SnapChat EVERYTHING: 7 Technology Tips For Freshman

20 Aug

It’s been six years since I was a nervous freshman on a college campus. We barely had color TVs back then. It’s a whole new world out there now, but as a twenty-something who graduated college I am an expert on both technology and pathetically reminiscing about the glory days. This comes with great responsibility and I consider it my duty to make sure incoming freshman putting futons under an elevated bed because it “really takes advantage of the space” are properly prepared to have the most technologically fulfilling college experience they can. 

Here are a few tips:


Your parents probably told you that you will spend the next four years gathering memories that will last a lifetime. Well, they are really old and don’t know anything. Those memories should last ten seconds max. When you and your roommate go to your first party together make sure you split up and send snap chats to each other of what the party looks like from each side of the apartment. It’s the best way to experience it. 

If you have what feels like one of those life-changing moments like meeting the person you want to marry, finding the career you want to pursue or joining a group of people you think really understand you then how is it not your My Story? What are you even doing? 

2. If You Wouldn’t Swipe Right Don’t Talk to Her/Him

Tinder has introduced us to a new level of shallowness and vanity. Why not apply that to your formative years? You are never going to find the person you love without first judging them by their three most attractive pictures. 

Someone walking up to you in the quad? Are they a swipe-left-person? Then don’t go have lunch with them. Don’t study with them. Say no when they ask, “don’t we have Spanish 110 together?” Make note of any sorority or fraternity they are in as it may include more swipe-lefties.

Remember, if we don’t use Tinder the ugly people will win

3. Assume Your Professors Double as Uber Drivers

EVERYONE is an Uber driver these days. It’s a down economy. If your teacher isn’t tenured then chances are they are also an Uber driver. Live on the other side of campus or in an apartment off campus? Just hop in Professor Miller’s black SUV after class. No need to set it up on your phone, he knows you, you’re that kid that answered that one question. It’s perfect because it can double as office hours.

Remember, Uber drivers don’t accept tips. Don’t insult them. 

4. Live Tweet Every Class

Obviously, I don’t mean to live tweet every class by yourself. That would just be ridiculous. Get together with a few classmates and form a schedule allowing you to take turns live-tweeting class. This will enable you to avoid having to attend every class as the notes will be available in a string of 140-character tweets. It will also teach you a valuable lesson in synergy that will be applicable to the real world. 

5. Trade Your Meal Plan in For Bitcoins

I’m not really sure what bitcoins are, but I live in the real world and I’m fairly certain they are going to be extremely valuable. Be ahead of the pack and grab as many as you can. Besides, someone can just sneak you leftovers from the cafeteria, assuming they would swipe right for you. 

6. Pick Up E-Smoking

This isn’t high school. You’re not going to be popular just being yourself. 

“Check out that handsome rebel with the clunky e-cig by the fountain? I would go talk to him, but there’s no way he’s single.”

That’s what the girls will be saying when they see you puffing on that coconut and sweet pineapple vapor.

7. Expose the Person on Campus with an HBO GO Account

Someone on that campus has an HBO GO account. Find them and expose them. You’ll be a hero. It’s scientifically proven that an entire campus can survive off just one HBO GO account. You don’t want to miss Game of Thrones and neither does the rest of the class of 2018. Do whatever it takes to get that password, even if it means cuddling up with a swipe-lefty. 

-Jonny Auping

Farts and Depression: Something to Take From Robin Williams’ Death

17 Aug

“I don’t believe it. He always seemed so happy.”

Some form of that sentence was said all across America in the days following Robin Williams’ suicide. It seemed unfathomable that a man who could appear so unabashedly cheerful and hilarious on screen could possibly have the desire to kill himself. 

Well, Robin Williams was an actor. Appearing to be something other than himself was his chosen profession. He doesn’t actually wear drag and babysit for money, he has never fought Captain Hook, he doesn’t actually have a disorder that forces him to age too quickly, he didn’t invent Flubber and he was definitely not always happy.  

