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...
Saturday, December 11, 2010
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.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)