2 for 1 sale today

well aren't you the lucky ones - going to get two mini rants today, but first let's do the haikus. last time gave us Dawn of the Dead -Fight Club -Spiral and in case you haven't picked up on it, all the haikus (at least for now) have been for movies that i really enjoy so consider them recommendations. now onto the new ones, pretty basic this week no real stumpers

clawed maniac strikes

he's the man of your nightmares

no sleep on Elm Street

nature gone crazy

overdue book makes trouble

Ash leads the attack

sage advice ignored

animal control lacking

kids, watch your balloons

now the first rant - more of a WTF actually. glad i found the link to verify i wasn't going any crazier. heard this the other day before work and had to comment - listen to the link provided (hope it works) up to about the 1:25 mark, my comments are after the link

http://www.npr.org/templates/player/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=122986165&m=123012623

okay is it just me or is it really unnecessary to know he died from cancer????? how does that have any bearing on the story??? are they just saying that as some form of validation - yeah he only got ticketed with careless driving, but it's okay he died later. or is there some connection to texting while driving and cancer? if that's the case how do you explain all the people that got cancer before the massive influx of cell phones? (mobiles for the AU fans reading this) sorry, but this little thing really struck me as bad journalism/reporting. absolutely no need to know/hear that the driver 'later died from cancer'. i would be interested in hearing the thoughts of others tho - i know i am overreacting to this, but it drives me crazy. yes it is too bad that people died from the carelessness of others, but again why the need to tack that little statement on there. three days later and it still bugs me - okay on with the fun stuff

again this week the topic was inspired by a comment by mikeg - thanks mikey!! while on a forum he made a comment that reminded me of a thought that struck me several years ago and has never quite left my brain. i apologize in advance if this is not new, but i have never seen this mentioned before and so will continue to 'claim' credit for it (not that anyone else would want it, but i'll take any glory i can get). my theory - Jason Vorhees was a mutant with powers very similar to Wolverine. okay all done laughing? read on, although it is pretty self explanatory when you stop and think about it.

let's start with the basic look - from the first movie Jason's look has been written as a birth defect, well a birth defect is, at it's basic level a mutation. the word 'mutant' hasn't made it's way into wide usage with the population in general and any variations in children may be considered a defect, but as loyal comic readers know mutatations can present themselves in a wide range of areas. Nightcrawler, Artie and Leech come right to mind as a mutation that was present at birth and included looks that are out of the norm.

picture on the left taken from the original movie and the one on the right taken from a deleted scene from the remake. toned down the extreme look, but still a variation.

one of the main conventions taken with mutant powers in the comics is that adolescence is seen as a catalyst for the powers. Jason may be a little young, but i contend that the trauma of drowning provided the boost to allow the powers to kick in early. Plus Jason was probably close in age anyway. going back to Artie and Leech (along with Franklin Richards in some continuity) age is not a necessity for the display/use of powers in mutants.

now why the connection to Wolverine? well apart from the obvious healing factor(and since we have never had any supernatural explanation until Jason Goes to Hell we have to go with a healing factor) it seems that Jason also has enhanced senses. throughout numerous movies Jason has been submitted to countless injuries and even appeared dead several times. however, over the course of time he makes a full recovery - sound like anyone else we know? recently Wolverine has shown the ability to come back from near total elimination, as long as there is a cell remaining Wolverine will come back, given enough time. again Jason has exhibited traits very similar and has even recovered from lacerations to the brain and body. while the same could be said for other movie killers, Freddy has supernatural connections from the start and Michael, while out of the ordinary, only dealt with minor wounds. not forgetting the numerous gunshots at the end of the original Halloween, but given that we are never really shown a good image of the exact number and location of the wounds there may be some luck involved. i don't think Dr. Loomis would qualify as a marksman. plus Michael was later given a somewhat supernatural backstory and, if i remember correctly, the novelization of the first movie did offer some magical background. this rules out the two most logical arguments.

back to our topic - Jason has shown that he is able to track people, strength (not a lot of gyms in the woods), and the already mentioned healing. add into that an almost berserker like rage and without mentioning names we could be talking about either character. some mention could also be made that Jason appears to age at a somewhat slower pace. despite the fact that the first 6 movies occured in consequtive years, much time had passed between movies and yet Jason appears (just due to physical appearance and general actions) to remain close to the same age throughout the series.

long posting that really rambles, so summing up - Jason has shown an ability to heal, above average strength, tracking abilities, and stealth despite his large stature along with the obvious different physical appearance. Wolverine first appeared in 1974 predating Jason by 6 years and some argument could be made that he really didn't start to gain popularity until much later (notably during the Claremont-Byrne run in X-men around '78), so while no attempt to cash in on Wolverine seems to be there i still feel that an argument can be made that Jason could be considered a mutant. while this was a little more organized in my head, if a person is familiar with both characters the similarities just bear mentioning and the mind will wander.

interested in hearing any thoughts regarding this from the readers - in conclusion i would like to present to you Wolverine and Jason two mutants cut from the same cloth.