Some more I'm looking forward to... now, let's see if I actually get to the theater at all.
Up by Pixar.
Seven Pounds with Will Smith.
Cadillac Records with Adrian Brody, Beyonce, Jeffrey Wright, Eric Bogosian, Mos Def & many others.
Oh, and I can't forget Gran Torino with Clint, which I'm looking forward to above all.
Up by Pixar.
Seven Pounds with Will Smith.
Cadillac Records with Adrian Brody, Beyonce, Jeffrey Wright, Eric Bogosian, Mos Def & many others.
Oh, and I can't forget Gran Torino with Clint, which I'm looking forward to above all.
Labels: movies
It's official. I am an instructor (professor? teacher? numbskull?) at ITT in Little Rock, AR.
You know, about a month ago, on a whim, I replied to an ad for instructors. I have always wanted to teach, which is part of the reason I am (hoping to be) starting my masters in January. I thought nothing of it at the time, just another attempt to put myself out there and make some contacts.
Shocked, perhaps, when I was contacted by the Dean and asked to come in for an interview. Not to blow my own horn, but I felt like they thought they had struck pay dirt - not terribly easy to find really qualified instructors in design in Arkansas. Big surprise there, I know. And maybe it was a "too good to be true" feeling, as well... until they talked to my references.
I've been fortunate, over the years, to work with some really amazing people. Talented, yes, but more than that. I'm still friends and work with someone I went to college with, whom I have known for 16 years - a remarkable man who has evolved so much since I've known him, to a place even he himself never wanted to go. Another friend and co-worker who's trust and (for lack of a better phrase) good-heartedness is so great that, even under terrific strain, is still a joy to converse and work with after over 11 years. And finally, a mentor who's talent and work-ethic is so strong that his seeming lack of modern computer skills just a few years ago has become a non-issue.
So these three men were my contacts. I was told today by the Dean that, normally, they only ask new instructors to teach 1 class. I was asked to teach not one, not two, but three classes starting December 1st.
So, enough tooting my horn. Needless to say, it's terribly exciting. Unfortunately, I cannot teach within the Bachelor's program (as of now), but may in the Associate's. I feel blessed, though - what better way to build my "next career" as a professor than by starting wherever I am trusted to help. I wouldn't care if it was a Print Shop certificate program - if they wanted me to teach advanced flatulence, I'd be there.
Actually, there's an idea...
+++
However, there's an issue. Not really an issue, more of a realization. I could teach "real-world" stuff with my eyes closed. But these people are funny - they follow a curriculum, and reference books. And if I really want to be able to admit that I am teaching "from the book", I probably need to read it.
But, like all great artists, once you learn the rules, you can break them.
I hope to be able to bring a real perspective to the classes - it's all well and good to learn type theory, Indesign controls and mechanical production (all very useful stuff, believe me), but another to learn the whys and wherefores and because thereofs. I must admit, I made that last one up.
At any rate. It's exciting. It's going to be taxing. But it's work - and it's in my field. And isn't that the whole ballgame?
Although, I gotta work this flatulence angle...
You know, about a month ago, on a whim, I replied to an ad for instructors. I have always wanted to teach, which is part of the reason I am (hoping to be) starting my masters in January. I thought nothing of it at the time, just another attempt to put myself out there and make some contacts.
Shocked, perhaps, when I was contacted by the Dean and asked to come in for an interview. Not to blow my own horn, but I felt like they thought they had struck pay dirt - not terribly easy to find really qualified instructors in design in Arkansas. Big surprise there, I know. And maybe it was a "too good to be true" feeling, as well... until they talked to my references.
I've been fortunate, over the years, to work with some really amazing people. Talented, yes, but more than that. I'm still friends and work with someone I went to college with, whom I have known for 16 years - a remarkable man who has evolved so much since I've known him, to a place even he himself never wanted to go. Another friend and co-worker who's trust and (for lack of a better phrase) good-heartedness is so great that, even under terrific strain, is still a joy to converse and work with after over 11 years. And finally, a mentor who's talent and work-ethic is so strong that his seeming lack of modern computer skills just a few years ago has become a non-issue.
So these three men were my contacts. I was told today by the Dean that, normally, they only ask new instructors to teach 1 class. I was asked to teach not one, not two, but three classes starting December 1st.
So, enough tooting my horn. Needless to say, it's terribly exciting. Unfortunately, I cannot teach within the Bachelor's program (as of now), but may in the Associate's. I feel blessed, though - what better way to build my "next career" as a professor than by starting wherever I am trusted to help. I wouldn't care if it was a Print Shop certificate program - if they wanted me to teach advanced flatulence, I'd be there.
Actually, there's an idea...
+++
However, there's an issue. Not really an issue, more of a realization. I could teach "real-world" stuff with my eyes closed. But these people are funny - they follow a curriculum, and reference books. And if I really want to be able to admit that I am teaching "from the book", I probably need to read it.
But, like all great artists, once you learn the rules, you can break them.
I hope to be able to bring a real perspective to the classes - it's all well and good to learn type theory, Indesign controls and mechanical production (all very useful stuff, believe me), but another to learn the whys and wherefores and because thereofs. I must admit, I made that last one up.
At any rate. It's exciting. It's going to be taxing. But it's work - and it's in my field. And isn't that the whole ballgame?
Although, I gotta work this flatulence angle...
For those of you that know me as a realist (some would say pessimist, but I digress), it would be a safe assumption to see the title above and expect a sarcastic diatribe to follow. But for one thing, I would agree with you.