Williams appeared happy for millions of other people most likely for the same three reasons most people of his profession do: he was paid to do so, he possessed talent and passion for acting and, hopefully, he could make other people happy in the process. All three of those ring true.

However, there’s another possibility: It was the easiest way to mask severe unhappiness. We don’t know all the details of Williams’ mindset and situation prior to his death nor am I anything resembling an expert on depression or mental illness so forgive me for speaking in generalities going forward. People with depression don’t wear a sign around informing people of their struggle. There might be a few telltale signs, but they are not universal. If there’s anything to be learned from Williams’ death it’s that you never know who might be suffering the most.

Considering there are incredible and inspiring scenes of Williams in films like Dead Poets Society, Good Will Hunting, Hook, Aladin, Patch Adams and even the graduation speech from Jack, you could argue I did a poor job of choosing a Robin Williams’ video clip to show for this story. But I took some time to think about it and I want to show this clip of Williams and a bunch of kids farting into a can.

Scientifically speaking, I’m not sure that collecting farts in a coffee can and lighting a match will really cause an explosion, but I chose this scene from Jack for a couple reasons. It’s typical Robin Williams; being silly and ridiculous, not caring about how his comedy will be received by critics and causing uncontrollable laughter of children, the least cynical of us all.

But more importantly, I chose it because it provides a vague metaphor. Jack and those kids collected those farts until the can couldn’t even be opened without causing one of them to lose consciousness. As they passed it around and farted in it, nothing notably changed about the tin can. The sides didn’t dent. It did not become heavier or look unable to withstand more farts. But when they lit a match and dropped it in the can it caused an explosion louder and more powerful than any one fart. It was like a super-fart and thank God it didn’t kill them all. 

So goes depression and other forms of mental illness. Each blow can seem inconsquential to everyone but the victim. It can build up very slowly, but the final straw can turn out to be tragic. In society, we often wait until that match is lit to wonder what we could have done differently. 

The Detroit Free Press claims that, “research tells us that psychotherapy, or talk therapy, may be the best option for those suffering from mild to moderate levels of depression….Friends and family members play critical roles in helping depressed men.” 

People with depression need someone to talk to. They may need to talk about their problems or they may just need to know there is someone out there happily willing to talk to them about anything. We can’t measure what loneliness does to depression, but no problem has ever been made worse by someone else genuinely offering to listen to it. Feeling alone in this world can suck the joy out of anything that once made you happy. People can seem popular, or have money or look happy, but the only way you can truly know that they don’t feel alone is if you are the one providing that companionship. 

Physiological diseases are awful. The need to raise money for them is crucial because hope will always remain that it could lead to a cure. Some day we will find a cure to cancer and even a way to prevent it. I believe that. But depression will exist as long as we do. Unhappiness is real, but like a can full of farts, it’s basically intangible. 

I have a theory about depression. It’s a theory of degrees. I don’t mean to contradict any medical or psychological facts that are proven, it’s just a theory. I think that we all suffer from some form of depression. Things make us unhappy and certain things make us flat out miserable. It’s when those different degrees of things happen at the wrong time and come together in the wrong way that we can cross a line and become clinically depressed. It’s not a matter of weakness. It’s a matter of chance and accumulation. It’s a matter of filling up that can. It could happen to any of us. It’s in our best interest to be there for one another. A few conversations can make all the difference. If someone is too deep in that hole than it becomes your responsibility to convince them to seek help. We don’t know what degrees of unhappiness got them there, unless you’re a professional, it’s not our place to say what degrees of help will get them out. But that’s why we try. The smallest degree at the right time might help in the biggest way.

We don’t know what exactly Robin Williams was going through and I don’t mean to imply that one person could have saved him. What he taught us, though, is not to assume. Don’t assume happiness and don’t assume strength. We can provide each other that strength and that can lead to happiness. There’s probably someone in your life whom you can’t name a person they are really close to. Don’t assume they have people you don’t know about to talk to. Be one of those people and you won’t have to assume. It might seem like nothing, but if you poke the smallest hole in that tin can, you never know, a bunch of farts might escape through. Anything to avoid that explosion.

