Without even realizing it, I'm on something of a Jeff Bridges kick as of late. It started out with TRON, the original, a couple of weeks ago (in anticipation of Legacy), then Legacy, Big Lebowski (technically, Kelly watched this without me, though I have seen it. Most of it), and culminating with True Grit this past weekend.
Phrases like "Oscar Contender" and "Instant Classic" have been tossed around when talking about the remake/reinterpretation of the 1968 novel of the same name (and 1969 film starring John Wayne). From my understanding, this version is much more faithful to the original novel than the '69 film, but never having read the book, I can only go on what I've read about it and what I've been told.
My question is, was this movie supposed to be a comedy? The trailers and advertisements make it out to be the revival of the Western-drama genre, but it seemed to be more tongue-in-cheek than anything. In a film about revenge and murder, there was an awful lot of joking aound and wordplay.
Don't get me wrong, I thoroughly enjoyed the film and will undoubtedly add it to my collection when it sees a home release, but I don't think it succeeds in what it set out to do. And that is be dramatic.
***SPOILER ALERT***
For example, Matt Damon's character accidentally walks into the ambush Jeff Bridges has set up for the gang he and the girl (I honestly can't remember the actress' name) have been tracking through the Indian Territory. Unable to warn him in time, Damon is wrangled up and is being dragged around by a horse. Before helping him, Bridges rattles off a joke. And then after the fight is over. And then as he is examining Matt Damon's injuries. And then Damon talks funny for the rest of the film.
***END SPOILER***
At no point did I feel the characters were in any real danger or that they wouldn't complete their task of hunting down the killer and bringing him to justice (JUSTICE!!!). I thought everything in the movie was great: The acting (especially the main girl), the feel, everything. It was just too damn funny. Even when something happens at the end, I didn't find it at all to be serious or dramatic. But maybe that's just me.
Some of you may be wondering why I put the word justice (JUSTICE!!!) in parentheses. It's a game that Scott and I started over Twitter regarding the show Smallville. Each season seems to have a theme, and last season's was justice (JUSTICE!!!). So, anytime a character saysthe word justice (JUSTICE!!!), the viewer is supposed to take a drink. I never did it myself, but I gotta imagine that someone playing would get pretty eff'ed up fast (especially in the episode 'Absolute Justice,' where the word was rattled off every 3 seconds). This season's game is The Darkness. So, for anyone brave enough to try it, watch an ep and take a drink anytime the word darkness is used.
Anyway, the point of that last paragraph is the True Grit drinking game. Take a drink every time the word grit is used. You'll be messed up pretty fast.
Speaking of Oscar contenders, I also took the time to see Black Swan. What a total mindf***. It's billed as a psychological thriller and boy does it deliver. It was beautifully acted and somehow actually made me care about the world of ballet, if only for two hours. Between this and Grit for best picture, I'd definitely take this. And not just because there is a very passionate moment between Natalie Portman and Mila Kunis. I mean, yeah, sure it helps (even if there was some freaky stuff going on besides, well, the freaky stuff). But it was still a very strong film without it.
So yeah, there you have it. I'd take a psychological thriller about ballet over a western starring a one-eyed Jeff Bridges. Whodathunkit?
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
Monday, December 20, 2010
Uncharted The Movie: Fillion's Bane
When I downloaded the demo for the first Uncharted game, booted it up, and watched the intro sequence, I was stunned when the main character, Nathan Drake, opened his mouth and was not voiced by Nathan Fillion (who some of you know as Capt. Malcolm Reynolds from Firefly). That's because it appeared someone at Naughty Dog really had a hard-on for the self-described "ruggedly handsome" actor. Nathan Drake bears a striking resemblence to Fillion and yes, they share the same first name.
Recently, talks have been underway of a movie based on the video game franchise. They have a director and writer who decided that the best idea would be to make the film a family affair. So...instead of getting something akin to Raiders of the Lost Ark, we'll get National Treasure. Fantastic. When it came to selecting an actor to portray Drake, Nathan Fillion himself started a Twitter campaign to get the lead role. So, much to dismay of his and the game's fans, it was announced a few weeks ago that Mark Wahlberg would be portraying the wise-cracking, loner, asshole.
I have nothing against Marky Mark, but I would've loved to have seen Fillion in a role that seemed like such a perfect fit. A lot of people said that the man best known for his role on a super short-lived Sci-Fi Western could not carry a blockbuster action movie, and three years ago, when there was a lot of fan support for Fillion to play Hal Jordan in Green Lantern, I would've agreed. The director has also said that he has never heard of Nathan, and the guy was kind of an ass about it.
And what has Wahlberg done that makes him a box office draw? The Happening? Planet of the Apes? The only film I recall seeing because of Wahlberg was Shooter, and I'll admit he was pretty badass in that.
However, he (Fillion) is now the star of his own prime time drama on ABC. Now in its third season, Castle has managed to survive far past his other shows. Now, I'll admit, I have always been immersed in nerd culture, so I knew of the Fillion long before most ever heard the name, but why can't he star in a bigger movie? Espeically now that he has a lot more exposure with Castle?
And why does it seem like all of the high profile projects that fans want to see (like Uncharted or Transformers) go to people who really don't know anthing about or care about the property? The argument there is that filmmakers make movies to appeal to the general audience, not us nerds who made the property popular in the first place. My counter to that is look at Iron Man. That took a comic book character that a surprisingly large number of people claimed to have never heard of, and made him a household name. And how did they do it? By sticking to the source material.
So here's my advice Hollywood: If you insist on adapting a popular franchise on the silver screen, try to get someone who understands why its popular and make a faithful movie.
Recently, talks have been underway of a movie based on the video game franchise. They have a director and writer who decided that the best idea would be to make the film a family affair. So...instead of getting something akin to Raiders of the Lost Ark, we'll get National Treasure. Fantastic. When it came to selecting an actor to portray Drake, Nathan Fillion himself started a Twitter campaign to get the lead role. So, much to dismay of his and the game's fans, it was announced a few weeks ago that Mark Wahlberg would be portraying the wise-cracking, loner, asshole.
I have nothing against Marky Mark, but I would've loved to have seen Fillion in a role that seemed like such a perfect fit. A lot of people said that the man best known for his role on a super short-lived Sci-Fi Western could not carry a blockbuster action movie, and three years ago, when there was a lot of fan support for Fillion to play Hal Jordan in Green Lantern, I would've agreed. The director has also said that he has never heard of Nathan, and the guy was kind of an ass about it.
And what has Wahlberg done that makes him a box office draw? The Happening? Planet of the Apes? The only film I recall seeing because of Wahlberg was Shooter, and I'll admit he was pretty badass in that.
However, he (Fillion) is now the star of his own prime time drama on ABC. Now in its third season, Castle has managed to survive far past his other shows. Now, I'll admit, I have always been immersed in nerd culture, so I knew of the Fillion long before most ever heard the name, but why can't he star in a bigger movie? Espeically now that he has a lot more exposure with Castle?
And why does it seem like all of the high profile projects that fans want to see (like Uncharted or Transformers) go to people who really don't know anthing about or care about the property? The argument there is that filmmakers make movies to appeal to the general audience, not us nerds who made the property popular in the first place. My counter to that is look at Iron Man. That took a comic book character that a surprisingly large number of people claimed to have never heard of, and made him a household name. And how did they do it? By sticking to the source material.
So here's my advice Hollywood: If you insist on adapting a popular franchise on the silver screen, try to get someone who understands why its popular and make a faithful movie.
Sunday, December 19, 2010
Those Were the Days...
The holiday season is upon us. It is a time that one is supposed to put the needs and wants of others first (at least when it comes to buying stuff). It is then, with great reluctance, that I sadly admit that I've spent way too much on myself as of late. Most of it being video games (or video juegos for those in Spanish speaking countries).
The shopping spree began in mid-November with the release of Goldeneye for the Wii (I've talked at length about it already, so go check that post if you want my thoughts on the game itself) and continued through last week where I picked up Super Mario Bros. All-Stars (also for the Wii. And a pain in the ass to find, but I'll save that for a different time), Band Hero (it was less than $10 on clearance), and bought Castle Crashers and X-Men: Arcade off the PlayStation Network. That sounds like a lot, but I had gift cards that covered Mario and the two PSN titles, and, well, Band Hero was on the cheap.
Something I noticed about my buying habits there? Three out of five purchases were motivated by nostalgia, those feelings of a simpler time and more awesome gaming than yearly installments of Call of Duty (yeah, I know, Goldeneye is a CoD clone). And it's four out of five if you count Castle Crashers and the fact that I bought it because it's an awesome lil homage to the beat 'em ups of a bygone era (such as the era X-Men: Arcade hails from).
Mario All-Stars is a collection of the SNES ports of the NES Mario games and I had been holding out for those versions of the game since I got the Wii. X-Men Arcade is, well, the X-Men arcade game from the early 90's. I remember using coupon vouchers for free arcade tokens and blowing it all in 15 minutes on that sucker back in the day. And now I feel old. And sad. Because I'm old. Goldeneye, I purchased because it was an update/remake of Goldeneye.
So my question is: How much does nostalgia really influence our lives? There's a whole niche industry that thrives on kids and adults buying stuff simply because they remember it. Look at stores like Hot Topic. They have walls dedicated to things like Power Rangers, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turles, and assorted old Nick Toons. And it's stuff we purchase and wear with pride (even though, at the height of its popularity, most of my classmates wouldn't have been caught did in a Power Rangers shirt).
And I've been guilty of buying this stuff. It wasn't for me, I swear. But I did get a Rocko's Modern Life Tee for the girlfriend.
So why do we do it? With video games and movies, where we can actually go back and play/watch the things we remember, they hardly hold up to our memories. If X-Men wasn't a game that everybody and their grandmas had an emulated version on their PC, I'm sure I would've been disappointed with the PSN release. But I knew exactly what I was getting there. Same with Mario and Goldeneye. But yet, we lay our money down for these products in hopes of capturing those days of our youth (and sometimes these come with spiffy new paint jobs, like the Perfect Dark HD game on XBLA).
There wasn't a huge point to this post. Only waxing intellectual-like. I'd invite others to join in with comments and such, but it annoys me when I read a very well-thought out article on other sites and then having it end with "Why don't you let us know what YOU think, whydontcha?"
Like, thanks guys, didn't know what the text box under the COMMENTS section meant. But that's a different story altogether. I had to beat them to death with their own shoes...
The shopping spree began in mid-November with the release of Goldeneye for the Wii (I've talked at length about it already, so go check that post if you want my thoughts on the game itself) and continued through last week where I picked up Super Mario Bros. All-Stars (also for the Wii. And a pain in the ass to find, but I'll save that for a different time), Band Hero (it was less than $10 on clearance), and bought Castle Crashers and X-Men: Arcade off the PlayStation Network. That sounds like a lot, but I had gift cards that covered Mario and the two PSN titles, and, well, Band Hero was on the cheap.
Something I noticed about my buying habits there? Three out of five purchases were motivated by nostalgia, those feelings of a simpler time and more awesome gaming than yearly installments of Call of Duty (yeah, I know, Goldeneye is a CoD clone). And it's four out of five if you count Castle Crashers and the fact that I bought it because it's an awesome lil homage to the beat 'em ups of a bygone era (such as the era X-Men: Arcade hails from).
Mario All-Stars is a collection of the SNES ports of the NES Mario games and I had been holding out for those versions of the game since I got the Wii. X-Men Arcade is, well, the X-Men arcade game from the early 90's. I remember using coupon vouchers for free arcade tokens and blowing it all in 15 minutes on that sucker back in the day. And now I feel old. And sad. Because I'm old. Goldeneye, I purchased because it was an update/remake of Goldeneye.
So my question is: How much does nostalgia really influence our lives? There's a whole niche industry that thrives on kids and adults buying stuff simply because they remember it. Look at stores like Hot Topic. They have walls dedicated to things like Power Rangers, Teenage Mutant Ninja Turles, and assorted old Nick Toons. And it's stuff we purchase and wear with pride (even though, at the height of its popularity, most of my classmates wouldn't have been caught did in a Power Rangers shirt).
And I've been guilty of buying this stuff. It wasn't for me, I swear. But I did get a Rocko's Modern Life Tee for the girlfriend.
So why do we do it? With video games and movies, where we can actually go back and play/watch the things we remember, they hardly hold up to our memories. If X-Men wasn't a game that everybody and their grandmas had an emulated version on their PC, I'm sure I would've been disappointed with the PSN release. But I knew exactly what I was getting there. Same with Mario and Goldeneye. But yet, we lay our money down for these products in hopes of capturing those days of our youth (and sometimes these come with spiffy new paint jobs, like the Perfect Dark HD game on XBLA).
There wasn't a huge point to this post. Only waxing intellectual-like. I'd invite others to join in with comments and such, but it annoys me when I read a very well-thought out article on other sites and then having it end with "Why don't you let us know what YOU think, whydontcha?"
Like, thanks guys, didn't know what the text box under the COMMENTS section meant. But that's a different story altogether. I had to beat them to death with their own shoes...
Saturday, December 18, 2010
TRON: Legacy
My hand hurts. I don't know why, it just does. And it's my good hand. My typing hand. When I lean too far on either elbow (I have a laptop and, therefore, type in bed), that is the hand I use to type. So...I don't know how long this is going to go on for (this particular entry, not the hand pain).
Yesterday, I saw TRON: Legacy at a local theater in super ultra 3DXD with 9.5 Surround Sound. I've never been a huge fan of the original film. I was born in '85, three years after its release, so I didn't grow up with it like others have. And I honestly didn't take the time to sit down and watch it from start to finish until about three weeks ago. So, unlike, say, Star Wars, I don't have any particularly fond memories of watching it with my dad on WGN (a station based out of Chicago, IL) or with friends or anything like that. If I had done any of that, maybe my perception of TRON would be different. But, to me, TRON was/is a film that tried to shoehorn in a crapload of inaccurate or made up techno-babble as a way to make a story for what was essentially the world's first video game film (the film heavily featured those new-fangled game machines all the yunguns crowd around in those dark, loud arcade places to waste their quarters on). That said, I didn't hate it. I try to enjoy it for what it is: a mostly cheesy film used to pioneer special effects produced by computers.
So how was TRON: Legacy? Pretty damn good. The special effects were well done. The acting wasn't terrible (something of a rarity in a lot of movies, it seems). And the story was good enough to keep the viewer involved throughout showing off the new lightcycles and jets and whatnot. My two biggest problems: 3D and the de-aging of Jeff Bridges.
The cost of the ticket was $16.50. This was for being at an upscale movie theater (there's a piano player in the ze lobby), the particular screen it was on (one of the larger in the Midwest, if one is to believe the hype) and the fact it was in 3D. And did 3D add anything to the movie? Not really. Most of the time I didn't even notice if a particular scene was meant to be "Three-Dimensional." There is a disclaimer stating that not all of the film is in 3D, but to keep the glasses on anyway, because, yeah...glasses. 3D. It was kind of awkward, that message. I dunno, just didn't sit right with me. It's like the filmmakers knew they could get way with not even having a 3D movie if they just told everyone that it was in 3D. That, and a lot of 3D films tend to be darker (I mean, come on, it's like wearing sunglasses in a darkened room most of the time), so it was kind of hard to see some of the finer details (like costumes, which overall were pretty damn cool).
Why do filmmakerss keep trying to de-age characters for films? I hear it was used to great success in Benjamin Button. I never saw the film (as I recall it was a horror film), so I can't really say whether it looked good, but here, it didn't. There was something off about the way the lips moved, and at times the face even looked off-kilter. Now, this could be explained away in the digital world, but they also used the de-aged Bridges in the opening, a scene that takes place in the real world (yeah, I know, spoiler alert and whatever).
Still, very minor flaws in an otherwise very enjoyable movie. I will definitely purchase it when it comes to a home release and might even see it again in theaters, though probably not in 3D.
Once again, I can't have an enjoyable theater-going experience. I can see why many are opting to wait for Blu-Ray/DVD releases of films, even if it is partially financially motivated. The last couple of movies I've seen there have been babies in the theater (including TRON, which led to a new 'in-joke' amongst my group), kids/teens texting and/or talking for the duration of the film (seriously, you paid $10+ to tap away at your phone for two hours?) and I can't remember the third point I was going to make (it's late, I'm tired, and my wrist still hurts), but I'm sure it involved the decline of society's values and morals. This time, though, it takes a bit to set up.
You see, the theater I went to has a "VIP" section, where you can purchase the tickets and can choose where in the VIP section to sit, barring anyone else already having taken it. I went with a group of friends, the inviter being the one who purchased the tickets. So we (my girlfriend and I) get into the theater, only to find the only two seats left in the reserved row (I know, fancy and whatnot) are on opposite sides of a food table/stand/thing (about the width of a seat and has cup holders, but can be used to hold popcorn, pizza, whatever), so that sucked. Then, throughout the entirety of the movie, the guy to my right kicked me. Was he an antisocial weirdo who was annoyed that somebody dared to sit next to him? Probably. But still, he kept crossing his legs, and whenever he did that, he kicked me. Not wanting a repeat of The Expendables Incident, I let it go. Then, there was the baby. Who brings a baby to a theater of that magnitude (the theater actually has 7.1 SurroundSound and the screen is very, very large)? Still, the baby, not a huge problem, since the movie is pretty loud and the sound drowned out the child. No, the problem was the guy who kept reacting to the baby. Whenever there was a rare lull in the film, this man (I did not know this man) would yell for the baby to be taken to the lobby.
Our new joke is "take the baby to the lobby." It has a variety of uses. Sexual? Sure. Getting the job done (in a nonsexual way)? You betcha.
So, overall. Fantastic movie. Shitty movie-going experience. Now I'm going to go hope my hand doesn't fall off in my sleep.
