Travel through space

I found this video to be fascinating. It starts here on Earth and travels out to the furthest reaches of space as we know it. What makes it so captivating to watch is how it demonstrates the shear scale and vastness of space. It makes our tiny, little blue rock seem downright microscopic.

Watch it, you'll be amazed...

Read more.

Sphere: Related Content

A short musing on Trust

"I'm not upset that you lied to me, I'm upset that from now on I can't believe you."

If you asked me years ago, “what is the most important thing in a relationship?” I would tell you to love your partner with all your heart, and make them aware of that love, in every day, every gesture, and in every word.

If you ask me now what I think that “most important thing” really is. I would tell you a simple word, trust.

It takes a great amount of effort and time to reach a level of truthfulness in any relationship. But if there is to be any growth in your feelings towards each other, trust is an absolute necessity. I daresay that love is tied to trust. I am not referring to that trepid initial infatuation or sexual attraction that may develop into a “love-like” feeling. It isn’t the superficial surface dwelling emotion that will provide the support through the toughest hardship or the greatest trial. Love is a deep-seeded state of being that is shared with a partner. This mutual feeling of life-long adoring affection is based,.. on trust.

Read more.

Sphere: Related Content

Florida Trip Photos

Here's my florida trip in pictures... No fancy descriptions or drawn out stories, just good old fashioned phtographs. Enjoy.

Me in West Martello Tower, an old abandoned civil war post that has since been converted into a botanical garden. Key West, FL.

Ernest Hemingway house in Key West. I'm moving in.

Gazebo and shrubery at West Martello Tower. Key West, FL.

Awesome foliage and doorway at West Martello Tower. Key West, FL

Creepy Hemingway House Kitty. Key West, FL. If you didn't know, the hemingway house is home to a lot of cats. They roam the grounds free to do whatever they want. It was pretty fun to walk around, take in the beautiful house and see so many kitties everywhere. And all were nice and friendly.

Another Hemingway House Kitty, but this one has a moustache and is sticking his tongue out. Key West, FL

I stopped for a swim while driving through the keys, it was only after I got out that I saw this. Whew. I actually did spot a jellyfish while out in the surf, luckily I could tell it wasn't the dreaded man-o-war. But it was enough for me to decide to get out of the water. Then I happened to spot this sign. Glad I did get out.

Sunrise over our Hotel's animal-less Savanna. The way the hotel was set up so that on both sides there was a bit of grassland where animals would roam. Unfortunatly our side didn't have near the amount of animals that the center part did. Still a beautiful hotel.

Giraffe in the savannah surrounding our hotel.

Awesome fireworks show at the Magic Kingdom in Walt Disney World. Really impressive display.

Me, the sis, Justin, and some fairy in front of Cinderella's Castle.

Rosemarie (Robbin's Mom) and I enjoying the early morning Kilimanjaro Safari.

Expedition Everest at the Animal Kingdom in Walt Disney World. Awesome ride, worth a trip to Florida.

Justin and I riding Expedition Everest at the Animal Kingdom in Walt Disney World.

You got to love the designs of the parks. This is the Expedition Everest ride queue. Looks like you're in the Himalayas. Imagineers are my heros.

Dad, Justin, & Me riding Test Track at EPCOT.

The whole gang in Disney's Hollywood Studios.

Dad & Robbin under Spaceship Earth.

I approve of giant geodesic spheres.

I approve of fake Canada pavillion waterfalls.

I approve of depressed lonely stuffed animals.

Took me all week to finally get a giant turkey leg, but I got it. Muhahaha!!

Read more.

Sphere: Related Content

Classic Movie Monday: The French Connection

Welcome to Classic Movie Monday. Every Monday, I watch a film at least 25 years old that I have never seen before. I will then write my comments on the film, telling you what I thought of it. This is an attempt to beef up my classic film knowledge as well as highlight some forgotten gems of Hollywood's heyday. So without further ado...

The French Connection
Released: October 9, 1971
Directed by: William Friedkin
Starring: Gene Hackman, Fernando Rey, & Roy Scheider

Plot in a Nutshell:
New York Narcotics Detectives Doyle (Hackman) and Russo (Scheider) stumble onto a large trafficking scheme known as the French Connection.

What I thought:
This film is an unending cat & mouse chase. From the moment the film starts to the gripping climax, the film never stops showing the tug between police and criminals. For the majority of the run time the chase is slow and methodical, consisting of tense scenes of tailing the suspect. Then there are the explosive moments of frenetic, determined pursuit. The French Connection easily balances the tension between methodical and maniacal and never becomes boring.

The main plot revolves around a large-scale drug smuggling operation from France to New York. Involving many shady characters, and a hierarchy that I never could quite grasp, the villains of the picture didn't bring much to the table. In fact, nothing about the operation or the players involved is strong enough to support the film. It's not the focus, and it doesn't need to be.