-Jonny Auping


The Rice Bucket Challenge

11 Aug

The Ice Bucket Challenge is sweeping the inter-webs faster than cats with hats. In a matter of weeks it will likely go the way of Harlem Shake videos, but unlike Harlem Shake videos the Ice Bucket Challenge was created for a good cause. The purpose of the videos, in which a participant dumps a bucket of ice water on his or her head and then challenges three friends to do the same thing, is all with the aim of promoting ALS awareness. 

While I doubt this goofy trend will save the world, it seems like we all can agree it’s a generally nice and productive idea, right? 

Apparently not. See, the Ice Bucket Challenge takes place on the Internet and nothing on the Internet is allowed to escape ridicule, snark and cynicism. While the challenges are going viral, there is also a growing resistance of the trend. The common argument of these detractors is that people do the challenge only for attention and pouring ice water on your head won’t actually cure a disease

Sure, it might be easy to mock the Ice Water Challenge if you look at it through narrow eyes. That’s why I think it’s my job to broaden your perspective and tell everyone the previously unknown origin story of the Ice Bucket Challenge. Perhaps if you realize how ridiculous the original version of the challenge was then you’ll appreciate what it has become and the impact it could have.

About five years ago, a group of young activists held a meeting in hopes of determining what they could do to improve the world and make a difference. After hours of brainstorming and gallons of green tea one of them casually mentioned that they should try to raise awareness of SLA. The rest of the group looked at each other in confusion until one of them finally asked, “What’s SLA?”

“You know, SLA. Lou Gehrig’s Disease,” the young man responded. 

“Uhh, that’s not SLA, Dave. It’s actually ALS. I think you might be dyslexic.”

As though they all shared the same brain, there was a collective light bulb that went off. Just like that, it was settled: they would raise awareness for dyslexia.

Three hours and many Black Cherry Almond Cliff Bars later they had their plan. They came up with the Rice Bucket Challenge. It went like this: participants would cook enough bowls of white sticky rice to fill a large bucket. They would then film themselves dumping the bucket on their head while yelling “RAISE DYSLEXIA AWARENESS!” They would then challenge three friends to do the same thing. 

The experiment was a universal failure. Of all six members of the group who made videos, not a single person they challenged accepted the challenge or even acknowledged the video. In fact, an alarmingly high number of those challenged unfriended their challenger. They tried to remake the videos putting the rice down their pants, but the results remained the same.

They sat down and thought of the possible downfalls of the experiment. They were as follows:

  • It takes awhile to cook a large bucket’s worth of rice.
  • It is a huge waste of rice. Donating the rice to places and people with food shortages might be more productive.
  • Watching someone pour rice on themselves provides very little entertainment value. A few kernels might stick to the face, but the vast majority of it will fall to the ground.
  • Cleaning rice off the ground is a pain in the ass.
  • Dyslexia is not a life-threatening disease, nor is it even a disease. Rather, it’s a disorder that is often not very difficult to live with. Practice and exercises can curb the disorder and allow victims to read and write on a regular basis without much difficulty. 
  • Yelling “RAISE DYSLEXIA AWARENESS!” did nothing to help people who suffered from it.

The group realized that they had to get back to the drawing board. For the next five years they brainstormed idea after idea (we won’t get into the Mice Bucket Challenge) until they finally remembered Dave’s original suggestion about ALS.

The challenge that I just described to you is ridiculous and arbitrary. The Ice Bucket Challenge is less so. The rules of the contest state that if you do not meet the challenge than you are to donate to the cause. I would suggest that even if you do accept the challenge you should donate $5 for the simple reason that ALS really is a horrific disease, which is what the challenge is trying to make people aware of.

