Here's a big question: Does Jackass Number Two attract vandals or make them? Now that I've seen my first article about theater vandalism and its link to the release of the Jackass sequel -- reports of vandalism came from all over the U.S. when the original opened -- I have to wonder if people are insinuating one or the other. Does the theater manager dislike the film because it brings riff-raff in, or does he dislike the film because of its influence on the audience? According to this news, the Tinseltown theater in Medford, Oregon had to evacuate 500 people over the weekend because somebody lit toilet paper on fire in the men's room, and the manager suspects that it was not an exiting moviegoer all hopped up on sugar and reckless stunts, but was instead some teens who were denied entry into the R-rated movie.

I would never have imagined such good news in all my life -- for once it is not the entertainment being blamed for violent behavior. This time it's the MPAA! Take that, Dan Glickman. Okay, so the politicians could certainly spin it the other way; the fire would have never happened if it weren't for Jackass, and the rating has now actually protected more people by prohibiting those kids from being exposed to even more dangerous ideas. So, what really came first? The jackass or the Jackass?