The past few days has given me new hope - hope for an America that I have looked for endelessly and have wished for passionately. It's not just that "my candidate" was chosen to be the 44th President of the United States of America, or that "my party" has taken power in Washington. It's much more than that.
I've often paraphrased a passage from a movie called "With Honors", starring Joe Pesci. In it, he plays a destitute homeless man living on Harvard's campus. Discovering a thesis by co-star Brendan Fraser, he is taken in by the young man in exchange for the slow return of the document. Through the course of the film, it is learned that Pesci's character is more than he seems, and gives a rousing monologue during one of Fraser's law classes at the Ivy League school.
I tell the story and relate the sentiments often because they are so true, and embody what, in my opinion, is the spirit of our country. When asked what is the beauty of the Constitution, the reply is simple: our founding fathers were smart enough to realize that they didn't know everything, and therefore created a government that could change itself.
Our founding fathers, though white landowners, and many slaveowners, were in essence liberals. They were radicals. By signing their name to the Declaration of Independence in August 1776 and forging a new nation, they were signing their death certificate, should this "experiment" not work out.
A big ado has been made of the foreign sentiment "how can America elect Bush and then 4 years later elect someone so unlike him?"
But that's the beauty of America. That's why immigration to this country is so great. That's why the "American Dream" is still alive, decades and even centuries after it was born. Though we have stumbled, made terrible mistakes throughout our history we, should we choose, change our ways and repair our errors.
We have, finally, elected a black man to the presidency. And, as John McCain said in his concession speech (where the John McCain I remember re-emerged), the "American people have spoken and they have spoken clearly."
And that gives me hope. Though I was always proud of my country, the idea of America, today I am proud to be an American. And, as political and sentimental as the catch-phrase has become, I honestly can think of no better way to explain America - no matter what happens, no matter what road we travel down, no matter what mistakes we make, we can always change ourselves, better ourselves and better the world.
Yes we can.
I've often paraphrased a passage from a movie called "With Honors", starring Joe Pesci. In it, he plays a destitute homeless man living on Harvard's campus. Discovering a thesis by co-star Brendan Fraser, he is taken in by the young man in exchange for the slow return of the document. Through the course of the film, it is learned that Pesci's character is more than he seems, and gives a rousing monologue during one of Fraser's law classes at the Ivy League school.
I tell the story and relate the sentiments often because they are so true, and embody what, in my opinion, is the spirit of our country. When asked what is the beauty of the Constitution, the reply is simple: our founding fathers were smart enough to realize that they didn't know everything, and therefore created a government that could change itself.
Our founding fathers, though white landowners, and many slaveowners, were in essence liberals. They were radicals. By signing their name to the Declaration of Independence in August 1776 and forging a new nation, they were signing their death certificate, should this "experiment" not work out.
A big ado has been made of the foreign sentiment "how can America elect Bush and then 4 years later elect someone so unlike him?"
But that's the beauty of America. That's why immigration to this country is so great. That's why the "American Dream" is still alive, decades and even centuries after it was born. Though we have stumbled, made terrible mistakes throughout our history we, should we choose, change our ways and repair our errors.
We have, finally, elected a black man to the presidency. And, as John McCain said in his concession speech (where the John McCain I remember re-emerged), the "American people have spoken and they have spoken clearly."
And that gives me hope. Though I was always proud of my country, the idea of America, today I am proud to be an American. And, as political and sentimental as the catch-phrase has become, I honestly can think of no better way to explain America - no matter what happens, no matter what road we travel down, no matter what mistakes we make, we can always change ourselves, better ourselves and better the world.
Yes we can.
Labels: politics
OK, I can't take it anymore. I really don't care who I offend with this one. The following seems to apply to the vast majority of you out there – the select few that it does not, I apologize for lumping you in with the rest of the idiots.
I have often remarked that the difference between Massachusetts and NY/NJ drivers was that Massholes are bad drivers and just don't know it, whereas NY/NJ drivers are bad drivers and just don't give a fuck.
I can now safely lump other states' drivers in with Massachusetts. Actually, maybe I should say, "I can now lump American drivers in with the Massholes. Sorry, American citizenry, but you can't drive for shit."
In order to do my best to help the situation rather than just bitch, I've got a simple set of reminder rules for you from your driver's test days. Some of these items may not be obvious to you, but to those of us out here swerving, braking and generally driving scared trying to avoid being hit by you would love it if you could commit them to memory.
1. Blinkers/Directionals. Whatever the fuck you call them, they are for letting the rest of us know where the hell you intend to go in your 11mpg behemoth of an SUV. They are not, repeat, not, an attempt by the government to give you a seizure whilst driving. You will, however, give the rest of us one if you don't use them. It's really a very simple device, I think you can handle it.
2. Gas. It's on the right.
3. Turning. This is a two-part issue. Firstly, when you intend to make a turn, make the fucker already. The rest of us are stacked up behind you in an almost vertical position thanks to your 90-minute slow down from 30 to take the entrance ramp. Secondly – yeah, I'm here in my proper lane, which seems to intersect with the trajectory of your car while you make your turn. The reason you are mad at ME is that you are doing what is called "cutting the corner" instead of turning from your lane in a wide or narrow enough arc (depending on the circumstance) to enter the correct lane 90 degrees away. This is also called, "you're a fucking moron". This crosses over (literally) into number 4, below.