Are there people meeting this challenge without much concern for the disease, but more interested in garnering Facebook ‘likes?’ Most likely, yes, but that cynical viewpoint does not take away from the good that the contest might do. If one were to hold a bake sale that encourages, but doesn’t demand, customers to donate to a charity we could all agree that this is a positive act, correct? But, eating a brownie bought from that bake sale is not actually an unselfish, generous act. It is enjoyable and delicious and that could be the motivation for eating it, Some people might buy one without donating. That does not take away any merit from the bake sale itself. You wouldn’t call that bake sale a waste of time. 

The vast majority of social media and Internet trends are pointless, distracting and ridiculous. Don’t shoot down the good ones.

-Jonny Auping

Grass is Not Greener and Anti-Marijuana Propaganda

4 Aug

Saturday’s edition of the New York Times featured a full page advertisement paid for by the group Smart Approaches to Marijuana, which opposed the legalization of marijuana. 

This is the advertisement:  

nyt anti pot ad

The caption reads: 

“The legalization of marijuana means ushering in an entirely new group of corporations whose primary source of revenue is a highly habit-forming product. Sounds a lot like a another industry we just put in place. Many facts are being ignored by this and other news organizations.”

I don’t smoke marijuana. I thought it was cool for a short period of time in my life, but then again, I also thought Axe Body Spray was contributing positively to my overall physical presence around that same time. That being said, I don’t have a problem with people who still use Axe Body Spray nor do I think that the good people creating scents like “Cool Metal” or “Phoenix” should be stopped from selling their product. 

I don’t pretend to know enough about all the issues of the legalization of marijuana to make a strong, active stance on the issue. I do take stances against people advertising agendas with extremely little depth to the merit of their specific points. It’s a good way to put a cloud of misleading smoke around an issue that actually needs to be debated intelligently.  

Smart Approaches to Marijuana is clearly stating that legalizing pot will lead to a huge industry that may very-well be compared to the tobacco industry (perhaps there are valid points in this argument). The “Perception vs. Reality” angle seems aimed at progressives and young people who don’t realize what the legalization of marijuana will lead to. I would argue that progressives and young people are not actually that naive. They realize that it will lead to big corporations selling pot. They also realize that it will increase the price of marijuana, but I think some of them balance that against the fact that they won’t, you know, get arrested for buying or possessing it. 

They did not need to be told that pot will not be universally sold by guys in snow hats. Not to mention, I doubt anyone who is reading this has ever bought pot from a guy that good looking. Drug dealers typically just look like unfunny Seth Rogans. 

The necessity for that add is about on par with the necessity with this ad I just created: 



The mass production of cookies may be enticing, but what you think is created by elves and old ladies is actually a giant corporation. Learn the facts at

I went to to look for more fleshed out arguments on their stance. Instead they have a scroll of random facts without any context or deeper explanation of what the stats mean. Here are a few:

Regular marijuana use can reduce your IQ by as much as eight points 

This doesn’t say how long it would take to happen. An eight point drop would not seem that significant over 20 years. It would also be extremely hard to prove this is the case considering environmental circumstances, like say education or lack thereof, could also strongly contribute to a decrease in IQ. Also, does anyone reading this actually know their own IQ?

Marijuana can lead to schizophrenia, psychosis or depression. 

This doesn’t say clinically diagnosed, long term schizophrenia, psychosis or depression. That claim can mean that it can cause similar symptoms while you are intoxicated. So basically, you could get really sad when you smoke pot or even act crazy. Kind of like when you drink alcohol or, in extreme situations, eat McDonalds. 

There were also “myths” like these:

 Legalizing marijuana will dramatically shrink the black market…Not true, the black market will undercut the taxed price to adults and still sell to minors.

If you were the kingpin of a giant illegal drug operation would you want marijuana to be legalized. No, you wouldn’t. Because less people will buy drugs from you. I don’t like dealing with big, ruthless corporations that don’t care about me, but I also don’t like dealing with cartels that would decapitate people or petty drug dealers who will shoot me if I sound like a cop. The word ruthless takes on a different meaning. 