Yesterday, I saw TRON: Legacy at a local theater in super ultra 3DXD with 9.5 Surround Sound. I've never been a huge fan of the original film. I was born in '85, three years after its release, so I didn't grow up with it like others have. And I honestly didn't take the time to sit down and watch it from start to finish until about three weeks ago. So, unlike, say, Star Wars, I don't have any particularly fond memories of watching it with my dad on WGN (a station based out of Chicago, IL) or with friends or anything like that. If I had done any of that, maybe my perception of TRON would be different. But, to me, TRON was/is a film that tried to shoehorn in a crapload of inaccurate or made up techno-babble as a way to make a story for what was essentially the world's first video game film (the film heavily featured those new-fangled game machines all the yunguns crowd around in those dark, loud arcade places to waste their quarters on). That said, I didn't hate it. I try to enjoy it for what it is: a mostly cheesy film used to pioneer special effects produced by computers.
So how was TRON: Legacy? Pretty damn good. The special effects were well done. The acting wasn't terrible (something of a rarity in a lot of movies, it seems). And the story was good enough to keep the viewer involved throughout showing off the new lightcycles and jets and whatnot. My two biggest problems: 3D and the de-aging of Jeff Bridges.
The cost of the ticket was $16.50. This was for being at an upscale movie theater (there's a piano player in the ze lobby), the particular screen it was on (one of the larger in the Midwest, if one is to believe the hype) and the fact it was in 3D. And did 3D add anything to the movie? Not really. Most of the time I didn't even notice if a particular scene was meant to be "Three-Dimensional." There is a disclaimer stating that not all of the film is in 3D, but to keep the glasses on anyway, because, yeah...glasses. 3D. It was kind of awkward, that message. I dunno, just didn't sit right with me. It's like the filmmakers knew they could get way with not even having a 3D movie if they just told everyone that it was in 3D. That, and a lot of 3D films tend to be darker (I mean, come on, it's like wearing sunglasses in a darkened room most of the time), so it was kind of hard to see some of the finer details (like costumes, which overall were pretty damn cool).
Why do filmmakerss keep trying to de-age characters for films? I hear it was used to great success in Benjamin Button. I never saw the film (as I recall it was a horror film), so I can't really say whether it looked good, but here, it didn't. There was something off about the way the lips moved, and at times the face even looked off-kilter. Now, this could be explained away in the digital world, but they also used the de-aged Bridges in the opening, a scene that takes place in the real world (yeah, I know, spoiler alert and whatever).
Still, very minor flaws in an otherwise very enjoyable movie. I will definitely purchase it when it comes to a home release and might even see it again in theaters, though probably not in 3D.
Once again, I can't have an enjoyable theater-going experience. I can see why many are opting to wait for Blu-Ray/DVD releases of films, even if it is partially financially motivated. The last couple of movies I've seen there have been babies in the theater (including TRON, which led to a new 'in-joke' amongst my group), kids/teens texting and/or talking for the duration of the film (seriously, you paid $10+ to tap away at your phone for two hours?) and I can't remember the third point I was going to make (it's late, I'm tired, and my wrist still hurts), but I'm sure it involved the decline of society's values and morals. This time, though, it takes a bit to set up.
You see, the theater I went to has a "VIP" section, where you can purchase the tickets and can choose where in the VIP section to sit, barring anyone else already having taken it. I went with a group of friends, the inviter being the one who purchased the tickets. So we (my girlfriend and I) get into the theater, only to find the only two seats left in the reserved row (I know, fancy and whatnot) are on opposite sides of a food table/stand/thing (about the width of a seat and has cup holders, but can be used to hold popcorn, pizza, whatever), so that sucked. Then, throughout the entirety of the movie, the guy to my right kicked me. Was he an antisocial weirdo who was annoyed that somebody dared to sit next to him? Probably. But still, he kept crossing his legs, and whenever he did that, he kicked me. Not wanting a repeat of The Expendables Incident, I let it go. Then, there was the baby. Who brings a baby to a theater of that magnitude (the theater actually has 7.1 SurroundSound and the screen is very, very large)? Still, the baby, not a huge problem, since the movie is pretty loud and the sound drowned out the child. No, the problem was the guy who kept reacting to the baby. Whenever there was a rare lull in the film, this man (I did not know this man) would yell for the baby to be taken to the lobby.
Our new joke is "take the baby to the lobby." It has a variety of uses. Sexual? Sure. Getting the job done (in a nonsexual way)? You betcha.
So, overall. Fantastic movie. Shitty movie-going experience. Now I'm going to go hope my hand doesn't fall off in my sleep.
Saturday, December 11, 2010
So That's What That Does...
If you've seen my blog before, then you may have noticed something new when looking at it today: A giant banner ad running down the right side of the page.
If you've never seen my blog before, and still don't know what I'm talking about: There didn't used to be a big banner ad running down the right side of the page.
On the blogger.com page (where I go to write, look at comments, settings, edit posts, etc.) there is a tab marked "Monetize." I never knew what it did, because whenever I looked at the page, it looked weird and scary. So, today I decided to just go ahead and do it. How intrusive could these ads really be?
Well, as it turns out, not very, and very. The first thing I noticed was that the area for the blog entries seems slimmer. Other than that, it seems ok. Not sure if I like it.
It's supposed to be under AdSense, where the ad program scans your viewing history and shoves ads down your throat based on your preferences. So, why then, when my viewing history is made up almost entirely of video game and movie websites, did I get an ad for Blogger.com when I was testing it out.
I'm not sure if I'm gonna keep the AdSense stuff yet, but I thought I might give it a try. And if an ad pops up that you actually find useful, give it click, why don't ya? I do get hundredths of a penny that way...
If you've never seen my blog before, and still don't know what I'm talking about: There didn't used to be a big banner ad running down the right side of the page.
On the blogger.com page (where I go to write, look at comments, settings, edit posts, etc.) there is a tab marked "Monetize." I never knew what it did, because whenever I looked at the page, it looked weird and scary. So, today I decided to just go ahead and do it. How intrusive could these ads really be?
Well, as it turns out, not very, and very. The first thing I noticed was that the area for the blog entries seems slimmer. Other than that, it seems ok. Not sure if I like it.
It's supposed to be under AdSense, where the ad program scans your viewing history and shoves ads down your throat based on your preferences. So, why then, when my viewing history is made up almost entirely of video game and movie websites, did I get an ad for Blogger.com when I was testing it out.
I'm not sure if I'm gonna keep the AdSense stuff yet, but I thought I might give it a try. And if an ad pops up that you actually find useful, give it click, why don't ya? I do get hundredths of a penny that way...
Friday, December 10, 2010
Senor Coach Chief Captain Awesome McAwesome III
That is my name now. Or, at least it is according the schools I teach at. It started off with a group of 5th graders and an exercise in which we (myself included) had to answer the question "If you could change your name to anything, what would it be and why?" Well, I already like my name, so I just went for silly. And so Captain Awesome McAwesome III was born.
I know what you're thinking. Why Captain Awesome McAwesome III? I'll break it down. I've always wanted to be called captain, because it just sounds important. And cool. And important. And what's more awesome than Awesome? Why, McAwesome, of course. It's like a double dose of awesome. And "III?" Does that mean there are two Captain Awesome McAwesome's before me? No. Adding "the Third" just makes it sound silly.
And what about the rest of the names/titles? Later on in the day, the students were wrapping up a unit on Native American Indians, and part of the the project was to assume a Native American identity. The same goes for the teacher. So that's where "Chief" came from. As for coach. I subbed for a gym class a couple days after that, and for some reason it's just second nature for students to call the gym teacher "coach," even if that person has taught English or Math or whatever. And as for Sr.? Same as the others, a natural instinct to plop Sr. in front of the teacher's name if they're teaching Spanish.
So that's the story of how Sr. Coach Chief Captain Awesome McAwesome III was born. Mind blowing, isn't it? I figured it was something other than a review for whatever movie or game or album I had happened to have watched/played/listened to lately, so there is that.
Also, how awesome would a Call of Duty-style game based on the Max Brooks' book "World War Z" be?
Very, I think.
I know what you're thinking. Why Captain Awesome McAwesome III? I'll break it down. I've always wanted to be called captain, because it just sounds important. And cool. And important. And what's more awesome than Awesome? Why, McAwesome, of course. It's like a double dose of awesome. And "III?" Does that mean there are two Captain Awesome McAwesome's before me? No. Adding "the Third" just makes it sound silly.
And what about the rest of the names/titles? Later on in the day, the students were wrapping up a unit on Native American Indians, and part of the the project was to assume a Native American identity. The same goes for the teacher. So that's where "Chief" came from. As for coach. I subbed for a gym class a couple days after that, and for some reason it's just second nature for students to call the gym teacher "coach," even if that person has taught English or Math or whatever. And as for Sr.? Same as the others, a natural instinct to plop Sr. in front of the teacher's name if they're teaching Spanish.
So that's the story of how Sr. Coach Chief Captain Awesome McAwesome III was born. Mind blowing, isn't it? I figured it was something other than a review for whatever movie or game or album I had happened to have watched/played/listened to lately, so there is that.
Also, how awesome would a Call of Duty-style game based on the Max Brooks' book "World War Z" be?
Very, I think.
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
Bond. James Bond.
First of all, I'd like to apologize (kind of) for my last entry. The intent was there, but I just don't think my ideas were presented as clearly as I like to think most of my ideas are. So...sorry if my rant against the new Twitter contests was as a jumbled mess as those contests seem to be.
Almost a month ago, Activision and Eurocom released their update/reimagining/remake/reboot of Rare's classic FPS: Goldeneye. Eurocom is the developer responsible for the Wii version of Modern Warfare: Modern Warfare Reflex. So, they had that going for them and with all of the positive reviews for 007, I decided to pick it up.
I decided to spring for the Limited Edition, which comes with a gold version of the Wii Classic Controller Pro. Also, the retailer I bought it from was offering a second Pro controller, so I picked up a second one in black (sadly, the second controller was not offered in gold, though I'm not sure that's really a negative).
Now, I've always had a gripe with most peripherals for the Wii. Namely, they require the Wii Remote in order to function. Got that Guitar Hero or Rock Band game for the Wii? Gotta slap a Wii-mote in the guitar. Got a Classic Controller? Tether it up to the Wii-mote my friend (I don't know about the original Classic, but the Pro's cord is way too short for my liking). And the Wii Zapper? Couldn't they have made one that actually functioned like the old Lightgun? I haven't had much experience with it, but I've found most games to work better without the plastic casing that is the Zapper.
But enough of that and back to Goldeneye. How does it play you ask? Like Call of Duty. Seriously. It's a one-man CoD (yes, there are sections of CoD games that have you by yourself, but on the whole, you play as part of a squad). There are a couple of tweaks, like vaulting over objects instead of just stepping up onto them to crawl over. But overall, it plays so similar that if you handed the controller over to someone who only knew CoD, they probably wouldn't know the difference.
The graphics are as about as good as you're going to find on the Wii. Meaning, it's still not so good compared to what you find on the PS3 and 360. Yes, graphics aren't everything. But, as I said, the gameplay is so similar to Activision's other first person shooter, the only real incentive to play this is a) you only own a Wii b) remember the N64 game so well you could do the speed run with your eyes closed and want to see how this one stacks up or c) have to play everything Bond and already blew through Bloodstone.
I'll address those in order. If you only own a Wii and you're jonesing for an FPS, this is about the best FPS as I've played for the system. I'll admit, my experience is limited to mostly Red Steel and Metroid Prime (which was good). I mostly used the golden Pro for my initial play through. It IS gold in color, so that was pretty sweet. My complaint is that the Pro is kind of light, especially after growing accustomed to the DualShock 3 (which I find to be just right for me) but whatever. It was still pretty responsive and the control was tight. I did try out the Wii-mote, because reviewers boldly exclaimed that that was the best way to play. I immediately went back to the Pro. Same thing happened when I tried the GameCube controller. Could be the age and wear on that one, though, so don't discount that one yet.
My main issue with the Wii-Mote was the trying to move so I could see offscreen enemies. I've never found this to be effective in any game I've played, FPS or not. The response of the Wii-mote just doesn't seem to be able to keep up with me.
But, like I said, the game plays well. So, CoD clone or not, it is a solid shooter. I will say this, it was pretty hard on the second highest difficulty and there were times that I couldn't find the optional objectives without looking it up. SPOILER How the hell was I supposed to know to shoot the painting? I even shot it once. But no. That doesn't do it. It has to be shot THREE times.
How does this compare to the original. There are similarities, yes. But almost nothing is exactly the same. That could be my faulty memory, but I don't think so. The game does start off with that same camera sweep leading up to the damn, but you quickly learn this was not your 64's 007. For starters, the game stars Daniel Craig as Bond. I've heard things from not being able to get Brosnan to sign off on the rights to him being too old to do the motion capture to just wanting something that might appeal to current fans of the series, whatever.
Because of the way this game fits into the movie timeline, there is no jump in years after the opening sequence (which, oddly enough, is no longer after James escapes from the dam, but rather after he does the bungee jump without the cord), because that would put the dam sequence before Casino Royale or Goldeneye would be pushed into the future. Either way, the game continues in a straight narrative rather than the time jump.
I've always found Daniel Craig's voice to be lacking when he does voice over work. I thought the same thing in the Quantum of Solace game and for Bloodstone. Just lacks...emotion, I guess. He's not even the coldblooded, emotionless killer from the films. It's more like someone has a Speak N Spell programmed to sound like him.
The changes work for the most part. It did feel a little "grittier" than before with an added melee system and silent takedowns. However, there were a couple of times the AI was alerted to my presence while I tried to perform these. I was crouched, barely moving forward, and to the best of my knowledge silent. And then the guard would spin around and open fire. Or fire and then turn around, as was often the case.
But, like I said, for the most part everything works well. Just a couple of instances where things don't go smoothly as I already outlined above.
I heard mixed reviews on Bloodstone, the latest 007 offering on the PS3/360 so I'll hold off on buying, but a friend didn't and I got a bit of a hands-on and it seemed ok.
I'd give this game a 3/5 because it's little more than a CoD Bond game (kind of like QoS), there are a couple of glitches that detract from my enjoyment (not enough to make me throw the game down in frustration), and the online component was hacked the day it came out (kind of like CoD).
Almost a month ago, Activision and Eurocom released their update/reimagining/remake/reboot of Rare's classic FPS: Goldeneye. Eurocom is the developer responsible for the Wii version of Modern Warfare: Modern Warfare Reflex. So, they had that going for them and with all of the positive reviews for 007, I decided to pick it up.
I decided to spring for the Limited Edition, which comes with a gold version of the Wii Classic Controller Pro. Also, the retailer I bought it from was offering a second Pro controller, so I picked up a second one in black (sadly, the second controller was not offered in gold, though I'm not sure that's really a negative).
Now, I've always had a gripe with most peripherals for the Wii. Namely, they require the Wii Remote in order to function. Got that Guitar Hero or Rock Band game for the Wii? Gotta slap a Wii-mote in the guitar. Got a Classic Controller? Tether it up to the Wii-mote my friend (I don't know about the original Classic, but the Pro's cord is way too short for my liking). And the Wii Zapper? Couldn't they have made one that actually functioned like the old Lightgun? I haven't had much experience with it, but I've found most games to work better without the plastic casing that is the Zapper.
But enough of that and back to Goldeneye. How does it play you ask? Like Call of Duty. Seriously. It's a one-man CoD (yes, there are sections of CoD games that have you by yourself, but on the whole, you play as part of a squad). There are a couple of tweaks, like vaulting over objects instead of just stepping up onto them to crawl over. But overall, it plays so similar that if you handed the controller over to someone who only knew CoD, they probably wouldn't know the difference.
The graphics are as about as good as you're going to find on the Wii. Meaning, it's still not so good compared to what you find on the PS3 and 360. Yes, graphics aren't everything. But, as I said, the gameplay is so similar to Activision's other first person shooter, the only real incentive to play this is a) you only own a Wii b) remember the N64 game so well you could do the speed run with your eyes closed and want to see how this one stacks up or c) have to play everything Bond and already blew through Bloodstone.
I'll address those in order. If you only own a Wii and you're jonesing for an FPS, this is about the best FPS as I've played for the system. I'll admit, my experience is limited to mostly Red Steel and Metroid Prime (which was good). I mostly used the golden Pro for my initial play through. It IS gold in color, so that was pretty sweet. My complaint is that the Pro is kind of light, especially after growing accustomed to the DualShock 3 (which I find to be just right for me) but whatever. It was still pretty responsive and the control was tight. I did try out the Wii-mote, because reviewers boldly exclaimed that that was the best way to play. I immediately went back to the Pro. Same thing happened when I tried the GameCube controller. Could be the age and wear on that one, though, so don't discount that one yet.
My main issue with the Wii-Mote was the trying to move so I could see offscreen enemies. I've never found this to be effective in any game I've played, FPS or not. The response of the Wii-mote just doesn't seem to be able to keep up with me.
But, like I said, the game plays well. So, CoD clone or not, it is a solid shooter. I will say this, it was pretty hard on the second highest difficulty and there were times that I couldn't find the optional objectives without looking it up. SPOILER How the hell was I supposed to know to shoot the painting? I even shot it once. But no. That doesn't do it. It has to be shot THREE times.
How does this compare to the original. There are similarities, yes. But almost nothing is exactly the same. That could be my faulty memory, but I don't think so. The game does start off with that same camera sweep leading up to the damn, but you quickly learn this was not your 64's 007. For starters, the game stars Daniel Craig as Bond. I've heard things from not being able to get Brosnan to sign off on the rights to him being too old to do the motion capture to just wanting something that might appeal to current fans of the series, whatever.