4. Your half of the road. Remember when you were a kid, and you and your brother/sister/cousin/friend were sitting in the back seat of the car, fighting? You would create an "imaginary line" in the middle of the seat, halving the area for your own personal space. Well, the same rules apply to driving, except the "imaginary" line is, instead, an actual line, and the result of crossing it isn't just a slap-fight, whining, crying and mommy screaming from the front seat but instead, possibly, death. This can be avoided by doing what we human beings call "staying on your fucking side of the road". Oh, and "staring at me in disbelief as to my anger" after you almost run me into a ditch is not a proper response to violating this rule.*
*Some claim that "I didn't see you there" is a valid defense to a charge of crossing the middle of the road. I drive a Charger. It's a huge fucking car. And it's silver. You would have seen me had you not been (a) picking a Goober you dropped off the ground, (b) making out with your girl/boyfriend or (c) sleeping.
5. Get off the phone. Many states have required that you used hands-free headsets to talk on the phone while driving. There's a reason there are, oh, 8,000 such products in your local Best Buy, Walmart or Target. There is a valid reason why this is a good idea (I'll give you a hint – you need to hold the phone to your face if you don't have a headset... this leaves you, believe it or not, with only ONE hand to operate the 2-ton metal killing machine with). In some areas, this rule is called something different than "get off the phone". Instead, it's called "get the fuck off the phone" or "get off the fucking phone". Either one I approve of.
These seem like good rules to start with. I'm sure I'll think of more.
I have often remarked that the difference between Massachusetts and NY/NJ drivers was that Massholes are bad drivers and just don't know it, whereas NY/NJ drivers are bad drivers and just don't give a fuck.
I can now safely lump other states' drivers in with Massachusetts. Actually, maybe I should say, "I can now lump American drivers in with the Massholes. Sorry, American citizenry, but you can't drive for shit."
In order to do my best to help the situation rather than just bitch, I've got a simple set of reminder rules for you from your driver's test days. Some of these items may not be obvious to you, but to those of us out here swerving, braking and generally driving scared trying to avoid being hit by you would love it if you could commit them to memory.
1. Blinkers/Directionals. Whatever the fuck you call them, they are for letting the rest of us know where the hell you intend to go in your 11mpg behemoth of an SUV. They are not, repeat, not, an attempt by the government to give you a seizure whilst driving. You will, however, give the rest of us one if you don't use them. It's really a very simple device, I think you can handle it.
2. Gas. It's on the right.
3. Turning. This is a two-part issue. Firstly, when you intend to make a turn, make the fucker already. The rest of us are stacked up behind you in an almost vertical position thanks to your 90-minute slow down from 30 to take the entrance ramp. Secondly – yeah, I'm here in my proper lane, which seems to intersect with the trajectory of your car while you make your turn. The reason you are mad at ME is that you are doing what is called "cutting the corner" instead of turning from your lane in a wide or narrow enough arc (depending on the circumstance) to enter the correct lane 90 degrees away. This is also called, "you're a fucking moron". This crosses over (literally) into number 4, below.
4. Your half of the road. Remember when you were a kid, and you and your brother/sister/cousin/friend were sitting in the back seat of the car, fighting? You would create an "imaginary line" in the middle of the seat, halving the area for your own personal space. Well, the same rules apply to driving, except the "imaginary" line is, instead, an actual line, and the result of crossing it isn't just a slap-fight, whining, crying and mommy screaming from the front seat but instead, possibly, death. This can be avoided by doing what we human beings call "staying on your fucking side of the road". Oh, and "staring at me in disbelief as to my anger" after you almost run me into a ditch is not a proper response to violating this rule.*
*Some claim that "I didn't see you there" is a valid defense to a charge of crossing the middle of the road. I drive a Charger. It's a huge fucking car. And it's silver. You would have seen me had you not been (a) picking a Goober you dropped off the ground, (b) making out with your girl/boyfriend or (c) sleeping.
5. Get off the phone. Many states have required that you used hands-free headsets to talk on the phone while driving. There's a reason there are, oh, 8,000 such products in your local Best Buy, Walmart or Target. There is a valid reason why this is a good idea (I'll give you a hint – you need to hold the phone to your face if you don't have a headset... this leaves you, believe it or not, with only ONE hand to operate the 2-ton metal killing machine with). In some areas, this rule is called something different than "get off the phone". Instead, it's called "get the fuck off the phone" or "get off the fucking phone". Either one I approve of.
These seem like good rules to start with. I'm sure I'll think of more.
Labels: rants
not been this intrigued since...
0 Comments Published by Peter on Tuesday, September 30, 2008 at 10:11 PM.
Just a quick post to note a few movies that I am looking forward to seeing extremely.
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button directed by David Fincher
Synedoche, New York directed by Charlie Kaufman
Appaloosa directed by Ed Harris
Body of Lies directed by Ridley Scott
Quantum of Solace directed by Marc Forster
It's a powerhouse fall of movies, folks. Look at those names. I'm stoked.
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button directed by David Fincher
Synedoche, New York directed by Charlie Kaufman
Appaloosa directed by Ed Harris
Body of Lies directed by Ridley Scott
Quantum of Solace directed by Marc Forster
It's a powerhouse fall of movies, folks. Look at those names. I'm stoked.
Labels: movies
The Darkness. Kind of an under-the-radar title, which you can find on trade-in racks for cheap, this is actually a very fun ride. Sparing you most of the story summary, which you can find anywhere, you play Jackie Estacado, a mob button man who falls out of favor with Uncle Paulie, the local don. Why you fall out of favor is not exactly clear, nor is why the Darkness powers first appear, but it doesn't matter.Using the shadows, Jackie can summon a number of demon tentacles from his back. After a time, you gain more powers, fight bad guys, cross into the demon world (why? not so sure) then finally face Uncle Paulie's minions and himself.