Will illegal drug dealers still sell drugs in America. Yes. But thousands of people on both sides of the Mexican border are being killed every year as colleteral damage to illegal drug trafficking. Every time you smoke weed you contribute to that and have a little bit of that blood on your hands. Legally buying marijuana may strengthen a giant, potentially harmful industry, but it allows a consumer to avoid fueling illegal operations that run rampant in poor cities like Juarez. 

Marijuana is harmless and non-addictive…Not true. 1 in 6 adolescents and 1 in 10 adults who try marijuana become addicted. 

Does this sound even remotely correct? This does not provide any context or their definition of addiction. If you go to the bottom of the page to the “research” tab and find the tiny roman numeral associated with each fact and then connect it to the tiny roman numeral for a bunch of sources, you can find that this very bold fact was backed up by just one particular source from 1994. 

There is also a big quote from the American Cancer Society claiming they do not advocate smoking marijuana. They are also strongly against cigarettes, but they are not illegal. 

Like I said, I don’t pretend to have a strong stance on the matter and I certainly believe that there is possible merit in the argument that creating a giant marijuana industry could be a potentially harmful endeavor, however, the information of this advertisement and their coinciding website is being presented in an extremely shortsighted manner. 

Out of context facts that are extremely hard to both prove or disprove are no way to make an argument. People on both sides of the political spectrum use them everyday to rally the people who blindly support their stance. That’s why young people choose to zone them out and remain uninformed in regards to huge world issues, environmental crisises and domestic threats. Well, that and we’re all really busy sending each other Snapchats. 

-Jonny Auping


This Week in Internet Advice: Don’t Eat Food and You’ll Get a Job

31 Jul

“This Week in Internet Advice” is a response to the overwhelming number of arbitrary advice columns on the Internet. The Internet has long been the place that we go to with our questions and as a result, over the past few years the Internet has responded by giving us unsolicited advice that we didn’t realize we needed. In this feature, the author picks one of these articles and points out the unintentional humor it provides. 

Guys, we’re back. I know, it’s been awhile since the last edition of “This Week in Internet Advice.” It’s not that the Internet took a break from giving us advice, I just took a break from making fun of that advice. 

Luckily, Huffington Post published an article that tells us that we should probably skip meals before a job interview and go into the ordeal hungry. Apparently a study was done at Dartmouth and Cornell that states that people who are hungry have a greater sense of entitlement and think they deserve more and, therefore, that entitlement will translate into your interviewer hiring you. 

I’d like to suggest that they are overstating the “entitlement” hunger causes us. Perhaps most humans feel entitled to keep living and because they require food to do so, they feel entitled to that food. But who am I to argue with the science of job interviews?

Here is the quote provided by Emily Zitek, who was one of the conductors of the study:

“If being hungry is a good way for someone to be entitled, as the surveys showed, they can maybe skip lunch or skip breakfast or something.”

I’m pretty old fashion, but I don’t like the last two words of my research studies to be “or something.” That’s one step up from, “or whatever, I dunno.” We can “maybe skip breakfast or lunch or something?” Thanks. Way to be confident in your findings.

Another really great part of this article was this picture it provided: 

job interview

The caption reads, “Perhaps this guys wolfed down a big meal before his interview.”

Uhh, yeah, perhaps. It actually seems like the interviewer is about to say “Are you ok? You look famished. Do you need some food? We can reschedule if you’re feeling lightheaded.” It doesn’t look like he just wolfed down a big meal, it looks like he’s about to pass out from hunger.

The researchers conducted two studies. In the first, they stopped college kids on campus and asked them on a 1 to 7 scale if they agreed with the statements, “I honestly feel more deserving than others” or “Things should go my way.” Then they asked them to rank their hunger on a 1 to 7 scale. Apparently hunger coincided with feeling deserving.

Here’s my problem: college students walking around campus have to give sporadicly different responses to “things should go my way.” I was in college not that long ago. You might have caught me on my way to a class that starts in 15 minutes on a day when I’m caught up with my studies, had plans to play basketball with some friends later and am feeling confient about my future. OR you might have caught me on my way to a class that started 15 minutes ago, wearing the same beer-stained clothes as the night before with a brutal headache and a fear that an unknown assignment was due today. I would likely have a drastically different opinion on what I feel I “deserve” on each day regardless of if I did or didn’t skip eating the disgusting microwavable lunch that my roommate happened to buy that week. 

