The Hottie and the Nottie, a teen comedy starring Paris Hilton and that skinny dude from Dodgeball, comes out today.
In a universe of order and morality, this would not have happened.
So, basically, the skinny guy from Dodgeball wants to fuck Paris Hilton, but he has to set up her pretty-but-made-up-to-look-ugly best friend before he can get to that fabled, disease-infested cooch. And though the trailer below doesn't reveal it, Skinny Guy From Dodgeball eventually finds out – hold onto your shorts, because you ain't never seen an ironic twist like this before – that true beauty is on the inside, despite the fact that SGFD doesn't go after the "Nottie" until she loses her zit prosthetics.But that's just the basic plot – shall we watch the full trailer?
This is not, by any stretch of the imagination, a good idea for a film. Despite having been done a hundred times before to little fanfare (remember a movie called Whatever it Takes? Neither does anyone else.), the mere thought of casting Paris Hilton as an All-American Dream Girl is laughable. Considering roughly 90% of the civilized world would pay good money to see Ms. Hilton's brains bashed out by an angry homeless person, Paris Hilton's presence in this film alone is enough to make it positively horrendous. That she also executive produced it makes it nothing less than an abomination.
Metromix Chicago unironically called the film "dumber than nearly every movie ever," claiming that "it's like a sociological study of a moronic alien race." Reelviews.net endorsed the film by pointing out that "[it] contains several comedic sequences that are about as funny as the anal rape scene in The War Zone." On RottenTomatoes, the film has an aggregate score of 11% – and if that seems high, please consider that (A) there are only 26 reviews thus far, and (B) that the most positive review claims that the film "could have been worse."
Given how stupid, unfunny, deluded and pathetic The Hottie and the Nottie is, I must seriously argue that it is, in fact, definitive prove that God does not exist.
One of the major arguments for the existence of God is derived from the inherent "perfection" of the universe; plagues and hurricanes aside, everything within nature works more or less as it is supposed to. Our eyes are perfectly developed to see, just as our minds are perfectly developed to allow thought and communication.
If God created a universe in which Paris Hilton not only exists, but is rich enough to actually produce her own movie, then this tells us one of two things:
1. God intentionally created an imperfect being to live in an imperfect world in which the rules of society would give her more power and exposure than she deserved.
2. God simply set up the rules of our planet, and humanity is to blame for the creation and success of Paris Hilton. In essence, God didn't create Paris Hilton; we did.
While these lines of reasoning may initially seem contradictory, they all ultimately end in the same conclusion: God does not exist. If God intentionally created Paris Hilton, then he would be doing so in order to cause the human race considerable suffering and harm. A God who would bestow Paris Hilton on his creation is not a God of love, but of malice and evil. As the Bible specifically tells us that God is love, a God who creates Paris Hilton is most certainly not acting out of love, and is therefore not God.
Conversely, if God simply created the Earth and then refused to interfere with it after its creation (as the deists believe), then he still created an imperfect and immoral world. Any civilization in which a person like Paris Hilton is not eliminated by natural selection, or put to death by majority vote at the age of 21, is inherently and naturally flawed. A perfect being would never create a world capable of such stupidity and evil; ergo, God is either not perfect (in which case he is not God at all), or God never existed and Hilton's existence is simply a horrible result of our social strcutures.
If that's too superficial, let's examine another theory frequently used to, if not outright prove the existence of God, at least emphatically suggest that everyone should believe in God, no matter what. I am speaking, of course, about Pascal's Wager.
Pascal's Wager essentially states that you have more to lose by not believing in a God that exists than you do in believing in a God which doesn't. If you don't believe in God, and there isn't a God, you have neither won nor lost nothing as after death your consciousness evaporates and you can't gloat to all the religious nutjobs you became acquainted with throughout your life (neutral result). If you don't believe in God and there is one, then he forces you to suffer in Hell for all of eternity (negative result). On the other hand, if a religious person believes in a nonexistent God, they get the same neutral result as an atheist who is proven right; if they believe in a God who does exist, then they get to live in Heaven for all eternity. Mathematically speaking, it is therefore preferable to believe in a god (neutral result vs. very positive result) than to not believe in one (neutral result vs. very negative result).
This entire theorem falls apart when one considers the existence of The Hottie and the Nottie.
As she mentioned on Larry King, Paris Hilton believes in God. Therefore, if God exists – and for the purposes of this argument, let's say he does – then she gets to go to Heaven when she dies. If you believe in God as per Pascal's Wager, then you also get to go to Heaven when you die. However, this means that, for the rest of eternity, you are going to be in Heaven with Paris Hilton.
Think about it. Eons go by in the blink of an eye. Universes are created and collapse. And all the while, you have to live side by side with Paris "I think living in a world without orgasms is like living in a world without flowers" Hilton.
A true Heaven, a true paradise, would not have Paris Hilton. Therefore, upon her entry into Heaven, Pascal's Wager collapses and you lose just as much from believing in God as you do from renouncing his existence.
Additionally, the bible states that Heaven is, in fact, a physical manifestation of God's wisdom and love: God and Heaven are permanently intertwined, and the latter is an extension of the former. If Paris Hilton enters Heaven, then, it will immediately cease to become Heaven because Paradise cannot possibly include the female lead of The Hottie and the Nottie and still be considered a Paradise. When Heaven becomes corrupted by Paris Hilton's presence, so too does God, as Heaven is merely an extension of his being; God becomes corrupt and imperfect, and therefore loses his status as a perfect deity, and therefore ceases to be God before winking out of existence entirely.
Nietzsche once famously claimed that God is dead – and now we know who killed him.
Comments
Seriously: Who actually expected this to become a screen classic? And even if for some inexplicable reason it had, who would have expected a single positive review?
This leads to the simple conclusion, that this entire page is obsolete if not counterproductive.
LOL
filmwad isn't exactly a website garnering so much internet traffic, much less public light, that this editorial is going to give it publicity. It's just meant to be funny. The longwindedness is part of that.
On the same base i could start an argument if Ms. Hiltons media presence derives from the media arguing where her media presence comes from.