Because of the way this game fits into the movie timeline, there is no jump in years after the opening sequence (which, oddly enough, is no longer after James escapes from the dam, but rather after he does the bungee jump without the cord), because that would put the dam sequence before Casino Royale or Goldeneye would be pushed into the future. Either way, the game continues in a straight narrative rather than the time jump.
I've always found Daniel Craig's voice to be lacking when he does voice over work. I thought the same thing in the Quantum of Solace game and for Bloodstone. Just lacks...emotion, I guess. He's not even the coldblooded, emotionless killer from the films. It's more like someone has a Speak N Spell programmed to sound like him.
The changes work for the most part. It did feel a little "grittier" than before with an added melee system and silent takedowns. However, there were a couple of times the AI was alerted to my presence while I tried to perform these. I was crouched, barely moving forward, and to the best of my knowledge silent. And then the guard would spin around and open fire. Or fire and then turn around, as was often the case.
But, like I said, for the most part everything works well. Just a couple of instances where things don't go smoothly as I already outlined above.
I heard mixed reviews on Bloodstone, the latest 007 offering on the PS3/360 so I'll hold off on buying, but a friend didn't and I got a bit of a hands-on and it seemed ok.
I'd give this game a 3/5 because it's little more than a CoD Bond game (kind of like QoS), there are a couple of glitches that detract from my enjoyment (not enough to make me throw the game down in frustration), and the online component was hacked the day it came out (kind of like CoD).
Monday, November 29, 2010
I have a Nintendo Wii. It seems to amaze some people who only know me as '7th Prestige' that I have a system that is primarily known for being host to 1st Party Nintendo games or shovelware aimed at kids/families. I am always quick to point out that I did not purchase said Wii, I won it.
Who/where did I win it? From 1up.com, formerly known as games.com. I think. The name/site changed a long time ago and my memory is not what it used to be. Either way, I won a Wii from them and therefore, didn't have to buy one myself. Awesome. Got the obligatory setup out of the way.
What irritates me is 1up's new setup for their contests, an almost daily giveaway run primarily through Twitter. The object of the contests are to sit on the 1up site, refresh the page constantly, and hope you see the secret message before anyone else and then reply to the Twitter feed with the secret message. Doesn't sound too bad, right?
While waiting for the message to appear on the site, the Twitter feed will give "hints" and "clues" to when the code will appear. These messages include such vague descriptions as "the next message is right around the corner" or "posting before the end of the hour." That last one wouldn't be so bad if they ever did just that. But they don't. Ever.
And having to refresh the page is an annoyance. I did it, one time, on the minute, every minute, for almost two hours and still missed the message! I wasn't the only one. 1up's reply? Try deleting the cookies before refreshing or using FireFox.
I use Internet Explorer *Shock* *Gasp* But up until IE8, it was the fastest and most reliable browser for me. I've tried FireFox, and no matter what my setup was, it was always slower than Microsoft's offering. I even timed it once.
And to have to delete my cookies every time I want to refresh the page (almost a requirement for the giveaways)? That borders on insanity.
I miss the old contests, even if it was an electronic version of throwing my name into a hat.
Who/where did I win it? From 1up.com, formerly known as games.com. I think. The name/site changed a long time ago and my memory is not what it used to be. Either way, I won a Wii from them and therefore, didn't have to buy one myself. Awesome. Got the obligatory setup out of the way.
What irritates me is 1up's new setup for their contests, an almost daily giveaway run primarily through Twitter. The object of the contests are to sit on the 1up site, refresh the page constantly, and hope you see the secret message before anyone else and then reply to the Twitter feed with the secret message. Doesn't sound too bad, right?
While waiting for the message to appear on the site, the Twitter feed will give "hints" and "clues" to when the code will appear. These messages include such vague descriptions as "the next message is right around the corner" or "posting before the end of the hour." That last one wouldn't be so bad if they ever did just that. But they don't. Ever.
And having to refresh the page is an annoyance. I did it, one time, on the minute, every minute, for almost two hours and still missed the message! I wasn't the only one. 1up's reply? Try deleting the cookies before refreshing or using FireFox.
I use Internet Explorer *Shock* *Gasp* But up until IE8, it was the fastest and most reliable browser for me. I've tried FireFox, and no matter what my setup was, it was always slower than Microsoft's offering. I even timed it once.
And to have to delete my cookies every time I want to refresh the page (almost a requirement for the giveaways)? That borders on insanity.
I miss the old contests, even if it was an electronic version of throwing my name into a hat.
Monday, November 22, 2010
Avengers: Assembled
After much buildup and a series of twenty micro-episodes (think the cel-animated Clones Wars cartoon from a couple years back), the new Marvel cartoon Avengers: Earth's Mightiest Heroes premiered last month. Airing on Disney XD, this is the first project released after Marvel was bought by Disney late last year.
The series incorporates the "classic" Avengers team, meaning those who were on the team when it was founded back in the 60's and those who are often thought of when the name Avengers is spoken. So we're given Captain America (starting with episode "The Living Legend," though he has his own series of micro-eps), Hulk (though he quickly leaves the team because of Enchantress), Ant-Man, The Wasp, Thor, and Iron Man (who for some reason is the team leader). Black Panther joins the team a couple of episodes in and it's hinted that Hawkeye will join up at some point (he was last scene when one of the super-villain prisons exploded). Nick Fury shows up now and again to argue with the team and/or Iron Man.
I have nothing against the core lineup of heroes. No, my main concern is that Iron Man was put in charge of the Avengers. Really? I get that the character has had two successful movies in the last two and half years and because of that is immensely popular with the casual audience. But to put him in charge of the team when they have Captain America, who is a far more capable tactician and leader, is mind boggling. And it's been demonstrated that ol' Shellhead doesn't have what it takes to lead a group as, ahem, mighty as this. So maybe there'll be some resolution to this sometime in the future.
The animation is ok, if not overly "kid-friendly," meaning there are a lot of goofy and cartoony facial expressions (mostly from The Wasp and Ant-Man), but I still think Wolverine and the X-Men had better animation overall. The voice-acting is spotty with most of the characters being at least decent enough to not want to claw my ears off. The stand-outs here are the villains, with each being appropriately nasty, dramatic, and gravely. Again, my biggest problem here is Iron Man. It's clear that the producers went for someone who could pull of the same type of character as RDJ's Stark, but what we get instead is a bad Jack Black impersonator impersonating Robert Downey Jr. playing Tony Stark (which immediately conjurs up images of RDJ yelling at Ben Stiller in Tropic Thunder).
The plot actually follows the basic premise of New Avengers (which appropriately enough, the initial episodes of A:EMH are called Breakout!), in that the Avengers have assembled to collect various super-villains that are on the loose thanks to a massive breakout at the four largest prisons for super-powered beings.
My favorite episode so far was "Everything is Wonderful" due to the fact that it actually showcased not only some of the best character development of the series (Iron Man accidently pisses off Simon Williams when he was actually trying to help him), but also has Thor fighting MODOC. Hilarity ensued. No, seriously.
I'm still peeved that Wolverine and the X-Men was cancelled (though there is a reference to the show in the oft-referred to micro-episodes), but at least we get to see some Marvel characters on screen. Until, y'know, part way through making the second season when the funding mysteriously runs out...
The series incorporates the "classic" Avengers team, meaning those who were on the team when it was founded back in the 60's and those who are often thought of when the name Avengers is spoken. So we're given Captain America (starting with episode "The Living Legend," though he has his own series of micro-eps), Hulk (though he quickly leaves the team because of Enchantress), Ant-Man, The Wasp, Thor, and Iron Man (who for some reason is the team leader). Black Panther joins the team a couple of episodes in and it's hinted that Hawkeye will join up at some point (he was last scene when one of the super-villain prisons exploded). Nick Fury shows up now and again to argue with the team and/or Iron Man.
I have nothing against the core lineup of heroes. No, my main concern is that Iron Man was put in charge of the Avengers. Really? I get that the character has had two successful movies in the last two and half years and because of that is immensely popular with the casual audience. But to put him in charge of the team when they have Captain America, who is a far more capable tactician and leader, is mind boggling. And it's been demonstrated that ol' Shellhead doesn't have what it takes to lead a group as, ahem, mighty as this. So maybe there'll be some resolution to this sometime in the future.
The animation is ok, if not overly "kid-friendly," meaning there are a lot of goofy and cartoony facial expressions (mostly from The Wasp and Ant-Man), but I still think Wolverine and the X-Men had better animation overall. The voice-acting is spotty with most of the characters being at least decent enough to not want to claw my ears off. The stand-outs here are the villains, with each being appropriately nasty, dramatic, and gravely. Again, my biggest problem here is Iron Man. It's clear that the producers went for someone who could pull of the same type of character as RDJ's Stark, but what we get instead is a bad Jack Black impersonator impersonating Robert Downey Jr. playing Tony Stark (which immediately conjurs up images of RDJ yelling at Ben Stiller in Tropic Thunder).
The plot actually follows the basic premise of New Avengers (which appropriately enough, the initial episodes of A:EMH are called Breakout!), in that the Avengers have assembled to collect various super-villains that are on the loose thanks to a massive breakout at the four largest prisons for super-powered beings.
My favorite episode so far was "Everything is Wonderful" due to the fact that it actually showcased not only some of the best character development of the series (Iron Man accidently pisses off Simon Williams when he was actually trying to help him), but also has Thor fighting MODOC. Hilarity ensued. No, seriously.
I'm still peeved that Wolverine and the X-Men was cancelled (though there is a reference to the show in the oft-referred to micro-episodes), but at least we get to see some Marvel characters on screen. Until, y'know, part way through making the second season when the funding mysteriously runs out...
Thursday, November 18, 2010
...In Blackest Night
I was going to rage about the stupid guy who decided it'd be a good idea to lunge out in front of my car in order to flip me off. I presume that it was to signify his displeasure with my car being too close to making contact with his stupid, stupid body, and the only time my car was remotely near him was when he jumped from the side of the road to flip me the bird. But hey, clearly I was in the wrong here...
No, what I really wanted to talk about was the upcoming Green Lantern film. I'm too lazy to research my own writing, but I'm pretty sure I've mentioned it somewhere on this blog before. This week saw the release of the first trailer for DC's quote "space epic." My problem with that is that very little of it appears to take place in space. But hey, it was just a 2:30 trailer. And we did get to see a lot of the cooler Lanterns that everyone was hoping to see (Kilowag and Tomar Re come to mind). Abin Sur and Sinestro also look pretty sweet.
That said, I do have some problems with what we've seen so far. First, Blake Lively was terrible in that snippet from the trailer. Second, Hal's characterization just seems...off. Could be Reynold's portrayal, could be the material from given him, I don't know. I'll wait to see if the wise-ass, doubt-ridden Hal works for the movie. Third, and this is the one that I've seen most complained about, is the special effects. The biggest one that I've seen is the mask. It just looks painted on, it makes Ryan Reynold's look cross-eyed, etc. Hopefully, the rumors about it being unifinished CG work prove true and it's either fixed or reshot with an actual mask.
With the argument about the costume, and I've said this before, is that the filmmakers side is that the costume is meant to look alien, because the ring is from outer space, etc. But, and this is my reasoning, is that the ring constructs the costume based on the user's preference, so wouldn't it stand to reason that at least Hal's costume would be cloth or even some kind of armor akin to the uniform from First Flight.
But my BIGGEST problem? It was revealed today that WB and DC have been sending out replicas of the Green Lantern ring from the film to celebrities and editors of websites that have been promoting the film. Allegedly, these rings are actually wearable and of much higher quality than the promo rings DC has been giving away at Comic Conventions. WHY? Why do companies do this? Give away expensive gifts to celebrities that could easily afford them that could care less about the product being advertised? Yeah, that's a good way to promote your product/film/whatever.
I said it on twitter (you can follow me at http://twitter.com/#!/klynchmob) and I'll repeat it here: I hope that DC/WB put these rings (or an even higher quality ring with selectable sizes) up for sale some time before the film comes out.
No, what I really wanted to talk about was the upcoming Green Lantern film. I'm too lazy to research my own writing, but I'm pretty sure I've mentioned it somewhere on this blog before. This week saw the release of the first trailer for DC's quote "space epic." My problem with that is that very little of it appears to take place in space. But hey, it was just a 2:30 trailer. And we did get to see a lot of the cooler Lanterns that everyone was hoping to see (Kilowag and Tomar Re come to mind). Abin Sur and Sinestro also look pretty sweet.
That said, I do have some problems with what we've seen so far. First, Blake Lively was terrible in that snippet from the trailer. Second, Hal's characterization just seems...off. Could be Reynold's portrayal, could be the material from given him, I don't know. I'll wait to see if the wise-ass, doubt-ridden Hal works for the movie. Third, and this is the one that I've seen most complained about, is the special effects. The biggest one that I've seen is the mask. It just looks painted on, it makes Ryan Reynold's look cross-eyed, etc. Hopefully, the rumors about it being unifinished CG work prove true and it's either fixed or reshot with an actual mask.
With the argument about the costume, and I've said this before, is that the filmmakers side is that the costume is meant to look alien, because the ring is from outer space, etc. But, and this is my reasoning, is that the ring constructs the costume based on the user's preference, so wouldn't it stand to reason that at least Hal's costume would be cloth or even some kind of armor akin to the uniform from First Flight.
But my BIGGEST problem? It was revealed today that WB and DC have been sending out replicas of the Green Lantern ring from the film to celebrities and editors of websites that have been promoting the film. Allegedly, these rings are actually wearable and of much higher quality than the promo rings DC has been giving away at Comic Conventions. WHY? Why do companies do this? Give away expensive gifts to celebrities that could easily afford them that could care less about the product being advertised? Yeah, that's a good way to promote your product/film/whatever.
I said it on twitter (you can follow me at http://twitter.com/#!/klynchmob) and I'll repeat it here: I hope that DC/WB put these rings (or an even higher quality ring with selectable sizes) up for sale some time before the film comes out.
Wednesday, November 10, 2010
Batman, Inc. and the Grant Morrison Complexity
The announcement of Batman, Inc. is nothing new. It's where Bruce Wayne decides he's going to fund and train heroes all over the planet to fight crime, like a corporation. Maybe. I haven't read whether all of the heroes he's training will dress as Batman and Robin, nor do I care to find out.
B,I. is being written by Grant Morrison, the bane of my comic reading. This is the guy responsible for non-sensical messes such as "New X-Men" (Before Academy X took on the name), Batman RIP, and Final Crisis. By his own admission, Morrison does not "write the character." He comes up with his bullshit and then crams it into whatever book he's been hired to write and most of the time his characters all read the same, spouting off phrases that aren't usually even complete sentences.
So why do people like Grant Morrison? I have no idea. Maybe it's under the same category as why people like some indie/foreign films, the "I have no idea what's going on, therefore, it's the best thing ever..." principle. Maybe some people have just as disjointed a mind as his and actually understand his words in the order in which they are written. I don't. Maybe it is just me, but half the time I can't figure out why the words are in the order they are, coming from the character's they are, and why I continue to read his bullshit. Maybe it's just so I don't fall behind entirely on DC Comics' continuity or that they keep putting him in charge of big DC events.
His recent offense, The Return of Bruce Wayne, is capped off with all the characters continuing to read exactly the same, spouting phrases that make no sense and reads like a child wrote some really terrible fanfics (not all fanfics are terrible, mind you, but this reads like a bad one). The kicker here? Now he introduces big, science-y words into the dialogue, which don't make sense in the context in which they're used. I would copy down some examples, but doing so would mean I'd have to reread his mental vomit, which would cause me to physically vomit, and thanks to the flu, that's not something I want to do right now. It's like he used Google to look up "Science" and just started inserting what he found into his writing, like some giant Mad-Lib.
And all of this just continues to run the Batman character into the ground. His latest move (aside from the aforementioned Return of Bruce Wayne debacle) was having Wayne announce to the world that he's been secretly funding Batman for years, but he is absolutely, positively not Batman. Yeah. Right. Like anyone is supposed to believe that. It's like Tony Stark trying to tell people he isn't Iron Man...again. Would anyone believe him at this point? Once that announcement is made, wouldn't anyone with half a brain be able to figure out Bruce is Batman?
So thank you, Grant Morrison, and by extension, Detective Comics, for ruining Batman comics for a generation of readers...
Also, today is Lou Ferrigno's birthday. Happy birthday Mr. Hulk. But you still owe me money.
B,I. is being written by Grant Morrison, the bane of my comic reading. This is the guy responsible for non-sensical messes such as "New X-Men" (Before Academy X took on the name), Batman RIP, and Final Crisis. By his own admission, Morrison does not "write the character." He comes up with his bullshit and then crams it into whatever book he's been hired to write and most of the time his characters all read the same, spouting off phrases that aren't usually even complete sentences.
So why do people like Grant Morrison? I have no idea. Maybe it's under the same category as why people like some indie/foreign films, the "I have no idea what's going on, therefore, it's the best thing ever..." principle. Maybe some people have just as disjointed a mind as his and actually understand his words in the order in which they are written. I don't. Maybe it is just me, but half the time I can't figure out why the words are in the order they are, coming from the character's they are, and why I continue to read his bullshit. Maybe it's just so I don't fall behind entirely on DC Comics' continuity or that they keep putting him in charge of big DC events.
His recent offense, The Return of Bruce Wayne, is capped off with all the characters continuing to read exactly the same, spouting phrases that make no sense and reads like a child wrote some really terrible fanfics (not all fanfics are terrible, mind you, but this reads like a bad one). The kicker here? Now he introduces big, science-y words into the dialogue, which don't make sense in the context in which they're used. I would copy down some examples, but doing so would mean I'd have to reread his mental vomit, which would cause me to physically vomit, and thanks to the flu, that's not something I want to do right now. It's like he used Google to look up "Science" and just started inserting what he found into his writing, like some giant Mad-Lib.