The second experiment is much more ridiculous. They surveyed students who liked pizza while a pizza cooked nearby with a strong aroma. They also did the experiment without the aroma. Apparently, hungry students refused to answer the extra questions in the survey, which means they felt more entitled, which somehow means they would do well in an interview. 

Here’s that logic one more time: 1.) Hungry student refuses to finish survey. 2.) Refusal shows sense of entitlement. 3.) Sense of entitlement means that hungry student would nail an interview. 

I’m not quite sure how 1.) leads to 3.). 

It sort of seems like that study just proved that hungry people don’t like to keep doing things that are preventing them from eating. So wouldn’t a hungry person just want to rush through the interview?

I’ve also been conducting a similar study for just about my entire life and my results have proven that hungry people are cranky, irritable and absolutely miserable to be around. So if you want to get a job at the leasing office of a mid-level apartment complex then go ahead and skip lunch. You’ll fit right in. 

-Jonny Auping


The Existential Question of the Everything Bagel

29 Jul

I always thought it was an arrogant name choice. 

The “Everything” bagel. 

Was the inventor prone to exaggeration? Or was he or she just lazy? Maybe it was supposed to literally imply that it had a vast amount of ingredients or maybe it was just a play on the colloquialism, “this is everything,” you know, like “money is everything” or family is everything.” 

I took to the interwebs to find out. I found this informative article in the Washington Post about the origins of the Everything Bagel. Two separate men claim to have invented the bagel. One claims, “There is no doubt I invented the Everything Bagel.” The other says, ” No, I definitely invented the everything bagel. There’s no doubt. It’s undeniable truth. It’s one of those things that’s 100% true, 50% of the time.”

I’m not sure what that last quote means, but unfortunately for both these men, when two people argue over credit for something I tend to believe neither of them. 

No, the Everything Bagel is beyond anything either of these two men could comprehend. It’s everything. 

It likely has existed in this world longer than we humans. Perhaps not fully formed, but all of its ingredients. Sesame, garlic, caraway, salt, and poppy are not just things. They are everything. If they are everything, what does that make us? Nothing? Probably, yes. We are nothing. 

As I type this I am sitting in a Starbucks, taking a break from more important writing (or could it really be more important? I mean we’re talking about everything here) and I look around and see nothing masquerading as a busy everything. I see a woman who brought her In-N-Out burger and fries into the establishment to eat. I see an eight-year old consuming a drink that is approximately 71 percent whipped cream. I see a man conducting an interview for a job that is so exciting that it conducts its interviews at Starbucks. 

What are we really doing here? The answer’s somewhere in the bagel. It has to be. 

The next time you groan as you look down and notice poppy seeds and who knows what else on your lap after polishing off an Everything Bagel with cream cheese maybe you should show a little appreciation. Twenty minutes earlier you had nothing on your lap. Now you have everything. 

Sometimes I wonder if God really took seven days to put this beautiful world together. Why waste so much time? I’m not sure that He really did create light on day one. I think He created the Everything Bagel. Then He kicked back. There is a hole in it for reason. The light could shine through. 

-Jonny Auping

Dawn of the Planet of the Anteaters

27 Jul

You may or may not have noticed that big action/adventure/disaster/suspense movies are not exactly original these days. We’ve got Godzilla, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, Planet of the Apes, Transformers, a thousand different superhero movies and on and on. We’re also supposed to believe that Into the Storm isn’t the exact same thing as Twister. 

Are we really that void of creativity? Hollywood really can’t come up with something new that can entertain us in a cold theater for two hours? Luckily, I have come across what should clearly be the newest blockbuster movie. I was stumbling around on Yahoo’s front page when I saw the headline “Giant Anteater Kills Two.” Naturally, I clicked on the link, but I didn’t expect much, it’s a big, crazy world out there and every day people manage to die in some very odd, but ultimately unimpressive way. 