Gene Hackman, as Detective "Popeye" Doyle, is the clear star of the picture. His foul-mouthed, determined, rules-be-damned attitude cuts through the bull. His actions as a police officer are considered reckless and foolish by his peers, but the man gets results. Today, this type of cop character has become cliche, but back in the early 70s, it was still fresh. Hackman plays it as though he is constantly restraining himself, keeping Doyle in check. It isn't until he is 'challenged' by a criminal foe that the gloves come off. Doyle has the potential to explode and in the final scene you see how far he is willing to go. The scariest part isn't how far that happens to be, but how little it affects him. This was a tremendous performance.

The film was made in a slight documentarian style. The camera never seems to be stationary: constantly struggling to keep up with the characters. Under-saturated, the film is grainy and filled with deep contrast. The night scenes in downtown New York lend the city a gritty, criminal quality. Friedkin paints the film as though behind every corner, down every street, and in every ally, nefarious characters lurk. It builds up a great, seedy mood for the characters to inhabit. I wouldn't want to visit the places shown on screen, but it fits the story and the people in it.

Highlighting the French Connection is a mother of a chase sequence. I have seen it billed as the best in all of cinematic history. While I won't quite go that far, I will admit that it's pretty damn impressive. One of the greatest pieces to it, is how it starts. Beginning innocently, with a tired groggy Doyle walking home with a sack of groceries, greeting the passerbys on a sunny day. Then suddenly, he is shot at by a distant sniper, who inadvertently hits a nearby pedestrian. Then it takes off, starting as a simple foot chase down the road, it peaks with Doyle in a car on a crowded street chasing down an elevated train. I'm not going to detail every moment of it because that would ruin the fun. But it was a terrific piece of cinema where the pursuit and the stakes increase in every suspenseful minute. It is a lot of fun to see unfold, and it is genuinely nail-biting.

The French Connection is a terrific film. Hackman livens up the film with his hard-edge detective who stops at nothing in his job to fight crime. Bringing us some great suspenseful moments and pursuits, director Friedkin tells the story with a terrific muddy style. And though the actually plot revolving around "The French Connection," isn't very strong or meaningful, the film has plenty to offer.

A

Read more.

Sphere: Related Content

Classic Movie Monday: Carrie

Welcome to Classic Movie Monday. Every Monday, I watch a film at least 25 years old that I have never seen before. I will then write my comments on the film, telling you what I thought of it. This is an attempt to beef up my classic film knowledge as well as highlight some forgotten gems of Hollywood's heyday. So without further ado...

Carrie
Released: Novemebr 3, 1976
Directed by: Brian De Palma
Starring: Sissy Spacek, Piper Laurie, & Betty Buckley

Plot in a Nutshell:
Carrie White has telekinetic abilities. Suffering humiliation and ridicule from her class mates and scornful admonishments from her mother at home, Carrie is about to snap on them all.

What I thought:
I'm having a difficult time deciding whether or not casting Sissy Spacek in this part was a good thing or bad. Carrie is constantly berated by her peers and harsh-fully scorned at by her mother. She is pushed down by all those around her. I express confusion because I don't know how anybody could possibly hate her.

The character, Carrie, is drenched in revulsion and disgust by virtually everyone she comes across. The students laugh at her when she speaks, ridicule her when she is in pain, and curse her when she makes a mistake. I know this takes place in high school, and kids, especially teens can be particularly cruel, but give me a break. The abuse she gets is beyond ridiculous, bordering on absurdity.

Carrie White is nothing but sweet. Horribly misguided by her domineering mother, she has been raised to be very subservient and passive. School kids love to verbally beat on her. They laugh at her when she doesn't know what menstruation is, pelting her with tampons and pads. The characters make Carrie feel like scum, and it is completely undeserving. There is good reason for this cruelty though. Not on a basic story level but on a structural one. You need the audience to see her put down, you need to see her in the lowest moments. After an hours of mistreatment, the final half hour of payback and payoff is much more earned, and as an audience, you feel much more vindicated.

Brian De Palma expertly crafts this story, dragging us on an emotional coaster. Even though every person in the movie hates this poor girl, he makes you fall in love with her. A large part is Spacek's subdued performance, but it is De Palma that seals the deal. Pulling no punches, he'll figuratively drag Carrie through the dirt, then later give her some happy moments of pride and joy. Just before all hell breaks loose in the finale, he allows Carrie to be in the spotlight in the best sequence of the film. She walks so smooth and gracefully, the camera slowly moving with her: she is radiant with happiness. Taking her place on stage, in front of everyone, the crowd cheers for her. She looks out at the crowd smiling, laughing: she is accepted. Then, when the rug is ripped from underneath her, she becomes emotionally devastated and mentally unstable. The most beautiful moment in her life is stolen from her in a cruel prank.