And all of this just continues to run the Batman character into the ground. His latest move (aside from the aforementioned Return of Bruce Wayne debacle) was having Wayne announce to the world that he's been secretly funding Batman for years, but he is absolutely, positively not Batman. Yeah. Right. Like anyone is supposed to believe that. It's like Tony Stark trying to tell people he isn't Iron Man...again. Would anyone believe him at this point? Once that announcement is made, wouldn't anyone with half a brain be able to figure out Bruce is Batman?
So thank you, Grant Morrison, and by extension, Detective Comics, for ruining Batman comics for a generation of readers...
Also, today is Lou Ferrigno's birthday. Happy birthday Mr. Hulk. But you still owe me money.
Sunday, October 24, 2010
There's some Activity again this year...
In 2009, Paranormal Activity was the first film that Facebook had gotten to theaters. Looking at the history of that film, the money it made, the critical and commercial acclaim, but especially the money, it is no surprise that a Paranormal Activity 2 got the greenlight. What is a surprise is with the speed in which the sequel was pumped out.
Made for approximately $15,000 (not including any costs for promotion, though that was mostly handled by Facebook, eventful.com, and other social networking sites), the first PA went on to make over $193 Million in theaters alone. The second, which saw release this weekend, was made for around $3 Million, still not a huge budget in today's high-octane, reliant on CG blockbusters.
*SPOILERS FOLLOW*
The film opens with a couple bringing home their newborn son, Hunter. We soon learn the connection between PA2 and the original when Katie (the woman who went on to be possessed in the first) shows up. The movie then tells us this is 60 days before the death of Micah (the guy from the first). At first, the film makes it seem as though this happens after the first when Katie says Micah, "isn't up for hanging out today." It's when the character appears shortly after that the "60 Days before the Death of Micah Sloat" message is displayed.
While it was hinted in the first movie that Katie might've just been randomly picked by the demon (through a ham-handed expositive sequence where Micah is doing internet research), it is now more heavily hinted (through an equally ham-handed expositive internet search) that a demon may haunt a family until it collects payment for services rendered (read: the firstborn son of the family for making the dealmaker rich and powerful). It turns out Hunter, the infant from the beginning, is the first male born to Katie/Kristi's family bloodline since the 1930s, so...weird things begin to happen. At first, the family thinks that it's just a break-in, though nothing is missing, and dad decides to go overprotective with it and installs a half-dozen security cameras, and these become the "found footage," much like the hand-held camera from the first film.
At first, it appears that the buildup is going to be slow, like the first's, but it becomes quickly apparent that the filmmakers feel the audience won't stand/sit for that, and the shit hits the fan much faster this time around. There is a hand-held camera, usually operated by Ali, the father's daughter from a previous marriage, and the action splits between this and the security cameras.
There is a twist that if you think hardenough about it, you can see coming, but that doesn't mean it's any less creepy.
The characters are more likable this time around. There's the dad, who only wants to protect his family. The mother/step-mother, who wants to protect her baby. The daughter, who confesses she hopes that the family is haunted, and that it could be her dead mother. And then there's the baby, who is innocent in all of this, much like Abby, the family's German Shephard.
The acting is much the same as the first, in that they try to get the actors to improvise their lines, which does lead to some really weird lines, most of which come from Ali. Speaking of Ali, her character, at least in the beginning, kept slipping into the 'dumb-girl' voice, where each sentence ended in an upper inflection, as though she were asking a question. I couldn't help but think of Stewie from family guy every time the girl opened her mouth.
Overall, the film offers some genuinely scary moments, most of which are straight out of the first flim, that tend to play with the viewer's mind more than most slasher flicks out today (which was why the first PA was so effective). The film works (mostly) as a prequel/sequel (you'll see) to the first Paranormal Activity, but on its own, this film would probably cause most to scratch their heads, as I heard throughout my viewing of the movie. However, it always felt off that this movie was supposed to link up to the first movie as neatly as the makers probably hoped.
And speaking of my viewing, I have a huge complaint. If you're going to be spending $10+ to see a movie, watch the movie. It shouldn't be a venue to shout at your friends from across the theater, that's what you use school for. It also shouldn't be nap time. There was more than one person who had brought a blanket to the theater and decided to lay down and text for the duration of the movie. It speaks volumes about our society that we can't sit through a 90 minute movie without texting our friends or even being able to sit up.
*END RANT*
I'm sure that I'll be reviewing the third film at about this time next year in some form or another.
If you liked the first (and I did), this one is right up your alley. Just don't think too hard about how these two films fit together.
Made for approximately $15,000 (not including any costs for promotion, though that was mostly handled by Facebook, eventful.com, and other social networking sites), the first PA went on to make over $193 Million in theaters alone. The second, which saw release this weekend, was made for around $3 Million, still not a huge budget in today's high-octane, reliant on CG blockbusters.
*SPOILERS FOLLOW*
The film opens with a couple bringing home their newborn son, Hunter. We soon learn the connection between PA2 and the original when Katie (the woman who went on to be possessed in the first) shows up. The movie then tells us this is 60 days before the death of Micah (the guy from the first). At first, the film makes it seem as though this happens after the first when Katie says Micah, "isn't up for hanging out today." It's when the character appears shortly after that the "60 Days before the Death of Micah Sloat" message is displayed.
While it was hinted in the first movie that Katie might've just been randomly picked by the demon (through a ham-handed expositive sequence where Micah is doing internet research), it is now more heavily hinted (through an equally ham-handed expositive internet search) that a demon may haunt a family until it collects payment for services rendered (read: the firstborn son of the family for making the dealmaker rich and powerful). It turns out Hunter, the infant from the beginning, is the first male born to Katie/Kristi's family bloodline since the 1930s, so...weird things begin to happen. At first, the family thinks that it's just a break-in, though nothing is missing, and dad decides to go overprotective with it and installs a half-dozen security cameras, and these become the "found footage," much like the hand-held camera from the first film.
At first, it appears that the buildup is going to be slow, like the first's, but it becomes quickly apparent that the filmmakers feel the audience won't stand/sit for that, and the shit hits the fan much faster this time around. There is a hand-held camera, usually operated by Ali, the father's daughter from a previous marriage, and the action splits between this and the security cameras.
There is a twist that if you think hardenough about it, you can see coming, but that doesn't mean it's any less creepy.
The characters are more likable this time around. There's the dad, who only wants to protect his family. The mother/step-mother, who wants to protect her baby. The daughter, who confesses she hopes that the family is haunted, and that it could be her dead mother. And then there's the baby, who is innocent in all of this, much like Abby, the family's German Shephard.
The acting is much the same as the first, in that they try to get the actors to improvise their lines, which does lead to some really weird lines, most of which come from Ali. Speaking of Ali, her character, at least in the beginning, kept slipping into the 'dumb-girl' voice, where each sentence ended in an upper inflection, as though she were asking a question. I couldn't help but think of Stewie from family guy every time the girl opened her mouth.
Overall, the film offers some genuinely scary moments, most of which are straight out of the first flim, that tend to play with the viewer's mind more than most slasher flicks out today (which was why the first PA was so effective). The film works (mostly) as a prequel/sequel (you'll see) to the first Paranormal Activity, but on its own, this film would probably cause most to scratch their heads, as I heard throughout my viewing of the movie. However, it always felt off that this movie was supposed to link up to the first movie as neatly as the makers probably hoped.
And speaking of my viewing, I have a huge complaint. If you're going to be spending $10+ to see a movie, watch the movie. It shouldn't be a venue to shout at your friends from across the theater, that's what you use school for. It also shouldn't be nap time. There was more than one person who had brought a blanket to the theater and decided to lay down and text for the duration of the movie. It speaks volumes about our society that we can't sit through a 90 minute movie without texting our friends or even being able to sit up.
*END RANT*
I'm sure that I'll be reviewing the third film at about this time next year in some form or another.
If you liked the first (and I did), this one is right up your alley. Just don't think too hard about how these two films fit together.
Monday, October 4, 2010
A Missed Opportunity?
As I've discussed earlier on in the life of my blog, I'm a writer. Not yet an author because apparently there is a distinction between the two, depending on whether one has been published. Writer = unpublished, author = published.
I bring this up because I wrote one story that I was sure would sell, only now I'm equally certain that it won't. You see, the story took a classic, popular text (Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, to be precise) and inserted the ever-popular undead into the story.
Now, I can hear the groans already (and not the ones coming from the previously mentioned zombies) but, while similar in description to Pride and Prejudice and Zombie, it is very different in form (to my understanding, anyway). I confess I've nver ready PPZ and only heard of it after I completed my ownstory and was describing it to a friend.
Nor is it the same as Romeo and Juliet and Zombies, which replaces, if I'm correct, Romeo with a zombified version of the Veronan lad. No, my story wasn't like that (well, it does have zombies). Instead of having the plucky couple fight off hordes of the flesh-eating monsters, it places side characters at the forefront of the action and uses Shakespeare's play as a backdrop.
The idea, which I describe as Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead meets Shaun of the Dead, came about when I was attempting to teach R&J to freshman. After the character of Mercutio bites it in the third act, the hapless student who read for the character dropped the book and said something like, "Thank God, now I don't have to read anymore." My reply was along the lines of, "Yeah, unless he (Mercutio) comes back to life..." And then the lightbulb switched on.
However, I was only a student teacher at the time and there was no way I was going to be able to write a story, short or otherwise, during that time. But I kept it on the backburner, took some notes on ideas for the story (especially when reading it with students) and left it to simmer until the school year was over.
By the time school let out, the story had already gone through a number of changes (of which I'll discuss at length another time) in my head and I was ready to write). I typed, edited, and fact-checked the story, which took almost six months from start to finish.
I explain this in such length because I thought I had something truly special. That is, until a week and a half ago, when I was wandering around a Barnes & Noble, and happened upon a table of books with similar premises (taking a classic story and mixing it with classic monsters like zombies, vampires, sea monsters, etc.). While they're still not exactly the same, their very presence helps saturate the market and I feel the opportunity to get my story published may have closed.
I bring this up because I wrote one story that I was sure would sell, only now I'm equally certain that it won't. You see, the story took a classic, popular text (Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet, to be precise) and inserted the ever-popular undead into the story.
Now, I can hear the groans already (and not the ones coming from the previously mentioned zombies) but, while similar in description to Pride and Prejudice and Zombie, it is very different in form (to my understanding, anyway). I confess I've nver ready PPZ and only heard of it after I completed my ownstory and was describing it to a friend.
Nor is it the same as Romeo and Juliet and Zombies, which replaces, if I'm correct, Romeo with a zombified version of the Veronan lad. No, my story wasn't like that (well, it does have zombies). Instead of having the plucky couple fight off hordes of the flesh-eating monsters, it places side characters at the forefront of the action and uses Shakespeare's play as a backdrop.
The idea, which I describe as Rosencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead meets Shaun of the Dead, came about when I was attempting to teach R&J to freshman. After the character of Mercutio bites it in the third act, the hapless student who read for the character dropped the book and said something like, "Thank God, now I don't have to read anymore." My reply was along the lines of, "Yeah, unless he (Mercutio) comes back to life..." And then the lightbulb switched on.
However, I was only a student teacher at the time and there was no way I was going to be able to write a story, short or otherwise, during that time. But I kept it on the backburner, took some notes on ideas for the story (especially when reading it with students) and left it to simmer until the school year was over.
By the time school let out, the story had already gone through a number of changes (of which I'll discuss at length another time) in my head and I was ready to write). I typed, edited, and fact-checked the story, which took almost six months from start to finish.
I explain this in such length because I thought I had something truly special. That is, until a week and a half ago, when I was wandering around a Barnes & Noble, and happened upon a table of books with similar premises (taking a classic story and mixing it with classic monsters like zombies, vampires, sea monsters, etc.). While they're still not exactly the same, their very presence helps saturate the market and I feel the opportunity to get my story published may have closed.
Monday, September 27, 2010
New Shows Part 2
Last week, I did a review/preview of the upcoming/now here new TV season.
Glee - I can't believe I forgot about this last week. It just proves that I watch way too much television. Even though the song selection wasn't to my liking, there was enough going on here that I didn't mind so much. The school gained a new, female football coach after Ken had a nervous breakdown. Even though it wasn't said, it was probably because of the fallout from April ditching him on their wedding day. Some of my favorite quotes were from Brittany. There was this gem from the beginning, where the story was framed by Jacob, in which Brittany describes her summer vacation: "People thought I went on vacation, but actually I spent the summer lost in the sewers." Classic. Again, not sure, but this almost seems like a reference to the Goonies...
Anyway, the next episode focuses on Brit where they sing Britney Spears' songs all episode. Wooh...kinda sick of the theme shows. And now there's supposed to be a second Madonna episode. Great.
The Big Bang Theory- This one was an odd duck. I'm sure I've said that phrase before, possibly even about another TV show, but it's true. There was just something...off about this one's season premiere. I think part of it was delivery, in that it almost felt like the characters were the actors playing the characters playing the characters. Sound confusing? It should. However, the show was still pretty funny, even if it was predictable.
Supernatural - This was the show I was most excited about, since it is one of my favorite shows and I just couldn't fathom where they could possibly go from the end of last season. And it really didn't do much. The producers (since I believe original creator and showrunner Eric Kripke is now hands-off on the show) said that it was going to be back to basics like in the first season, before any of the apocalypse stuff started showing up. And that wasn't entirely accurate. Yes, it does seem like it's moving back to the monster of the week format of season one, but they've already set up a number of storylines such as the Winchester boys' grandfather also coming back with Sam, who doesn't know who pulled him out of the Devil's Box and "a whole bunch of demons are going crazy...including some things no one has seen before." Super. Like Scrubs, the intended end of the series is probably going to be better than the actual ending if the first episode is any indication.
Also note, I still haven't had a chance to watch Smallville, though I've heard some great things about the episode.
There were some other things I wanted to mention, too, but I can't remember what they are. Oh well, such is life.
Glee - I can't believe I forgot about this last week. It just proves that I watch way too much television. Even though the song selection wasn't to my liking, there was enough going on here that I didn't mind so much. The school gained a new, female football coach after Ken had a nervous breakdown. Even though it wasn't said, it was probably because of the fallout from April ditching him on their wedding day. Some of my favorite quotes were from Brittany. There was this gem from the beginning, where the story was framed by Jacob, in which Brittany describes her summer vacation: "People thought I went on vacation, but actually I spent the summer lost in the sewers." Classic. Again, not sure, but this almost seems like a reference to the Goonies...
Anyway, the next episode focuses on Brit where they sing Britney Spears' songs all episode. Wooh...kinda sick of the theme shows. And now there's supposed to be a second Madonna episode. Great.
The Big Bang Theory- This one was an odd duck. I'm sure I've said that phrase before, possibly even about another TV show, but it's true. There was just something...off about this one's season premiere. I think part of it was delivery, in that it almost felt like the characters were the actors playing the characters playing the characters. Sound confusing? It should. However, the show was still pretty funny, even if it was predictable.
Supernatural - This was the show I was most excited about, since it is one of my favorite shows and I just couldn't fathom where they could possibly go from the end of last season. And it really didn't do much. The producers (since I believe original creator and showrunner Eric Kripke is now hands-off on the show) said that it was going to be back to basics like in the first season, before any of the apocalypse stuff started showing up. And that wasn't entirely accurate. Yes, it does seem like it's moving back to the monster of the week format of season one, but they've already set up a number of storylines such as the Winchester boys' grandfather also coming back with Sam, who doesn't know who pulled him out of the Devil's Box and "a whole bunch of demons are going crazy...including some things no one has seen before." Super. Like Scrubs, the intended end of the series is probably going to be better than the actual ending if the first episode is any indication.
Also note, I still haven't had a chance to watch Smallville, though I've heard some great things about the episode.
There were some other things I wanted to mention, too, but I can't remember what they are. Oh well, such is life.
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
New Fall Line Up and PC Problems
It's been awhile since I've made a post and that is because of a really weird problem I've been having with my computer. My desktop has fallen out of service ever since the battery backup blew and I've been too lazy/cheap to get a new one...for two years.
About a year ago, my laptop had this issue where it would scroll by itself. Seen desktops do that, but was because of something with the mouse. I do not have a mouse hooked up to my laptop. But, after some finagling (is that how you spell that?), the issue seemed to have stopped.
Now, a new problem has cropped up in the last week or so. Randomly, the Windows Help window will pop up and something happens with Yahoo Widgets (I'm alerted to sub jobs through a program that only runs through YW). That is annoying, yes, but the strangest part is that, while this is going on, if I try to type something, it only pops up as =65 over and over again. If anyone has any tips or hints to fix this, I'd appreciate it. And yes, I have reformatted the hard drive (and possibly screwed up my music collection doing it).
On to the premiers of the shows that I watch (sounds...important, doesn't it?):
How I Met Your Mother - The tease for this episode is that Ted runs into an ex-girlfriend, the roommate of whom we know is the infamous 'mother.' But since when has this show ever not woven its intricate plots of twists and misleadings? It was ok, but I'm just glad it's back, since it is the characters and not the 'who is the mother' angle that makes this show worth watching.
Two and a Half Men - I had an argument the other day about what CBS comedy (about the only channel doing any sitcoms really worth a damn aside from The Office, and that has gotten a bit long in the tooth) is the best. I put it in the order of HIMYM, The Big Bang Theory, and Two and a Half Men. And this season's opener did nothing to change that. The focus seems to have shifted from Charlie to Alan, a not unexpected, but most disagreeable change, given Charlie Sheen's current legal drama. The high point of the episode is when we first see Charlie passed out on his stairs after another night of heavy drinking. He's missing his pants. Hilarious.
