Talking About Stuff, with Mike and Christiana

Check it out! Looks like a really sweet romantic comedy.

It's actually an older film, starring Jack Nicholson. It's called: Shining.

And this trailer makes it look really light-hearted and funny! A must watch!

UPDATE!

I totally meant to give credit for the link to PolySciFi. It was an accident ommission only, not intentional.

.

Subscribe to the feed at http://feeds.feedburner.com/ChristianaTalksAboutStuff

Or if you must, you can download the mp3 directly. (Right click to save to your hard drive.

It's a big file, but it features about a full hour of awesome Survivor chat.

In the meantime, it is now 4:30 in the morning and I'm going to see if two hours of sleep will be better than zero hours of sleep.

More later, when I'm awake again.

...

All right I'm back. Basically, this is the "Podcast Notes" for Podcast #2. I'll be doing a post like this for every podcast I do, and so the comments for the podcast notes post are where you can give feedback for any of the individual podcasts. (Of course, you can always send me email as well. If you send me an audio file, I may even play it on the next one!)

Podcast #2 covers the first half of a two-hour conversation I had with my friend Mike Meitín last night after Survivor. In the first hour, we talk exclusively about last night's episode of Survivor. The second half, where we move on to other shows, like The Apprentice and Lost, will be part of Podcast #3, sometime this weekend.

The sound quality for the phone call still has plenty of room for improvement, but I'm discovering that it's actually pretty difficult to achieve a high-quality recording of both ends of a phone conversation. Hopefully though, by the next time we do this, I'll have figured out a better way. (P.S. Anyone who knows a better way, let me know!)

I'm not going to do a whole lengthy Survivor post of the type that I've been doing the last couple of weeks, mostly because I'd just be recovering all the same ground as in the podcast and I want to encourage everyone to listen to them!

However, I will go ahead and cover the broad strokes.

Brianna's expulsion was telegraphed pretty early on merely by the fact that we hadn't heard hardly anything from her until last night, when she was suddenly front and center. Very suspicious. What might that mean for Brooke, who has been practically invisible so far?

I think that Brianna may have been good at the later, mental, strategic portion of the game, but since the tribes are actually bucking tradition and voting out the weak people instead of the strong ones, she didn't get a chance to play that part of the game. I was a little disappointed about that, but I don't think that anyone can really argue getting rid of her after her inexcusable performance in the immunity challenge.

Brian pulled off a slick move saving Lydia last week, but he needs to watch the cockiness, lest it get him into trouble.

Amy's a trouper! I love it! I'm really happy that she has been able to resist the bossiness that I was worried would come. I like her a lot.

Kudos to Rafe for scoring one of the points in the immunity challenge. It went a long way toward redeeming him from the ladder disaster.

Jamie is clearly a power-player, but I wonder if he's too emotional for the later part of the game. Mike pointed out that he's somewhat like Stephanie in this respect.

Not liking bossy Margaret quite as much as Super-Nurse Margaret, but then, she had a point: Bobby-John and Judd were screwing it up!

Liking Cindy, Danni, and Brandon a lot.

Judd not so much.

Eagerly anticipating the inevitable blow-up that is Gary the pretend landscaper.

.

Okay, so they've finally got images of a living Giant Squid!



I actually spotted this story on Monday, but when they were first put up, they didn't actually have the images to go and look at, and what freakin good is that?

Anyway, you can go and see some pictures now. In fact, they have a little video too, though that should not be confused with a video of the squid itself. Despite what some stories were reporting, what they have is a series of stills taken 30 seconds apart, not "video footage".

Regardless, very very cool!

Although it kind of sucks that they injured it. A hook on the camera ended up tearing off a 20-foot piece of tentacle! I'm sure it wasn't totally intentional, and it did allow for genetic testing to confirm that it was in fact a giant squid and not some other species. Still, we finally find a living healthy specimen and we rip one of its tentacles off?

UPDATE! D'oh! Maybe I could actually post the link, eh?

.

Wow, a Reuters story just blew the whole secret twist of the movie Flightplan in the very first sentence! If you don't want to be spoiled, don't click this link!

Flight Attendents Outraged over Jodie Foster Film

I won't repeat it here, but dang!

Not that the twist is anything all that special. After all, in my review, I thought the script was pretty awful.

Further, I can see how it would be hard to report the story without giving away the twist, but right there in the first line, with no warning whatsoever? I swear, there's no respect for dramatic presentation anymore.

.