This film demonstrates an exceptional ability to play with the audience. It's a great compliment to the film that I was able to experience all the emotions Carrie was feeling. However, I still have a hard time seeing the hatred the other characters see. I don't get why they feel the need to go to such elaborate lengths simply to humiliate someone. I don't understand in films like this, where the bullies are beyond reality. In film-land, all a bully cares about is making others feel bad and it is usually only one person. They fixate and do everything they can to make that person miserable. Concocting schemes and plots to bring about humiliation. It is unrealistic and I hate it. It's this point that knocks the film down for me.

Carrie is described as a horror film. If you see this film, don't expect a slasher, a gore fest, or even a violent film. This isn't a horror film in the way the term means today. It is a different type of scary feeling. This is about the horror of being exposed, being publicly disgraced, ridiculed amongst the people you are trying to impress. These are fears people feel every day, it's nice to see them explored in a film.

It's taken me some time to appreciate this film. Immediately after finishing it, I felt disappointment. I was expecting a lot more on the creepy/spooky/scary front. Instead what I got was a great film about the fears of high school and of acceptance. Carrie's horror doesn't involve chainsaws, ghouls, marionettes, or masked killers, rather, genuine fears of being disliked, public ridicule, and peer acceptance. I really enjoyed it.

Bottom Line:
Made with great craftsmanship by Brian De Palma, performed excellently by Sissy Spacek, the film is a great tale about our personal horrors.

B+

Read more.

Sphere: Related Content

Classic Movie Monday: Animal House

Welcome to Classic Movie Monday. Every Monday, I watch a film at least 25 years old that I have never seen before. I will then write my comments on the film, telling you what I thought of it. This is an attempt to beef up my classic film knowledge as well as highlight some forgotten gems of Hollywood's heyday. So without further ado...

Animal House
Released: July 28, 1978
Directed by: John Landis
Starring: John Belushi, Tom Hulce, & Karen Allen

Plot in a Nutshell:
At Faber College, 1962, a determined Dean is intent on removing the rowdy and mischievous Delta house fraternity, but they have other plans.

What I thought:
What is it that makes a classic film? Memorable Lines? Fantastic Characters? Stay-ability? I don't think you can pin the concept of a classic on any one of those, rather it is how a film impacts and sticks, long after you've seen it. Animal House is a movie that dares you to not find its charm, vulgarity, and goofy antics hilarious and worth every, repeated viewing.

I found myself while watching, that I've seen this movie before. No, I had never seen the film, but the impact that it has had on our pop culture is noticeable. Even to someone like me who had never seen it, it is hard not to see the appeal and impact the film has had. Many of the scenes, the lines, the jokes, and antics, I have heard before. Every song on the soundtrack has been pounded into my head during my adolescence. It is a movie that is so entrenched into our pop culture, that those who are not even aware of it, have felt its repercussions.

It's hard to judge this film based on filmmaking style or technique. Comedies don't need to be slick, stylish, or artistic. Their ultimate goal, is to make you laugh, and maybe be a bit reminiscent. The set ups here are hilarious, and the payoffs equally terrific. On more than a few occasions I found myself laughing hysterically at the situations, circumstances, and insane characters, but mainly Belushi.

John Belushi IS this movie. He is a cartoon come to life. His expressions and mannerisms are always a laugh. When he sits in a corner and does nothing but look side to side, you can't help but giggle at him. His peeping-tom scene is probably the greatest moment in the entire film. Peeking in through the widow at a very undressed college girl, he turns to the camera and gives a flash of his expressive brows. He says, to THE AUDIENCE, "Look at me, isn't this awesome!" Between this, Blues Brothers, and his stint on SNL, Belushi left us some great comedy moments. It's only a shame he wasn't around longer.

Animal House is a terrific comedy, that isn't particular impressive for its style, but more for how outlandish and hilarious it ultimately is. If you have never seen this film, I can't recommend it enough. I'm already looking forward to watching it again, and if you know me and comedies, that's no small task.

Bottom Line:
A hysterical college Frat picture, filled with classic lines and some terrific comic moments, and Belushi is always great.

A

Read more.

Sphere: Related Content

Classic Movie Monday: The Human Condition Review

Welcome to Classic Movie Monday. Every Monday, I watch a film at least 25 years old that I have never seen before. I will then write my comments on the film, telling you what I thought of it. This is an attempt to beef up my classic film knowledge as well as highlight some forgotten gems of Hollywood's heyday. So without further ado...

