite carefully and pick quite an extreme stance.
"I thought it was my civic duty to encourage, basically, children to go out and smash things."
What did you think of the actual VICE content? I can't remember any of the specific comments, but I do remember them being largely negative. Ben: I really liked it! I don’t know if I’ve changed a lot or if VICE has changed a lot over the past few years, but I’m not really that into it any more. I still do look at it, but there are no [below the line] comments now. That's a good thing, but I stopped commenting before the comments disappeared. I hadn’t commented for almost a year.
So your trolling days are behind you. Ben: Totally, yeah. Sophia: A little bit. Ben: A little bit. I just troll her in person now. I like an argument. Sophia: He does.
Fair enough – it’s stimulating stuff. Ben: Yeah. I used to really love winding people up on VICE. But I also had a genuine, genuine political agenda, which is that society should be run by people who are 20 to 30 years old. I was already older than that when I was doing all this trolling, so I kind of felt like I was past it, but I was trying to instil a bit of hatred for the police in youngsters. I thought it was my civic duty to encourage, basically, children to go out and smash things. Sophia: And he still does [laughs]. Ben: Yeah, I still believe that completely, but I’m now doing it through Krishna consciousness, which is far more subversive.
That was going to be my last question – you told me on Facebook that you're both into Krishna consciousness, and that the two of you now have a baby? Ben: Yeah, he’s nearly two – he’s called Avi. And obviously we’ve got Lulu – who’s my daughter from a previous relationship – who lives with us full time as well, so we’re a proper little family. Sophia: Yeah.
Congratulations. So Bin Skinor really is no more. Sophia: Yeah, you deleted your account, not even just deactivated it. There was a 4chan thing that people set up about him, though. Ben: Yeah, there was all sorts. Sophia: Yeah, saying, "Who is this dickhead?" I loved that when you showed me. I thought it was amazing.
It was nearly a year ago, sometime after April, when hundreds of Canadians buying salmon in their local supermarkets got something they didn’t expect. It looked identical to other farmed Atlantic salmon—there were no labels suggesting something different. But it was AquaBounty AquAdvantage salmon—a genetically-engineered fish that grows to market size in less than half the time of conventional farmed salmon, thanks to the insertion of genes from two other fish.
About 4.5 tonnes were sold in all—a pittance compared to the over 120,000 tonnes of farmed Atlantic salmon typically produced annually in Canada—but it was a successful trial run for the global commercialization of the first genetically-engineered food animal ever approved for human consumption. And it was all brought to market by Massachusetts-based AquaBounty Technologies, a subsidiary of US biotech giant Intrexon.
This sale was possible because the Canadian federal government approved the GE fish in 2016, finding it “as safe and nutritious for humans…as conventional salmon.” A scientific review also concluded the environmental risks of GE salmon are negligible, as long as they are farmed on land and not in the ocean, given that it’s possible for GE fish to breed with wild fish.
But just as these conclusions were being reached, an Ipsos Reid poll found that 60 percent of Canadians—whose taxes have bankrolled the development and ongoing commercialization of this GE product—opposed genetically-engineering crops and food animals, with about half supporting an outright ban on all GE food. Almost 90 percent wanted to know what they were eating.
If the polling numbers were right, there was a massive disconnect between the government’s GE policy and what Canadians were comfortable eating.
Canadians have been doing much more than providing a first test market for GE salmon. Not only are they eating GE salmon without labelling, they have over decades invested at least $8.2 million to fund the development of AquaBounty GE salmon.
The question now: after decades of publicly-funded grants, tax-free loans, and royalty financing agreements, as GE salmon is poised to enter our food system whether people want it or not, what’s the return on investment for Canadians? With the future commercial success of this GE salmon in question, what’s in it for us?
***
The research to create AquAdvantage salmon began in the early 1980s. Although the technology was developed in Canada, this novel lifeform is owned by an American company—a subsidiary of Intrexon, led by billionaire CEO Randal J. Kirk. With a personal wealth estimated by Forbes at about $3 billion (US), Kirk has acquired a stable of GE organisms and technologies in recent years—including disease-fighting mosquitos, an apple that never browns, and a service to clone dead family pets.
One thing that hasn’t changed since the 80s, even after Kirk’s company became the controlling AquaBounty shareholder in 2014—is that this pioneering GE food animal continues to reap big subsidies from Canadian taxpayers.
“The money behind this organization is considerable,” said PEI Green Party leader Peter Bevan-Baker last year, the province where AquaBounty’s Canadian subsidiary resides. “It’s my personal opinion that they should be able to fund all R&D [research and development] and all applications for whatever regulatory hoops they have to jump through, without any public funds being put in there.”
Without taxpayer funding over the years, AquaBounty salmon would not exist. The fish was invented by a scientist named Garth Fletcher—whose research team combined genes from Chinook salmon and an obscure cold-water fish to stimulate rapid growth. Fletcher’s pioneering research, focused on cold adaptation in fish, has received about $1.2 million in federal public funding since 1991.
By November 1999, AquaBounty Canada—by this point a US-owned subsidiary—had negotiated an interest-free loan for just under $3 million from Technology Partnerships Canada, a federal agency mandated to stoke economic growth and job creation. Repayment was to take the form of a small royalty on company revenues. (The financing was never repaid, because in 2014, the year the term of the agreement expired, AquaBounty had not generated any revenues from its fish.)
By far, the GE salmon’s biggest source of public support (at least $3.5 million to date) has been the Atlantic Canada Opportunities Agency (ACOA)—a Canadian federal agency that funds business development and promotes employment in Canada’s Atlantic region. The biggest was a 2009 grant for $2.8 million—repayable via a 10 percent royalty on any products that were commercialized from the project.
Less than two years later, the US department of Agriculture gave half a million dollars to AquaBounty Technologies to research methods to sterilize the fish—an important safety measure to ensure GE fish do not reproduce and colonize if they escape captivity. (Despite this, AquaBounty has never been successful in producing 100-percent sterile GE salmon.) The timing of the grant came under intense scrutiny by US environmental campaigners, who accused the US government of “bailing out” AquaBounty’s main investor at the time—billionaire oligarch Kakha Bendukidze from the former Soviet republic of Georgia.
