What is Anderson Cooper trying to do?

When I first saw Anderson Cooper, he didn't have a smirk on his face. He was talking about the Iraq War. He was talking about a huge world event on CNN, which is supposed to be a trusted news network, telling me it in a trustworthy newscaster way.

"Hello, this is a very serious topic I'm discussing in a very serious and professional way. There is no way you could watch this and think that I could giggle at will."

The last time I saw Anderson Cooper? He was having his business stared at by Kathy Griffin on New Year's Eve.

"Hello, you are staring at my package. There is no way that I cannot giggle at this. I am about to commence now. Here goes. Giggling."

I can say that I truly do not understand Anderson Cooper. What is this man about? Is he someone who can just fit into any role that he's put into? Is he someone who wants to express every side of himself on TV? Is he a man who, due to his family ties to very wealthy people, wants to show the world that he doesn't need that security and is quite capable of doing anything he wants on his own? I do not know. And I do not have anything against him, I just don't understand him.

Anderson Cooper's CNN show, AC360, is a very serious news program. It's not a show you would watch if you were looking for laughs.

"Honey, I feel like watching something upbeat. Do you want to toss on Anderson 360? I hear tonight he's talking about women's rights in India. Always a laugh riot, this guy."

For ten years now we have seen him in this role. For ten years we thought we knew about Anderson Cooper. He was a man who cared about the world. A man who went to the Middle East, Africa, and Haiti, where he was shown on camera carrying a bloody child out of rubble. We had a pretty good idea about him.

"You know, I trust this guy. He went to Iraq and personally reported the news. He didn't sit in an office. He went to the action! There's no WAY that he would have a daytime show where he gives away Pringles. No way!"

But then that man's worst fears came true. Anderson Cooper started to host his own daytime talk show, Anderson Live, and sometimes, gave the audience Pringles.  His show at night was about real world events, and on his daytime talk show he was asking ditzy celebrities what THEY think about world problems!

"Thanks for coming, Snooki. What do you think about the gun control situation?"

"Glad you asked. Do you like my hair?"

"...Yes. It's very nice. Back to guns. What do you think should be done?"

"I have a blower dryer that I call my 'dry hair' gun, so I guess, sometimes I'm for them. But the bad kind? The bang bang kind? No."

I have nothing against Snooki, but you don't ask her about world issues when you yourself know about world issues! Ask her about dogs. Ask her about tanning. Ask her about becoming a mom, or breaking nails, or things to do with your hair or shoes! But DON'T ask her about the fiscal cliff!

This starts to explain why I do not understand this man. Does he want us to think he's smart? Does he want to be a cast member on a reality show? At night he's giving facts about the poverty in the world, in the morning he's co-hosting with a cast member of Jersey Shore, and telling us about a tanning salon they went to together.

"We went tanning. We're friends. My tan didn't take, but still, we had a good time. At one point, I squirted tanning oil into Snooki's hair and she was all, 'No! Why would you do that Ande..."

"Anderson! You're on your nighttime show! You are patched in live with a Saudi prince and you are supposed to be discussing oil!"

"You… went tanning? Is Snooki a talking beverage? I am a very busy Saudi prince. I have no time for this!"

"Sir, please! Would you like some Pringles?"

He was, at one point, a host on a reality show. He used to host 'The Mole'. USED to. Then he started telling us about the news, and actually going to do something about it. You can't go back after that. You stepped up. You can't go back! Cal Ripken can't get his old job back at a gas station.

"Holy hell! Cal Ripken! What are you doing here?"

"Hello. One, I'm here to buy gas. Two, are you hiring?"

"Hiring? Are you nuts? You're a millionaire!"

"Don't worry about me, all right, kid? I want my job back. I'm sure you've heard, I have a great record for showing up. I won't miss a day."

What is the next career move for this man? A very serious news program. Followed by a Rosie O'Donnell rip off from the 90s. Next? Maybe he'll try to get on a 2 Chainz song.

"She got a big booty, so I call her big booty. 2 Chainz!"

"AC in the building! I go in 360 degrees, that's called a circle. On my daytime talk show, I act like Urkel. I've given aid to Africa, the Middle East. And I've been on TV talking about cheese!"

"2… Wait! You can't actually rhyme on this song. That ain't 2 Chainz. That's 2lames. This is swag rap. The idea here is to just look cool. You got it?"

