I am not one of these people who likes all of these conspiracies that I see on the web.
How this character is really dead, how it is all a dream.
Some of them I even wrote, like how Shooter McGavin is the good guy or how your interpretation of Jesus is wrong.
So I admit that there is hypocrisy in my statement against conspiracies, but I do think that they take away from some sensible logical thoughts that one could have, if you only focus on them.
When you think of only a conspiracy, all of a sudden, everyone is in on it.
Everything works around the conspiracy, which can get exhausting, as well as I mentioned really warp your mind.
With that being said I would like to bring up a interesting situation I noticed while watching the movie Liar, Liar the other day.
I will let you decide if there is something more to this.
Jim Carrey became known as Hollywood’s go to funnyman in the 1990’s, making hit blockbusters like The Mask, Ace Ventura: Pet Detective, and Liar Liar with the help of his zany personality and slapstick comedy.
He was able to make audiences laugh without much of a plot or other characters needed to help him make some humor.
Whether he was changing outfits or talking funny or falling over, his movies were never about the story itself with Carey, but his way of making the ride worthwhile.
This mass appeal led him to become a large box office draw in movies that had relatively mediocre story lines and characters.
People went to see Carey, not the movie.
For those of you who do not know the plot of Liar Liar, it is basically about a guy who can’t lie because his kid wished that his lying dad can’t lie for a day.
See what I mean when I say that the story lines were pretty dull for Carey’s movies?
The humor comes in because that guy is a lawyer, who are known liars as he tries to keep his promise while dealing with a divorce case or his secretary, or the hot woman in the elevator.
In the end, Carey wins the case on a technicality, since his client was underage when she had the kids, which makes the whole thing void.
Or something like that.
The point is that he won the case with the truth, but the better of the parents, the father, lost the kids, not the mother, who Carey defended.
It is in this moment he realizes that despite telling the truth, he was wrong in winning the case.
After approaching the judge and explaining his change of heart, he is dragged out of the courtroom by two police officers while proclaiming loudly for everyone to hear that he is Jose Canseco.
Which I am not sure if you have ever been in that situation, but that is not the normal response one would have when being held in contempt.
Who is Jose Canseco exactly?
Was it just a random person’s name that Carey shouted out?
Is there any significance to that peron’s name being selected by the character?
I bet that is the name of that mexican restaurant down the street that I haven’t tried yet.
There are a few ways of looking at it.
The simplest is what the man’s name means in the context of the movie.
Jose Canseco is not Jose Canseco, but a symbol used by Carey to say that he wants to spend time with his son, who he promised he would play catch with when he got home and who his son mentioned he wanted to be while doing it.
That is a typical act that young people do while playing sports.
They pretend to be a star athlete in that particular sport, so they swing the bat like their favorite player, or shoot the ball like him.
At the time of the film, Canseco would fit this bill perfectly, for he was a popular player in the league in the late 1980’s while playing with the A’s.
Kids would have liked him because he was a home run hitting machine with Mark McGuire.
It is our opinion of Canseco now, that gets me thinking.
Now Canseco is known as the guy who let the cat out of the bag with steroids.
Whether he is viewed as a rat for selling out his teammates or a hero for exposing the truth in his business.
The mention of Canseco now, has to do with his affiliation with steroids, not his glory days in the league.
In 2005, he wrote a book, Juiced that told everything about the scandal.
How Barry Bonds, Mark McGuire, Sammy Sosa; all the stars of his day, took steroids.
The league was corrupt and everyone was on something.
This problem became so persistent that it even got to the sport naming the time the “Steroid Era”
We see the effects of this change in the game, whenever a player is brought up as a Hall of Famer, or by historians recording the past.
Should a player be a Hall Of Famer if he took steroids?
What if we know he did them?
What if we don’t?
How do we remember a time in a sport where everyone cheated?
Do we just forget it like it never happened?
Do we forgive the abusers?
Do we only reward the innocent?
Yelling that you are Jose Canseco in a scene today takes on a different meaning than it did back then, and not just because he isn’t a player anymore.
So where am I going with this?
What is the conspiracy that could in the movie?
I am not entirely sure myself.
But I can’t help but notice a few coincidences in Liar Liar relating to the famous baseball player.
A man who is trying to tell the truth all day, gets dragged out of a courtroom yelling a name of a baseball player that would later reveal that there is a steroid problem in the sport.
Wow. That is quite the coincidence.
If the movie was about a lawyer winning a case and had nothing to do with truth, then it doesn’t work.
If he shouts any other ball player’s name, then it doesn’t work.
If Jose Canseco doesn’t write the book that changed the sport, then it doesn’t work.
There are a few coincidences in this whole thing, that make my think that something else was going on.
Mind you, steroids was not a problem in 1997, the year of the movie’s release.
Mark McGuire and Sammy Sosa were hitting 60-plus home runs in a season, and everyone was loving it.
No scandal was in sight.
You can claim that it is just a coincidence.
The movie picked a player that the audience would know and that they had no idea of steroids or of Canseco’s involvement in the future exposure of the use of performance enhancing drugs.
Or you can say that the writers of the film had a hint of the problem and wanted to tell the people without actually telling them.
Or you can say that the Hollywood film was somehow in on the steroid scandal and wanted to prepare them by having the actor shout out the name of the rat/hero.
Is this a conspiracy?
Just a few coincidences?
I don’t know, you tell me.
Like I said, I can’t think of a movie that had such an unusual reference to a person whose public opinion changed so much years after the movie’s release.