The Human Condition
Release Dates:
Part I: No Greater Love: January 15, 1959
Part II: Road to Eternity: November 20, 1959
Part III: A Soldier's Prayer: January 28, 1961
Directed by: Masaki Kobayashi
Starring: Tatsuya Nakadai, Michiyo Aratama, & Keiji Sada

Plot in a Nutshell:
An epic trilogy of releases, spanning one Japanese man's journey during WWII. Beginning as a labor camp supervisor, becoming drafted into the Japanese army, and finally ending captured in a Soviet POW Camp, this story defines epic cinema.

What I thought:
What a film.

After watching the Human Condition, I am left floating in a wake of mixed emotions. On one hand it is very difficult not to admire the extraordinary work that was accomplished. In the other hand, I am left stirred and shaken, and maybe a little underwhelmed. But after completing the film, I can't be disappointed by its faults, but only marvel at it successes. This film is every bit a triumph of cinema. It really is, but I'm feeling mixed.

The story follows one character on a long journey. Kaji, played by Tatsuya Nakadai, is in virtually every scene and his odyssey is the focal point for the entire film. The great advantage to having a picture of this length is the great changes you can perform to your characters. Where some films will tighten their stories, and shorten their lengths, a film like the Human Condition can detail every moment, every point of significance, showing to the audience why somebody has become who they are. It makes for a terrifically fascinating character study. Its amazing seeing the main character, Kaji, transition from a very liberal, anti-war, naive, young man in the beginning, to then transition and become a leader of men and a seasoned war veteran who doesn't hesitate to kill those who are a threat. When you watch the film, you see every moment in that long transition, and never once do you think "He wouldn't do that," "That's not Kaji." You are with his character constantly and you feel his every emotion. By the end you have invested what in cinematic terms, equates to a lifetime, into this one singular character.

Played with near perfection by a then newcomer, Tatsuya Nakadai pours everything into the portrayal of Kaji. Requiring an enormous effort on his part, it is incredibly impressive that he is able to bring so much life into his character for so long a time. Performing the gamut from longing lover, misunderstood prisoner, idealistic youth, impassioned humanitarian, oppressed junior soldier, and vengeful friend, Nakadai effortlessly moves between them all, and brings great presence to this fantastic character. He inhabits every frame with a strength and conviction that is rare in today's film performances. As the single consistent role throughout the picture, he deserves all the credit for the success of this character, and in turn, the success of the film.

The film was adapted from a lengthy six-part novel. Each of the films three releases are split into two parts, totaling the six parts of the book. Believe me when I say, it is DENSE. Characters often transition into lengthy speeches about humanity, war, oppression, socialism, and democracy. The film makes dozens of statements about many ideas present in a tumultuous post-war Japan. But I found the greatest impact came from two key ideals. First is the futility of war; it's effects on society, cultures, and people's beliefs. Second is the treatment of people and races different than your own.

The absurdity of war is a topic that has been discussed ad nauseam in countless books & films over the years. The thing that makes this film so relevant in that discussion, again comes down to the length and depth into which the film is willing to go. Also in American war films of the 40s and 50s, it was all about the heroics and idealism. A very interesting point was brought up by Japanese filmmaker Masahiro Shinoda in the Human Condition's extra features. He said that the victors never can see the whole picture in the aftermath of a large scale war. It is only the defeated who can look at everything objectively and with clarity. In that statement, you realize that to obtain the truth of history, you need not look at what the winners write, but what the losers feel. Its an incredible thing to think about. And the Human Condition shows emotions and feelings about war that American films are only just now starting to explore.

The second major theme to the Human Condition focuses on is supremacism. The first two parts to the six part film focus on the mistreatment of the Chinese by the Japanese. In exchange for a military draft exemption, Kaji betrayed his beliefs by taking a position heading up a labor camp. He figures he can try to change the way laborers are treated. But superior Imperialism has become too entrenched in the minds of every Japanese citizen, and Kaji realizes it is very difficult to change their minds about humane treatment.

The consensus of opinion is that the Chinese are dogs. Nobody can match the supremacy of the Japanese race. Kaji fights this dog-headedness throughout the entirety of the film, it becomes one of the mainstays to his character. It is only towards the end, when everything is falling apart, that the Japanese characters begin to see how wrong they are. Defeated and broken by years of battle and fatigue, then are they only able to see who the real dogs are: themselves. Interestingly enough, Kaji begins as a humanist, but by the end, he has become desensitized by battles and his internal trials. As the general culture changes around him, he degrades into mindlessness. He never once turns from helping the weak, never turns his back on the helpless, yet he loses a little bit of his humanity every time he is forced to kill. It is a sad thing to see happen to a once proud and idealized individual.