OK, more summary than I wanted. Needless to say, this is actually quite a fun (and pretty long, if you do all the side missions) game. Some of the most fun I had was to use the demon arm, a sharp, stabbing tentacle, to impale enemies and toss them into the air. Ah, impaling enemies. There's also an impossibly overpowered black hole ability, which simply sucks any unlucky bastage off their feet and around in the air for a while, apparently scaring them to death. Use, recharge, rinse, repeat.
Jackie is dark, moody and has no redeeming values whatsoever. Go forth, my child, and kill. The plot leaves a bit to be desired – standard revenge story, really – but it's enough to justify all the killing. And did I mention there's a lot of killing?
I have much less good to say about the first game based on the wildly successful movie franchise based on the Robert Ludlum books, The Bourne Conspiracy. Phew.Basically, you play Bourne from the movie "The Bourne Identity," but you are not Matt Damon. Follow me on this one. The game follows the events of the movie with additional scenes/missions acting as flashbacks, as if Bourne remembers his previous life in flashes, and you play out the memories.
It is not a bad convention, and would make for an interesting story and game if it weren't for a few major annoyances.
First, it's short. Absurdedly short. I started this on a Tuesday and finished it Wednesday. And I work for a living. It was probably about 5-7 hours total gameplay, which is starting to be close to "standard" for action games, but with no multiplayer and no replayability, that's just unacceptable for a top license game that costs $60. I'm sure it's longer on higher difficulties, but only because you would die more. (Good thing I Gamefly'd it.)
When you get into hand-to-hand, you are locked into one opponent at a time. And you can't get out until he's dead. It's fun to fight like Bourne, but there is a limited attack set, and it just devolves into a formulaic button-mashing until you fill an "adrenaline bar" and can do a "takedown", which basically is just a theatrical "find-the-closest-object-and-jam-it-in-their-throat" kind of move, which you don't control.
Bottom line? It's kind of boring, in retrospect. I wanted more. I wanted to be more free in my combat moves. I wanted to control the "takedowns", and I wanted to be able to be more mobile in the fight structure and even, heck, pull out my pistol and execute someone once in a while.
The last thing I'll mention is the context-buttons. This is the worst gaming convention ever, and should be done away with. During cutscenes and even mid-action at times, a context button pops up and requires you to vigilantly mash it in miliseconds or else the scene fails and you must restart at a checkpoint. There's no "Choose Your Own Adventure" aspect to this, allowing you to recover from mistakes, or choose one route over the other, it's essentially a movie that you can't really watch because your eyes are riveted on the bottom of the scene, waiting for the next button to appear.
Stop this. Stop it! Stop it! This would be like watching Star Wars and then being required to push a button on your remote when Luke fires his torpedoes. If you failed to hit it in time, you would have to watch the entire trench scene again just to get back to that spot. Fuck me.
So, big disappointment, Bourne. Now I have to wait for 2010.
OK. I think enough time has passed for me to get my mind around this one a bit. Here is a collection of my thoughts on the political spectrum for the last few weeks.
1. Palin. Here's a small-town beauty queen who becomes governor of the 4th smallest state in the Union (believe it or not, North Dakota, Vermont and Wyoming have less people), and then gets picked to be a VP candidate. Why? Let's not be so stupid or afraid of political incorrectness to say the truth – she's a woman. Plain and simple. McCain (or, rather, his staff) picked her to be a little controversial and to attempt pick up the Hillary vote.
Now here's the problem I have with Palin (aside, of course, from her politics): McCain has been campaigning on the "Obama has no experience" platform. But here's a woman who has been governor for 1 month more than Obama has been on the campaign trail. Before that, she was the mayor of a town I could fart bigger than, and an unknown. And she comes on the scene and then delivers THAT speech after 5 days – berating and belittling Obama, just because she is riding the coattails of McCain. Shame on you.
And stop parading that poor infant around. He is a human being, not a show-piece.
And great work with the "abstinence only" sex education policies. Practice what you preach. So your 17-year-old daughter is pregnant. But, it's OK, because they are going to have a shotgun wedding! See, we're Christians! The hypocracy of that is almost too much to comment on. And guess what, Obama, families are NOT off-limits. You are a civil servant and a public figure – your home life is public as president. But, on the other hand, is Obama's daughter was in the same situation, the Repubs would be all over him for it.
Palin is a pathetic role-model and choice as a VP. She's a joke. Politicians, especially those who touch the highest office in this land, must be held to a higher standard than "they seem just like normal people" or "I could have a drink with them". They must be BETTER than the rest of us. And she's not.
Oh, and the Bush Doctrine? Google it. You know how to do that? Ask your buddy Ted Stevens, if you don't. He's an expert on the series of tubes.
2. Speeches. Which leads me to the speeches at the RNC. Venom. Namecalling. Belittlement. Every single speech was filled with hate. That's all I need to say about that.
And not one word about policy. How about more of what you plan on doing, Republicans, and less of how much you think Dems suck?
3. Namecalling. Both sides need to stop this. This "go on the attack" politics that the TV is rife with right now. We are less than 2 months from election day. The intelligent among us want to hear more about the policies and issues that matter. Which leads me to...
4. Idiocy. I hate to say it, but most of us are dumb. Yeah, I'm talking about you. You fall for this crap. You don't question it. You say "I like that guy, so he should be president," or, "I read an email that said he's voted for this and that, so it must be true!" Listen, a forwarded email with no chain of ownership from a guy with the email address "bud1975@dipshit.com" is not a reliable source for accurate information.