Modern Family - One of the better shows from last season, but one that I've always had mixed feelings about. At its best, it was hilarious and charming. At its worse, it was just grown inducing. The standout characters, in my opinion, were always the all-male couple and Ed Bundy's part of the family. Claire and what's his name, to me, were never that funny. The 'hip dad' thing grew stale quickly and the highlights are always from the previously mentioned characters.
L&O: SVU - This one has been my favorite from the L&O family for years. I never cared for CI and the main show was cancelled for good reasons (though I do wish it would've stuck around for just one more year, if only to get the record). I will admit, I didn't watch the whole thing through, but what I did see was cringe-worthy. I'm talking about the exchange between the brother and the sister he had raped when he was younger. I don't know what acting school SVU keeps getting its bit part actors from, but it needs to stop.
As for the rest, I'm looking forward to Smallville the most, since they've been infusing the show with references and characters from the comic for the last few seasons. And they got rid of Lana Lang, who had been dragging the show down for seasons 4-7. Seriously, her arc was one of the few blights on season 8, aside from an awkward looking Doomsday (if they didn't have the budget for him, they shouldn't have used him like they did).
After that, I'm very interested in what Supernatural has to offer. At the end of last season, Sam gave in and became Lucifer's vessel, only to dive into the containment...thing and the Earth swallowed him up. But...he did reappear outside of the house where Dean had seemingly settled down with a lady friend and a kid who looks suspiciously like him (it's not his, though). My only disappointment was the hint that the Prophet Chuck was hinted to really be God-Chuck. Way to ruin a character (and I didn't like the fact that the Trickster, arguably the best guest character from the show, was really Gabriel, a rogue angel).
The Office - It has been hinted that this is the last season for the folks at Dunder Mifflin, that they'll be folding up shop when Steve Carrel leaves the show after seven seasons. While I still enjoy the show, it's peak was probably during season three. So...that's saying something.
Grey's Anatomy - After the hell that was unleashed upon Seattle Grace during the season finale last year...that's it. I've got nothing on this one. They tried to make you care about the people they were slaughtering, but I didn't. Did feel for Baley when she dragged Percy to the elevators only to find the power had been shut off so she had to hold his hand while he slowly bled out. Though it was certainly a dramatic moment, it did have its plot holes. Namely, it was established that Baley (Bailey?) had been in contact with the police via cell phone. Couldn't she have just called them up to get the elevator turned back on? Even have a SWAT team ready to go or something.
So there ya have it. How I feel about this fall's lineup and the reason why I haven't been so prolific of a blogger lately.
Also, as an honorable mention for TV, Desparate Housewives returns Sunday and...*gasp* a new house has moved in. Really? Can't come up with anything new DH?
About a year ago, my laptop had this issue where it would scroll by itself. Seen desktops do that, but was because of something with the mouse. I do not have a mouse hooked up to my laptop. But, after some finagling (is that how you spell that?), the issue seemed to have stopped.
Now, a new problem has cropped up in the last week or so. Randomly, the Windows Help window will pop up and something happens with Yahoo Widgets (I'm alerted to sub jobs through a program that only runs through YW). That is annoying, yes, but the strangest part is that, while this is going on, if I try to type something, it only pops up as =65 over and over again. If anyone has any tips or hints to fix this, I'd appreciate it. And yes, I have reformatted the hard drive (and possibly screwed up my music collection doing it).
On to the premiers of the shows that I watch (sounds...important, doesn't it?):
How I Met Your Mother - The tease for this episode is that Ted runs into an ex-girlfriend, the roommate of whom we know is the infamous 'mother.' But since when has this show ever not woven its intricate plots of twists and misleadings? It was ok, but I'm just glad it's back, since it is the characters and not the 'who is the mother' angle that makes this show worth watching.
Two and a Half Men - I had an argument the other day about what CBS comedy (about the only channel doing any sitcoms really worth a damn aside from The Office, and that has gotten a bit long in the tooth) is the best. I put it in the order of HIMYM, The Big Bang Theory, and Two and a Half Men. And this season's opener did nothing to change that. The focus seems to have shifted from Charlie to Alan, a not unexpected, but most disagreeable change, given Charlie Sheen's current legal drama. The high point of the episode is when we first see Charlie passed out on his stairs after another night of heavy drinking. He's missing his pants. Hilarious.
Modern Family - One of the better shows from last season, but one that I've always had mixed feelings about. At its best, it was hilarious and charming. At its worse, it was just grown inducing. The standout characters, in my opinion, were always the all-male couple and Ed Bundy's part of the family. Claire and what's his name, to me, were never that funny. The 'hip dad' thing grew stale quickly and the highlights are always from the previously mentioned characters.
L&O: SVU - This one has been my favorite from the L&O family for years. I never cared for CI and the main show was cancelled for good reasons (though I do wish it would've stuck around for just one more year, if only to get the record). I will admit, I didn't watch the whole thing through, but what I did see was cringe-worthy. I'm talking about the exchange between the brother and the sister he had raped when he was younger. I don't know what acting school SVU keeps getting its bit part actors from, but it needs to stop.
As for the rest, I'm looking forward to Smallville the most, since they've been infusing the show with references and characters from the comic for the last few seasons. And they got rid of Lana Lang, who had been dragging the show down for seasons 4-7. Seriously, her arc was one of the few blights on season 8, aside from an awkward looking Doomsday (if they didn't have the budget for him, they shouldn't have used him like they did).
After that, I'm very interested in what Supernatural has to offer. At the end of last season, Sam gave in and became Lucifer's vessel, only to dive into the containment...thing and the Earth swallowed him up. But...he did reappear outside of the house where Dean had seemingly settled down with a lady friend and a kid who looks suspiciously like him (it's not his, though). My only disappointment was the hint that the Prophet Chuck was hinted to really be God-Chuck. Way to ruin a character (and I didn't like the fact that the Trickster, arguably the best guest character from the show, was really Gabriel, a rogue angel).
The Office - It has been hinted that this is the last season for the folks at Dunder Mifflin, that they'll be folding up shop when Steve Carrel leaves the show after seven seasons. While I still enjoy the show, it's peak was probably during season three. So...that's saying something.
Grey's Anatomy - After the hell that was unleashed upon Seattle Grace during the season finale last year...that's it. I've got nothing on this one. They tried to make you care about the people they were slaughtering, but I didn't. Did feel for Baley when she dragged Percy to the elevators only to find the power had been shut off so she had to hold his hand while he slowly bled out. Though it was certainly a dramatic moment, it did have its plot holes. Namely, it was established that Baley (Bailey?) had been in contact with the police via cell phone. Couldn't she have just called them up to get the elevator turned back on? Even have a SWAT team ready to go or something.
So there ya have it. How I feel about this fall's lineup and the reason why I haven't been so prolific of a blogger lately.
Also, as an honorable mention for TV, Desparate Housewives returns Sunday and...*gasp* a new house has moved in. Really? Can't come up with anything new DH?
Monday, September 13, 2010
When we burn inside the fire of A Thousand Suns
I don't make it a secret, Linkin Park is my favorite band. While they have millions of followers/fans/stalkers, there are a number of people who have as much hatred for them as I do love. They toss around such labels as 'sellouts,' 'manufactured,' etc. I respect people's opinions, even if they are wrong. It's just who I am as a person. But it's the opinions of people who claim that they also love the band but hate them now that baffle me. I've seen more people who say, "I use to like them, but now they suck," than people who just out and out say they don't care for them.
I'd point out a line from one of their new songs from A Thousand Suns, their latest effort that was released yesterday. From the song "When They Come for Me:" "'Cause once you got a theory of how the thing works/ Everybody wants the next thing to be just like the first..." So, from that I gather the band knows that critics and listeners are expecting more of the same (which is what the "fans" want), but the band doesn't want to repeat themselves. It's actually an odd song, and my girlfriend cracks up when Mike swears. She's right, it seems unnatural. I know, he's sworn in songs before (Bleed It Out comes to mind), but it still sounds funny.
As for the album itself? It is an odd duck. The band has said that A Thousand Suns works best as a whole (there even appears to be an option to by the album on iTunes as one, long track), which I agree with. Unfortunately, the sum of its parts doesn't quite match up to the whole here. There are 15 tracks, the most off of any of their studio efforts to date (non-remix/collaboration albums).
However, that number is misleading. The first two tracks "The Requiem" and "The Radiance" are really just one intro track broken into two for the sake of fluffing the album. Track 5, "Empty Spaces," is just that. It's 18 seconds long. 18! Was that really necessary? There's also the track, "Wisdom, Justice, and Love," which, much like "The Radiance," is a soundbyte meant to sound dramatic. I know everyone in the band said that this was to be an experimental, concept album. But really? Did we need four tracks that are just filler?
What music there is on here is pretty good. I don't know if it tops Minutes to Midnight, Meteora, or Hybrid Theory, but the songs are pretty good. Notice I said songs. Not weird, grainy voice clips or 18 seconds of filler.
When the band said they were experimenting with styles, they were not lying. I felt a bit of a Jack Johnson (sorry if I got that wrong) vibe on one track, and there seems to be a hip hop influence (though with LP's usual edge) on another. The rest are a mix between the 'revolution' message that started with M2M and something a bit more introspective. While I felt the standouts were "Wretches and Kings" (I'm a sucker for Shinoda's flow, what can I say?) "Robot Boy" "Burning in the Sky" and "Iradescent," the rest of the album is decent and it'll be stuck in your head for days. That is, if you give it chance (and you like LP's music...)
I'd point out a line from one of their new songs from A Thousand Suns, their latest effort that was released yesterday. From the song "When They Come for Me:" "'Cause once you got a theory of how the thing works/ Everybody wants the next thing to be just like the first..." So, from that I gather the band knows that critics and listeners are expecting more of the same (which is what the "fans" want), but the band doesn't want to repeat themselves. It's actually an odd song, and my girlfriend cracks up when Mike swears. She's right, it seems unnatural. I know, he's sworn in songs before (Bleed It Out comes to mind), but it still sounds funny.
As for the album itself? It is an odd duck. The band has said that A Thousand Suns works best as a whole (there even appears to be an option to by the album on iTunes as one, long track), which I agree with. Unfortunately, the sum of its parts doesn't quite match up to the whole here. There are 15 tracks, the most off of any of their studio efforts to date (non-remix/collaboration albums).
However, that number is misleading. The first two tracks "The Requiem" and "The Radiance" are really just one intro track broken into two for the sake of fluffing the album. Track 5, "Empty Spaces," is just that. It's 18 seconds long. 18! Was that really necessary? There's also the track, "Wisdom, Justice, and Love," which, much like "The Radiance," is a soundbyte meant to sound dramatic. I know everyone in the band said that this was to be an experimental, concept album. But really? Did we need four tracks that are just filler?
What music there is on here is pretty good. I don't know if it tops Minutes to Midnight, Meteora, or Hybrid Theory, but the songs are pretty good. Notice I said songs. Not weird, grainy voice clips or 18 seconds of filler.
When the band said they were experimenting with styles, they were not lying. I felt a bit of a Jack Johnson (sorry if I got that wrong) vibe on one track, and there seems to be a hip hop influence (though with LP's usual edge) on another. The rest are a mix between the 'revolution' message that started with M2M and something a bit more introspective. While I felt the standouts were "Wretches and Kings" (I'm a sucker for Shinoda's flow, what can I say?) "Robot Boy" "Burning in the Sky" and "Iradescent," the rest of the album is decent and it'll be stuck in your head for days. That is, if you give it chance (and you like LP's music...)
Saturday, September 11, 2010
How many more times could they have used the terms 'Mockingjay' and 'Catching Fire'
As I had previously reported, I received Mockingjay by Suzanne Collins as a gift for my birthday (September 1st). I finished it by the end of the day on September 5th and I've just been letting the ending sink in before commenting. That time has come.
In other reviews, I have tried to keep things as spoiler-free as possible. That will not be the case here. You have been warned.
***SPOILER ALERT***
Mockingjay picks up about a month where Catching Fire left off. It's not as jarring of a transition as Hunger Games was to CF, and I was quickly able to remember what had happened even though I haven't read the previous book since before school let out in June.
At first, the book seems to move at the same breakneck speed of the first as opposed to what I felt was a plodding pace in the second. I think this is mostly due to Suzanne Collins' fantastic ability to really capture a scene and make the reader invest in these characters. However, with Mockingjay, that's a bit hard to due, because Collins doesn't invest enough in the new characters and she really screws up the ones that the readers have had a book or two to get to know.
One of the new characters, the second in command of District 13, comes off as kind of a prick at the beginning, only to have Katniss (and, by extension, the reader) warm up to him as he does more heroic and/or stupid things to win her trust. And then he dies. Yeah, it's about that abrupt in the book, too. The thing is, I can't even remember the characters name. I can remember some of the things he did. Like died. But, I can't remember his name. He left that big of an impression on me.
And ***SUPER SPOILER ALERT*** some of the old characters really get screwed with. We learn that Gale is really just kind of a sadistic, twisted bastard. Not that I can blame him, mind you, but his capacity for violence was not really explored here, so it was just as shocking to me as it was to Katniss when he went into detail about his plans to lay some hurt down on the Capitol.
That was one of the things that bothered me about this book and with the series as a whole. It is repetitive. It's difficult to point out in this one, as it isn't exactly the same, but the best example I can give is that people keep secrets, Haymitch really understands Katniss, Katniss always sulks about her situation or half the book, and there is always a Hunger Game. In Mockingjay, it isn't an actual HG, but it's similar enough that Katniss and crew refer to the final mission in the Capitol as such, and it comes complete with televising the names of the surviving rebels/contestants.
What bothered me the most, and I really hope I'm not alone in this, is the final "twist" of the book. I found it more to be of shock value than anything that carried any real dramatic weight.
****SUPER DUPER SPOILER ALERT*****
****SERIOUSLY, YOU'VE BEEN WARNED****
****THIS RUINS THE END OF THE BOOK****
Prim dies. In a fiery, melty death. And if it hadn't happened in the way it had, I think I would've felt something besides anger at it. I know, it's Collins characters to do with as she pleases, but we can have the "when does a character no longer belong to the creator and belongs to the masses" debate in a different entry. My immediate reaction was to reread the scene again and again to make sure I had it correctly and it wasn't a dream or hallucination or something. It wasn't. Katniss' motivations for her actions in and about the Games were about keeping her family safe. Before the first Game, she takes Prim's place and then makes Gale promise he will look after her family.
And then, out of nowhere, her sister shows up and gets flash-fried like a Thanksgiving Day turkey. Not only is it sudden and not really supported by the story at all, but it is described fairly graphically. I'd actually be a bit uncomfortable letting some younger readers at this book.
And speaking of uncomfortable, if you're a teacher like me, pray that your students are either old enough to handle the ending or not old enough to figure it out. Because it really is a tender moment and I wouldn't want the burden of trying to esplain it ruin what just happened.
Overall, the fact that this whole series has gotten me worked into such a frenzy is saying something. In a good way in this case. The story is just as wonderfully written as the first two books and, despite a shaky ending, I still loved every page (almost).
In other reviews, I have tried to keep things as spoiler-free as possible. That will not be the case here. You have been warned.
***SPOILER ALERT***
Mockingjay picks up about a month where Catching Fire left off. It's not as jarring of a transition as Hunger Games was to CF, and I was quickly able to remember what had happened even though I haven't read the previous book since before school let out in June.
At first, the book seems to move at the same breakneck speed of the first as opposed to what I felt was a plodding pace in the second. I think this is mostly due to Suzanne Collins' fantastic ability to really capture a scene and make the reader invest in these characters. However, with Mockingjay, that's a bit hard to due, because Collins doesn't invest enough in the new characters and she really screws up the ones that the readers have had a book or two to get to know.
One of the new characters, the second in command of District 13, comes off as kind of a prick at the beginning, only to have Katniss (and, by extension, the reader) warm up to him as he does more heroic and/or stupid things to win her trust. And then he dies. Yeah, it's about that abrupt in the book, too. The thing is, I can't even remember the characters name. I can remember some of the things he did. Like died. But, I can't remember his name. He left that big of an impression on me.
And ***SUPER SPOILER ALERT*** some of the old characters really get screwed with. We learn that Gale is really just kind of a sadistic, twisted bastard. Not that I can blame him, mind you, but his capacity for violence was not really explored here, so it was just as shocking to me as it was to Katniss when he went into detail about his plans to lay some hurt down on the Capitol.
That was one of the things that bothered me about this book and with the series as a whole. It is repetitive. It's difficult to point out in this one, as it isn't exactly the same, but the best example I can give is that people keep secrets, Haymitch really understands Katniss, Katniss always sulks about her situation or half the book, and there is always a Hunger Game. In Mockingjay, it isn't an actual HG, but it's similar enough that Katniss and crew refer to the final mission in the Capitol as such, and it comes complete with televising the names of the surviving rebels/contestants.
What bothered me the most, and I really hope I'm not alone in this, is the final "twist" of the book. I found it more to be of shock value than anything that carried any real dramatic weight.
****SUPER DUPER SPOILER ALERT*****
****SERIOUSLY, YOU'VE BEEN WARNED****
****THIS RUINS THE END OF THE BOOK****
Prim dies. In a fiery, melty death. And if it hadn't happened in the way it had, I think I would've felt something besides anger at it. I know, it's Collins characters to do with as she pleases, but we can have the "when does a character no longer belong to the creator and belongs to the masses" debate in a different entry. My immediate reaction was to reread the scene again and again to make sure I had it correctly and it wasn't a dream or hallucination or something. It wasn't. Katniss' motivations for her actions in and about the Games were about keeping her family safe. Before the first Game, she takes Prim's place and then makes Gale promise he will look after her family.