All right, so I've seen this quiz all over the place now, (though it was Rantings of A Space Cadet's straw that broke the [Insert Political Mascot of Choice]'s back), and I figured I'd go ahead and do it again.

I'd already taken it you see, but had not actually retrieved the results in a post-able way. Anyway, here it is.

You are a Social Liberal (65% permissive) and an... Economic Conservative (63% permissive) You are best described as a: Libertarian Link: The Politics Test on OkCupid Free Online Dating Also: The OkCupid Dating Persona Test

For the most part, I think it's pretty accurate, though I tend to want to resist being labeled as a "libertarian" because, although I agree with some of their principles, I don't really think that the "Libertarian" party speaks for me. At least not on a Federal government level.

.

First it was sponges, and now this...

Armed and Dangerous - Flipper the Firing Dolphin Let Loose By Katrina

It may be the oddest tale to emerge from the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Armed dolphins, trained by the US military to shoot terrorists and pinpoint spies underwater, may be missing in the Gulf of Mexico.

Experts who have studied the US navy's cetacean training exercises claim the 36 mammals could be carrying 'toxic dart' guns. Divers and surfers risk attack, they claim, from a species considered to be among the planet's smartest. The US navy admits it has been training dolphins for military purposes, but has refused to confirm that any are missing.

Thanks for the link to Matthew Dessem at PolySciFi, who also points out that not everybody is quite so willing to imagine Rogue Dolphin Commandos. Apparently, the source of the story has pulled the media's collective legs before.

Still, how could this not be true? It's only a matter of time before they start teaching other dolphins, and soon, we could be facing an entire army of poison-dart-bearing aquatic mammals! I, for one, will be buying some extra canned goods at the grocery store tonight, just in case.

.

Wow, just got a bit of a blast from the past. I was checking out some of my readership statistics and I noticed that someone found my site by Google-searching "tequila shots with cinammon and orange".

The reason that's so cool is because it links all the way back to my VERY FIRST BLOG POST EVER, all the way back on June 20th, 2003.

Wow, that means I've been doing this for over two years now. I hadn't quite realized that before. Of course, that included a pair of big long chunks of time where I wasn't doing any posting, but still!

Also, I still maintain that cinammon and orange is a good way to do tequila shots. It's a whole different taste sensation, but it gets you just as drunk! Bonus!

P.S. I saw that someone also found my site by googling "impalation free movies".

...

As it happens, my site, (more specifically, my House of Wax review) turns out to be the number one link for impalation movies!

.

Better not be. At least not if you live in Scotland.

Hospital bans cooing at babies 'to protect their human rights'

She said: "We know people have good intentions and most people cannot resist cooing over new babies, but we need to respect the child. Cooing should be a thing of the past because these are little people with the same rights as you or me.

Apparently, there's even a sign, with a doll that says "What makes you think I want to be looked at?"

Yeah! After all, who likes people paying attention and showing affection? Exhibitionist freaks, that's who, and thank heaven for bureaucrats and their zero-tolerance policies. Without them, people might have to use their own judgement, and that could be a disaster.

.

I just stumbled across one of the more bizarre announcements you're likely to hear this week.


Fraggle Rock film in development

The Jim Henson Company is in the early stages of creating an all new “Fraggle Rock” feature film. The idea of returning to Fraggle Rock has been floating around ever since the show ended in the ‘80s, but now the Henson Company feels that it the right time to bring the Fraggle’s universe back to life and reintroduce the world to the funny little creatures known as Fraggles. Henson responded saying that early work on a Fraggle Rock film is underway.

The story goes on to suggest that the film would likely feature the fraggles going into "outer space", meaning, the human world. (Betcha it has something to do with Gobo having to rescue his Uncle Travelling Matt!)

You know, my first reaction to this news was incredulous surprise.

Me: "Fraggle Rock? Seriously?"

But the more I think about it, the more I think this is something I'd actually like to see. Fraggle Rock was really an incredibly charming show and it might be nice to see something new from the Henson company instead of Muppet Wuthering Heights or something.

Besides, just dig that groovy theme song!
MP3 of the song
WMV of the opening credits

Oh, and just because I can, here's the theme song for Dangermouse!

Under no circumstances whatsoever should you go to this site. It's like crack.

.

I don't know if anyone has actually even subscribed yet, but if you have, please delete the subscription to the link I posted over the weekend and subscribe to this one instead. The change will allow me to track how many people have subscribed. I've gone ahead and changed all the links on the site, including the one on the side bar, to the new link.