Question what you hear or see. Read about things. Research. Then make a decision.
5. Issues. I've found down here in Arkansas (as in many states) that often one issue, or a misunderstood and misguided explanation of a policy is make or break. Gun control is a biggie. "The Dems want to take my guns away" is often the definition of the words "gun control". Mention it as one of your policies, and you lose the vote down here.
My uncle owns many weapons. He's also a Republican and a staunch Bush supporter, bless his soul. And he believes in gun registration, though he is not currently required to do so. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.
6. POW. Now, I know I'm going to anger some people with this. But being a POW does not make you fit to be president. It doesn't even make you more or less patriotic than the next man or woman. It does make you worthy of deep respect and admiration. In order to be John McCain, you have to first be a soldier, which is something I could never be.
But these facts are not worthy of spending half of your presidential nomination acceptance speech reliving. And it does not make you automatically a better person, a better American, or a better candidate.
7. Experience. Obama's campaign is attacking McCain for being in politics too long and being too old-fashioned. By my math, Biden is only 7 years younger than McCain, and has 14 more years in the Senate. You can't have it both ways, boys.
But on the other hand, that means that the Obama/Biden ticket has MORE government experience that the McCain/Palin ticket.
So let's all just STFU about it, and get on with the business of being the best candidates we can be, eh? Oh, I forgot, this is America.
For some great additional commentary, watch the Daily Show for the week of the RNC.
1. Palin. Here's a small-town beauty queen who becomes governor of the 4th smallest state in the Union (believe it or not, North Dakota, Vermont and Wyoming have less people), and then gets picked to be a VP candidate. Why? Let's not be so stupid or afraid of political incorrectness to say the truth – she's a woman. Plain and simple. McCain (or, rather, his staff) picked her to be a little controversial and to attempt pick up the Hillary vote.
Now here's the problem I have with Palin (aside, of course, from her politics): McCain has been campaigning on the "Obama has no experience" platform. But here's a woman who has been governor for 1 month more than Obama has been on the campaign trail. Before that, she was the mayor of a town I could fart bigger than, and an unknown. And she comes on the scene and then delivers THAT speech after 5 days – berating and belittling Obama, just because she is riding the coattails of McCain. Shame on you.
And stop parading that poor infant around. He is a human being, not a show-piece.
And great work with the "abstinence only" sex education policies. Practice what you preach. So your 17-year-old daughter is pregnant. But, it's OK, because they are going to have a shotgun wedding! See, we're Christians! The hypocracy of that is almost too much to comment on. And guess what, Obama, families are NOT off-limits. You are a civil servant and a public figure – your home life is public as president. But, on the other hand, is Obama's daughter was in the same situation, the Repubs would be all over him for it.
Palin is a pathetic role-model and choice as a VP. She's a joke. Politicians, especially those who touch the highest office in this land, must be held to a higher standard than "they seem just like normal people" or "I could have a drink with them". They must be BETTER than the rest of us. And she's not.
Oh, and the Bush Doctrine? Google it. You know how to do that? Ask your buddy Ted Stevens, if you don't. He's an expert on the series of tubes.
2. Speeches. Which leads me to the speeches at the RNC. Venom. Namecalling. Belittlement. Every single speech was filled with hate. That's all I need to say about that.
And not one word about policy. How about more of what you plan on doing, Republicans, and less of how much you think Dems suck?
3. Namecalling. Both sides need to stop this. This "go on the attack" politics that the TV is rife with right now. We are less than 2 months from election day. The intelligent among us want to hear more about the policies and issues that matter. Which leads me to...
4. Idiocy. I hate to say it, but most of us are dumb. Yeah, I'm talking about you. You fall for this crap. You don't question it. You say "I like that guy, so he should be president," or, "I read an email that said he's voted for this and that, so it must be true!" Listen, a forwarded email with no chain of ownership from a guy with the email address "bud1975@dipshit.com" is not a reliable source for accurate information.
Question what you hear or see. Read about things. Research. Then make a decision.
5. Issues. I've found down here in Arkansas (as in many states) that often one issue, or a misunderstood and misguided explanation of a policy is make or break. Gun control is a biggie. "The Dems want to take my guns away" is often the definition of the words "gun control". Mention it as one of your policies, and you lose the vote down here.
My uncle owns many weapons. He's also a Republican and a staunch Bush supporter, bless his soul. And he believes in gun registration, though he is not currently required to do so. Stick that in your pipe and smoke it.
6. POW. Now, I know I'm going to anger some people with this. But being a POW does not make you fit to be president. It doesn't even make you more or less patriotic than the next man or woman. It does make you worthy of deep respect and admiration. In order to be John McCain, you have to first be a soldier, which is something I could never be.
But these facts are not worthy of spending half of your presidential nomination acceptance speech reliving. And it does not make you automatically a better person, a better American, or a better candidate.
7. Experience. Obama's campaign is attacking McCain for being in politics too long and being too old-fashioned. By my math, Biden is only 7 years younger than McCain, and has 14 more years in the Senate. You can't have it both ways, boys.
But on the other hand, that means that the Obama/Biden ticket has MORE government experience that the McCain/Palin ticket.
So let's all just STFU about it, and get on with the business of being the best candidates we can be, eh? Oh, I forgot, this is America.
For some great additional commentary, watch the Daily Show for the week of the RNC.
Some comments on the RNC so far as said by Chris Cantwell. I like it. I won't comment until I watch McCain's speech, as well:
Chris Cantwell's RNC Day 3 Review
And what the hell, how about the previous days?
