April Fool's Day is stupid, let's face it.
But what if we played practical jokes on our own tongues? That could be a thing that almost works, how 'bout it? Ok, well the words will continue anyway.
Synsepalum dulcificum is a type of berry that originates in West Africa and one of the common names for it is Miracle Berry. Miracle Berries have a molecule (or several, probably) that binds to the tongue and alters one's sense of taste for a few hours. In particular, they affect the sense of sour and bitter. And I tried them tonight before taste testing a bunch of other food to see what would happen.
The big thing to note is that, going into it, you would hope to get some mind-melding combination where apples taste like rubber, orange juice tastes like carrot or snozberries taste like not-snozberries. I was disappointed to find that there's nothing like that. Everything still tastes basically the same, it just heightens or deadens the various components. And it's only sour and bitter - if you try foods that vary from those two components, they won't taste much different.
So for fruit, the overarching theme is that fruit generally tastes better after eating Miracle Berries. The strawberries taste better, apples taste like really good apples, watermelon is pretty much unchanged. Tomatoes taste different but it's hard to describe... I would say there's a pronounced "ketchup" flavor maybe. The big, bold red letter items that changed dramatically were lemons and limes. Miracle Berries have the effect of converting sour to sweet. If you eat a lemon - and you can just eat straight lemon with no problem - it tastes like sweet, sweet lemon candy... or like sweet lemonade. And a lime isn't that far off.
Another category people talk about is hot sauce. I tried some and it is pretty interesting. Under the influence of the berries, hot sauce is still hot but it's muted and the flavor is (I'd say) better too. It may have been sweet or it might have been flavorless. I don't remember exactly.
I also bought an assortment of sour candy for the occasion. Sour candy is a fun experiment. The Miracle Berry blocks sour receptors so the sour candy just goes back to being regular candy. Skittles Sours taste like sweet Skittles. Mike and Ike Zours: same thing. A Mamba Sour just feels like eating a cube of wax - it's interesting in the sense that it's so boring.
Other than the lemon, which is the #1 thing to try in my opinion, the most fun comes from the "bitter" end of the spectrum. At least it did for me. That's the area that I was most surprised. Drinking Apple Cider Vinegar, I could still register that it was vinegar but it was really close to tasting like just apple cider. Normally straight, pure cinnamon would be inedible but it tasted great. The most bitter thing I could think of was baking chocolate. I ate some when I was a kid, thinking that "chocolate" meant goodness. Of course baking chocolate is one of the worst things in the world, but with the berries, it pretty much tasted like good dark chocolate. That was trippy.
The effects last longer than I would have thought. It's now two hours later and I'm just about back to normal.
Friday, April 1, 2016
Thursday, March 31, 2016
Tonight Show - James Spader's Kennedy Story
James Spader tells a story of hanging out at the Kennedy household.
Saturday, March 26, 2016
Roger Ebert's Great Movies
When I was growing up "Siskel and Ebert"(the show as well as the critics) were very much in their heyday and I always found them fascinating. It seems to defy all logic that I did. I went to the movies maybe 2 or 3 times per year and there was a strict rule about only seeing movies rated G or PG. So why would a TV show where two guys discuss movies - movies that I hadn't seen and couldn't see - be interesting?
I'm not sure. I could analyze it but it's easier just to say I find movie discussion inherently interesting. Why did I love watching Bob Ross when I was never going to paint?
Roger Ebert came back to my consciousness again when I was going through the IMDB 250 list. I found some movies on the list to be absolutely unwatchable and devoid of anything worth celebrating. "How could people actually like this?", I'd wonder. But the IMDB 250 is a system of votes, not a person, you can't just ask unless you want to post that question on a forum and be dismissed as a "troll".
But I found Roger Ebert's "Great Movie" reviews online and they were the key. Even if I disagreed, even if I was absolutely unchangeable in my hatred for a particular movie, Roger Ebert usually had an essay that explained what people saw in a particular movie, what was unique about it, how it changed the history of film. Like "Siskel and Ebert", whether we agree or disagree, the discussion is still interesting.