Randall Kirk entered the picture increasingly after 2012; by early 2014, AquaBounty Technologies became a subsidiary of Kirk’s growing biopharma empire. (As of January 2018, Kirk personally owned 47 percent of Intrexon’s shares.)
Recent years have seen the company achieve a global precedent: its GE fish was approved as human food by both the US and Canadian government in 2015 and 2016 respectively—making it the first GE food animal ever approved for humans to eat.
Last year’s pilot sales project is just the beginning. The next step is to ramp up a hatchery in PEI to grow eggs—and establish on-land facilities (in PEI and the US) to grow the GE fish to maturity. To make just this latter bit happen, over a million federal and provincial dollars has been lent or given to AquaBounty since 2016, to kick-start its new facilities in PEI.
Bevan-Baker says federal agencies giving non-Canadian interests large sums of money is a systemic problem that goes beyond this one company. “This is very much business as usual here on Prince Edward Island,” he told VICE. “There doesn’t seem to be any distinction between a company that is Canadian or any other.”
Chris Palmer, PEI’s Minister of Economic Development and Tourism, rejects criticism of the province funding foreign-owned subsidiaries like AquaBounty Canada—a company he says has an annual payroll of over $900,000 per year in PEI. He cites other examples of other foreign subsidiaries that have been attracted to PEI with provincial funding—including Standard Aero (the second largest private sector employer in PEI), Electronic Arts and Sekisui Diagnostics. “Business today is global and PEI must compete globally for new companies, new investment and new jobs,” he said.
As for federal investments, an ACOA spokesman said a company receiving money can be foreign owned, as long as the funding recipient is based in Canada, and is providing benefits to Atlantic Canada. (In the case of AquaBounty Canada, 22 people are currently employed north of the border.) He added that ACOA is independent of any regulatory deliberations, including the federal process that resulted in the 2016 approval of the salmon.
Still, a question remains: with at least $8.2 million invested—a conservative estimate gleaned from public sources, not including the US grant—what is the payback on public expenditure? Is it a fair trade for jobs and local investment? Does the public come out even or in the hole?
AquaBounty Technologies spokesman Dave Conley says it’s too early to talk about a payback to taxpayers. “We can't calculate a ROI [return on investment] at this early stage of development,” he wrote by email. “We honour all our commitments, financial and otherwise.”
It’s possible that AquaBounty Canada could pay a royalty on the 4.5 tonnes it sold last year, repaying some of the 2009 ACOA grant—but that’s speculation, given that the terms of the financing are confidential.
But with AquaBounty Technologies listed as a public company on the NASDAQ—it’s the shareholders who stand to benefit if the salmon succeeds in the marketplace. Or even they could lose out. Late last year, the Canadian Biotechnology Action Network (a coalition of environmentalist, food security, and farm groups that oppose the commercialization of GE fish) reported that national retailers Sobeys, Loblaw, and Metro—which represent more than 50 percent of the Canadian food-retail market—have no plans to sell GE salmon. Walmart, Costco, Whole Foods, and nearly eighty other retailers in the US have made similar pledges. Even Canada’s biggest salmon farming association has come out against AquaBounty GE salmon, vowing not to grow them.
The prospect of mandatory labelling of GE animals is another looming risk. Canada is allowing the product to be sold without labels (labelling is mandatory only if there is a health or safety issue identified and associated with a food), but the issue is still being determined in the US. Meanwhile, at least 65 countries in the world demand mandatory labelling of GE food.
“We may have limited success in gaining consumer acceptance of our products,” reads AquaBounty Technologies’ 2016 annual report, referring to environmental campaigns pushing for mandatory labelling, retailer boycotts and other risks. “We may have limited success in gaining consumer acceptance of our products.”
And true to that risk assessment, CBAN Coordinator Lucy Sharratt is now calling for action on several fronts: mandatory labelling so that Canadians consumers know what they are eating, and greater transparency about how taxpayer funds are used to support companies like AquaBounty Canada.
“Mandatory labelling is just one step,” she said. “Questions need to be raised about the government investing in the development of GE products, and potentially receiving royalties from those products, which it also has a responsibility to regulate.”
If you’ve ever held an irrational fear, you know how much it sucks: full-on panic washes over just thinking about a common place, situation, or object. Heartbeats flutter and breaths get shorter just imagining whatever horror you’ve conjured in your head (vermin, being in a plane crash, touching a cotton ball). You might feel silly because your logical brain knows you’re not in genuine peril although your body is reacting as if you were.
The National Institute of Mental Health defines specific phobia is an “intense, irrational fear of something that poses little or no actual danger. Although adults with phobias may realize these fears are irrational, even thinking about facing the feared object or situation brings on severe anxiety symptoms.” According to the Anxiety and Depression Association of America, specific phobias affect 19 million adults, or 8.7 percent of the U.S. population, and women are twice as likely to experience the phenomenon as men. We asked friends and co-workers about their most unreasonable fears. Here’s what they said.
I was 22 the first time I visited The New York Earth Room. I was sent by an eccentric friend of my parents. She’s the type of person who seldom seen without multiple scarves, has lengthy opinions about deconstructivism, and always seems to smell like cloves. When the friend found out I was heading to Manhattan she reached into her gigantic purse and pulled out a sharpie. On the back of an envelope she wrote the address 141 Wooster Street. The friend handed it over and said: it’s the second floor, get buzzed up, and don’t ask too many questions.
At that age I tended to ignore most things said by adults—my teen angst lasted well into my 20s—but the set up was too good to turn down. My second day in New York I headed over to Soho. Without really knowing what I was looking for I located the building: a nondescript office, eight stories tall. I buzzed twice and the front door clicked opened. I slowly made my way inside, walked past the out of service elevator, and started up the stairs. The air was thick with must. The office smelled pleasantly of rain. At the end of an all white hallway there was a man sitting at a large desk. He noted my confusion then asked if I was here to see the exhibit. I shrugged. The man waved his hand motioning me around the corner.
Glassed off and spread evenly across the floor of the office was the most dirt I had ever seen. Like, more dirt than I thought reasonable. A stupefying amount of dirt. I looked for a moment and tried to piece together what I was seeing. Why was this here? Was I missing something? Why so much...soil? Dumbfounded I returned to the man at the desk. naively looking for an explanation.