Another great strength to the piece is the love shared between Kaji and his wife, Michiko, played by Michiyo Aratama. In the very first scene of the film, Kaji is followed by this sweet woman, Michiko. She wants to be with him and marry, but Kaji has doubts, as any man would at his young age. But when he makes the fateful decision to go work at the labor camp, he takes the plunge into marriage. Michiko isn't around for much in the grand scheme of the overall narrative, but she becomes an ever present point in Kaji's life. It was incredible to see his reluctance to marry, then his devotion develops, and ultimately she becomes all he has. *SPOILER* And if it had turned out ok for this couple, this would be one of the greatest love stories ever told. It felt very much like Cold Mountain, only much more depressing. Down though it may be, the drive captured in Kaji's eyes, speaks to his devotion, and that alone is worth it. I do wish it would have ended better though. *END SPOILER*

The production on this thing is beyond impressive. The sheer logistics that come with crafting a near 10 hour film can only be staggering in the least. To his credit, director Masaki Kobayashi is able to maintain great consistency across the entire film. The first minute of the film feels in line with the final crushing moment. Shots are incredibly simple yet completely effective. Kobayashi is able to evoke fantastic emotions, utilizing little more than a simple tilt or a slight push in. I was deeply impressed at the level of sophistication in the shots and editing. A scene towards the end involving Kaji's interrogation by the Soviets, exemplifies Kobayashi's skill as a cinematic craftsman. The use of silence, music, lighting, camera placement demonstrates he is a master of film technique, working well before his time. The level that he is working at in 1958-60, is better than many films I have seen in the past few years.

As impressive as the film ultimately is, there were still things I wish could have been done differently. The first 5 hours to the film are tedious and slow. There are more than a few great moments within that time (including an incredibly powerful execution scene), but it isn't until Kaji gets involved with the war that the film begins to glide right along at great pace. The final three hours are by far the best to the entire film. Kaji is leading a group of survivors back to safer territory, and is maneuvering around Soviet forces and meeting up with Chinese and Japanese all struggling to deal with the effects the war has wrought. But for roughly the first half of the near ten hour length, it was a real chore.

I also did not enjoy seeing how the Japanese army was. Director, Kobayahi was in the Army, as was the original book's author, so you know Japanese Army life is accurately depicted. I simply found it difficult to watch. The senior enlisted members routinely beat and thrash the new soldiers for minor grievances. It is not only common, but expected! It may have been authentic to the way things were in the Japanese Army, but after the 10th beating, I began to get fatigued. This could be what Kobayashi was going for, the discomfort, the angst that comes with mistreatment. In that regard, it is a success, but still tiring to watch.

When looking at the complete film as a whole, these grievances seem completely minor and inconsequential. The Human Condition is a massive undertaking that is just as equally impressive and awe inspiring as it is long and tedious. I don't know what Kobayashi was thinking when he set out to tell this story in this manner. All I can say is that it is an experience I will not soon be forgetting. It lingers on, occupies your thinking, and ultimately challenges you. I can think of nothing better to say about this epic film.

Bottom Line:
A massive film that is simultaneously riveting, slow, revealing, uplifting, sad, and altogether impressive. A landmark film achievement that should be seen by every film buff, but only if you can stomach 10 hours of Japanese in subtitles.

A

Read more.

Sphere: Related Content

In Defense of Video Games

Here at work we are restricted as to where we can go on the Internet. Obviously the military doesn't want us looking up pornography, wasting time on YouTube, visiting extremist sites, or looking at pages on how to build pipe bombs. All of these things are blocked. You couldn't get to them if you wanted, not that I would want to anyway. But another item is thrown into this banned list, and it has me really frustrated. Any site that has any relation to the word "Games," is forbidden. I'm not talking just flash game sites (which I find to be perfectly acceptable as being banned), I'm talking about ANYTHING that has the slightest thing to do with the moniker "Games."

News sites, review sites, developer sites, forums, etc. All Blocked. An argument could be made that it is a time waster at a place that you shouldn't be wasting time with. And if you want to start down that path, I could list thousands of sites that I have no problem getting to that are as big if not bigger time wasters than anything related to games. News Sites like CNN, Fox News, MSNBC, none are blocked. Movie news sites such as Variety, Hollywood reporter, Coming soon, Ain't it cool, none are blocked. The list continues: Celebrity Gossip sites, Facebook, Tech review sites, blog sites, recipe databases, etc. What is the whole of the Internet if not an enormous black hole of a time waste? So then why the specific hatred towards Gaming? I could detail my frustrations with this work computer restriction, but I think there is a larger issue present that needs to be explored.

Generally, in our culture, video games are looked down upon. They are kid's toys. That's why when a Mature rated game, a game designed and intended for Adults, gets so much press when an enraged parent finds out what their kid is really playing. That's why you have politicians (who do not really understand and appreciate gaming due to their inexperience), who try to pass restrictive laws regarding the distribution of games. The responsibilities of censoring children's entertainment intake, rests solely with the parent. But that is another post.