And then, out of nowhere, her sister shows up and gets flash-fried like a Thanksgiving Day turkey. Not only is it sudden and not really supported by the story at all, but it is described fairly graphically. I'd actually be a bit uncomfortable letting some younger readers at this book.
And speaking of uncomfortable, if you're a teacher like me, pray that your students are either old enough to handle the ending or not old enough to figure it out. Because it really is a tender moment and I wouldn't want the burden of trying to esplain it ruin what just happened.
Overall, the fact that this whole series has gotten me worked into such a frenzy is saying something. In a good way in this case. The story is just as wonderfully written as the first two books and, despite a shaky ending, I still loved every page (almost).
Thursday, September 2, 2010
How Did I Miss that One?
On September 1st, I turned 25. Yep. I am now a quarter of a century old. As everyone has pointed out, that means I'm officially old. But the main point isn't that I'm old (of which I already know), but that one of the gifts I received was Mockingjay by Suzanne Collins. Mockingjay is the last of the Hunger Games books, a series that is hugely popular with the young population. I know this, because, as I have said before, I'm a teacher (even subs/guest teachers are teachers, so there), and I'd see probably twenty to a hundred copies of each of the first two books every day during the previous school year.
I read the first one because of this. As a teacher, I try to at least stay current with what the kids are listening to/watching/reading/whatever, even if I don't know a ton about it. This is how I ended up reading Twilight, which, I do appreciate the fact that it gets kids to read, an ever increasingly difficult feat to accompish, but that was just utter garbage. I mean, I know I'm no prize-winning author, but I like to think that I'm at least more to the point than Stephanie Meyer. Anywho, I digress. I was a bit apprehensive about reading anything the students are because of the whole Twilight fiasco, but I picked it up from the library, and wow, that book was everything Twilight was not. It was fast-paced, the characters were believable (under the circumstances) and even the forced romance was more palatible than the one between Bella and Edward. As an added bonus, at no point in reading HG did I ever feel unclean, no matter how hard I tried to wash myself.
Anyway, the point is, I had been keeping close track of the series and was blindsided by the fact that, in the craziness that was my summer, the release of the third and final book in the series had snuck up on me. However, I got it, and all is good in the world. It continues with the time jumping (not actual time travel, just skipping forward hours, days, months to get to the meat of the story) and picks up about a month where Catching Fire left off. Some of the reveals are both sad and shocking, but I can't wait to see how it ends (I've had the book for about sixteen hours, so I'm a little ashamed that I'm not further along that I am).
In other literary news, I picked up the first volume of Young Avengers at the convention. It sucked because I settled for the paperback edition (I have the hardcover of the second, because I found that at Half-Priced Books months ago and figured that it'd stand up to student reading a bit better). No sooner had I picked up the paperback edition did we find a stand that had an entire row of sealed copies of the hardcover edition...at a stand we had already picked through, but had given up because Kelly had been looking for Walking Dead and not any comics from Marvel.
I also picked up the first four volumes of Brubaker's Captain America as well as the first volume of Runaways, New Avengers, and volume two of Atomic Robo. So, overall, it was a good year for trade buying. My brother, who had a table in Artist's Alley, said that, despite the screwups by Wizard, this was probably his most successful convention yet. I will detail why at another time, as it is late, and I am tired.
I read the first one because of this. As a teacher, I try to at least stay current with what the kids are listening to/watching/reading/whatever, even if I don't know a ton about it. This is how I ended up reading Twilight, which, I do appreciate the fact that it gets kids to read, an ever increasingly difficult feat to accompish, but that was just utter garbage. I mean, I know I'm no prize-winning author, but I like to think that I'm at least more to the point than Stephanie Meyer. Anywho, I digress. I was a bit apprehensive about reading anything the students are because of the whole Twilight fiasco, but I picked it up from the library, and wow, that book was everything Twilight was not. It was fast-paced, the characters were believable (under the circumstances) and even the forced romance was more palatible than the one between Bella and Edward. As an added bonus, at no point in reading HG did I ever feel unclean, no matter how hard I tried to wash myself.
Anyway, the point is, I had been keeping close track of the series and was blindsided by the fact that, in the craziness that was my summer, the release of the third and final book in the series had snuck up on me. However, I got it, and all is good in the world. It continues with the time jumping (not actual time travel, just skipping forward hours, days, months to get to the meat of the story) and picks up about a month where Catching Fire left off. Some of the reveals are both sad and shocking, but I can't wait to see how it ends (I've had the book for about sixteen hours, so I'm a little ashamed that I'm not further along that I am).
In other literary news, I picked up the first volume of Young Avengers at the convention. It sucked because I settled for the paperback edition (I have the hardcover of the second, because I found that at Half-Priced Books months ago and figured that it'd stand up to student reading a bit better). No sooner had I picked up the paperback edition did we find a stand that had an entire row of sealed copies of the hardcover edition...at a stand we had already picked through, but had given up because Kelly had been looking for Walking Dead and not any comics from Marvel.
I also picked up the first four volumes of Brubaker's Captain America as well as the first volume of Runaways, New Avengers, and volume two of Atomic Robo. So, overall, it was a good year for trade buying. My brother, who had a table in Artist's Alley, said that, despite the screwups by Wizard, this was probably his most successful convention yet. I will detail why at another time, as it is late, and I am tired.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Back from the Con...
I'm being lazy with uploading the photos from Chicago Comic-Con to my facebook page (to which I never have posted a link, so it doesn't matter anyway), but I wanted to let everyone know that they are coming. Eventually. Until then, enjoy this video of Iron Man and War Machine crossing the street:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_z0a0G0ids
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_z0a0G0ids
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
You've Just Been...Expendabled...
This past weekend saw the rise of a new number one movie (which will probably replaced this weekend, since most movies these days, with few exceptions don't have much staying power), Sylester Stallone's latest nostalgic throwback, The Expendables.
As always, I try to provide a spoiler-free review of films/games/whatevers, but be warned, there are some.
First off, while the plot and the stars might be from a bygone era (though the plots of beefed up action heroes out to rescue damsels in distress will probably never die), the filming techniques are very modern. While Stallone's Rambo had a very gritty feel to it, Expendables looks to utilize modern techniques like the jerky hand-held camera style for the action scenes as popularized by the Bourne films (though why all of Ultimatum had to be filmed that way is still beyond me). It even tries to be innovative during a couple of scenes, to varying degrees of success. Overall, though the action gets muddled at times by the shaky camera and jerky cuts, there's more than enough mayhem to go around.
The actors do a good enough job at making you like the right people and hating the rest. My only real problems were with Steve Austin and Randy Couture (sp?). Randy isn't an actor and Austin just came off as a pro-wrestler, not a bad ass military-type. I know his claim to fame is as a wrestler, but he has been in films since leaving the WWE, so I expected a little bit more from him.
The film has a reported budget of 90 million, and it looks like most of that went into the special effects. An oddity I noticed was in the blood splatters later in the film. Sly reported that there was no CGI used in the Expendables, but the blood towards the end looks straight out of Ninja Assassin.
A bit of the thrill is seeing which of the Expendables is going to bite it, and there are several tense moments. However, there is one fight scene where I almost couldn't suspend my disbelief.
Overall, the film is a bit deeper story-wise than what I was expecting, but it definitely was a no-holds barred action film and that's all anyone really needs to know.
As always, I try to provide a spoiler-free review of films/games/whatevers, but be warned, there are some.
First off, while the plot and the stars might be from a bygone era (though the plots of beefed up action heroes out to rescue damsels in distress will probably never die), the filming techniques are very modern. While Stallone's Rambo had a very gritty feel to it, Expendables looks to utilize modern techniques like the jerky hand-held camera style for the action scenes as popularized by the Bourne films (though why all of Ultimatum had to be filmed that way is still beyond me). It even tries to be innovative during a couple of scenes, to varying degrees of success. Overall, though the action gets muddled at times by the shaky camera and jerky cuts, there's more than enough mayhem to go around.
The actors do a good enough job at making you like the right people and hating the rest. My only real problems were with Steve Austin and Randy Couture (sp?). Randy isn't an actor and Austin just came off as a pro-wrestler, not a bad ass military-type. I know his claim to fame is as a wrestler, but he has been in films since leaving the WWE, so I expected a little bit more from him.
The film has a reported budget of 90 million, and it looks like most of that went into the special effects. An oddity I noticed was in the blood splatters later in the film. Sly reported that there was no CGI used in the Expendables, but the blood towards the end looks straight out of Ninja Assassin.
A bit of the thrill is seeing which of the Expendables is going to bite it, and there are several tense moments. However, there is one fight scene where I almost couldn't suspend my disbelief.
Overall, the film is a bit deeper story-wise than what I was expecting, but it definitely was a no-holds barred action film and that's all anyone really needs to know.
Saturday, August 14, 2010
You've Got the Touch!
You've got the power....yeah!
*Ahem* Anyway. I swore that I wouldn't purchase the recently released "Transformers: War for Cybertron" until I had either played it, or at least wait until after Chicago Comic-Con. Yeah. You can see where this is going. I swear I was going to hold myself to it, but I was at a local(ish) used game store and there it was, all by its lonesome, calling to me. Also, it was only thirty, half of what I would've paid for the game new. So there was that.
Before I could even play the game, which my girlfriend graciously allowed me to do (she picked up both Burton/Keaton Batman films from the same place), I had to install updates.
That is something that has appeared only in this generation of console gaming: updates (and installs, but more on that in a moment), and there is nothing that infuriates me more than getting a shiny new game and then having to wait for the updates to download and install. I also hate having to wait for a game to install itself to the PS3's harddrive. Also, I don't know where all my storage space went, since I have a 60gb model, and can only account for about half the drive being taken up by games and demos and what not (I don't have movies and the only music I have is from a Linkin Park concert I went to in '08). So where'd it all go?
So after almost an hour of updating and freeing up space from my drive (I deleted the game data for Oblivion, since I tried it once and didn't much care for it), I finally get rewarded for my time with an awesome intro voiced over by Peter Cullen (the voice of Optimus Prime from what is now dubbed Generation 1) in which he explains that there is a War for Cybertron (ah, so that's why it's called that). I decided to start from the beginning rather from the middle. The Decepticon campaign begins with Chapter One and the Autobot's start on Chapter Five or Six. After playing for about ten minutes, you know what I noticed?
That my favorite parts of the old cartoons is running out of ammo every twenty seconds.
That's sarcasm, by the way. Also, I don't really like the voices. Soundwave sounds like, well, Soundwave. But Megatron doesn't sound right and Brawl and Barricade (the Deceptichumps that hang around with Megatron for at least the first chapter) just sound...wrong. They don't sound like Decepticons. They almost sound like slightly more evil versions of the main character's best friends from a Judd Apatow film.
Overall, only about an hour or so in, but I like it, I guess. Probably should have started with Prime's campaign. Then again, who knows if I would've ever played through Megatron's...
*Ahem* Anyway. I swore that I wouldn't purchase the recently released "Transformers: War for Cybertron" until I had either played it, or at least wait until after Chicago Comic-Con. Yeah. You can see where this is going. I swear I was going to hold myself to it, but I was at a local(ish) used game store and there it was, all by its lonesome, calling to me. Also, it was only thirty, half of what I would've paid for the game new. So there was that.
Before I could even play the game, which my girlfriend graciously allowed me to do (she picked up both Burton/Keaton Batman films from the same place), I had to install updates.
That is something that has appeared only in this generation of console gaming: updates (and installs, but more on that in a moment), and there is nothing that infuriates me more than getting a shiny new game and then having to wait for the updates to download and install. I also hate having to wait for a game to install itself to the PS3's harddrive. Also, I don't know where all my storage space went, since I have a 60gb model, and can only account for about half the drive being taken up by games and demos and what not (I don't have movies and the only music I have is from a Linkin Park concert I went to in '08). So where'd it all go?
So after almost an hour of updating and freeing up space from my drive (I deleted the game data for Oblivion, since I tried it once and didn't much care for it), I finally get rewarded for my time with an awesome intro voiced over by Peter Cullen (the voice of Optimus Prime from what is now dubbed Generation 1) in which he explains that there is a War for Cybertron (ah, so that's why it's called that). I decided to start from the beginning rather from the middle. The Decepticon campaign begins with Chapter One and the Autobot's start on Chapter Five or Six. After playing for about ten minutes, you know what I noticed?
That my favorite parts of the old cartoons is running out of ammo every twenty seconds.
That's sarcasm, by the way. Also, I don't really like the voices. Soundwave sounds like, well, Soundwave. But Megatron doesn't sound right and Brawl and Barricade (the Deceptichumps that hang around with Megatron for at least the first chapter) just sound...wrong. They don't sound like Decepticons. They almost sound like slightly more evil versions of the main character's best friends from a Judd Apatow film.
Overall, only about an hour or so in, but I like it, I guess. Probably should have started with Prime's campaign. Then again, who knows if I would've ever played through Megatron's...
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
Today was a Good Day...
Most days, when I go into work, feel like Office Space. You know, the part where Ron Livingston is explaining how everyday he goes into work is the worst day of his life? That's how I feel about ninety percent of the time when going into work (at my summer job, anyway). However, every so often, I have a day that doesn't suck. Nothing seems to go wrong, or I'm just too tired to notice/care, and I don't feel entirely like harming myself or others by the time my shift is over. For some reason, that Ice Cube song always plays in my head when that happens. I don't have an AK, but I don't think I would've used it today. And that's a good thing.
On a different subject, some friends/almost relatives of mine have purchased Playstation 3's recently and came to me with adivce on what games to get. Now, most of my collection for the PS3 is either games I don't expect other people to get (Dynasty Warriors: Gundam 2) or franchises that have carried on from the PS1 & 2 days (Resident Evil 5, Metal Gear Solid 4). So I have a hard time making recommendations. I like those games, sure. Love them? Might be too strong a word, since I have huge problems with both, of which I have vented for years about, so I don't need to expand upon that here. But would I recommend those games?
No, not really, not unless you've been following the franchises for years.
Instead of just poopooing some of those games, I've come up with a list. Without further ado, here's my list of top 5 PS3 games that I would recommend (in no real order) and why:
Batman Arkham Asylum: Despite the fact that I feel let down by any and all news of the sequel (outside of the teaser trailer from last year) that does not keep me from recommending this gem. It might have the most entertaining melee combat system I've ever seen in a game. Every hit, every move has weight to it and it is a blast to fight through the challenges. An added bonus is that they got Kevin Conroy and Mark Hammil to reprise their characters from the Batman: Animated Series. Fun fact: At one point, I was ranked #6 on one of the combat challenges (after the boosters were cleared out).
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare (2): Either one is a great game, though I'd recommend both just for the story. Some felt jilted by the single player story in 2, but my only complaint is that it really felt like it was a setup for the next game (which may or may not come). The only difference in multiplayer is that MW 1 seems to be more strategic in that there aren't as many ridiculous knife kills and kill streaks to use to rain hell down on your enemies.
Lego Star Wars: The Complete Trilogy: Yes, this one is available on the PS2 as well (and the DS and every other system out), but the PS3 version is only 19.99 new, and for what comes out to be two complete games, the price can't be beat. I've heard some gamers say that they like Batman or Indy better, but I think things like the Force and lightsabers just works better than the whip or batarangs.
And...that's it. Huh. I don't own five games that I would honestly recommend to others. I own about twenty games, but not all of them are good, and not all of them are by choice.
Honorable Mentions: Metal Gear Solid 4: I know I said I wouldn't recommend this game, but it does deserve a spot on this list for being a part of the series that I did one of my first speed runs on. We never timed it, but we got through MGS1 in just over two hours. If you want to see the end to Snake's story, here it is, in all of it's 1/2 hour + per cinematic glory. On the plus side, the graphics are amazing, the gameplay has been refined from 3 (which was already pretty good), and you get to pilot a Metal Gear.
Resident Evil 5: Some say that RE has lost its way. That the series has lost its dark roots and is no longer scary. Yeah, I guess so. But if better gameplay is the sacrifice I have to make for cheap scares, then yeah, take the cheap scares.
Sound off in the comments if anyone has more games to recommend.
On a different subject, some friends/almost relatives of mine have purchased Playstation 3's recently and came to me with adivce on what games to get. Now, most of my collection for the PS3 is either games I don't expect other people to get (Dynasty Warriors: Gundam 2) or franchises that have carried on from the PS1 & 2 days (Resident Evil 5, Metal Gear Solid 4). So I have a hard time making recommendations. I like those games, sure. Love them? Might be too strong a word, since I have huge problems with both, of which I have vented for years about, so I don't need to expand upon that here. But would I recommend those games?
No, not really, not unless you've been following the franchises for years.
Instead of just poopooing some of those games, I've come up with a list. Without further ado, here's my list of top 5 PS3 games that I would recommend (in no real order) and why:
Batman Arkham Asylum: Despite the fact that I feel let down by any and all news of the sequel (outside of the teaser trailer from last year) that does not keep me from recommending this gem. It might have the most entertaining melee combat system I've ever seen in a game. Every hit, every move has weight to it and it is a blast to fight through the challenges. An added bonus is that they got Kevin Conroy and Mark Hammil to reprise their characters from the Batman: Animated Series. Fun fact: At one point, I was ranked #6 on one of the combat challenges (after the boosters were cleared out).
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare (2): Either one is a great game, though I'd recommend both just for the story. Some felt jilted by the single player story in 2, but my only complaint is that it really felt like it was a setup for the next game (which may or may not come). The only difference in multiplayer is that MW 1 seems to be more strategic in that there aren't as many ridiculous knife kills and kill streaks to use to rain hell down on your enemies.