Chris Cantwell's RNC Day 3 Review
And what the hell, how about the previous days?
Jeff Gerstmann was right. And if he truly got fired for his review of Kane & Lynch: Dead Men, then he at least has convictions.Copying the game mechanics from Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter seems like a no-brainer – until Rainbow 6: Vegas, nobody had done the cover mechanic better. Even the simple squad controls – cover, move, attack – are borrowed from GRAW.
And then, the ambition was to craft an elegant story. That's what we heard all through the run-up to this game's release – two men thrown together... the struggles, the choices.
I knew that they wouldn't pull it off completely – I mean, how often do you hear about "groundbreaking gameplay" and "innovative storytelling" and "freedom of choice" when game companies talk about their games? Fact is, these things are what they WANT to do, not what they CAN accomplish. Krap & Lurch: Damn Mess would be a better title. (Sorry, that was the best I could come up with this morning.)
Graphics: Everything is either too light or too dark – there's not "shading" per se. You will think you are going blind.
Controls: The best part is rubbing up against a flat surface and HOPING, PRAYING, WISHING that you would "stick" to it to take cover. This works as well as you think.
Gameplay: Hold the left trigger to "precision" aim. Only do this if you want to miss a lot. Fire from the hip, not even really in the direction of the bad guy, and you can Rambo your way through the level.
Story: Write a compelling "buddy" movie, say 20 scenes. Roll a 20-sided dice 10 times. Remove the scenes that correspond with the rolled numbers. Add the F-Bomb in every 3rd to 5th word. Hire terrible voice actors and let a drunken monkey direct them. Perfect.
It's worth playing, just for the "wow, this DOES suck as much as everyone says" factor, but only on rental.
Now, this is worth playing, if just for the badass-ness (if you will). I played through the single player, since my co-op buddy (you know who you are!) is too busy playing Soul Sucker.The partner controls are easy to use and a snap to control aggression/cover/attack conventions. With co-op this would be even easier, as you don't need to control your partner (though you might want to at times).
Don't look for story. At all. This is just an excuse for two dudes to kick the crap out of about 30,000 generic terrorist-type people. And, for that, it's a lot of fun. And the game time is longer than expected for a co-op, 3rd-person shooter, so you can enjoy the carnage longer.
This is kind of the Doublemint of games – double your treasure, double your guns.
But, play it with a friend you like. One with a brain, preferably, or else you'll spend half your time trying to fight your way over to revive them.
So I forgot my Obama shirt. I did. But I don't think I would have been allowed in the car if I had it on.My father-in-law asked me to go to this "redneck event thing" (his words) Saturday night. Come to find out, it was an NRA booster event, which the family business, AMTR, contributes to. And it was actually a good time, hanging out with the family, eating good barbecue and getting tipsy. Well, I didn't drink much, and most of us got drunk, so I'll split the difference.
Very pro-American, very pro-prayer, very pro-guns. And there were some hair-dryers, cutlery sets and deer corn on raffle, so that's nice.
The NRA are not known to be progressives. But from some of the "facts" I got that night, they might not even be living in this country. I was told, and I'm dead serious about this, that you do not register your guns down here because, if you did that, the government would know what you had and where you lived, and then Obama and the Democrats would get into office, and into Congress, and then (and I swear I did not make this up) they would "take them away from you".
Yeah, that makes sense.
I don't even know how to respond, except to say that guns are a MAJOR sticking issue for a lot of Republicans down here. It's the one issue that they are adamant about, and they have NO IDEA WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT.
Look, when you BUY the gun, they take all your info. They already know you bought it. The idea of registration is to TRACK it, so that if you decide to sell it to another person, or give it away, law enforcement can know that. That way, when a law-abiding citizen like yourself hands a pistol or 12 to a kid for their 13th birthday who promptly goes off and shoots someone, there might be a paper trail to find the responsible party.
It's not about "taking" guns away from people. It's about making sure that the guns have an owner.
I don't see people down here complaining about having to register your vehicle (which you can't own and drive unless complete), or yourself to vote (which you can't participate in without doing so), or your kids for school (which they cannot attend without). Nobody thinks "the Democrats want to take our cars away from us", do they?
Think, people, think. Democrats own guns, too, and support the second Amendment. Shit, I own a pistol, and I'm proudly left-brained. Someone breaks into my house and threatens my family, I will shoot the motherfuckers, too.
I just think we need to keep track of these things better. Is that so bad?
Ok, so I love the original R6:V. It's great. Period. Not only is the single player engaging, but the multiplayer rocks, too. The best part about it? You can play the entire single player experience in co-op, a la Gears of War.So when Vegas 2 was announced, we all lost our collective minds. More Vegas? More Logan? More killer co-op? Yippee, someone hand me my pants!
Gamefly delivery, pop it in the 360, settle in for a long session (baby just went to sleep, so there will be at least 20 minutes of free time, yes!!!). Great, the new Pyrenees-themed casino... um, 5 years ago... France... Bishop...?
What the hell did you do to my Vegas! You made it into France!
See, I don't understand when reviewers give games great reviews when they clearly don't deserve it. This game is more of the same. More of the same, but not as interesting. Not only is the gameplay not an improvement (or much of a change at all) but the story is inscrutable. When I have to check Wikipedia for the plot of a game I'm currently in the middle of, there's a problem. It took me 3/4 of the game to realize who the main antagonist was. Which is sad. And when the title is "Rainbow Six: Vegas 2" and the majority of the action takes place outside of Sin City (part of what made the original exciting), then I just lose interest.