And if you haven't subscribed yet, what's the hold-up? I'm desperate for feedback here!

Also, I have the upcoming Survivor podcast, so if anyone has questions you'd like Mike and I to answer, or suggestions on something you'd like us to talk about, just email me using the Contact Christiana link on the sidebar. As long as you can get the message to me by 11PM Eastern Time, we'll try to use it in the show!

Further, if anyone has questions or suggestions for any future podcast, Survivor-related or otherwise, just email me and I'll do it!

.

First up, not only are we getting Ghost In the Shell: Stand Alone Complex, 2nd Gig on November 18th on Adult Swim, but there are rumors circulating at the Anime News Service that they may even make a third series!

The director of the existing episodes was accepting an award and after answering a few questions about what he would be doing next, he said this:

"well... I'll tell you what..". After a couple of glances in the direction of Mr. Ishikawa of Production I.G. Kamiyama said "Think of... a sequel to 2ndGIG. "

At the same site, it sounds like we may now know what Hayao Miyazaki's next film project will be, and I must say, it's a really interesting choice.

According to a blog entry of an anonymous editor working for a publisher in Tokyo, the next film animation work to be tackled by Studio Ghibli will be based on the Earthsea series of novels by American fantasy writer Ursula K. Le Guin.

Now, that's a great series of books, and much of the content is right up Miyazaki's alley. (Young protagonist, fantastical setting, magic, heavy nature themes and imagery, etc.) Still, to my knowledge he's never adapted something with such a large existing fanbase as the Earthsea series. Of course, his primary audience is Japan, so perhaps they are less familiar with the books. Still, no matter which direction he goes with it, I'd bet good money on it being better than the Scifi Channel's disastrous mini-series version.

Sadly, given that it's still in the book licensing stage, the finished product is probably quite a ways off.

.

I mentioned in an earlier post that I was planning to try my hand at podcasting with a conversation between my friend Mike and I about the upcoming episode 3 of Survivor: Guatemala.

Still, in order to be at all timely, I would really want to be able to put that podcast up by Friday morning, but I suspected that it would take me a little while to figure out the technical details of the thing. As a result, I decided to do a non-Survivor podcast before then, when I would have more time to figure everything out.

So that's what I've done. Even got me an XML RSS feed and everything, with a lot of help from a few tutorials, such as this one. If you know what to do with those, you can find mine right here. I'll also be putting a link to it in the sidebar.

If you don't already know how to use them, what you need is an aggregator, like iPodder. (You can use that even if you don't use an iPod, btw.)

What the aggregator does for you is it allows you to subscribe to a podcast RSS feed like mine. You cut and paste the link I supplied above, or other feeds (generally indicated by an ".xml" suffix) and it "subscribes" you. When you are subscribed, the software reads the xml file and determines what podcasts are available on that file and downloads them (or not) per your settings. It can also automatically check for and download new episodes whenever they are posted. Pretty handy, eh?

iTunes also has podcast functionality where it acts as an aggregator for all podcasts in the iTunes podcast directory. I hope that mine will be listed there soon, but right now, it's in the review phase.

Now, if all of that sounds like too much work but you are still interested in listening, you can download the mp3 file directly right here: Christiana Talks About Stuff Podcast #1
(If you want to be nice to me and save me some bandwidth, please right-click and download the file, rather than playing it directly off of my server.) Fair warning, it's about 32MB. That works out to a total play time of around 23 minutes. Hopefully in the future, as I start figuring some of this stuff out, I'll be able to bring the relative file size down a bit.

Podcast #1 is pretty basic. I begin by introducing myself, (since I may end up with listeners who have not visited the blog,) then I begin what will likely be a series where I discuss and analyze some of my favorite movies. This time around, it's Groundhog Day. Then I finish up by playing a song from PodSafeAudio.com, which specializes in songs released under the Creative Commons license, making them safe for use in podcasts.

I'm not going to be ignoring the blog, and whenever I put up a new podcast, I'll definitely mention it here, but of course, if you subscribe to the feed, it will all go through automatically.

Also, this is my very first attempt at this sort of thing, and I'm sure it needs a lot of work. If you listen, please, please, please leave a comment or send me an email to let me know what you think or give me suggestions on what I could do better. In fact, if you have the capability, you could even send me comments in mp3 form, and you just might get some airtime on the next episode!

This is an ongoing invitation, and applies whether you are offering suggestions about the podcast itself, or whether you have a comment about the content. Thanks, and I hope you like it!