It could be simplified by saying that people just don't understand Video Games. The over 40 crowd, for the most part, don't understand the appeal, or why somebody would want to "rot their mind" on worthless video games. Older generations never had the technology at the age younger generations have it now. So it is natural that people don't understand it. But I really don't get why they receive so much hate from so many people. I believe many people are greatly misinformed. There is much to be said about the expanding and maturing industry of game design. So let me geek out a bit about this young, exciting field of entertainment.

Interactive storytelling. It's one thing to read a book and create images in your head. It's another experience to go and watch somebody's vision of a story. It is an entirely different experience to interact with characters, and write your own story in a world people have crafted specifically for your enjoyment. The level of detail that goes into some of these games is staggering. The gorgeous visuals that today's machines can create is simply stunning. I always enjoy taking a step into interactive worlds, exploring and having fun.

And a funny thing is beginning to happen within the game industry. The technology has gotten so great and so powerful, that developers are forced to throw more assets towards creating a game. More art, more textures, more code writing, more, more, more. Subsequently, costs are rising. A triple-A game released today costs quadruple it would have cost to produce a similar game 10 years ago. So what is happening? Since publishers and developer are throwing more money at the games they are releasing, the financial risk of failure becomes much more important. So what you are seeing in the games that are released is an extraordinary amount of time is being put into getting the game right. Getting a solid story, introducing great mechanics (how the game is played), ironing out all bugs, to deliver a satisfying experience and to ultimately craft a strong release that will earn money.

Video games have gotten so good in the past few years, that soon they will surpass film and television in their quality and level of polish. There are already games out now that I think are better experiences than a lot of movies I've seen. Some stories have genuinely touched me and have transcended the boundary that exists between the content and human emotion. Developers are constantly pushing the bounds of storytelling and emotion. There are several guys out there who are trying to get to the holy grail of gaming, making the gamer cry. It sounds silly to say, but it is a real goal for many developers to be able to create that game that impacts the player to the degree of physical emotional response. The games out now are slowly inching to that level, it is only a matter of time.

I hate the Wii. But it is hard not to admire what the Wii has been doing. People who don't play games are picking it up. There are stories of parents fighting the kids for play time, of nursing homes buying systems because they are so popular with the crowd. Finally, people are enjoying games in a much wider market. So many are experiencing them for the first time and really enjoying themselves that it is has become a very exciting time. Who would have thought that a simple innovation in controller design would be the feature that bridges the gap. It's a true phenomenon. But I'm still irritated with it. Mostly because I love good graphics and diverse stories. The Wii doesn't provide much of either. The games are all targeted to one audience, and the system is essentially a rebuild of a last generation system. But it is doing good, and I see it. I just hope those new to gaming through the Wii, will expand to better consoles and titles.

The full cultural penetration of gaming across all demographics, it is something that will take time. I foresee gaming will one day be looked at like any other entertainment medium. People will fondly reminisce about the "classics." I am sure that games will one day take their place amongst great pieces of art and film. But it still has a way to go for that to happen. I'm just so excited about being here at the beginning. The feeling I get when I think about the prospects of the future of gaming is similar to how I imagine some cinema goers felt in the 20s when films started taking off. And they still had Gone with the Wind, Citizen Kane, and The Godfather yet to be made. Imagine for a moment, the possibilities of where this field can go.

Read more.

Sphere: Related Content

Musical Birds

Saw this neat video today and thought I'd share it with you.


Isn't that the neatest thing?

I wonder what THIS orchestration would sound like?!?!

Probably sounds like a herd of feral cats in heat! ...with violins!!

From Hitchcock's 'The Birds'

Read more.

Sphere: Related Content

Classic Movie Monday: A Night to Remember

Welcome to Classic Movie Monday. Every Monday, I watch a film at least 25 years old that I have never seen before. I will then write my comments on the film, telling you what I thought of it. This is an attempt to beef up my classic film knowledge as well as highlight some forgotten gems of Hollywood's heyday. So without further ado...

A Night to Remember
Released: July 1, 1958
Directed by: Roy Ward Baker
Starring: Kenneth More, Ronald Allen, & Robert Ayres

Plot in a Nutshell:
The Titanic was considered unsinkable, until she sank. This is the story of that horrific night when she went down.

What I thought:
You can't make a bad film about the Titanic. Her sinking is filled with so many remarkable stories. These are the things that are ingrained into the Titanic legacy. An unsinkable ship, not enough boats, steerage being locked up, how the band played on, etc. There are so many heart-wrenching moments to be told, that I think it is not possible to tell this story without jerking at your heart strings. That said, give me a little more than this.

This book adaptation is a fantastic telling of Titanic's sinking. It is obvious that a great amount of attention was given to make this film authentic. Hell, there were still living survivors with plenty of stories to tell when the film was made. This film is stuffed to the brim with stories, moments, and anecdotes. But I began to want a center, a focus point. At times it felt all over the place with no core to the story other than the feeling of "this actually happened." I feel very similar to this film as I did with the Longest Day. After watching that film, I felt that while it had been made with a great attention to detail and the facts, it never felt as though there were a through line. Things just happened. Events took place, but weren't set up. Characters introduced, then forgotten.