“What’s it all supposed to mean?” I asked.
“It means what you want it to mean,” he said.
I went back and looked at the dirt. Then I laughed and laughed and laughed.
The New York Earth Room was created In 1977 by musician and conceptual artist Walter De Maria, who had previously played drums in noise rock band The Primitives alongside a pre Velvet Underground Lou Reed. For the minimalist installation De Maria used 280,000 pounds of dirt spread over 3,600-square-feet of the Soho office building. Each week a caretaker waters and rakes the dirt to maintain its symmetrical layout and rich earthy smell. The exhibit, while open to the public, remains unadvertised. Defying the rapid gentrification of Soho the hidden, unexplained, installation has been there for forty-one years. It serves as a throwback to the neighbourhoods history of big ideas and weirdo art.
Since my first visit I’ve been back to The Earth Room at least a dozen times. I’ve come to appreciate its duality. The Earth Room serves as a quiet refuge against a cityscape that can feel overwhelming. It’s a still an sereine environment and its emptiness works as the perfect backdrop for reflection. At the same time the exhibit as one of the greatest jokes I’ve ever. The buildings surrounding Earth Room are home to flagship retail stores and within blocks there are countless cocktail bars and Michelin star restaurants. The real estate for Earth Room, given the location and square footage of the office, would easily sell for millions of dollars. Devoting the space to an art exhibit is a romantic and admirable ideal to uphold. But devoting the space to an art exhibit that no one knows is there? That’s funny. The fact that De Maria famously would not explain the piece is even funnier. Here is a space that is worth more money than I will ever make in my lifetime. It’s valuable enough to pay for literally dozens of houses in a more reasonable landscape. And what have we decided to do with it? Fill the thing with dirt! Why? Won’t say! Where is it exactly? Not Telling! That’s very funny. That’s a great joke.
The New York Earth room is my favourite art exhibit. Over the years I’ve taken a handful of friends to look at the dirt with me. Before going in I’ve tried to give them as little information as possible. Below I asked a some of them to give their thoughts on the installation:
The Earth Room. I like to imagine someone was trying to make an indoor swimming pool and got the ingredients mixed up. You’ve got to hand it to them: there's something undeniably rock n' roll about buying an apartment, dressing it up like the a natural disaster came through, and getting it valued at over a million dollars. Just a big middle finger to… somebody? I’ve got some musician friends back home living in nearly the same conditions if anyone wants to endow them.
SoHo has flipped since the 70s. It’s one of the most expensive places to live but this loft full of dirt is still there. Other residents got priced out by literal dirt. Sorry, you don’t get rent control but a knee-high pile of soil does. That is the most New York thing imaginable. But at least it’s free. That’ll make it way harder for some big company to steal the idea and make a bunch of money off an even bigger room full of dirt.
It seems like a dumb pun, but the whole thing was really grounding. Conceptually The Earth Room seems silly, but when you’re there it’s different. The smell is beautiful. The contrast between the soil and the white walls is pretty. It’s all very simple and clean. I felt a lot calmer after visiting.
Chris Ross-Ewart, Sound Designer It’s stupid waste of time. A big room full of dirt. Yep, that’s a great idea. Let’s go look at that. Dumb.
Amberley Baggett, toy expert
Nature within the Concrete Jungle. I get it. It’s just sad. An elitist joke on the common people that just don’t have the high class education to comprehend dirt in a room. It’s a grotesque display of aristocracy on a level I won’t put time into understanding. In the same breath, there’s something that lingers about Dirt Room. There is lots of art I’ve forgotten but this is something I still think about.
Graham Isador lives in a room covered with dirty clothes but nobody believes it’s art. Follow him on Twitter.
A Quebec woman who pleaded guilty to smuggling cocaine into Australia while vacationing on a luxury cruise told the court her sugar daddy convinced her to do it.
Mélina Roberge, 24, and two other French Canadians, Isabelle Lagace, 30, and Andre Tamine, 64, were busted with 95 kilograms of cocaine (valued at $20 million) in August 2016, as they deboarded the MS Sea Princess in Sydney.
Roberge, who pleaded guilty to trafficking 29 kg of the overall coke haul, appeared in a Sydney courtroom Wednesday for her sentencing hearing.
According to News.com.au, Roberge said her “sugar daddy” who she did not identify flew her and Lagace to Morocco in May 2016 and convinced them to smuggle the drugs. In a letter to court, she also said she agreed to take part for the social media “likes” she would gain from posting photos from her six-week-long baller trip, which included stops in New York, the French Polynesia, South America, and Ireland. Tickets for the cruise cost $15,000 a piece.
"I was meant to just be there and look like I was on holiday and look like a cover for everyone else," Roberge said in court, the CBC reports. A friend told police Roberge claimed she was making $100,000 for her role in the operation.
Roberge told the court Wednesday that since she’s been in jail, she has come across women with substance abuse issues.
“I want to be able to help them," she said, as she apologized for not thinking about the consequences of smuggling a massive quantity of cocaine across international borders.
Lagace has already been sentenced to seven-and-a-half years in jail.
The women made international headlines, earning the nickname “cocaine babes” by some media outlets, in large part due to the glamorous photos they posted from their trip.
According to Australian authorities, the shipment of seized coke was the largest of its kind smuggled via seaport or air.
The idea of an illegal casino usually calls to mind some shady warehouse filled with high rollers, cigar smoke, and ritzy cocktails, or maybe a tightly-patrolled, Michael Clayton-esque hovel tucked into some city alleyway. If you're looking to run a den of iniquity right under the cops' noses, the very least you could do is find a cunning way to disguise it—a crucial first step one illegal gambling room in Texas apparently skipped before opening up anyway.
Last week, police raided a betting house masquerading as a Zumba studio in a Houston strip mall, local ABC affiliate KTRK reports. Instead of, say, putting up a few posters of suburban moms in neon workout clothes, or even just investing in an actual sign, whoever ran the joint did the absolute bare minimum they could to disguise it.