UPDATE!

I have now corrected some of the wonky volume levels in the first podcast. All the same links apply.

UPDATE AGAIN!

My podcast is now officially listed in the iTunes podcast directory. If you use iTunes, you can find and subscribe to it by searching "christiana" in the podcast directory.

.

Movie Reviews: Red Eye and Flightplan

What makes a good thriller?

A good thriller, as opposed to a horror movie, is designed like, as cliche as it is to say so, a roller-coaster ride. They are, well, "thrilling" for the time that you are watching and then they are done. If they are done well, they don't leave you feeling insulted and manipulated.

Thrillers generally don't try to say anything important about humanity or to change the world. They are just here to entertain you with vicarious excitement where likeable characters triumph over nastiness.

A good thriller is the equivalent of a fast food cheeseburger. Sure, they aren't very nutritious, but sometimes, when you get that craving, nothing else will do and they can be extrordinarily satisfying.

First up, (because that's the order I saw them in,) Red Eye






.

Next, Flightplan.






.

I actually found myself a little bit underwhelmed by last night’s episode, but on reflection, I can’t put my finger on any reason for that, so I suspect that it really has more to do with me being a bit distracted, rather than any flaw in the show itself.

I suppose part of the problem though is that sending Jim home last time was such a no-brainer that it didn’t really leave the tribe dealing with very much in the way of ramifications at the opening here. Pretty much story #1 at the beginning of last night’s episode was Blake’s now-it’s-here-now-it’s-gone breathing problem.

I don't think that he is faking exactly, as Judd suggested, but it is a little fishy. He’s having so much trouble breathing that he can barely stand up straight without reeling, and then he comes out and turns into a superhero during the challenge? My first reaction during that challenge was: “Oh good, it looks like he’s getting better.” Because after all, getting knocked out because you’re sick or injured kind of sucks. But then right after the challenge, he’s on his back again!

Here’s what I think is happening. This is mostly in his head. It’s not that he’s making it up or deliberately shirking his work, it’s just psychosomatic. Part of it is real, I’m sure. None of those people are likely feeling at 100%, so I doubt that he’s completely healthy, yet his performance during the challenge suggests that this is something he can shrug off when he really wants to. It’s like when people have panic attacks. It is real but the cause is psychological, not physiological. I suspect this is similar.

His system got a massive shock by both the blow to the shoulder and the exhaustion and dehydration from that first challenge. As a result, the animal part of his brain is effectively hiding under the bed and sucking it’s thumb, unconvinced that the danger has passed. So it’s trying to make him take it easy. It’s not necessarily that his body physically needs the rest any more than the others do, but I think that the extreme effort and strain has triggered a fear response in his subconscious.

He’s afraid of exerting himself that much again, even if he’s not actually aware of it. But then, when it’s “important,” such as during the challenge, the conscious part of his mind overrides that fear response and his body rises to the occasion. Then, when they return to camp and the pressure is off, the fear response returns.

If I'm right, by the way, Margaret could actually be contributing to the problem by insisting that he rest all the time.

Anyway, if it turns out that he actually has asthma or something, I’ll owe him an apology, but short of that, this sort of situation is tailor-made for phrases like: “suck it up.”

Okay, so now that that’s out of the way, I have to say that that reward challenge last night was pretty cool. Seeing everybody clinging upside-down like giant awkward spiders was excellent.

Though what was up with Rafe’s inability to get up that ladder? I don’t begrudge him falling off the ropes themselves, because I’m sure that was way harder than it looked, but that ladder didn’t look overly complicated to me. He may continue to have trouble physically, which would be a shame, because he seems like a fun guy to me.

So of course, the other remaining biggie last night was Garry and his eyebrow-raising plot to keep his former occupation a secret. Now, it actually wasn’t a super shock to me last night because Jim on Survivor Live had mentioned that Danni the sportscastress recognized him right away. (Props to her for that, btw.)

I hadn’t necessarily expected it to come out so quickly, especially since they weren’t on the same tribe, but Garry was living in a dream-world if he really thought he’d be able to keep it secret for the whole game. Even if no one actually blew his cover, it was a huge part of his life and he’s spending 24-7 with these people in stressful circumstances. The only way he’d successfully manage to keep it under wraps is to have to clam up whenever the talk gets personal, which would only make him seem standoffish. Having a secret would turn into an albatross around his neck, much heavier and more problematic than the information itself. Frankly, I think that he’s overestimating how much people will care.