Last May I decided to watch every movie in Roger Ebert's "Great Movies" collection and read every review. There are about 372 entries and slightly more movies in the list. There's an inexact correlation between essays and movies because one entry might be a trilogy, one essay might be about the classic Warner Bros. cartoons, one entry, "The Decalogue" is really 10 movies, and so forth. But it's around 372 and as of tonight I've finished watching every movie and reading every essay.
Now that the list is completed, I'll continue missing Roger Ebert's film reviews... and Siskel's for that matter. It's strange how they could be so successful and yet no one has come along to replace them. Perhaps the modern world is happy using review aggregators, just skip the opinion and arrive at a number. One of the knocks on film critics is that people simply don't like to be told what to watch and what not to watch. I think that misses the point. The child version of me certainly didn't see it that way watching "Siskel and Ebert" on television and I don't see it that way now.
The different reactions that movies elicit reveal the differences in the people watching them. A movie watched alone is fine but how much richer is a movie watched, discussed and contemplated with others. Yes, watch any movie you want to see and avoid any movie you don't want to see, but read the review of someone you respect, regardless. The purpose of a worthwhile review is not to tell you what to do. The purpose is simply start the conversation.
I'm not sure. I could analyze it but it's easier just to say I find movie discussion inherently interesting. Why did I love watching Bob Ross when I was never going to paint?
Roger Ebert came back to my consciousness again when I was going through the IMDB 250 list. I found some movies on the list to be absolutely unwatchable and devoid of anything worth celebrating. "How could people actually like this?", I'd wonder. But the IMDB 250 is a system of votes, not a person, you can't just ask unless you want to post that question on a forum and be dismissed as a "troll".
But I found Roger Ebert's "Great Movie" reviews online and they were the key. Even if I disagreed, even if I was absolutely unchangeable in my hatred for a particular movie, Roger Ebert usually had an essay that explained what people saw in a particular movie, what was unique about it, how it changed the history of film. Like "Siskel and Ebert", whether we agree or disagree, the discussion is still interesting.
Last May I decided to watch every movie in Roger Ebert's "Great Movies" collection and read every review. There are about 372 entries and slightly more movies in the list. There's an inexact correlation between essays and movies because one entry might be a trilogy, one essay might be about the classic Warner Bros. cartoons, one entry, "The Decalogue" is really 10 movies, and so forth. But it's around 372 and as of tonight I've finished watching every movie and reading every essay.
Now that the list is completed, I'll continue missing Roger Ebert's film reviews... and Siskel's for that matter. It's strange how they could be so successful and yet no one has come along to replace them. Perhaps the modern world is happy using review aggregators, just skip the opinion and arrive at a number. One of the knocks on film critics is that people simply don't like to be told what to watch and what not to watch. I think that misses the point. The child version of me certainly didn't see it that way watching "Siskel and Ebert" on television and I don't see it that way now.
The different reactions that movies elicit reveal the differences in the people watching them. A movie watched alone is fine but how much richer is a movie watched, discussed and contemplated with others. Yes, watch any movie you want to see and avoid any movie you don't want to see, but read the review of someone you respect, regardless. The purpose of a worthwhile review is not to tell you what to do. The purpose is simply start the conversation.
Thursday, March 24, 2016
Garry Shandling
If you're looking for a good Garry Shandling video, check out his episode of "Comedians in Cars getting Coffee".
Interesting that the name of the episode, released months ago, is named "It's Great That Garry Shandling Is Still Alive".
Interesting that the name of the episode, released months ago, is named "It's Great That Garry Shandling Is Still Alive".
Wednesday, March 23, 2016
Post-Retirement David Letterman
Here's how naive I am... All those times Dave made those jokes about wearing a toupee, I thought he was just joking. I thought he just had bad hair so he made light of it by saying it was a toupee. It took me WAY too long to figure it all out.
Tuesday, March 22, 2016
Conan - Jordan Schlansky Product Review
Not a lot of product info in this one.
Ironically, Jordan gives more information about the Norelco Bodygroom 2038 in the video where Conan and Jordan attend couples' counseling.
Ironically, Jordan gives more information about the Norelco Bodygroom 2038 in the video where Conan and Jordan attend couples' counseling.
Labels:
Conan,
Conan O'Brien,
Jordan Schlansky,
Product Reviews
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)