All photos via the Harris County Constable / Facebook
If any curious Houstonian hoping to get in a fun, upbeat workout to Jason Derulo or whatever had actually walked into the place, it'd take about half a second to realize no one was going to teach them how turn a squat thrust into a dance move. There was no front desk, no full-length mirrors, no vibrantly dressed instructor all hopped up on endorphins. Instead, the place was packed wall-to-wall with bootleg slot machines.
The closest thing to a class schedule was a poster with the word bonos (bonds) hand-scrawled at the top, listing a few hourly specials for the joint's big spenders.
Understandably, the cops saw right through the ruse. They stormed the joint last Wednesday, seizing thousands of dollars in cash, confiscating 40 motherboards from the illegal machines, and arresting one lonely gambler inside, according to the Harris County Constable Precinct 5's Facebook page.
There's no word on exactly how the cops found out something fishy was up with the bogus dance studio, but the bars on all the windows probably didn't do the place any favors. Who knows—maybe if the person who ran it remembered to slap an E at the end of "ZUM BA DANC," it'd still be in business.
From teen dealers selling counterfeit Xanax bars on social media to addicted college kids using the benzos to help with panic attacks or comedowns, VICE UK is investigating the rise of Britain's counterfeit Xanax use. Read more features in this series here and watch our new film about mental health and fake Xanax, 'Xanxiety: the UK's Fake Xanax Epidemic' here.
This is the diary of Dan, a British man in his twenties. Over the past six months Dan has been documenting his attempts to break his addiction to counterfeit Xanax. The pills he's been taking still contain alprazolam – the benzodiazepine marketed as Xanax by medical company Pfizer – but have been made by home dealers, rather than in a regulated setting, and sold on dark web marketplaces, rather than prescribed by a doctor. Read Pfizer's statement on the rise of counterfeit Xanax here.
When coming off Xanax, it's important to taper the dosage down gradually, as sudden cold turkey can cause side effects such as psychosis and seizures. With the help of a GP, in September of 2017 Dan began to taper down from a daily dosage of 20mg. In the first diary entry he is down to a daily intake of 18mg of counterfeit Xanax.
September 14th: My friend dies. This sends me into a spiral and I crash and burn. I can't believe it has happened – I looked up to him. I simply cannot go back to work so go off sick. Mentally and physically drained. I'm not sleeping, I have restless legs, racing thoughts. I feel sick when I wake up and have a distinct lack of pleasure when smoking cannabis. The dopamine hit just seems to have not registered. I begin using heroin and ketamine to numb myself.
September 28th: 16mg. I binged hard on H, for five days. Bad move: was on the brink of a second addiction. Attempted to drink a bottle of Jack Daniel's, stupidly. Threw up all night and the next day. Pretty sure I gave myself alcohol poisoning. Feeling alone in these four walls. I am manic, swinging between irritable, restless, moody and quiet, to stimulated. In grief and feeling helpless. I go to my local drug addiction centre, where I explain my drug use with benzos and H. The support worker is understanding and advises me to do things other than sit in my room thinking. Easier said than done.
"I am still using other drugs, but begin to ask myself, 'Why? Why do I constantly feel the need to escape?'"
October 14th: 13mg. I try to go back to work – too soon. End up having an anxiety attack and now back off sick, cannot handle it. I sink deeper into depression. Constantly thoughts are running through my head about the future, about myself. My body feels like it’s shaking and tensing. I've literally just been sitting in my room, playing games and not really leaving the house, except to go to the shop across the road. What has my life become? I'm basically just existing, not living.
October 29th: I am now down to 11mg. My hands have tremors, my muscles twitch. I cannot sleep. I barely have an appetite. I am still using other drugs, but begin to ask myself, 'Why? Why do I constantly feel the need to escape?' I listen to some philosophers. Alan Watts is a huge help. I feel something like a spark in my head. Get comfortable with being uncomfortable. I decide to just try to accept the discomfort. I begin yoga and meditation at home – this helps massively with the muscle tension.
November 7th: Listening to Lil Peep feels good. Love his music; this guy has got it on lock. It's amazing how you can connect to someone else through their music and relate to their story. Now, I’m down to 10mg. I'm noticing a pattern of mania every time I drop a dose. About a week later, I begin to get waves of euphoric hysteria. They don't last for more than a few days, but they feel pretty good. Shame everyone else gets irritated by them. It feels good to be able to laugh for the first time in a couple of months.
November 15th: Peep is dead. Cannot believe it. Just as I started listening to him. Gone down an extra 1mg. I am deep in the heart of withdrawal now. I have stomach-twisting pain, muscle tension and irritability beyond anything I have ever had before. I cannot focus on anything that requires a lot of attention, just stresses me out. Simple TV at a low volume. Still smoking weed, just not much. Craving other drugs.
"I feel like no one understands. It makes me angry. Alone, isolated. Hold on, Dan."
November 23rd: Down 2mg to 8mg. Just want it over, but know I cannot rush it. I cry, feel sorry for myself and think about how stupid I was to get addicted in the first place. Sleep isn't happening. No pleasure from anything except drugs, which just mask everything. Everyone notices I'm neglecting myself, which has prompted me to eat and look after myself. Luckily I am still receiving pay cheques somehow from work. This helps massively, enabling me to buy plenty of games to keep myself occupied. I pace a lot nowadays.
December 2nd: Another 2mg down. The dose dropping isn’t noticeable for about a week. By the end of each drop I notice the mania and increase in symptoms. I brace myself, anxiety at an all time high. I am dizzy, lethargic, constant fear of impending doom and just general concerns about random things in life, about the future. Feel frustrated, angry, weak and sorry for myself; my heart pounds whenever anything remotely emotionally involving happens. Its just too much and I cannot take it. I feel like no one understands. It makes me angry. Alone, isolated. Hold on, Dan.
December 9th: Another 2mg drop, to 6mg. This is getting fucking hard now. I cannot even explain some of the symptoms – I don't know the words. I just wanna give up. My muscles are spasming every day. Restless legs at night and racing thoughts – makes me dizzy. I feel constantly sick. The worst is in the morning, though: the stress and tension and pacing is constant and relentless. I am absolutely knackered by the afternoon, every single day. Lonely. And not working sucks. Who knows if I'll ever be able to go back. At this point it feels like I won't.