But he’s screwed now! Even given the dubious strategy of trying to keep it a secret to begin with, he should have fessed up immediately when Brian called him on it. He should have said something like: “Yeah, I was worried people would see me as a threat before I got to actually play the game, so I didn’t tell. Sorry about that everyone, but I hope you’ll see how much I can contribute during this phase of the game.” He could then even make it charmingly self-deprecating by saying something like: “How could I have known someone would actually recognize me?”

Unfortunately, it seems he isn’t quite that sly.

In fact, he’s very very very not sly.

I think he botched his denial so badly that no one who heard it will have any doubt that he’s lying. So now, with every word he’ll only be digging himself ever deeper. (Also on the not-sly front, did you see his reaction when Lydia came to him for support? Even this early in the game, he couldn’t even tell her a white lie like “I haven’t made my mind up yet.” What makes it worse is that he ended up voting for Morgan anyway, so basically he alienated Lydia for no benefit whatsoever! And then what exactly did he think he was going to accomplish by running over and tackling Judd during that second challenge?)

I think the only way that Garry’s foolish denial won’t be the end of him is if, for some reason, Danni leaves the game in the next couple of episodes. If she’s gone, then people are just left with “Do we believe him or not?” and the issue could mostly drop, because it might seem reasonable that she was only saying it to psych them out. If she sticks around though, it becomes a dramatic he-said-she-said, which practically guarantees that the issue will stay in everybody’s mind. I think that there are ways that he could get himself out of this, but I don't think that he's up to the task. Being in the NFL might have made him a target, but lying about it is worse.

Appropos of nothing, but simply because it has to be said, Bobby Jon is a freak.

Last up, I think it’s pretty clear that Nakum is not unified in the slightest. Garry’s denial, the concern about how long they should keep Stephanie, the debate about Morgan vs. Lydia, and the utterly cold way they shut out Morgan at the end. There is barely a pretense of unity in that tribe. They have major problems as far as I’m concerned, which is a shame, because I like several of the people on that tribe.

Poor Morgan. I think she was probably the only one who really believed the unity thing. Considering she’s a magician’s assistant, you would have thought she would know the old saw about what it means when you don’t know who the sucker is. If she’s that unaware of the dynamic around her, she totally deserved to go. But still, she was so cheerful and naïve, watching her get voted out was like seeing someone stomp on a butterfly.

So, thoughts for next time? I have reevaluated my initial concern that Amy would be unable to avoid bossing people around. It seems that being a little weaker physically might actually have been a blessing in disguise, as it denied her any credibility for telling others what to do. As long as it doesn’t get so bad that she starts costing them challenges, she might well be around for a while. The preview for next week seemed to suggest that she injures her foot, but I suspect that it won’t be as big a deal as the preview made it look.

Heh. Given that I felt somewhat unengaged immediately after the episode, I sure found a lot to say about it.

P.S. For next week’s episode, I plan to experiment with podcasting. It has become a weekly ritual for me and my old friend Mike to discuss the most recent episodes of Survivor and The Apprentice. I found these discussions sufficiently entertaining that I wondered if others might find them entertaining too. And since podcasting is cool, I thought I’d give it a try.

If all goes according to plan, Mike and I will record our conversation in a listener-friendly way, and I’ll have it up on the site by Friday morning. At the very least, I’ll have an mp3 of it available for download, but I’m hoping to also supply an RSS feed for those of you who know how those work.

Thoughts? Suggestions?

.

The Fantasy League portion of the Survivor Website is now active. Better head on over there to select your team before tonight's episode, or else everyone else will have a head start!

Still, the site seems to be having some troubles, likely due to them waiting so freaking long to set up the site and having everybody and their cousin trying to set up their teams all at once.

So if you have trouble setting up your team, my suggestion is to just check back a few times over the course of the day. Good luck!

And good luck with your selections!

Also, so far Hannah and Kevin have said they want to be in my tribe, anyone else?

.

Today, I found myself attempting to describe something as simultaneously tiresome and tedious. Though the two words are similar, they are subtly different. The former suggesting that the thing is irritating/exhausting, the latter suggesting that the thing is boring and repetitive.

I began to wonder if there is a single word that could convey both subtle meanings, and I was unable to find one.

As such, I hereby propose the creation of a new word:

Tirious (Teye-ree-us)

I find that combination superior to something like "tedisome", because of the possibility that the word would be confused with "teddy" which suggests all the wrong images, or with "tedium" which, of course, would only convey the aforementioned boredom/repetition without the irritating/exhausting.

