A Sarcastic Cover Letter

So, I wrote a really goofy cover letter for an indie publication because they were looking for a “snarky editorial writer” who likes to rant and such. I figured instead of just showing my fiance what I wrote, I’d show my fiance what I wrote through the internet as well. I personally thought their ad was awesome and per request, I tried writing a cover letter that grabs their attention and something that was applicable for what they were looking for. I don’t recommend copying this format though.

“The music scene is terrible. Artistry has been traded in for the talentless. Anything

popular tends to be over produced electronica and ran by nepotism (I’m talking to

you Will Smith). It’s a generation ran by One Directions and I’m expected to give 5

Seconds of Summer a pass because they know how to play the same three chords

repetitively. Please, don’t tell me that Skrillex is talented or how cool Coachella is. If

you’re over the age of 12 and don’t take drugs, then congratulations, you’ve peaked

higher maturity than the aforementioned demographics. I could write a novel about

my distaste for the music scene, but that’s not the point of this “cover letter.” I’m

reaching out to you for employment.

BitCandy, you say you’re looking for a snarky Editorial Writer, but how serious is

your claim? When I was an editor for the Golden Gate Xpress Newspaper, the editors

above me would constantly edit my pieces for being “too snarky” or “too cynical.” I

know I’m what you’re looking for, but do you know it? I personally felt at home

when I read the first lines of “Do you like to rant? Are you a sarcasm machine?” in

your ad. I’m often labeled a hipster because I find the music I like the old fashion

way; you know, by purchasing records and going to shows. Pretty hipster of me, I

know. I could give you a long list of why I’m qualified for what you’re looking for and

how I want this job, but what’s the point? It was either grab your attention or give

you information I’m sure all your other applicants have spewed out.

I hope this was enough of an attention grabber to get you to the third paragraph and

I guarantee you, if BitCandy takes the time and chance on me, you won’t regret it.

Thank you for your time and I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,

John Bradley Wilson

P.S. Nickleback is spelled “Meghan Trainor.”

Advertisements

Backpacking in 82 Days: INTERSTELLAR

IMG_1605.JPG

Ok, so technically it’s not 82 days anymore. It’s 82 days minus 14. I realized that after I finished yesterday’s blog.

In keeping with our homesick feeling, all Devyn and I did today was read in 2 different Starbucks while waiting for our 3:45pm showing of Interstellar; all an elaborate ruse to avoid parasites known as hawkers.

Now, generally, I always told myself if I consistently blog, I’ll never do movie reviews. Everyone does it now a days, whether it’s on WordPress or YouTube. Admittedly, my favorite film critics are on YouTube; schmoesknow, Jeremy Jahns, and Redlettermedia. I don’t fancy myself having anything new to offer (except that I hate everything) so it’s a territory I tend to avoid.

However, I am technically reviewing a film simultaneously with my travels, so there’s a new angle for ya. I saw and am reviewing a film I saw, which had Indonesian subtitles. Devyn and I feel pretty similar about Interstellar, but I have some different thoughts about it. If you want to know what she thought, she’s hot and won’t be hard to spot on Facebook.

(Spoilers I guess)

My main verdict about this film is a solid MEHHHHHHHHH!!!! I didn’t hate it nor will I ever watch it again. I went into this film with no expectations after hearing some initial negativity about it, and I remain in a solid middle-ground. The visuals did an awesome job at showing the vastness in space and I felt it was as realistic as a space exploration film would get. It’s not worth the IMAX admission. They’re aren’t enough shots where I wished I was in an IMAX theater. Not to take away from how well the film looks, but as opposed to the opening shot in The Dark Knight Rises, I think a normal price for admission is all you need.

I’m not going to get into how I thought the acting was good because I’m lazy, but I will say one thing. I like that Matthew McConaughey is on a resurgence of being a respected actor. During the period where it was easy to hate on him, I was in my early teens. I remember being shocked at how bad the roles he chose to be in. The first time I saw him act was in 2000’s U-571. He’s great in that, and it’s nothing like how he was in films like Surfer Dude. He’s always been a good actor, so his weird lull period was something of a shock to me.

With this being a Christopher Nolan film, there’s going to be a great deal of hype and nerdgasms surrounding it. This is where lies the film’s first problem. I feel like people had a very different film in their head going into this. It’s part of the same issues that plague the Star Wars prequels (don’t get confused, I hate those films). It was not what they expected, and that leaves people disappointed. Before hearing mixed reviews, I thought this film, and I’m sure others will agree, would be on an epic scale the way last year’s Gravity was, with a Nolan touch. What we are left with is a space exploration film that left audiences confused.

I personally understood the film perfectly well, even with the heavily scientific elements. At the very least, I got the gist. The plot itself is pretty linear; it’s the side elements about relativity and different dimensions that seemed to have left people dumbfounded.

I think another issue with the film is that, it too, didn’t know what it wanted to be. Was it supposed to be a more realistic space epic or opera, like a Star Wars and Gravity love child? Or was it supposed to be a film layered with social commentary about the future of the human species, mixed in with dense scientific theories? The film was entertaining on a visceral level, but I understand why people disliked it.

Side note: It felt lazy when they were showing Michael Caine’s character aged 20 something years later from when we first saw him, but they didn’t bother making Ebenezer Scrooge look older. They stuck him in a wheel chair to imply age and frailty, which is humorous when you verbally discuss it. Also, Matt Damon shows up! His character’s motive I found to be the most baffling.

Maybe I’m wrong, so help me out brilliant people on the internet:

He was sending out faux information about the planet he was on being sustainable in order to be rescued. Instead of explaining this to the crew of the Endurance, he tries killing them so he can take their ship to leave back to earth. Why couldn’t he just tell them the planet he’s been stuck on can’t sustain life, so move on? Was he worried they would carry out their mission and head to the next planet orbiting Saturn? Is attempted murder and blowing up your camp really necessary? The character of Cooper has every motive to head back to earth, even Anne Hathaway does. I could be wrong, but I felt confused at that moment, and didn’t really care either way.

The film looks great, but has nothing much else going for it except on an aesthetics level. The scientific theories about black holes, relativity, and the concept of space hibernation is intriguing, but Neil Degrasse Tyson has a much more interesting outlet in these phenomenons, and then some. I’d say check the film out for something mentally stimulating, but it didn’t go beyond that for me.