WATCH:
December 15th: 1mg drop. Come on! Nearly there. Since the last drop I have begun to notice a clearing in my head. I'm beginning to feel like a cloud has been lifted. My thought process seems faster. I begin to get "windows of hope". I begin to smile again. My doctor calls me to check on me – I tell him I'm beginning to feel more… human? This doesn't last, but it’s better than nothing. Still getting manic phases; I end up obsessing over random shit and going on shopping sprees. Invasive thoughts are starting to seep in. Is this taper too fast? What will happen when I reach 0mg? These thoughts become more noticeable over the next week. Doesn't matter what reassurance people give me, it doesn't help. This is something you have to go through yourself. I have found that while many people share the same symptoms, benzo withdrawal is very individual.
December 22nd: 1mg drop for two weeks. I am now at 4mg. Waves again. The room is spinning, I can't breathe or sleep. Pass out. Major anxiety attack: when will this end? I was seriously considering just ending it all. Obsessive thoughts about life and about the end of taper. The only thing that works? More drugs.
But that relief is only temporary, and afterwards you feel even worse. I keep repeating to myself: get comfortable with being uncomfortable. Feel the pain, it's OK! All my life I have used substances to escape pain; now I must realise that pain is inevitable, and the more you try to avoid it, the worse you will be at dealing with it when it actually comes. Up, down, up, down, literal rollercoaster of emotions (yet nothing in your life is actually going on).
December 29th: Another 1mg drop. 3mg! Christmas was good. It felt nice to see family, even though I usually can't be bothered. I’m feeling more connected when I speak to others; everything begins to feel more fluid in conversation. I feel moments of happiness and also good mania where I am euphoric and find everything hilarious. Feels kind of trippy, like a low dose of LSD where you cannot stop smiling or laughing. Sleep is getting better, so physically I'm feeling more energetic.
January 7th: Another drop, 2mg. I have noticed a decrease in physical and mental symptoms. Feeling stronger and more confident. Want to be working again, but don't feel I can. I go to work for my absence review, expecting to resign. However, my employer offers me "phased return" to work, two days a week. I’m over the moon.
I go to work the following week for two days – it's kinda tiring, but very nice to see everyone again and socialise. Feel loved and missed, and realise how much I missed work too.
January 21st: 1mg!!! I am near the end… what a fucking journey. I’m constantly worrying about jumping off now: what if I didn't taper long enough? What if this is just the beginning and now it’s gonna be even worse when I come off? Will I lose my job? What will happen? Feel like no one understands. Sesh Safety on Facebook helps by allowing me to talk to others who have been through a very similar set of circumstances, or even worse circumstances than myself.
"I will never go back to those blue little pills, ever. Now I can live my life."
January 29th: 0.5mg. Half of a half 2mg pill. Tiny amount. I think this is more psychological now. It's the fear of coming off. I’m working two days a week still. It’s got me feeling confident in my ability, and good about myself.
February 5th: I jump off. 0.5mg to 0mg. Didn't sleep the first night, very scared. Waiting for something to "kick in", waiting for the dreaded withdrawal.
February 6th: Still waiting, anxious and nervous.
February 8th: Nothing has really happened yet? I ask other people and they say it can take two weeks to kick in to withdrawal. I will wait another seven days.
February 14th: Another seven days go past. During this time I was becoming doubtful of any withdrawal. Nothing happened. This was it. I done it. I survived. It’s fucking over. I feel so happy – I feel all these emotions I haven't felt in years. It's actually pretty fucking overwhelming. Joy, happiness, I am smiling. The birds are tweeting and the sky is a beautiful blue. I could cry. That’s how good it is. I will never go back to those blue little pills, ever. Now I can live my life, and I look back and think of my mindset during those months, the struggle. But I made it.
Game of Thrones may be nearing the end of its run, but George R.R. Martin is here to stay. HBO somehow managed to turn his hulking fantasy series into a global cultural juggernaut, and now everybody is racing to adapt his other books in hopes that they can wring out another ratings bonanza.
But don't expect the coming onslaught of George R.R. Martin adaptations to follow in the Game of Thrones mold of dragons and zombies and siblings who fuck. On Tuesday, SyFy released the first teaser for its new ten-episode series, Nightflyers, based on George R.R. Martin's 1980 novella—and the sci-fi horror looks absolutely nothing like Game of Thrones.
The Nightflyers setting is about as far from Westeros as you can get. The original book is about a spaceship crew off in search of some aliens, who then wind up in the middle of a deep-space bloodbath when the ship's AI computer turns on them. There are no GoT sprawling vistas or looming castles in the minute-long teaser—it's all tight, claustrophobic shots of unhappy astronauts and malfunctioning high-tech junk. But space setting or no, the show still seems to deliver on the one thing we've come to expect from anything George R.R. Martin-related: a ton of brutal murders.
Martin himself pops in during the clip to explain that the show is "a haunted house story on a starship" and "Psycho in space," but the thing seems more like Alien filtered through SyFy's other recent foray into prestige TV, The Expanse. The Nightflyers story was first adapted into a brain-bleedingly bad 1988 film, but as Handmaid's Tale and Westworld have proven, we can't judge a new series by its gloriously cheesy early adaptations. And with Martin's name attached, it'll probably pull in viewers regardless.
This story was published in partnership with the Trace.
Megan Ranney will never forget the first time she witnessed a trauma unit treat a shooting victim.
She was a young medical student at the Columbia University Medical Center in New York when a young man was rushed in on a gurney with what medical professionals often refer to only as a “GSW.” Ranney was familiar with the initialism from her training, but in that moment she learned something textbooks can’t teach: the emotional toll of a gunshot wound.
“My memory of it is both the utter fear on the kid’s face,” she said, “but also the speed of the response.”
The team quickly mobilized to assess the damage, control the bleeding, and save the man’s life.
Hospitals are prepared to deal with injuries like this every day, thanks in large part to the enormous resources devoted to post-trauma care. Ranney wondered what could be done to match the intensity and precision of our response to gun-related injuries to their prevention.