It has the additional advantages of sounding simultaneously sophisticated (Probably the Latin-sounding -us ending) and childish (Tiry evokes a toddler's droopy-eyed proclamation). Furthermore, I assert that it is fun to say.

Tirious: As in: "Wading through hundreds of industrial glass-washer program cycles in order to document each parameter is very tirious. Can I go home now?"

.

.

Don't be forgettin' International Talk Like A Pirate Day, me mateys.

Only one day a year come a day where it be incumbent upon all o'ye, whether ye be salty dog or seasick landlubber, to call upon the pirate wi'in ye, and to keelhaul the agents of conformity.

Rebel! Rebel, ye pirates! Even if it only be by talkin' funny fer a day.

Arrrr!

.

The truth is, I don't think it's worth spending a lot of time describing Transporter 2.

That's not a bad thing. It's just that this is a very specific type of movie with very specific objectives, and the only real question to be answered is: How successfully does it achieve those objectives?

Action Movie (aka "Car-chase movies", "heh heh... explosions") Objectives.

1. Have an appealing and convincingly awesome hero.

Check. Jason Statham reprises his role from the first movie, and he's still all-business. He doesn't say much, but whatever he says, you can tell he means it. Plus he beats people up a lot and his stuntman is really skilled.

2. Have an interesting locale and set-pieces.

Check. The movie makes excellent use of its Miami setting and features sequences involving such diverse elements as intercoastal highways, shipping yards, brightly colored apartment buildings, and even a commuter jet.

And most importantly...

3. Have exciting action sequences.

Check. The action in this film is a lot more James Bondian than the first film, with some glorious stunts and action that you don't believe for a second, and yet are paced and directed so effectively that you only have time to have fun gaping at the supreme audaciousness. (I will refrain from actually mentioning any of them to avoid spoiling your pleasant surprise, but trust me that they are supremely silly in a very enjoyable way.)

All right, so Transporter 2 succeeds on all three levels, so that translates as a thumb's up for me.

The film isn't perfect. In particular, neither villain really gets a satisfactory dispatching. Also, a lot of the plot is brushed by with nary an attempt to make any of it logical. To say that the details involve a lot of hand-waving is a dramatic understatement. I think you'd need spotlight-waving to distract from the gaps in both the logic and physics of what we see.

Still, despite not being the best action flick ever, it remains nonetheless a pretty good one. Plausible? Not remotely. But a lot of fun just the same.

.

Okay, in case any of you haven't actually watched the episode already, I'll put my reactions in hidden text.




UPDATE! As I predicted, the (mostly) full Survivor web site is up now. Still no fantasy league though.

.

30-second Bunny Theater has got a new piece up: The Big Chill. Actually, since I last linked to them, they've also put up Rocky Horror Picture Show.

Click here to see all of the cartoon bunny re-enactments.

.

I want to start this post by encouraging any of you out there who are not Survivor fans already to give the show a chance. Commit yourself to five episodes. Just watch the first five episodes and then participate in the discussions (here or elsewhere,) afterwards.

If you do that and still don't enjoy the show, fair enough. At least you gave it a fair shot. However, I suspect that if you do watch those first five, you'll find yourself watching the rest of them too. By the time the finale comes around, you'll be a full-fledged convert.

Join us...

Okay, now for some predictions.

Christiana’s Prediction #1:

Although Stephanie and Bobby Jon will be showing up, I do not think that they will be just playing the game like all of the new castaways. I think they will be involved in some other, perhaps only subtly different, capacity. Team captains of some sort, for example. Also, look for reactions from the other playels to vary from nonplussed to outright pissed.

Christiana’s Prediction #2:

The strife and chaos will start early. The first few episodes are usually fairly sedate, since everybody’s still trying to be nice to each other and they’re still well-fed and psychologically sound. But this bunch is skewed much younger, with more than half of them in their early-to-mid-twenties, and none of the young ones particularly strike me as much of a leader. Furthermore, some of the older ones might be more inclined to take charge, but I suspect that they will come across as bossy, and the young, know-it-all castaways will resent it. So I predict at least two heated arguments before the episode is over.

Christiana’s Prediction #3

Amy will be the first to go, for exactly the reasons I mentioned above. She’s a corrections officer, and used to taking control of things. She’s also used to people having to do what she tells them under threat of force. This would not necessarily be a problem, except that, from her intro video, she doesn’t seem to realize the distinction between her job and working with people who she can’t smack around. This will not go well and they will boot her for it.