Lego Star Wars: The Complete Trilogy: Yes, this one is available on the PS2 as well (and the DS and every other system out), but the PS3 version is only 19.99 new, and for what comes out to be two complete games, the price can't be beat. I've heard some gamers say that they like Batman or Indy better, but I think things like the Force and lightsabers just works better than the whip or batarangs.
And...that's it. Huh. I don't own five games that I would honestly recommend to others. I own about twenty games, but not all of them are good, and not all of them are by choice.
Honorable Mentions: Metal Gear Solid 4: I know I said I wouldn't recommend this game, but it does deserve a spot on this list for being a part of the series that I did one of my first speed runs on. We never timed it, but we got through MGS1 in just over two hours. If you want to see the end to Snake's story, here it is, in all of it's 1/2 hour + per cinematic glory. On the plus side, the graphics are amazing, the gameplay has been refined from 3 (which was already pretty good), and you get to pilot a Metal Gear.
Resident Evil 5: Some say that RE has lost its way. That the series has lost its dark roots and is no longer scary. Yeah, I guess so. But if better gameplay is the sacrifice I have to make for cheap scares, then yeah, take the cheap scares.
Sound off in the comments if anyone has more games to recommend.
Monday, August 9, 2010
The Other Guys & What is up with CoD: BO?
I saw The Other Guys tonight at a local theater. I've been trying to save for the convention coming up, so I wasn't going to go, but then the theater advertised that all tickets were supposed to be $6 all day. I say supposed, because we ended up getting charged full price (which has gone up at that theater). No explanation was given as to why the promotion didn't apply to the movie we were seeing, but since we were there, we saw it anyway (probably something the theater was counting on).
The movie itself was pretty flippin' hilarious. There were times where I wondered if the film even had a plot, since it seemed to mostly be a bunch of over the top cop jokes. Samuel L Jackson and Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson were great as the over-the-top action heroes that Mark Wahlberg's character longed to be. Kind of messed up what happens there, but I won't spoil it.
If you've seen other Ferrel movies, you know what to expect going in, and that about sums up The Other Guys.
The Multiplayer (MP) trailer for Call of Duty: Black Ops was released today. It looked kind of neat, but I do have some problems with it. Namely, it still contains everything players complained about in Modern Warfare 2's MP. Of course, since it doesn't have MW in the title, people for some reason are going apeshit over it instead of getting pissed off. It still has the ridiculous knife kills, killstreaks, and everything else you'd come to expect from Treyarch ripping off Infinity Ward's work. I know some people will call foul on that, but it's true, Treyarch just takes the game engine IW develops as well as some of the scripted events and tosses 'em together and calls it a day/game. Sure, the end result might turn out ok (as was the case with WaW and probably will for BO), but that's really all Treyarch is doing at this point. Kind of makes you wonder what's going to happen next year now that IW was all but gutted.
Anywho, that's all for me. Nine days until Comic-Con.
The movie itself was pretty flippin' hilarious. There were times where I wondered if the film even had a plot, since it seemed to mostly be a bunch of over the top cop jokes. Samuel L Jackson and Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson were great as the over-the-top action heroes that Mark Wahlberg's character longed to be. Kind of messed up what happens there, but I won't spoil it.
If you've seen other Ferrel movies, you know what to expect going in, and that about sums up The Other Guys.
The Multiplayer (MP) trailer for Call of Duty: Black Ops was released today. It looked kind of neat, but I do have some problems with it. Namely, it still contains everything players complained about in Modern Warfare 2's MP. Of course, since it doesn't have MW in the title, people for some reason are going apeshit over it instead of getting pissed off. It still has the ridiculous knife kills, killstreaks, and everything else you'd come to expect from Treyarch ripping off Infinity Ward's work. I know some people will call foul on that, but it's true, Treyarch just takes the game engine IW develops as well as some of the scripted events and tosses 'em together and calls it a day/game. Sure, the end result might turn out ok (as was the case with WaW and probably will for BO), but that's really all Treyarch is doing at this point. Kind of makes you wonder what's going to happen next year now that IW was all but gutted.
Anywho, that's all for me. Nine days until Comic-Con.
Well...damn
So, in about ten days I'll be heading down to Rosemont, IL to attend Chicago Comic-Con, where I will once again be nerding it up. In addition to hunting down collectibles and trades, there are also a number of celebrity(ish) guests that I'd love to meet.
For the past month or two, there was one in particular that I'd do just about anything to get a picture with (including paying the $100-200 fee to do so). That person was Sir Patrick Stewart. Unfortunately, he has been removed from all of the guests lists and there was a note of apology from the third-party company (pretty much a party planner for conventions) saying that anyone who bought the picture package could get a refund (thank goodness I hadn't, 'cause I don't want to know how hard that would've been to actually make good on the refund).
So...yeah. I'm a bit less enthusiastic for the convention now, since that had really gotten my hopes up for how awesome it was going to be. Now...meh. I'm still looking forward to it, but it isn't like, "oh my god oh my god oh my god" fanboyish excitedness any more.
Still, I want to get a baseball signed by Avery Brooks (and whoever else I can get from Star Trek), because I'd just find that awesome.
For the past month or two, there was one in particular that I'd do just about anything to get a picture with (including paying the $100-200 fee to do so). That person was Sir Patrick Stewart. Unfortunately, he has been removed from all of the guests lists and there was a note of apology from the third-party company (pretty much a party planner for conventions) saying that anyone who bought the picture package could get a refund (thank goodness I hadn't, 'cause I don't want to know how hard that would've been to actually make good on the refund).
So...yeah. I'm a bit less enthusiastic for the convention now, since that had really gotten my hopes up for how awesome it was going to be. Now...meh. I'm still looking forward to it, but it isn't like, "oh my god oh my god oh my god" fanboyish excitedness any more.
Still, I want to get a baseball signed by Avery Brooks (and whoever else I can get from Star Trek), because I'd just find that awesome.
Friday, August 6, 2010
I bet most of you thought I was dead...
I've been neglecting my social netwoking facets this week (facebook, twitter, this blog, etc...), but that's mostly because I have nothing really new to say. I spent most of my work week in a department I despise (front end, or cashiering, for those not in retail). That's how I was rewarded for my excellent sales for the first two weeks of July. I was stuck up front at a register where I can't move and am overworked for eight hours a day. You know what wasn't designed to stand in one spot for eight hours straight? The human body. My knees are pretty well shot by the time one of those shifts are done. And at one point one of my managers asked why my sales weren't as high (I have seven different bosses. I'm hoping for one more so that I can find someone named Bob and explain to them how many bosses I have).
But today, oh boy, today was going to be different. I was actually in technology. And, you know what, I made a bunch of sales! Who would have thought? But enough of the bitching about work, because, honestly, it doesn't get me anywhere. I will, however, write one thing more about work. Only because it is so f***ing ridiculous.
So, on Tuesday, the last day I worked before today, I found and then rang up a couple of flash drives (or USB drives or thumb drives or whatever) that were on sale for a customer.
She came in today after hearing that we were giving away a cheap lil 6.99 backpack with a $10 purchase and demanded to know where her backpack(s) was(were).
I told her that we were out.
She asked for a raincheck.
I explained that it was a promotional item and that we weren't expecting to get anymore in.
Then she asked why I hadn't given her her backpacks when she had been in on Tuesday.
I had no response to this, because, really, anything I could have said would only have made things worse.
She asked who the store manager was and if he was around (I've been asked that a lot lately, and it's usually never my fault or that of the employee the customer is angry at). He had just left, so I told her I was calling the manager on duty to the front of the store.
She proceeds to call the MoD by the wrong name and then goes off on how she never shops at our store because we intentionally label items with the wrong price and how I should have given her the backpacks when she was in the store on Tuesday before they ran out on Wednesday (I mispoke, because I rarely have Wednesdays off and we had run out the last day I worked).
He explained that it wasn't an item that we just give to the customers, that they had to either get one off the shelf or request it at the register. She yelled for a few more minutes and then said she was going to write a letter of complaint to someone or other and asked for all of our names.
She then called the MoD by the wrong name again and he asked for her name so that he could relay her complaint to the Store Manager. And then she left.
It was only the 2nd customer of 3 in a row to yell at me. And it all boils down to this:
The customer was pissed because I wasn't psychic. Sorry.
Now, I will very rarely openly debate politics. Mostly because I try to actually be rational and logical when it comes to such things, and whoever I argue with hardly thinks of those things as useful or intelligent. I preface this next segment because I don't want to see any political comments (not that there are many comments in general). An...acquaintance that I knew in high school joined the military after graduation. I say acquaintance because I mostly knew him from working at the grocery store in my town and I graduated high school with his sister. He served in Iraq and was wounded three times in the line of duty. Twice from shrapnel from homemade explosives and once from a missile. He took a godamned missile hit and kept going.
He recently received the Purple Heart and a commendation from President Obama. His sister, with pride (and well-deserved) pointed to a news article on the website for the local paper (hence how I know how many times he was injured and from what). I read through the article and thought, "This is a boy (I later corrected myself and said man when retelling the story to my girlfriend, since the young man in question is only a year younger than I am) that served his country. And he was mentioned, by name, by the President of the United States. How cool is that?"
And then I made the mistake of reading the comments. I think maybe two comments in is all it took for the hate and political rhetoric to creep in. One of them even blasted him for joining the military to support a fake war. Another was ranting about President Obama and how he is ruining the country. Now, I don't care how anyone feels about Iraq, Afghanistan, or the current President of the United States, but there is a time and a place to argue about such things. At the end of a news article about a soldier receiving the purple heart for being wounded in action is not one of them. Nor the funeral for anyone who fought for their country and died. Nor anything having to do with sports. Really? The Cubs are playing lousy and you're going to blame the war or Pres. Obama?
So this is my salute, Matt Seidl. Thank you for serving your country and continuing to do so in the face of adversity.
But today, oh boy, today was going to be different. I was actually in technology. And, you know what, I made a bunch of sales! Who would have thought? But enough of the bitching about work, because, honestly, it doesn't get me anywhere. I will, however, write one thing more about work. Only because it is so f***ing ridiculous.
So, on Tuesday, the last day I worked before today, I found and then rang up a couple of flash drives (or USB drives or thumb drives or whatever) that were on sale for a customer.
She came in today after hearing that we were giving away a cheap lil 6.99 backpack with a $10 purchase and demanded to know where her backpack(s) was(were).
I told her that we were out.
She asked for a raincheck.
I explained that it was a promotional item and that we weren't expecting to get anymore in.
Then she asked why I hadn't given her her backpacks when she had been in on Tuesday.
I had no response to this, because, really, anything I could have said would only have made things worse.
She asked who the store manager was and if he was around (I've been asked that a lot lately, and it's usually never my fault or that of the employee the customer is angry at). He had just left, so I told her I was calling the manager on duty to the front of the store.
She proceeds to call the MoD by the wrong name and then goes off on how she never shops at our store because we intentionally label items with the wrong price and how I should have given her the backpacks when she was in the store on Tuesday before they ran out on Wednesday (I mispoke, because I rarely have Wednesdays off and we had run out the last day I worked).
He explained that it wasn't an item that we just give to the customers, that they had to either get one off the shelf or request it at the register. She yelled for a few more minutes and then said she was going to write a letter of complaint to someone or other and asked for all of our names.
She then called the MoD by the wrong name again and he asked for her name so that he could relay her complaint to the Store Manager. And then she left.
It was only the 2nd customer of 3 in a row to yell at me. And it all boils down to this:
The customer was pissed because I wasn't psychic. Sorry.
Now, I will very rarely openly debate politics. Mostly because I try to actually be rational and logical when it comes to such things, and whoever I argue with hardly thinks of those things as useful or intelligent. I preface this next segment because I don't want to see any political comments (not that there are many comments in general). An...acquaintance that I knew in high school joined the military after graduation. I say acquaintance because I mostly knew him from working at the grocery store in my town and I graduated high school with his sister. He served in Iraq and was wounded three times in the line of duty. Twice from shrapnel from homemade explosives and once from a missile. He took a godamned missile hit and kept going.
He recently received the Purple Heart and a commendation from President Obama. His sister, with pride (and well-deserved) pointed to a news article on the website for the local paper (hence how I know how many times he was injured and from what). I read through the article and thought, "This is a boy (I later corrected myself and said man when retelling the story to my girlfriend, since the young man in question is only a year younger than I am) that served his country. And he was mentioned, by name, by the President of the United States. How cool is that?"
And then I made the mistake of reading the comments. I think maybe two comments in is all it took for the hate and political rhetoric to creep in. One of them even blasted him for joining the military to support a fake war. Another was ranting about President Obama and how he is ruining the country. Now, I don't care how anyone feels about Iraq, Afghanistan, or the current President of the United States, but there is a time and a place to argue about such things. At the end of a news article about a soldier receiving the purple heart for being wounded in action is not one of them. Nor the funeral for anyone who fought for their country and died. Nor anything having to do with sports. Really? The Cubs are playing lousy and you're going to blame the war or Pres. Obama?
So this is my salute, Matt Seidl. Thank you for serving your country and continuing to do so in the face of adversity.
Friday, July 30, 2010
Under the Red Hood, Thor, and a Legend Born?
While I don't find it terribly creative to title a blog entry after what I'm going to be writing, it certainly is effective. That said, I'm going to start off with the previously promised review of Under the Red Hood, the latest film from the DC animation department.
The film begins with an adaptation from the now-classic "Death in the Family" storyline where Joker beats Jason Todd with a crowbar and then leaves him to die in an exploding warehouse. They took out the part where Jason is looking for his mother and instead made a minor change in that the Joker was working with/for Ras Al Ghul.
Flashforward to modern day where Batman has continued on without a Robin (by the time Judd Winick's "Under the Hood" storyline came out, Tim Drake had been Robin for years, though this story might have taken place during one of his 'breaks' from the mantle) and a new player (the Red Hood) has set himself against both Batman and the current Gotham crimelord, Black Mask. The story continues as Batman tries to deduce the identity of the new, ultra-violent vigilante as well as keep Gotham safe from the Black Mask.
So, that's the short end of it, now for the review.
The Voice Cast: I'm a huge fan of Jensen Ackles, but I will admit I was a bit apprehensive after hearing his initial line-readings. That said, I think he did a pretty decent job with the role.
One area I was disappointed in was Neil Patrick Harris as Nightwing. NPH has become one of my favorite actors (after seeing him play "himself" in Harold & Kumar and then on to his role as Barney in HIMYM) and Nightwing might be my favorite DC character (he can kick ass like Batman, but he's not as broody), so I had high hopes for the character in UtRH. Unfortunately, NPH makes the attempt to sound "heroic" (think a kid playing the protagonist in the school play) and just comes off sounding goofy. It gets a little better when he's just Dick Grayson and his "Can you for once just say 'Let's get in the car...'" line was well-delivered.
Bruce Greenwood does a good job as Batman and his line about why he hasn't/couldn't kill the Joker was fantastic.
John DiMaggio (Bender from Futurama) turns in a fine performance as the Joker. Although, I will say that he seems to switch between an evil Bender (well, more evil) and a Mark Hammil impersonation, but it is still good. My favorite line comes when Black Mask breaks him out of Arkham to do a job for him.
The story itself could have used more room to breathe, but it's forgivable because of it's 70-odd minute runtime. Something that could've been improved was Batman's reaction to Jason Todd's death. There are flashbacks to show that Batman was "softer" when Jason was around, but, honestly, it wasn't all that much of a difference. Other than that, the story moves along quickly, with minor changes from the comic.
SPOILER ALERT*************************
Ras Al Ghul himself puts Jason in the Lazarus pit, instead of Talia sneaking him in there. And it wasn't to heal his mind, it was to actually bring him back from the dead. In the comics, it was Superboy Prime punching against of his paradise dimension that brought Jason back to life. Seriously. I'm not making that up. So I actually prefer the movie's version to the comic's.
The animation/art is much like "Crisis on 2 Earths," which is good. My only complaint is how some of the characters looked unmasked, namely Nightwing and Red Hood.
Overall, this is probably one of my favorite DC Animated films so far, with my only gripes being a couple of spots where the voice acting needed better direction (both in terms of the actor's delivery and in the lines themselves) and a couple of story points (again, I get that it is a 70-something minute direct-to-DVD animated film, so stuff needs to get cut).
Now, to my next topic. Last week, Marvel unveiled footage from their upcoming 'Thor' film (for the first time, to the best of my knowledge) at one of its shows at San Diego Comic-Con. A couple of days ago, the trailer shown (approx. 5 minutes in length) leaked onto the internet. Hours later, Marvel had already unleashed the law to get it taken down. Luckily, I saw it before that happened. The only thing I can say is that it looks incredible. As a comic book purist, I question why Thor has leather biker pants, since the top half of the costume comes directly from JMS' recent reboot of the character and there are some story points that I question, but overall, I'm even more excited for this film. I think after watching it I said, "Holy f***. I want it. I want it, now."
My gripe is that Marvel has yet to officially release the trailer themselves. Why? It's not like it was rough, unfinished footage meant to only gauge fan reaction. This stuff looks as polished as any movie I have ever seen (one of the complaints is that it seems over-polished in its use of CG-enhancements). Why keep this from the general public. In most cases, when something like this is shown at a trade event (like Comic-Con or e3), the company releases it after a few days (so that the attendees of the show can feel like they got something special). But that isn't the case here. No. Marvel demanded the trailer be removed from all streaming-video/viral sites and have yet to make an announcement as to when we can expect the trailer from them.
Here's my request to Marvel: Please, let everyone bask in the glory that is the Odinson. It is awesome, and you have nothing to fear of retribution from fans (well, maybe the super, hardcore fans, but they always complain about something) and release the trailer.