"Yo, 2 Chainz. I don't want to disturb you, but that last sentence right there? Sounded tight as hell on the beat! You got anymore of that fire?"

Anderson Cooper came out last year and announced that he was gay. That is fantastic, but it seems since that time that he has done some of the things that makes me not understand him. That is around the time that he started to interview dumb people about stupid things. Was straight Anderson Cooper the smart one? Did he care more about using his brain? Then when he came out as gay he decided that he needed to be a little less serious?

"Guys, look. I just came out, okay? I can't be doing this 'save the world' type of journalism all the time! I need to lighten up a little! Any ideas?"

"You could wear more colorful ties?"

"I don't haaate it. Anything else?"

"Uh, you could get people who really wanted to be in Ellen's audience but couldn't to sit in front of you while you hand out Christmas trinkets?"

"Whoa! That's amazing! How can we get Ellen's audience leftovers, though? She's in LA."

"Are you kidding? We're near Times Square. Go there and say, 'Who wants a free t-shirt?!' All the women who scream, there's your audience."

Anderson then went to the daytime show and it was cancelled shortly thereafter. How come? Could it possibly be because people who remember him from his late show, and were fans, didn't necessarily want to see him on a show where he is supposed to be the male version of Ellen? Nobody watches Ellen and thinks the opposite for her.

"You know, I really like her here. She's perfect! She's funny, charming, she dances. Makes everyone happy. I would love to see her in Kosovo interviewing a child who was just hit by a missile. Call me crazy, but I would love to see it."

And of course they don't want to see that! We get pretty used to seeing people do what it is they do. Does anyone want to see Charlie Rose doing cartwheels on daytime TV? Or James Lipton doing wacky breakfast television games? We looking for Wolf Blitzer to start judging America's Got Talent? This is neither good nor bad, but I do not understand Anderson Cooper.

Twitter @nathanmacintosh

Every movie has to be two and a half hours?

I remember a time when some movies were an hour and a half. If a movie was two and a half hours, it was usually because the acting was great, it was about a true event, and it was going to be nominated for an Oscar. Now? There's barely a movie that gets made that isn't as long as it takes to cook a pot roast.

"How long should I cook this turkey?"

"Toss Spiderman 3 on. When that's done, throw it out the window and never bring it into this house again. Also, that turkey will be done."

Some movies need to be two and a half hours. Movies about true events where the details and the story are crucial. They could have made Chaplin an hour and a half, but it was about a man's life. Hard to knock out details.

"I want to make movies! That's what I want to do!"

"Okay. Nobody's stopping you. Start making movies!"

"All right, I will!"

'And Charlie made movies. Very popular movies. He was banned from America for some stuff. The end.'

But there are a lot of movies that do not have to be this long.

For example, comedy movies. Why the hell do comedies need to be as long as Amistad? Pretty much every Judd Apatow movie is at least a half hour longer than it needs to be. They are funny, but there's a point when it's just overkill. Save some of the jokes for another movie. Funny People was one hundred and forty-six minutes. Amistad was one hundred and fifty-five. How does a comedy with Adam Sandler need to be nine minutes shy of a movie about the true story of a slave ship?

"Guys, I think I know how to stop racism. If I make a funny movie that's longer than a sad movie about slaves, I can break the curse."

"...What curse?"

"The curse of racism. It's only stuck around because of these long movies. Wait! I have to make this movie longer than Roots! THAT'S where the power of the curse lies! Get the writers back. We need to make this eight hours long. This curse will be destroyed!"

Even comedies that are fantastic don't need to be that long. Dumb and Dumber. That movie is crazy funny. It's one hundred and seven minutes long. And in that one hundred and seven minutes, I was given all of the information and jokes I needed to enjoy that movie. What's missing from it? Would it have been better if there were another forty-five minutes in it?

"That movie was great! It was funny and has one of the best endings ever. But… what happens to them when they walk away from the Hawaiian Tropic bus? Do they get jobs in the next town? Do they ever find love? Does Harry grow out of that ridiculous haircut? So many unanswered questions. I really wish it were longer."

Over the last few years, why have movies started to become so long? Were people complaining that they didn't have enough time to sit in the theatre chairs that lean back?