Boy, was I wrong. Apparently the anteater mauled the two people to death in Brazil, but it wasn’t the story that left me breathless. It was THIS PICTURE:

I’m assuming you’ve spent about three minutes trying to figure out what you are looking at.  How many animals is that? Well, technically it’s three animals. After reading the story and the description of the picture I was informed that it is a picture of the giant anteater with its two small baby anteaters riding on its back.

Oh, okay. That makes sense, except for, you know, ITS LEG IS A FUCKING PANDA HEAD!

Apparently that is a picture of an anteater walking forward and what “appears” to be a panda head is actually just its left leg. Yahoo makes no mention of the panda and will just have us believe it’s some sort of optical illusion. 

I’m not buying it. We have a genetically created, cross-species, super predator that is out there killing people. The two deaths were separate incidents meaning this thing has struck twice. Here’s the description of one incident:

“The anteater stood on its hind legs and grabbed the man with its forelimbs, causing deep puncture wounds in his thighs and upper arms. The hunter bled to death at the scene.”

It seems to leave out that one of those “forelimbs” is the head of a panda bear, which probably bit through him like a piece of bamboo. 

So authorities should probably figure out how to subdue this creature before there are any more victims. But that’s not my job, that’s the authorities job. My job is to pitch this to Hollywood so we can finally get a cool summer movie that doesn’t involve Mark Wahlberg pretending he cares about dinosaur robots fighting each other. 

Here we go…

So quick camera shot of beautiful Rio De Janeiro. Now keeping going past the beaches to a low-budget, but well-intentioned zoo where there is only so much space and certain animals are kept in the same environments together including, yep, you guessed it, anteaters and pandas. 

Joseph Gordon-Levitt is the American animal lover/panda specialist who warned the park that the two species shouldn’t be in the same proximity. He was worried about his favorite panda, Daisy. 

One day, Daisy and a giant anteater named Gregory both spot a bamboo stick, which just so happens to be covered in ants. They both want it and it turns into an epic battle. Apparently, when Brazil built the stadiums for the World Cup they had to relocate a bunch of toxic waste and they irresponsibly and inexplicably stored it at this particular zoo. Amidst the anteater/panda battle they knock over barrels of toxic waste which results in a large explosion. All animals are seemingly dead. BUT when the dust settles we see the anteater walking away with DAISY AS HIS FOOT. He escapes into the forrest/jungle.

Manny from Modern Family will play another zookeeper. He’ll be the comedic relief. There’s a strong chance he’ll die at some point in the film. 

As the anteater/panda continues to eat ants and bamboo it gets bigger and bigger and its two baby anteaters are also growing. Eventually it’s approximately the size of Godzilla. To a creature that big, humans begins to look like….ants. And skyscrapers look like bamboo sticks. 

Emma Watson will play the female American solider who is always underestimated by all the guys even though she’s the toughest solider in her squad. She is part of a plan that will destroy the creature. Eventually she crosses paths with JVG and he tells her “there’s got to be another way” and keeps saying “if I could just talk to Daisy,” which if you haven’t kept up is the left front leg of this giant anteater, which happens to be the head of a panda, which used to be JVG’s best friend. Watson is clearly falling for JVG. 

The final battle scene will be epic and some major city will basically be destroyed. 

If the studio demands that the animals can talk Jack Black can be on hold to voice as many animals as possible. 

Don Cheadle will play Watson’s ranking officer who knows she is the best solider out there, but “takes too many damn risks.”

Jeremy Piven will play the owner of the zoo who took too many shortcuts to cut costs and put everyone’s life in danger. 


I think it’s fair to say I’ve laid out the groundwork for a Citizen Kane-esque film that will entertain the entire globe. It is now someone’s job to sign me up for Kickstarter. Someone else should put this pitch on KickStarter and hopefully we’ll have the money by September to get this thing rolling. 

-Jonny Auping


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 164 other followers