More than a decade later, Ranney still wrestles with this every day. As an injury prevention researcher, she has focused on evidence-based ways to reduce the impact of violence. She has become familiar with the statistics, which she’s used for years to push for increased funding for research into injuries from firearms. (Approximately 1,565 patients with gunshot wounds are treated in emergency rooms across the country each week.) But she’s found that when it comes to rallying support for this type of research, no statistic is as powerful as a story. So, after the school shooting in Parkland, Florida, she started collecting stories.
“What was really missing from the conversation after Parkland was the real impact [of gun violence] across our country on real Americans,” said Ranney, who also works as an emergency physician and associate professor at Brown University’s Albert Medical School.
She remembered how her colleague Esther Choo used Twitter to give a voice to patients who were deeply affected by, but not included in, decisions about the Affordable Care Act. Believing that a similar approach could be useful in the post-Parkland conversation, Ranney posted requests on Facebook and through email asking doctors to share their experiences with gun violence. She also collected stories from doctors across the country using the hashtag #docs4gunsense.
In just a couple of days, Ranney received hundreds of messages from medical workers nationwide. She has shared the most powerful responses in a thread that, as of March 20, was 124-tweets long and growing.
The stories come from a range of medical workers, including nurses, EMTs, psychologists, and pediatricians. “Most of us, no matter what specialty we’ve gone into, have cared for hundreds or even thousands of GSW victims,” Ranney said.
Reading through the responses, Ranney said she had to take breaks because of how viscerally upsetting many of the tweets were. The stories are deeply personal—they deal with suicides, incidents of domestic violence, and unintentional, but preventable, deaths—and highlight the ripple effect that gunshot wounds have on the body and mind, on families, and in communities.
Some doctors described the screams and wails of mothers who had lost a child:
Stories of gunshot survivors were also common. As The Trace has reported, survivors often experience psychological trauma, permanent disability, and financial hardship:
The stories illustrate that you don’t have to be hit by a bullet for your life to change dramatically as a result of gun violence. Those who’ve lost loved ones to gun violence experience trauma that can be devastating and even deadly:
After Ranney started posting the stories on Twitter, she heard from a friend with whom she often disagrees politically. “Regardless of our political viewpoints,” the woman said, “we all bleed the same.” Ranney said she hopes that people can bring this frame of mind to discussions about gun violence and injury prevention. For her, these conversations aren’t about demonizing gun ownership, they’re about keeping patients safe.
A version of this article was originally published by the Trace, a nonprofit news organization covering guns in America. Sign up for the newsletter, or follow the Trace on Facebook or Twitter.
OnThe VICE Guide to Right Now, VICE's daily podcast, we delve into the biggest news of the day and give you a rundown of the stories we're reading, working on, and fascinated with.
Today, we run through the day's biggest headlines before talking to Motherboard writer Kaleigh Rogers about the recent death of the very last male Northern white rhino and what his passing means for conservationists and the future of the species.
It's 2018 and I'm on the phone with my boyhood hero, Johnny Knoxville. The 47-year-old daredevil is telling me about how his eyeball popped out during the filming of his new movie, Action Point. "The makeup ladies, two of them, they started crying," he laughs, recalling the final days of shooting. "I was like, 'It’s OK, it’s gonna be OK!' I had been to the ER so much by that point, I think everyone was over me going to the emergency room."
Knoxville co-wrote and stars in the narrative film punctuated by stunts, which hits theaters on June 1. In Action Point, Knoxville operates his own dangerous, poorly-run theme park for his daredevil friends who are played by real-life stunt performers and Jackass alum Chris Pontius. As Knoxville tells it, the film features, "No pads, and no cutting on the action." During its production Knoxville suffered concussions, broken bones, a globe luxation, and more. Which means this is about as close as we're going to get to a new Jackass movie anytime soon.
Below, you can check out the first trailer for the film followed by an exclusive interview with Knoxville. He touches on everything, from the decor of his home office to what it was like writing this movie with the help of the Silicon Valley's John Altschuler, Dave Krinsky, and the legendary Mike Judge.
VICE: Where are you right now? Johnny Knoxville: I’m in Los Angeles, California.
What are you looking at? I am looking at my dirty ass red Chucks on the floor in front of me.
Are you at home? No, no. I’m in my office.
You have an office? What’s that like? Well, my personal office is pretty messy at this point. I have some pictures on the wall of Evel Knievel loading a pistol shirtless with a cane in his bed and his money and gold watch. I think it was taken when he was in England. I have a picture of Hunter S. Thompson behind me, passed out at a press table when he was in the service, and a suitcase with “Poon” written on it. In the outer office I have a bunch of ridiculous albums lining the shelves. It used to be an accountant’s office or something, so I have an enormous amount of shelf space we had to fill in some way.
What’d you have for breakfast? I don’t know, some kind of egg thing with potatoes. I get meals delivered so I don’t have to think about it, and since I don’t think about it, I just consume what’s in front of me. So I can barely tell you what I ate.
That’s convenient. So many decisions in a day, I like to take a lot out of the way. That’s why I have one pair of shoes, two pairs of pants, one style of socks, one style of underpants. I don’t have to think about it.
What’s on your schedule for today? Well, the trailer for Action Point is coming out, so I gotta do some throws for the trailer. I had to rewrite those a little and I’m researching David Allan Coe, ‘cuz we’re contemplating doing a documentary on him with Julien Nitzberg, the guy who did The Wild and Wonderful Whites of West Virginia with me. I’m reading his book, Just for the Record, and a couple of others.
Nice. Is it true that before Hurricane Sandy, I saw you walking around SoHo wearing a sailor’s hat? I have a sailor’s hat right on top of this Captain Morgan-type thing—I think it’s for a wine bottle but it’s got a sailor with his mouth agape and his hand right in front of his mouth. So, I put the sailor hat on him. You know, I wear sailor hats quite often and I don’t know if it was before Hurricane Sandy. Quite possibly.
Glad we cleared that up. What can you tell me about this movie? When did you get started? Why’d you decide to make Action Point? Derek Freda, my partner, sent me the documentary on Action Park, a theme park in New Jersey. It was an amazing theme park where the owner was like, Let’s not hassle the kids with a bunch of rules. Let’s leave safety up to them! And he did. And people got wrecked. That inspired us to make a film about a dangerous theme park, but we took the story from our experiences with Jackass.