"Man, JUST when I get my chair leaned into the perfect position, the movie's over. I swear, Hollywood, stop cutting these off as soon as I get comfortable. Or maybe I should learn to get comfortable sooner. Nope, Hollywood's fault."

Were people upset that they didn't have the chance to stay in a building that charges $5.50 for bottled water? Was there a vote taken that people were upset that they weren't given enough time to finish the monstrous Coca Cola slushies and popcorn that they buy?

"Whoa, this is great. I really like thi... credits? What the hell?! I JUST spiked this slushie for the fourth time. Where am I gonna drink this now? In an alley? And how am I going to finish this tub of popcorn! I can't carry this home on the subway with me. I can't have people knowing I eat this much to myself! It has to be eaten in a dark room like everything else that is shameful. Man. They have to start making these longer."

Have they started making every movie long because of the price increase of the movies? Do they feel they owe us more because movies are fifteen dollars now?

"Look, we can't charge fifteen bucks and only give them an hour and a half of movie."

"What if the movie is really good? They'll probably leave with a beautiful feeling and tell everyone to go see it. If we just make it longer for the sake of making it longer, we'll bore them and they won't tell anyone to see it!"

"Answer me this. When have you ever paid fifteen dollars and not stayed in that place for two and a half hours?"

"Buying socks, picking up fruit, eating an upsized Big Mac meal, getting pants hemmed. How many of these do you want me to name?"

"That's enough. Now, if you had bought socks and could sit down and try them on for two and a half hours in a dark room with OTHER people who are doing the same thing, wouldn't you feel that you got your money's worth?"

"...No! There honestly couldn't be anything I can think of that would be worse. Why would anyone want to do that?"

"Because while you do that you can watch Tom Cruise do stuff! Drive cars. Blow things up. Do you see?!"

"...I... can't...I can't even... I have to leave."

Are movies longer now because most that come out are really bad? Is that it? There are some good movies coming out for sure, but there are a LOT of bad ones as well that still don't pull out at the hour and a half mark.

"All right, the movie is done and edited, and let me tell you – it stinks."

"What's wrong with it?"

"The story, the actors, the editing. The last one is my fault, but when you see a story and actors that are this bad, you don't care about editing it well."

"Oh, man. This is bad. People are going to hate it… I know! We'll make it longer, so they don't feel like they are getting ripped off!"

"...Whoa! I love that idea! How can you complain something was bad if you get a lot of it? It's like if you complain about your two-piece at KFC, and they give you six more pieces! The other six are still trash, but it's MORE OF THEM!"

"Exactly. So throw it all in. Continuity errors, boom mics in the shot, flubbed lines. We'll keep them in the theatre so long, they'll love it!"

The two and a half hour movie is becoming such a staple that soon people will probably be upset if theirs isn't that long.

"How was the movie?"

"Total rip! It was only an hour and forty minutes. Great movie, but come on? I mean, I paid for a babysitter! She's just gonna make thirty bucks for two hours of work?"

"...I'm the babysitter. You are talking to me."

"...Oh ...Yeah. Sorry. Do you mind if I give you the thirty next week? I bought Milk Duds... You want a Milk Dud?"

When is this long trend going to catch on with TV? I'm waiting for half hour sitcoms to become marathons.

"Did you see The Big Bang Theory last night?"

"Are you serious? I don't have a spare hour and a half."

"Man, it was a good one. The gang lost their apartment, got it back, beat ALL of Zelda: Ocarina of Time ON CAMERA, AND lost all of their virginities with a duration of five minutes each. It was epic. Took them an hour alone to get out of the water temple. With commercials! Just amazing."

Most movies do not need to be this long at all. We don't spend this much time on other things that are interesting. People can get through a zoo in less than two and a half hours. A zoo! A place that has beautiful, exotic, live animals. We can get all that we need out of that place in about an hour.

"Huh, look at that. A rhino. Never saw that before... All right, we ready to go home?"

Twitter@nathanmacintosh

"Attention passengers, give us more money."

Airlines have started to make flights "cheaper" by letting you pick what you are going to use and what you're not going to use.

"Excuse me, I know for a FACT that I will not be using my window. I'm going to fall asleep. Can you maybe knock ten bucks off my price?"

"Sure. No worries at all."

"Thanks... Oh, by the way, I probably won't throw up. I mean, I'm a pretty good flyer, and unless my wife calls me to tell me she's cheating on me with my friend Bill, who, come to think of it, has been spending a lot of time at the house recently – I should be okay. Another dollar off?"