.

I posted about some preliminary trailers a few weeks back, international trailers, I think.

But now they've posted the final, official release trailer, and it's better than either of the others.

It's an EXCELLENT trailer. Check it out.

.

I don't have much to say now that I haven't already said, but let's put it out there.

What do all of you want to see happen tonight?


Also, if you need something to watch after Survivor, at 9, the WB is replaying the first episode of a new show that premiered on Tuesday. Supernatural. It's about a pair of brothers who are well-versed on ghosts and beasties of the night, since their father is a passionate, committed ghost hunter, searching for the think that killed his wife and their mother many years ago.

Now he's missing and the brothers must go on a road trip across the country trying to find him.

I watched the first episode and I was pretty darn impressed. It has a great cast, (talented and easy-on-the-eyes both!) and high-quality special effects, but most of all, it has some truly scary stuff. It's the best straight horror show I've seen in a long while.

It's not perfect. A lot of the "banter" is a little cliche and scripted in parts (though the cast manages to salvage much of it,) and there is a slight over-reliance on the sort of flickery-jump-cutty effect that was first popularized in The Ring. That said, let me reiterate that even the less original bits are presented with remarkable skill and there's plenty of original stuff as well.

.

I've been receiving a lot of hits in the last few days from people searching "Survivor Guatemala fantasy league" and have even received an email asking me about it.

What's the Survivor Fantasy League, you ask? Well, basically it's just a fun Internet companion game to Survivor, where you choose four of the castaways and are awarded points based on how they do on each week's episode. It can add an extra level of entertainment to the show, particularly during the early part of the season before the people's personalities really start to come out.

The new season starts this Thursday at 8 on CBS, but the main Survivor Site is still just the simple preview that they've had up for weeks. Where's the full site? Where's the Fantasy League signup?

Well, I don't have any official answers or inside information, but I suspect that two things are going on.

First, the fantasy league simply doesn't start until Episode 2. This is the same as the past two seasons, by the way. Presumably they want to have the premiere and let people get a better look at the castaways before they choose their tribe. So I don't think anybody has to worry that they're going to miss out on points because they were not able to sign up prior to the premiere this Thursday. Just remember to check back after the first episode airs. I'd bet good money that the full site and the fantasy league will be up and running by Friday morning.

So that explains the absence of the Fantasy League, but why still the bare-bones preview site? Well, remember that the previews talk about "not one big surprise, but two!"

Of course, it seems pretty clear that those surprises entail the return of Stephanie and Bobby John from Survivor Palau. It's not totally clear whether they will be playing the game in the normal way or whether they will be on the show in some other capacity. But I'd say that the full site isn't up yet in order to preserve the surprise, whatever form it may take.

So, as I said before, I don't "know" this stuff, it's just what makes sense to me.

Regardless, I'm psyched for this season, and can hardly wait for Thursday night.

Also, as I did last season, I plan to start a private tribe on the Survivor Fantasy League once it gets running. Everyone still picks their own four castaways, but the private tribe provides a handy way to compare your scores to those of all your friends. Also, the various tribes compete against all the other tribes, even though I don't think there is a prize for that.

If you want to be a part of my tribe, just let me know and give me an email address to send your invite to. Hannah, Kevin, and Mike(Meitin) did it last time. Are you in again this year? Also, anyone else with an interest, just drop me a line with the "Contact me" link and you're welcome to join too!

.

In these days of war and disaster and political infighting, it can be easy to lose perspective. The 24-hour news media permeates everything with an ever-thickening layer of gloom and scandal.

So in these troubled times, it is up to us to see that society does not lose sight of what really matters.

That's right, I'm talking about 1980's pop-rock.

So, in the interests of advancing the public debate, I have decided to compile a list of five songs that, to me, truly embody the 1980s. It is not that these are the best songs of the 80's per se, but rather that they represent the way I look at that decade.

So, on with the list, in no particular order...

Walk Like An Egyptian (The Bangles, 1986), (Video)

What the hell ever happened to songs that aren't about anything except some silly new "dance"? I think it must have been around the time that those glow-light sticks came into vogue, because suddenly you were supposed to look "cool" when you danced, and so bouncing around with your arms awkwardly trying to resemble an Egyptian hieroglyph suddenly gets you laughed at in the bad way instead of the good way.