Not to say that it is a bad game. It's not, it's just not worth the 82 to the original's 89. The main change they made was to allow single-player experience to effect your multiplayer experience – essentially they are one in the same. But unless you play multiplayer, it doesn't help you much at all – there's not enough of an opportunity to gain enough XP throughout the game to unlock useful weaponry.
To be fair, I didn't play the multiplayer. The reason? If the change to multiplayer is as slight as the change to single player, I know it would be great. It would be fun. But it wouldn't be enough to make me devote the time I've already spent in the original Vegas.
Maybe I'll find it in the bargain bin some time and I'll pick it up for some hilarious multiplayer times with Mr. Bohl. But until then, I'll await my next delivery.
OK, I''m not going to get into the nitty-gritty of my "dinner theater" experience last evening, especially since friends of my wife were in the show. And it wasn't the show, per se, that was... interesting. I mean, it's a musical, first off, so it's got that going against it, and it's dinner theater... BUFFET. DINNER. THEATER. So there's that. But it's the culmination of all the elements that really make it, um, special.It's one of those experiences where the director is the star. And the lighting designer. And the set designer.
So it's a ham-fest. Which musicals are, anyway. But more than most. And the crowd is less than highbrow, which doesn't mean they don't deserve theater, as well. Shakespeare originally wrote for the masses, you know. And it's ok, I guess, that the giant man at the corner table has on cargo shorts, a dirty Red Sox T-Shirt and hat and sandals, and happens to be shoving copious amounts of fried chicken (yes, fried chicken) into his face.
But it makes me want to shoot myself. I'm not trying to be a theater snob, but I am. It's the same reaction when Indiana Jones and the Craptastic Staff of Doody or whatever receives great ratings and a thumbs-up from my nephew, or my nieces tell me they've watched "Camp Rock" (or whatever other "High School Crapsical" clone comes on next week) 147 times.
It's not good art. It's not high art. But it's art, in one sense. It tries. Fails, but tries.
But what I'm mad about is that this is stuff we are supposed to show to kids. You know what, watch ANY Disney movie ever made, or any of the shows and movies on the Disney Channel, and tell me that they don't perpetuate negative stereotypes. These are the ONLY things we have for our children to watch, aside from Nickel-blow-dion, which isn't any better – tell me that each and every show isn't about being a hot, trendy and rich girl (or trying to fit in with them) and catching that cute, mop-topped, kinda-on-the-edge boy. It's utter trash, and it is all the same. And each 14 year-old girl is dressed like a 20 year-old whore (you may not be a whore, but you are wearing a whore's uniform -DC), and vying for the attention of the boy/man she desperately needs.
Am I the only one that notices this? And this is what we show our children, because it is "family" entertainment?
You know, I would care less about "adult" content in stuff that kids watch (they watch it when you aren't looking, anyway), if it would just have an empowered, smart (and not candy-coated) message for them.
"Gee, Sally, you're right. We should all be nicer to each other. Now hike up that belt-for-a-skirt and French kiss Rocko, the semi-edgy rocker dude who bet his friends he could make any girl look, walk and talk just like the rest of us whores."
And "Guys and Dolls" is the same story. And "Grease". And "Annie Get Your Gun". And... well name me a "family" musical that DOESN'T follow this pattern. Please. You know, for a change, go watch "Sideways", or "Little Miss Sunshine", or "John Adams," for fucks sake, which are all stories about NOT fitting in, about sticking to your guns and being who you are.
Which are all worthwhile things for children to see. Empowered. Proud. Happy.*
Smart. How about smart. For once.
*Well, not so happy, in the case of "Sideways", but you get my point. And so what. Life isn't all beer and Skittles, anyway, fuckers.
you mean I have to like the Jets?
0 Comments Published by Peter on Thursday, August 07, 2008 at 9:09 AM.
I don't normally do this, post sports stuff, but this is pretty big news.
Packers Trade Favre to Jets
Um. You mean the Jets might actually give the Pats a run this year?
Oh, wait... silly me. Never mind. I lost my head!
Packers Trade Favre to Jets
Um. You mean the Jets might actually give the Pats a run this year?
Oh, wait... silly me. Never mind. I lost my head!
I feel like I was living under a rock in the week from the time of its release to my viewing of Dr. Horrible's Sing-Along-Blog. But I've seen it, and I love it.Kudos all around. Go see it now – it is simply brilliant.
just eat my soul already (or whatever)
0 Comments Published by Peter on Wednesday, July 30, 2008 at 10:54 PM.
So having played through the first chapter of Alone in the Dark, the Atari update to the classic adventure game, I have only one thing to say.I don't want to play this damn game.
Ok, so I have a few more things to say.
First of all, you just need to peruse the critics' scores to get a sense of the playability of this, um, thing. I think I like Team Xbox's abstract the best. Comparing it to a nice car without a functional engine:
Alone in the Dark is just that, a game going no place and with no reason in the world to suffer it.Survival horror as a genre is interesting to play. Though not my favorite genre, I do remember the first Resident Evil on the PSOne, making my sister sit with me while I played and having to pause every 2 seconds to change my shorts. I had a similar feeling playing F.E.A.R. (the original, not the crappy sequels NOT made by Monolith), having to get up every couple of minutes to shake off the ooky feeling.
But this title made me feel ill. I don't mean grossed-out ill, I mean motion sickness, vertigo ill, and not from the tall building setting of the first level. Switching back and forth between bad 3rd-person (with an uncontrollable camera) to bad 1st-person in order to do certain tasks literally made me queasy.