A Night to Remember has all the moments of the Titanic story, but it doesn't really explore the whys. It documents, rather vividly, the last few hours of the fated voyage. It isn't bad that it chooses to only focus on the sinking, I just felt like there was more to be said. When the lifeboats were rescued, I wanted to know about the survivors, the backlash, the crew of the Californian. What about these people? Filling a film with 40 or so supporting speaking roles, and no real lead performer, doesn't make for a very grounded story.

I enjoyed this film. It is chock full of details on the sinking, and me being a huge history buff, I ate it all up. I love the little moments; White star employees yelling at steerage for damaging a gate; Molly Brown demanding to return to help those in the water; Mr. Andrews going over minute details while the ship lists precariously. The stories here are legendary. But that's all there is here. I want more than a simple retelling of a story. It is a very powerful and emotional story to tell, but give us a little bit more to grab onto. Craft characters with intros, conflict, and resolution, don't just show a true life instance just for accuracy's sake. Set things up properly, and I guarantee they will pay off more effectively in the end. Regardless, A Night to Remember is still a great film that manages to adequately tell what happened. But why?

Bottom Line:
The gripping story of Titanic's last hours are told vividly and with great attention to detail, if not a little too respectful and dry.

B+

Read more.

Sphere: Related Content

100th Post!!! So why am I here?

This post marks the 100th post to the ole Observer! Yay!! Fireworks!! Explosions!! People flying through the Air!! YAY!!

So what's the point? Why am I here? I started this thing because my sister chided me into it. Pure and simple. The reason I keep coming back is because I enjoy writing. I love the idea of creation. I love to create something from nothing. Using only my head, a few fingers, and more than a little hard work and persistence, this site and my posts have lingered.

But the real reason I am here is not for the reader. I'm sorry to say that I don't write these things for you. I know how often I get visitors to my site, and I know they mostly come from the St. Louis Area, Connecticut, and Memphis. It's no secret that I don't have hundreds of readers, and that's ok. Like I said, I'm not here for you, I'm here for me.

You see, before this site came along, I would write very sporadically and often nothing meaningful. The little writing part of my brain just sat, unused. I worked on stories or scripts at various times, but never for any longer than a few hours every other week or so (if I was lucky). Now that I have this form of outlet and expression, that little writing corner of my brain has flourished. And it's made me realize that I love to write. I enjoy getting on here and putting thoughts to paper (or ones and zeros). It has been a great way to think about subjects that are close to my heart, and some that are nowhere near that personal.

I think you'll agree I hit a wide variety of topics. Things have been random. Things have been heated (even amongst myself) and things have been fun and a bit crazy. I've debated everything from girl scouts to absurd drive thru windows. I always try to be fair to my thoughts. I've done a bit of environmental hippie bashing and turned around and supported the current healthcare agenda. My topics range from one end of the spectrum to the other, and I love it.

And then there is my ongoing series, Classic Movie Monday. If there isn't anything going on, or if nothing is sparking my interest, there is always a classic movie to watch. This has been one of the real highlights for me in doing this whole web site thing. I've always had a love for film, but never really been thrilled with thought of watching the classics. I know there are hundreds if not thousands of important films to watch, and slowly I'm going to get to them all. As of this post, I have watched and reviewed 31 classic movies. Some I surprisingly hated, and others I found to be amazing. But every one is a film that I might never have watched otherwise, and I am better for it.

But the thing that makes doing this so great, is the moments like this. It makes me proud when I look back and see how much I've done in 10 months. I don't normally stroke myself, that's not my style, but I am very happy with the progress I've made. So now I pat myself on the back, *pat* *pat* and move on.

See you again after the next hundred!

Read more.

Sphere: Related Content

Classic Movie Monday: Porky's

Welcome to Classic Movie Monday. Every Monday, I watch a film at least 25 years old that I have never seen before. I will then write my comments on the film, telling you what I thought of it. This is an attempt to beef up my classic film knowledge as well as highlight some forgotten gems of Hollywood's heyday. So without further ado...

Porky's
Released: March 19, 1982
Directed by: Bob Clark
Starring: Dan Monahan, Mark Herrier, & Wyatt Knight

Plot in a Nutshell:
A group of teenagers in 1954, must deal with high school, raging hormones, and a malicious bar owner, all while trying to lose their virginity.

What I thought:
I find it difficult to review this film. Not because it is bad, but because there really isn't much to say. This is probably one of the first true teenage sex comedies to be made. Angsty Teenagers have to fight against evil adults, throw in a healthy dose of sex and nudity and you have Porky's in a nutshell.