I thought of the most painful stunts I could, and we made a film. And boy did it cost me: I got more injured on this than on any Jackass film I’ve ever done. Because all the stunts we did were real. I asked the stunt guys, “Look, we’re gonna do them for real. So no pads, and no cutting on the action.” I felt kind of bad for asking them to do that, but actually they were psyched because they never get a chance to do that. There was a good energy on set.
Why real stunts, rather than movie magic? I’m not that interested in movie magic. I think it’s more exciting when you’re doing your own stunts. In movies I produce, I can do my own stunts. I get on a regular movie, they have stunt guys for me which I still don’t understand. With this, I could do what I wanted [laughs]. It got a little intense.
What was the worst injury? Jeez, I don’t know. I had four concussions, I broke my hand, I busted my meniscus, whiplash... Maybe the worst one is I got back from the emergency room one night from a gnarly concussion and I had a little blood in my nose, so I went to blow my nose and when I blew it, my left eye popped out of its socket. It freaked me out. I didn’t know what to do so I popped it back in its socket and I called the producer and said, “Look, you have to come get me because my left eye just came out of my head.” He’s like “A-hahahaha.” I’m like, “I’m serious.” I had to go straight back into the emergency room.
What the hell? What had happened is, unbeknownst to me, I had broken my orbital lamina bone in my eye. In fact I didn’t break it, they said it just disappeared on impact, and so when I was blowing my nose, I blew air behind my eye and it was pushing it out. Wasn’t expecting that one.
That never happened before, huh? That never happened. You’re not expecting that. Then they’re like, “OK, well you might have to do surgery, we don’t know, but whatever you do, don’t sneeze for six weeks.” And I have bad allergies, so I’m like, “I don’t know how to do that!” [Laughs] And it popped out again like a week later! I was walking around with Chris Pontius, because he’s in the film, and he said something funny and for whatever reason, I put both my fingers over my nose and laughed and blew, and it blew the eye out again, and I popped it back in. It wasn’t as bad as the first time, but still…
Does your vision get all weird when your eye pops out? Yeah, yeah. It was double-vision for awhile, but it corrected itself. But we had two or three days left of shooting, so on the last few days they could only film the right side of my face. I had an old pirate patch on my eye. We shot around it.
Did that affect the story at all? You can’t really tell, you just turn your head to one side. But if you look real close in one scene, you can just catch a glimpse of my left eye. And it doesn’t look good.
How’d Chris Pontius get involved? Well, I just asked him. I wrote the part for him and then asked him if he would like to do it, and he said “Yeah.” He’s amazing in the film. God he’s funny. Just, like, between takes. He’s obsessed with hatchets and the history of hatchets, so I kind of wrote that into the character. Between shots he was constructing spears for the makeup ladies or crew members. I mean, he made at least 30 spears for people while we were there. I don’t think anyone really asked for a spear, but that was his way of saying “I like you.”
Do any of the other Jackass members appear in the movie? No, just me and Pontius, but the spirit of Jackass is all over the movie. It’s basically like me and the Jackass guys had our own theme park. It’s just that poorly-run and dangerous.
Why do you keep putting on old-person makeup? This one was decided after the fact. It’s just my character is old, but since there’s Bad Grandpa, we had to try to make him not look like Irving Zisman. But the geography of my face only let them do so much, so we wanted to do a Princess Bride-type of past/present narrative.
You ever think that your reason for getting in oldface has anything to do with constantly testing the limits of your own mortality? No… No. I don’t have to get in makeup to do that. But a little makeup always helps the lady.
Out of all your favorite stuntmen in history, who do you think would win in a fight? Wow, I don’t know. Jackie Chan? I don’t know if Buster Keaton was much of a fighter, but he was a hell of a stuntman. He’s Jackie Chan’s idol. Stallone could fight. And I’m sure Schwarzennegger would be a handful. Me, personally, I’m 0–83 lifetime in fights, so me picking a good fighter is like me telling you who’s a good guitarist: I have no fucking clue.
How’d you pick the stunts for the film? It’s a movie about a dangerous theme park, so they gotta be related to the theme park. So you just sit around and think of the worst things you can do to yourself in a theme park. It was about that complicated. There was a huge list.
How’d Mike Judge get involved? You know, I told him about the idea so me and Mike met with a couple of the guys he works with—John Altschuler and Dave Krinsky—and we tossed around ideas.
How long did it take? It took a long time. Three years, probably. Maybe three and a half. Six months to shoot, six months to edit, and the rest of the time trying to get the script right.
What were the biggest challenges to that? Trying to get the tone and the story right, and just trying to get the fucker to work. It’s the first narrative film I ever wrote on, so it’s been about six months trying to figure it out myself in the end.
Would you write another one? Yeah, I would feel more confident doing it now. There was many months of being too scared to even try, and finally I was like, “Fuck, I have to do something.” It’s funny what you’re scared of sometimes.
Action Point is in theaters June 1, 2018. Keep up with the film on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.
Every day I see columns by and for 40-year-old white men bemoaning how free speech is under threat by the dreaded university leftist. So when I heard about a defacto free speech rally being held at an Ontario university I knew I had to go and find out for myself: whose free speech is being infringed on?
The talk was put on by Lindsay Shepherd, a Laurier student who dominated a seemingly unending news cycle in Canada last year after being interrogated by professors for playing a Jordan Peterson video in a class as a TA. The event, held by Shepherd’s group The Laurier Students for Open Inquiry (LSOI), was titled “Ethnocide: Multiculturalism and European Canadian Identity”—words that, when combined, lead to few topics other than “white genocide” or white nationalism. Goldy’s talk, while not initially billed as about free speech, morphed into a defacto rally on the subject thanks to online backlash. The event never actually happened because it was cancelled shortly before it began Tuesday night after a fire alarm was pulled.
But fortunately I was able to talk to many of the people who came to hear Goldy speak and find out why exactly they were so worried about free speech. Specifically, I wanted to hear about one time their voice was stifled. Out of about 20 people I talked to not one could recall a situation where their speech was ever limited in Canada.