Until Jeff Gerstman was fired from Gamespot.com (and all the rest of the qualified staff left, too), I would have trusted their reviews on a title like this. But judging from the review of this game (given a 6.5 out of 10 but faulted so heavily in the reviews I wonder what they were smoking) is inconsistent at best.
I'll simplify it for you all. Don't play this game. It sucks.
And I refuse to finish it. Gamefly, send me the next one.
EDIT: I didn't even mention the story. That's because I have no idea if it has one.
Actually, that pun was not intended until after I typed it. Then I laughed at my accidental wittiness.2004's Hellboy was a highly anticipated and exciting ride. Director Guillermo del Toro was coming off of Blade II (which was mediocre) and was yet to receive real critical acclaim in the states (his previous big-budget movie, 1997's Mimic was, in a word, terrible).
Hellboy changed that. It led to enough cred to make Pan's Labyrinth (which I have not seen but have heard nothing but good things about) and then to Hellboy II: The Golden Army (which, you can tell, takes the lessons and creativity learned making Pan to a whole new level).
Hellboy II once again stars the prolific Ron Perlman as the title character, who again does a great job of bringing a surly, angry and confused Hellboy to life. He's just as wonderful as he was 4 years ago, but unlike the original, Hellboy II focuses on more characters, and seems to suffer from the same problems that plagued the 90's Batman series – too many heroes. The story centers on Liz and Hellboy's relationship, but also includes Abe and a new character, Johann Krauss, an ectoplasmic being voiced by the hilarious Seth MacFarlane.
Anyway, all that "professional reviewer" sounding crap aside, Hellboy II is good. It's a fun ride. It's got some great hand-to-hand fight scenes, and some incredible creature creation. It's also got a hilarious love-lorn drinking scene and, unfortunately, a "romantic-depths" musical montage. Ick.
And yes, Selma is smoking, as always (pun intended). But she get's second fiddle, really, and Liz's issues in this film just don't seem to have the weight of the first film.
So, I enjoyed it. I'd see it again. I'd buy it. But was the original better? Yes.
the dark knight (or, how to correctly make a sequel)
2 Comments Published by Peter on Thursday, July 24, 2008 at 9:57 AM.
I know. I KNOW. Everyone and their mother is reviewing The Dark Knight. And everyone is raving about Heath Ledger's performance, and talking Oscar, etc.But I have a different take. First of all, kudos to Chris Nolan for not just remaking the first movie with a different villain. "Batman Begins" was about reconciling the demons within with the world without – the duality of becoming that which you fear in order to strike fear into those around you.
The Dark Knight is about the demons in ALL of us. It's much darker, much grittier, and a tale of not compromising who you are just because it is easier – not becoming that which you are fighting in order to defeat it.
Yes, Ledger is great. GREAT. His performance is not just "playing crazy" but true character work as the Joker. If you see it for no other reason, see it for that.
But equally great is Eckhart as Harvey Dent. His transformation into Two-Face is believable, not only because the story is written so well, but because Eckhart imbues Harvey Dent with the passion he needs to be so great as a crusader against crime and, ultimately, a man who is so betrayed by the system he fights within that he gives up all responsibility to the haphazardness of chance.
And let's not forget Bale. Bale's Bruce Wayne is what shines. We know that Batman is a symbol, an idea – not a person. Wayne is the person, and the nuance and fear and anguish that Wayne shows as a result of letting Batman consume him is worth mentioning. As "V" says in V for Vendetta, "Beneath this mask there is an idea... and ideas are bulletproof." Batman cannot be destroyed, he is infallible – but Bruce Wayne is a human, and thus can waver.
And he almost does, if not for Harvey Dent. Bruce says at one point, "I believe in Harvey Dent," and so he must.
It seems frivolous to say so, but I must also commend Gary Oldman for Gordon – as we know from the last film, for a man that seems like a natural to play an over-the-top character like the Joker, his subtle, driven Gordon is refreshing, and wonderful.
Chris Nolan is a great writer and filmmaker. And that shows in The Dark Knight, not as a superhero action movie, but a film about human nature, and all its facets: Batman's sacrifice, Harvey Two-Face's chance, Gordon's justice and the Joker's unpredictability. This is a story, a compelling story, first.
"That chopper is still up there. Like Airwolf. I love that." You can't help but laugh at the inanity of some of the comments that the comic foils Sweetwater and Haggard make throughout Battlefield: Bad Company. They even make fun of the "Sarge" and his grasp of overused war-movie squad-leader Sergeant clichés. And you, Preston, the "New Guy" are seemingly as inept as the rest of these mopes.Except the four of you, who are supposed to be a bunch of moronic misfits, seem to mow through hundreds of "elite" mercenaries and Russian troops like a supercharged John Deere. Actually, I'll rephrase: YOU mow through hundreds of "elite" mercenaries and Russian troops like a supercharged John Deere. Your squadmates rarely hit anything and when they do it seems mostly like an accident. I think they know it, too.
Ridiculous story and standard FPS gameplay aside, the graphics and sounds are great, and the destructive environments really add to the fun. The acheivements reflect this on the 360, with multiple points for destroying buildings, people and, yes, even trees. It's just fun to play.
But don't expect a breakthrough. And don't let the "Battlefield" name fool you – this is in no way realistic combat. I got hit in the face multiple times by depleted uranium tank shells and walked away with nary a scratch.
Worth playing? Yes. Worth buying? No. You can finish this in 2-3 days of casual playing (probably 8 hours or so total, which seems to be the "norm" for FPS's these days – when did that happen? Gamefly it. I did.