Those things are not optional, and as it turns out, you need just about everything that they let you choose from.

For a while now, airlines have been charging for checked bags. For a bag that a few years ago they knew they had to have the human decency to just put on the plane, now they charge you for it. I think it makes sense in some cases. I'm sure years ago people would bring a trunk full of rocks onto the plane.

"I'd like to check this. You're gonna wanna watch that. It blew the tire on the cab on the way over, and I threw my back out twice moving it. You guys have a crane you use for the bags, right? Hey! Watch it, okay? It's fragile."

Not long ago, though, even if an airline charged you for checked bags, you were allowed to have one for free. Now? That luxury is pretty much gone. You want your luggage to be on that plane that you paid to be on? You're paying for it. Or maybe you're going on vacation with nothing.

"Okay. I'm flying to Rome tomorrow. What do I need? Well, I'm going for three weeks. I got my keys, my wallet, my passport.... Yep. I think I'm ready to go. I'll buy clothes over there. Actually, I'm not even wearing clothes on the plane. Just a robe. Let's do it, customs. I'm ready."

Maybe you're not traveling far. So you think that you can bring a carry-on bag with you. You're not checking anything, so this shouldn't cost anything extra. Wrong! Now airlines charge for a carry-on. A bag that could really be anything. How the hell did this happen?

"We're not making enough money on these flights. What do we do?"

"Raise the price of flights?"

"Jesus. Of COURSE we could do that. But do you think that's evil enough? You know what? I've had it with you and your garbage. You're fired! Anyone else?"

"...Ummm, we could charge people money for their carry-on bags?"

"...Now, Goddamn. THAT is an idea! We'll charge ol' sucker tits to bring on bags that we give them the room for anyway! That is great. You keep coming up with ideas like these, I'll you get a raise."

"Well, I have some more! What about charging people money to get on to the website to book their flight?"

"... There... are no... words. Pat yourself on the back, and get the hell out of here. You deserve the day off after that wicked brilliance. There will be a briefcase of money on your door step. And if you see the man I just fired, kick him in the ass and tell him your idea!"

What constitutes a carry-on? A backpack? What about a wallet? It is technically a carry-on. It holds things the same as a bag does. Is it just anything that you are not going to keep directly on you at all times? What if you are going to keep it on you? You could sit in a seat wearing a gym bag. That's a carry-on? What about a fanny pack? Fanny packs can hold a ton. Goes around your waist like a belt. Are we charging for those?

"Whoa, a bigger wallet. Sir, we're going to have to charge for that fanny pack."

"Actually, I'm not a man. I'm a hot woman who thinks that this is not a fanny pack because it's Gucci and I wear it over my arm."

"Oh, my apologies! Most people with those are over weight men wh..., you don't watch NASCAR?"

Isn't that amazing? Charge you to bring on a bag that you could keep on your lap. A bag that doesn't have to leave you at all. Are they going to start charging for pants?

"Sir, I'm sorry. It's forty dollars to wear full-length pants. Shorts are free. Capris are twenty dollars. But full-length pants? Forty bucks. New policy. We just don't have the room on the plane for all of the fabric."

"But... I'm wearing it. How is there no roo..."

"Sir. Don't embarrass yourself. Just give us the money."

Flights will even charge you for a seat. Not an upgraded seat. Not an exit row seat. A seat! A seat now on some airlines doesn't come with the price of the ticket! No seat! The ticket price now is just so you have the privilege of getting on the plane.

"Thank you for paying three hundred dollars for your flight! We will open the doors for you and you are allowed to step onboard. However, until you pay a bit more, do not sit down! Our seats do not come with the ticket price, you bag of trash. We have stopped you from being homeless – that is all."

You need a seat! That is not an extra. That is not a perk! They'll let you fly without a bag; they will not let you fly without a seat. You HAVE to buy a seat or you can't fly. It's complete robbery. If you could fly without a seat, people would do it to save money.

"Man, this flight only cost me four dollars! I refused all of the luxuries! No seat, no bags, no free peanuts, no washroom privileges. Nothing! I heard that starting next year they'll let you fly for free if you agree to be apart of the landing gear. Oh, man! Thailand here I come! Hey, can I go ask the pilot for a transfer like this is a bus? I'm standing like it's one."