As a protest against the event raged outside, I approached the massive lineup waiting to enter the event. Here, I met a young man wearing a MAGA hat and T-shirt with a right-wing pundit’s slogan on it, who told me his name was Nicholas and that he was a member of LSOI (but declined to give his last name). Because of his attire, I asked if it was safe to assume what side of the political spectrum he sits on and he assured me that he was indeed right-wing. However, he explained that he didn’t necessarily agree with Goldy on immigration.
"We're at a university so we're just trying to get everybody's opinions, it's not that we necessarily agree with everyone's opinions, it's about discussing them and seeing how everyone feels about them,” he told me. “Not trying to suppress them and hide them, they do exist and pretending they don't is wrong. Trying to eliminate somebody's ability to express their opinion is wrong.
"So far, I haven't had that experience, I do feel like with my point of view not being as popular—especially with the university—I do feel somewhat afraid of expressing my point of view for fear of repercussions from the left."
Not everyone would go on the record with me, but everyone I talked to made similar points to Nicholas.
A little further up the line, which was made up of primarily students and a couple older folks, was Juan Duarte, a 22-year-old man also in a MAGA hat. Duarte told me that he had never heard of Goldy before receiving an email from the university about the event and didn’t really know about the night’s topic. He told me that he was indeed right wing, but that he hasn’t had his free speech infringed upon.
"For the most part no, just for me, maybe because I am a minority or something, so people are afraid to put me in my place so to say but I feel like everybody has always let me speak my mind and I've never been shut down or anything like that," said Duarte.
Our interview had to be cut short because at this point someone pulled the fire alarm and the building was evacuated. Once outside in the cold, I met a man named Tyler James who, like Nicholas, claimed to be a right-leaning member of LSOI. He told me that he came to the talk because he supports free speech and that, frankly, he just wanted to see what would happen. I put the question to him.
"I don't think my free speech has been encroached upon, not at this school, this school is pretty good,” he told me. “[I don't really think it's an issue] because the university is allowing [Goldy] to speak, I don't think it's an issue, they have the right to protest and Faith has the right to free speech."
Again this interview had to be cut short as a cop popped out the door to tell us to move away from the building. As we were walking, James added one further thought.
"I think [free speech on campus] is an issue but Laurier has been handling it really well— they've apologized for the one professor,” he said. “But I think if we don't stand up for it now, it'll be a bigger issue."
Once the building was evacuated, the crowd leaving the event began to intermingle with the protesters in Wilfrid Laurier’s quad area. On the outskirts of the protest, I found four people evacuated from the building having a smoke. They said they were there to see Goldy—one of them, a man named Anthony Germann, said the group consider themselves free-speech absolutists.
"I think we're all centralists or left, I don't feel like my free speech has been infringed but at the exact same time, we're all here, we're all proponents of free speech and believe in it,” said Germann. “I feel like you don't really know what you're protesting until you really listen to what somebody has to say."
Across a road from the protest stood a contingent of disappointed people who were there to see Goldy. Nearby, some people who were respectfully arguing with each other attracted other groups of onlookers. In the middle of the group farthest from the protest was Lindsay Shepherd, giving out interviews. Shepherd told VICE she was “very disappointed” that the event ended in this way, adding she expects to reschedule. I asked her about a major criticism people had in regards to the event—that it was explicit provocation.
"Maybe the people who say [this is explicit provocation] should realize that there are people—maybe not the people they hang out with—who advocate for ethnonationalism and it's maybe more than you think. So the best way to counter this is to just air this out, let's listen to it, let's be aware of it. It's not really good to have things go underground,” Shepherd told VICE.
I then asked if she agreed with Goldy’s views.
"Well, I didn't get to hear anything tonight,” she responded. “I'm sure we disagree on a lot but I see some intelligence in her."
Back in 2013, the Wall Street Journal published what is arguably its single crowning journalistic achievement over the past century—an article about the game of tag. The front-page story spelled out the saga of ten middle-aged men locked in a decades-long game of playground tag, one that started in the early 1980s when the gang was in high school in Washington state and never seemed to end.
The rules for the epic game—first spelled out in a 1990 "Tag Participation Agreement" drawn up by a lawyer in the group—are basically the same as they were on the schoolyard, with one major exception: The game is only on for a month a year, in February, and the last person tagged by the time March rolls around has to stay "it" for an entire year.
The WSJ article is a heartwarming tale of adult companionship, dumb games, and anecdotes like this:
One February day in the mid-1990s, Mr. Tombari and his wife, then living in California, got a knock on the door from a friend. "Hey, Joe, you've got to check this out. You wouldn't believe what I just bought," he said, as he led the two out to his car.
What they didn't know was Sean Raftis, who was "it," had flown in from Seattle and was folded in the trunk of the Honda Accord. When the trunk was opened he leapt out and tagged Mr. Tombari, whose wife was so startled she fell backward off the curb and tore a ligament in her knee.
"I still feel bad about it," says Father Raftis, who is now a priest in Montana. "But I got Joe."
The game is still going, five years after the article, but things are about to reach a whole new level. Apparently someone found the epic story of 30-year tag game so alluring that they decided to turn it into a movie—and now that movie, starring Jon Hamm, Hannibal Buress, and the guy who played Jason Bourne that one time, is heading to theaters. What is the name of this movie, you ask? Yes, you guessed it: Tag.
The film's first trailer, which dropped Tuesday, teases a few key moments from the WSJ article, namely the time someone tagged a guy at his father's funeral but fictionalizes the rest to give the thing a narrative spine about the friends trying to finally tag Jeremy Renner, who has never been "it." The movie is due out June 15.
Does the world need a film adaptation based on a newspaper article about a playground game? No. But the idea of watching Ed Helms and Jon Hamm chase each other across America in an on-going game of tag seems oddly compelling. Plus, the whole thing is ultimately just a treatise on how difficult it is to maintain adult male friendships past your 20s. Maybe we should all start playing tag.
For the record, Mike Konesky of Spokane is currently "it." Good luck next February, Mike. Until then, enjoy the fact that your commitment to a ridiculous schoolyard game has inspired a major motion picture.