I didn't hate the film, but I can't like it. There were more than a few memorable moments, that I'm sure many people will fondly reminisce about, but it just doesn't do much for me. I could go into about how the characters suck, the story is simplistic, and how enough random bits of funny can't elevate a movie out of garbage.

This movie isn't pure out trash, but it comes close. I did enjoy the main antagonist Porky. I loved how he treated the boys like a bunch of stupid horny teenagers. And I also liked the character Pee Wee. A guy who is so awkward but still manages to have a good time and make his friends laugh. There are some good dynamics amongst the kids, but it's not anything you haven't seen before.

I'm not going in depth with this one, mostly because there is no point. Either you like this kind of movie or you don't. I think once you've seen a teen sex comedy, you've seen them all. The only real distinction of Porky's, is that it was one of the first to be made so raunchy. And yes, it is raunchy.

Bottom Line:
A crude teenage sex comedy that is a fun watch, but ultimately forgettable and not very meaningful, but that's kind of the point.

C-

Read more.

Sphere: Related Content

Classic Movie Monday: Strangers on a Train

Welcome to Classic Movie Monday. Every Monday, I watch a film at least 25 years old that I have never seen before. I will then write my comments on the film, telling you what I thought of it. This is an attempt to beef up my classic film knowledge as well as highlight some forgotten gems of Hollywood's heyday. So without further ado...

Strangers on a Train
Released: June 30, 1951
Directed by: Alfred Hitchcock
Starring: Farley Granger, Ruth Roman, & Robert Walker

Plot in a Nutshell:
Two strangers meet on a train. Both are having problems with somebody that they wish could just disappear. Bruno (Walker) has a father who rules over his life, and Guy (Granger) has a wife he'd like to divorce so he can move on but she refuses to agree. Bruno suggests they murder the other's problem, that way, they'd both have no motive and they could have realistic alibis. Guy turns him down and shrugs it off, but Bruno goes through with it killing Guy's wife. Does Guy go through with it, and if he doesn't, what ends will Bruno go to make sure he doesn't take the blame?

What I thought:
I really enjoy Alfred Hitchcock presents. It was an old TV show back in the early days of the format, where Hitchcock would present a short 30 minute story filled with his usual staples: murder, mystery, suspense, contained within a clever yarn. They are great bite-sized pieces of a master storyteller at work. About halfway through Strangers on a Train I began to feel that it was a story that was better suited to that 30 minute limitation of television. But my mind quickly changed by the conclusion of the film.

This is a very simple set-up, Two men meet, a scheme is hatched, and over the course of the film, the cards come crashing down. It seemed very cut and dry. That's why I felt it shouldn't have been a feature length film. The things it was reaching for seemed very rudimentary. There really was no sense of suspense or great build up. The characters just seemed to be, and not do. But then something happened. The film twisted and ceased to be about whether or not a man was going to commit to murder and morphed into a story where a man was desperately trying to keep from being framed for a murder he didn't commit. By all accounts, Guy should have been the one to kill his wife, he had a motive, a shoddy alibi, and no real credible story. He couldn't tell the police, Bruno would have denied the whole thing. So about 2/3rds of the way through you realize the picture is much more dangerous than initially thought.

The two leads are not very good, but I don't think it is the fault of the actors. Both Granger and Walker perform fine, but they don't seem to bring anything with them. It is the fault of the screenwriter that the characters are not very detailed or deep. There are no layers to their conflicts or circumstances. Guy is an upstanding citizen tennis player who tries to do things right. Bruno is a man suckling from his parents' teat too long and wishes daddy could just go away. Those may sound like interesting characters, but believe me they aren't, and there is very little beyond that. I wish more could have been made out of them, and I never really cared for either one.

But let's be honest, this isn't a Robert Walker movie or a Farley Granger picture. This is Hitchcock, and he more than brings his skill to play here. I have no idea how he is so able to effectively create such great moods and chilly vibes with just simple understated shots and slow deliberate pacing. It is amazing. The finale literally had me on the edge of my seat. Even though it was absolutely preposterous and very unnatural, Hitch had me glued. And there is no greater testament to the man, than his ability to turn around such an unexciting premise into something very watchable.

Anybody who can take a mediocre story, with bland characters, and infuse it with as much tension as he does, is a true master storyteller. This is a Hitchcock film that doesn't disappoint, even though it seems that it might. I was more than ready to give up on this flick, but it was able to squeak up a notch or two by the end, all thanks to Alfred Hitchcock.

(And yes, that is a spinning out of control merry-go-round pictured above that our two characters are fighting on. It gets THAT silly.)

Bottom Line:
Dull characters inhabit a simple and sometimes silly story, but under the direction of Hitchcock, it manages to make up for it's deficits.

B+

Read more.

Sphere: Related Content