This coming season of Smallville is supposedly going to be its last. I have mixed feelings about that. This is its 10th season, and that seems like a good, even number to go out on, but at the same time, I almost don't count seasons 5-7. They were just...bad. It was a perpetual circle of suck (mostly caused by Lana Lang) and I wasn't at all disappointed when Millar and Gough announced that they were leaving the show after 7. From there, the show picked up and improved (except for when Lana showed up for 5 or so eps in season 8). I credit the improvements with the fact that the new showrunners made an increased effort to move the show closer to the known Supes mythology. Sure, it still has its downs (mostly the final fight with Doomsday in season 8), but what show doesn't?
My point is, and I thank Scott with sending me this link, that, at San Diego, they had a trailer for season 10. While the qualty isn't very good, this gives us a taste of what's to come, and is much better than the season 10 trailer the CW has been showing (see the trailer here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LfA2vSwYeIc&feature=player_embedded)
I have a feeling most of this is going to turn out to be, as my brother called it, Coma-Clark, but still. Hot damn. The trailer shows the Superman costume and Clark flying while carrying the Daily Planet's globe back up to the top of the building, but again, this could just be the visions of a dying Clark. Also, Kara (Laura Vandervoot) will be in at least one episode as 'Supergirl' and, when asked if she will finally teach Clark to fly, the producers just smiled and said, "Funny you should ask that."
Rumor has it that Darkseid will be the final villain, but that Lex is supposed to appear sometime during the season as well.
If you wish to partake in our Smallville drinking game, the rules are as follows: take a drink anytime someone says the word 'justice,' or, in the expanded rules, anytime there is a reference to chess (particularly in reference to the Checkmate organization).
Since it's been awhile since I mentioned work (like, two whole blogs), I do have something say. They announced the employee of the month for July, and it's a manager. One, I don't think managers should be eligible (but since the ratio of employees to managers is 2:1, there's not a whole lot of choice there) and two, this particular manager...doesn't do anything! Now, I had heard from other employees that this particular person didn't do a whole lot, but could never really comment because I didn't really work enough hours to observe. But since I've been working 35-40 hours a week during the summer break, I've really noticed that yes, she doesn't do shit. In the past week, I've seen her ring up three customers, responded to two manager calls (one while she was on the phone gossiping about a former employee) and give the customer the wrong product and then denied doing it. That's about it. The rest of the time she spends wandering around or hiding in the manager's office.
Now, what really grinds my gears is that, when it was announced, the sales staff (as pitifully small as it is) all voiced complaints about the worthlessness of the employee to the manager on duty. Her response? We should grow up and start acting professional. What'd she spend the rest of her night doing? Bitching about another one of the managers and throwing chairs around our stockroom. Classy.
I should state, there is no criteria for Employee of the Month, just three people, of which the winner of July is one of, who get together in secret and whisper about who should get it. Seriously, that's how they pick. I was even there for it this month because I was in the breakroom while they met. So I guess it's not much of a secret meeting. It's not even that I didn't get it after having a stellar month or that it was probably my last month to get it, it's who got the title instead that really pisses me off.
Also, today is the last day to get Project Zero: BulletProof for free from Smashwords.com. Use coupon code GE48N at checkout to get it free. Buy Project Zero: Bulletproof from Smashwords (also available on the iPad's iBook store):http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/10007
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Digital Distribution and Under the Red Hood
Today, I read an article over on IGN (read it here: http://gear.ign.com/articles/110/1108505p1.html) on how Sony is developing/has developed a new disc-based medium that could eventually replace the Blu-Ray disc as the highest capacity disc-based storage medium (I refuse to say it's the standard, as, even though I have and love my PS3, DVD movies still seem to see the biggest sales). In the article, Sony claims that the discs may hold up to one Terabyte of information, which would be approximately 20 times the capacity of Blu-Rays (there are some Blu-Ray discs that can hold 100 Gigabytes, though most I have seen are somewhere between 25 and 50). Now, I didn't think much of the article itself, just thought it was kind of neat the amount of data they'd be able to fit on one disc, but some of the comments caught my attention.
The one(s) that really got me were about digital distribution and the fall of physical discs. Most of these comments seem to be a single person, as the mannerisms in the posts were similar to the point where I would've pointed and cried foul had I taken the time to care enough to comment myself, but they (he) raised an interesting point. Will streaming video/downloading data ever replace physical media? I tend to believe no, it won't. And here's why:
1) Most consumers tend to feel a bit better about having something tangible they can hold onto in case something goes wrong. It's the same principle (pal?) behind my company's selling tactics for our Protection Plans. The consumer is much more likely to purchase something if there is something they can hold and take with them (in our case, it's a lil brochure with their contract number on it, but it still seems to placate the customer).
2) Networks aren't anywhere near setup for that kind of traffic. Sure, your cable, super-high speed internet is fine now for streaming a movie off netflix and you say, "So what? It's awesome!" Yes. It is. But all of that awesometastic movie streaming your doing? It uses bandwidth, something your internet provider would claim there is a limited amount of. So imagine if every single person in your neighborhood, your city, county, state, country, world was doing the same thing? Not to mention the fact that there're still areas that don't have high-speed internet access. And those people that want a tangible disc to hold in their hands? Some of those folks probably don't have/haven't heard of wireless networks in their homes.
I know, some of you are thinking, what kind of person is stupid enough to stream a high-def film over a wireless network, anyway? Running hundreds of feet of cable to every video game, computer, and internet-capable device in your home is where it's at. But, and most of you who have read this thus far, also know that there are companies that purport that their wireless routers/adapters are capable of handling that sort of task. But again I ask, what happens when you have a kid's PS3/360, your other kid's Wii, five laptops, two desktops, and a media server all on one connection? According to one customer (this is what he reported he had on one network, though I do have the feeling he was exaggerating), it doesn't handle it so well (the customer in question was in the store buying, and grumbling over, a new, close-to-$200 router (one of the simultaneous dual-band extreme range/speed Wireless N devices). Which leads me to my next point.
3) Cost of setup. Now, some people may have a shit-ton of cash to throw around to purchase the equipment necessary for this kind of thing. One person on the IGN boards said he had hundreds of movies on his two Terabyte external harddrive. Ok. Cool, I guess. But those cost between 150-200. Add in the cost for the high-speed internet, optional wireless networking, or if you want to use a decent PC, PS3, 360, or Wii to stream movies from, say, NetFlix (not sure if any of the systems even support Amazon's VOD) and you have a system that could cost anywhere from $200-there's no symbol for infinity but it's infinity. I know, that's a huge range, but everyone's setup is different and can drop in/out different components based on needs/wants. And that's not even getting into the cost of TVs. Some people haven't even made the jump to LCD/Plasma/LED/etc. (it's true, my parents have a pretty kickass 40" Sony tube-TV) and then there's the whole 3D-HD TVs.
So yeah, eventually digital storage and distribution will probably replace physical media, but based on the factors above, I don't think it's going to be anytime soon.
I was going to write up a review for the Under the Red Hood animated film (I implied pretty heavily in the title about it), but I need to get to bed. I have a long day of sweating my ass off at work ahead of me. I also need to get my ass in gear over editing 'Zero' and finishing the third book. If I don't finish book three by the end of the summer/year, it will have been the first time in four years I'd have gone a summer without writing a book. Now, if I could only get some of that published.
In an entirely unrelated to anything note: I bought a used copy of Uncharted 2 back in late March (or early April, can't remember exactly) and just got around to popping it in. After forty minutes of updating, the game doesn't work. I thought maybe it was smudged, since a lot of the games and movies I got from this retailer had a problem with that, but I cleaned the disc off and it still won't load. I get to the point where I start a game, it goes to the loading screen, and then it stops. I'm really disappointed. There aren't any scratches that I can see, but I still might try taking it to another store I frequent and see if they can't fix it for me (it's a longshot, since I didn't buy it there, but maybe they'll be nice).
Only FIVE days left to get Project Zero: BulletProof for free from Smashwords.com. Use coupon code GE48N at checkout to get it free.Buy Project Zero: Bulletproof from Smashwords (also available on the iPad's iBook store):http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/10007
The one(s) that really got me were about digital distribution and the fall of physical discs. Most of these comments seem to be a single person, as the mannerisms in the posts were similar to the point where I would've pointed and cried foul had I taken the time to care enough to comment myself, but they (he) raised an interesting point. Will streaming video/downloading data ever replace physical media? I tend to believe no, it won't. And here's why:
1) Most consumers tend to feel a bit better about having something tangible they can hold onto in case something goes wrong. It's the same principle (pal?) behind my company's selling tactics for our Protection Plans. The consumer is much more likely to purchase something if there is something they can hold and take with them (in our case, it's a lil brochure with their contract number on it, but it still seems to placate the customer).
2) Networks aren't anywhere near setup for that kind of traffic. Sure, your cable, super-high speed internet is fine now for streaming a movie off netflix and you say, "So what? It's awesome!" Yes. It is. But all of that awesometastic movie streaming your doing? It uses bandwidth, something your internet provider would claim there is a limited amount of. So imagine if every single person in your neighborhood, your city, county, state, country, world was doing the same thing? Not to mention the fact that there're still areas that don't have high-speed internet access. And those people that want a tangible disc to hold in their hands? Some of those folks probably don't have/haven't heard of wireless networks in their homes.
I know, some of you are thinking, what kind of person is stupid enough to stream a high-def film over a wireless network, anyway? Running hundreds of feet of cable to every video game, computer, and internet-capable device in your home is where it's at. But, and most of you who have read this thus far, also know that there are companies that purport that their wireless routers/adapters are capable of handling that sort of task. But again I ask, what happens when you have a kid's PS3/360, your other kid's Wii, five laptops, two desktops, and a media server all on one connection? According to one customer (this is what he reported he had on one network, though I do have the feeling he was exaggerating), it doesn't handle it so well (the customer in question was in the store buying, and grumbling over, a new, close-to-$200 router (one of the simultaneous dual-band extreme range/speed Wireless N devices). Which leads me to my next point.
3) Cost of setup. Now, some people may have a shit-ton of cash to throw around to purchase the equipment necessary for this kind of thing. One person on the IGN boards said he had hundreds of movies on his two Terabyte external harddrive. Ok. Cool, I guess. But those cost between 150-200. Add in the cost for the high-speed internet, optional wireless networking, or if you want to use a decent PC, PS3, 360, or Wii to stream movies from, say, NetFlix (not sure if any of the systems even support Amazon's VOD) and you have a system that could cost anywhere from $200-there's no symbol for infinity but it's infinity. I know, that's a huge range, but everyone's setup is different and can drop in/out different components based on needs/wants. And that's not even getting into the cost of TVs. Some people haven't even made the jump to LCD/Plasma/LED/etc. (it's true, my parents have a pretty kickass 40" Sony tube-TV) and then there's the whole 3D-HD TVs.
So yeah, eventually digital storage and distribution will probably replace physical media, but based on the factors above, I don't think it's going to be anytime soon.
I was going to write up a review for the Under the Red Hood animated film (I implied pretty heavily in the title about it), but I need to get to bed. I have a long day of sweating my ass off at work ahead of me. I also need to get my ass in gear over editing 'Zero' and finishing the third book. If I don't finish book three by the end of the summer/year, it will have been the first time in four years I'd have gone a summer without writing a book. Now, if I could only get some of that published.
In an entirely unrelated to anything note: I bought a used copy of Uncharted 2 back in late March (or early April, can't remember exactly) and just got around to popping it in. After forty minutes of updating, the game doesn't work. I thought maybe it was smudged, since a lot of the games and movies I got from this retailer had a problem with that, but I cleaned the disc off and it still won't load. I get to the point where I start a game, it goes to the loading screen, and then it stops. I'm really disappointed. There aren't any scratches that I can see, but I still might try taking it to another store I frequent and see if they can't fix it for me (it's a longshot, since I didn't buy it there, but maybe they'll be nice).
Only FIVE days left to get Project Zero: BulletProof for free from Smashwords.com. Use coupon code GE48N at checkout to get it free.Buy Project Zero: Bulletproof from Smashwords (also available on the iPad's iBook store):http://www.smashwords.com/books/view/10007
Saturday, July 24, 2010
Another one of those nights...
It's another one of those nights where I'm just too tired to think of anything to write. Rather than taking the same cheap way out, I'm going to try something new...ish. I think I saw it one an episode of Family Guy once. The positive sandwich. I'm going to say something positive, then negative, then something positive.
+ Joss Whedon was finally officially announced as the director for The Avengers. Since the movie seems to be on a tight schedule, it seems there is a fair chance that this will stick.
- A woman at work last night came in to buy networking equipment. One of our associates helped her and noted that she complained a lot that her coupons wouldn't work, so he said that there's an e-mail coupon going around that would work, so he prints it out and hands it to her.
The woman comes up to the register, where I've been scheduled for most of the week, and, before I'm even finished with the customer ahead of her, she starts yelling out her phone number. I have to assume it's for the loyalty card. Then she spends most of the first couple of minutes alternating between whistling and humming. Everytime I hear whistling, I always think of Red from That 70's Show, "You know what's the best part about whistling? You can STOP whistling." So at that point I was already pretty irritated with the customer. Like, I wanted to place a pane of glass in front of her, run up behind her, and do a knee drop into the back of her head, forcing her to go face first through the glass. But, I don't, since I'm such a nice guy.
I finish ringing her items through and scan the e-mail coupon the other employee gave her, and tell her the total. She says, "I have this coupon, too!"
Without skipping a beat, I reply, "That coupon isn't valid on any technology items."
With one of the most obnoxious smiles I have ever seen, she says, "Well, guess what. Your guy back there said it does..."
Again, without missing a beat, "Well, guess what. It doesn't matter what he said, it's not valid on any technology items."
Now, whenever that happens, there's one of two outcomes. The customer gets so pissed that I won't push the coupon through (on a lot of tech stuff, I couldn't even if I wanted to, which I didn't in this instance) and leave, or, they knew the coupon wasn't going to work so they grumble about how shitty we all are personally and they pay for their stuff and leave. It was the latter.
I didn't hear about the fact that the salesman had printed out the email coupon to be nice until after I called him up to the front (we have radios, but I think it's BS to call someone out over a public network like that) to tell him not to tell customers they can use those coupons on tech.
The only good thing about the whole ordeal was that it got her to stop whistling.
Then she came back today. Guess what she asked for?
+ After giving a customer a lot of help (as well as helpful suggestions on where to get product we don't carry, because we're an office supplies store, and what she was looking for wasn't office supplies), she turned to me and said, "You're amazing, you know that?"
Kind of weird, but ok, nice to get a compliment on a shitty day.
+/- A lot of things are being shown at Comic-Con. There, that covers the lot o' ya.
Also, one of the districts that I guest teach in is looking for permanent building subs...er...guest teachers. It'd only be a bit more money, but it'd be working everyday, which would be nice.
Also also (instead of PSS), some of my work is on a site for authors so they can get feedback and help from other authors (doesn't always work out that way, but hey, somethings better than nothing), and today I got a message from John Connor. Unfortunately, it did not contain anything about saving the future or going with him if I want to live.
+ Joss Whedon was finally officially announced as the director for The Avengers. Since the movie seems to be on a tight schedule, it seems there is a fair chance that this will stick.
- A woman at work last night came in to buy networking equipment. One of our associates helped her and noted that she complained a lot that her coupons wouldn't work, so he said that there's an e-mail coupon going around that would work, so he prints it out and hands it to her.
The woman comes up to the register, where I've been scheduled for most of the week, and, before I'm even finished with the customer ahead of her, she starts yelling out her phone number. I have to assume it's for the loyalty card. Then she spends most of the first couple of minutes alternating between whistling and humming. Everytime I hear whistling, I always think of Red from That 70's Show, "You know what's the best part about whistling? You can STOP whistling." So at that point I was already pretty irritated with the customer. Like, I wanted to place a pane of glass in front of her, run up behind her, and do a knee drop into the back of her head, forcing her to go face first through the glass. But, I don't, since I'm such a nice guy.
I finish ringing her items through and scan the e-mail coupon the other employee gave her, and tell her the total. She says, "I have this coupon, too!"
Without skipping a beat, I reply, "That coupon isn't valid on any technology items."
With one of the most obnoxious smiles I have ever seen, she says, "Well, guess what. Your guy back there said it does..."
Again, without missing a beat, "Well, guess what. It doesn't matter what he said, it's not valid on any technology items."
Now, whenever that happens, there's one of two outcomes. The customer gets so pissed that I won't push the coupon through (on a lot of tech stuff, I couldn't even if I wanted to, which I didn't in this instance) and leave, or, they knew the coupon wasn't going to work so they grumble about how shitty we all are personally and they pay for their stuff and leave. It was the latter.
I didn't hear about the fact that the salesman had printed out the email coupon to be nice until after I called him up to the front (we have radios, but I think it's BS to call someone out over a public network like that) to tell him not to tell customers they can use those coupons on tech.
The only good thing about the whole ordeal was that it got her to stop whistling.
Then she came back today. Guess what she asked for?
+ After giving a customer a lot of help (as well as helpful suggestions on where to get product we don't carry, because we're an office supplies store, and what she was looking for wasn't office supplies), she turned to me and said, "You're amazing, you know that?"
Kind of weird, but ok, nice to get a compliment on a shitty day.
+/- A lot of things are being shown at Comic-Con. There, that covers the lot o' ya.
Also, one of the districts that I guest teach in is looking for permanent building subs...er...guest teachers. It'd only be a bit more money, but it'd be working everyday, which would be nice.
Also also (instead of PSS), some of my work is on a site for authors so they can get feedback and help from other authors (doesn't always work out that way, but hey, somethings better than nothing), and today I got a message from John Connor. Unfortunately, it did not contain anything about saving the future or going with him if I want to live.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)