You don't get a seat anymore? That's completely ridiculous. No one else could get away with this.

"Yes, sir. The steak is forty dollars. A plate is an extra three dollars."

"Plate? You don't give me a plate with this? Well, I'm not tipping."

"That is impossible, sir. Gratuity is included in the bill. We win at every turn. So... plate?"

Also, the whole 'Cheap Flights!' sentiment is basically a lie. You'll see ads that say, "Fly to the other side of the earth for two hundred dollars!" then you look at the small print and the tax is eight hundred dollars! If the tax is higher than the price, then that's the price! You can't say it's ten bucks if the tax is four thousand dollars.

"Hey! Come get this free TV!"

"Oh, man! I'll take it!"

"Good choice! How would you like to pay? That'll be seven hundred dollars."

"What? You said it was free."

"Oh, it is! The tax on free, though, is seven hundred dollars. I know, it doesn't make any sense! But think of the deal you're getting here. Free!"

"Free! Take my credit card and charge it! I'm getting a free TV!"

And this isn't tax! Tax on ten bucks is about a dollar. What world are you living in that the tax on something is way higher than the price?

"See, people thought they were paying too much before. So we started doing this new thing, where we say something is very cheap, and then have the tax be two thousand percent of that. People are paying the exact same amount, but they feel they are getting a deal. It's kinda the same as if a woman offers you a hand job and then fully has sex with you."

"...It's nothing like that at all. And who the hell are you? You pulled my headphones off while I was trying to write. What do you want?"

"Oooohhhh, I'm sorry. I guess people at this Starbucks don't want to hear the tale of the 'price lowering, tax highering' debacle of the late 2000s. Soooorrryyyy. You buy a latte four days ago in here and somehow your opinion doesn't mean anything. I see how it is!"

If airlines are now going to charge for things we should be getting anyway, we should start getting some other options. Some options we might actually want. When are they going to start charging you for the ability to tell the stewardess what we don't want to hear? How much would that cost?

"If you would direct your attention to the front, we will be going over the safety features of this air cr..."

"We get it. The safety features. We've all flown before. Can you just shut it!"

"Me 'shutting it' is an extra charge of ten dollars."

"Here! Just stop telling me how to buckle a seat belt!"

How about being able to pay a bit more to keep your headphones on? Which would basically just be money to fly as an adult. You were old enough to book the flight, pay for it, but you are not an adult enough to decide whether you wear headphones or not? How about a fee to have no babies on a flight? I don't mean kids. I mean babies. Babies scream. A lot. It's annoying to hear on the street, but in a tube that you are stuck in? Whoa. If there had been a baby in that canyon, '127 Hours' would have a very different ending.

"Ah, God! My arm is stuck under this rock! What the hell will I do? I have enough water to last a fe...."

"Waaaaa! Waaaaa! WAAAAA!"

"A baby? There's a baby in this canyon!? Well, that settles it. I can't deal with this!" (<smashes his head off of rock until he passes out>)

Yes, people with babies have to fly with babies, but some of it is just unnecessary.

"We're taking little Ted here to Florida! He can't wait!"

"Waaaa! Waaaaaa! WAAAAAAA!"

"Well, he doesn't know you're taking him to Florida. He'll be very happy when he grows up, though, to see pictures of the time you took him to see Mickey at a time when he couldn't enjoy it. How much to get this baby out of here!"

How about being able to pay some money so that they don't try to sign you up for a credit card in the air? There's almost nothing more offensive than that. Being stuck in a tube that is flying through the air, and having someone trying to get you to sign up for credit. The only equivalent to that on earth is if you found yourself stuck inside a priority mailbox with a banker.

"Greetings, sir! Do you want to hear about our interest rates?"

"What the hell is going on?! Am I inside a mailbox!?"

"Not quite, sir. You're inside a box that SENDS mail."

"Well, how the hell did that happen? I was just walking down the street..."

"And you came across a man holding a goat's head?"

"Yeah! I bumped into him by accident, then I en..."

"Yep, there you have it. Bumped into a witch doctor. Me too. But that hasn't stopped me from trying to make an extra dollar for a company that doesn't care about me. Now let's talk limit. You have thirty thousand dollars of debt. How about a card with a million dollar limit?"

"Nooooooooooo!"

Twitter @nathanmacintosh