Now I'm all for songs that make a powerful statement, using meaningful or poetic lyrics to make you think, or at least, to really make you feel something. But still, I think there's still room for songs that make you feel like dancing around with silly arm movements and a big goofy grin on your face.

See, it seems like fun was still allowed in the 80's. Now I think fun is making a bit of comeback recently, but for so long during the 90's and the early 00's it seemed like all we got was anger, angst or... um, I can't think of another a-word, but how about pretentious posturing?

But in the 80's it was still acceptable to have a big, non-drug-induced smile on your face while you were dancing, or even just while listening. And it is for sheer fun, that I nominate "Walk Like An Egyptian".

Oh whey oh!

Stand (REM, 1988), (Video)

REM's "Green" Album was the first album I ever bought. I was ten years old at the time, and I'd heard "Stand" on the radio. It was loads of fun and it felt... good. It felt right. Yeah! Stand in the place where you live! Think about direction! Singing along felt like being a part of something.

Only as I revisited the song years later did I realize how incredibly trite and stupid it is.

But here's the thing, it was written that way on purpose! Watch the video for crying out loud! There is no way in hell that was meant to be taken seriously, not even in the "fun" 80s. The band's guitarist came up with a pleasantly stupid, but catchy guitar riff, and challenged singer and songwriter, Michael Stipe, to come up with lyrics to match. Stipe, a notably political fellow, basically set out to write the stupidest, emptiest, shallowest lyrics he could think of.

So given that the whole song was kind of a joke, consider that "Stand" was R.E.M.'s first big hit, and it was largely the result of that song alone that they were launched to such prominence. The song was just like grilled-cheese made with Wonder-Bread and good old American cheese food product. Oh, and don't forget the margarine! So was it really any surprise that it went over like gangbusters? Clearly, I was not alone in failing to grasp the irony. Of course, I was only ten years old at the time. (I also really enjoyed another song on that album, "Orange Crush", because I also enjoyed Orange Crush.)

For a creative-writing class I took in college, I once wrote a satirical piece where all of the republicans in congress had gotten together to decide how best to deliberately destroy the environment. It was not so much an endorsement of any particular environmental policy, but a jab at the spurious and non-productive style of debate wherein it is assumed that the other side does not merely disagree with you, but is consciously setting out to do harm.

I got an "A" on the story, but at the bottom, the teacher wrote "Pretty scary."

I went up to her and asked. "It was supposed to be satire, did that not come through?"

"Oh, it did," she said. "It's just that it's kind of true."

So, it is in that vein, namely, satire being misunderstood as sincerity by the very people being satirized, that I say "Stand" represents the shallow, me-first, sanitized worldview held by many people (myself included) during the 1980s.

Still kinda fun to sing along to though...

Rock the Casbah (The Clash, 1982)

This song is included for similar, but subtly different reasons as "Stand". It wasn't satire really, but "Rock the Casbah" was, no question, one of The Clash's least politically-conscious songs. At the base of it, it's kinda about music censorship, but not in any really meaningful or coherent way. Check out this brief synopsis from Songfacts.com:

Joe Strummer wrote the lyrics about an Arab ruler (the Shereef) who hates music, but is defied by the citizens and even his own air force. Strummer was inspired by a news report of Iranians who were flogged for owning Disco albums.

Wow... deep stuff, eh? It's rebellious on approximately the same level as "Footloose."

But the thing is, The Clash were an extremely idealistic, outspoken, politically conscious band. And yet, this song, one of their "just for fun" songs, was one of only two Clash songs to even crack the US Top 40. In fact, when this song, out of all their songs, became a success, it eventually led to the breakup of the band, because they no longer felt like they had any credibility singing about rebellion and politics when they had made so much money singing about "that crazy casbah sound"!

American people have a tendency (we had it then, we have it now, we will have it for years to come) to overwhelmingly embrace fun, but shallow, things and to fundamentally reject anything with substance or meaning to it. And that tendency broke up The Clash, "The Only Band that Matters."

I hope you're happy.

One could make an argument that "Rock the Casbah" is, strictly from a musical perspective, one of their best songs, but that could potentially weaken my moral indignation.

Fact: "Rock the Casbah" was used as a rallying cry for US Troops during the first Gulf War.

Tainted Love (Soft Sell, 1981)

Why "Tainted Love"? Well, it's a kick-ass song, that's why! Want to make something of it?

It's not the subject matter or the societal context that lead me to nominate this one, but rather it's the music itself.

"Tainted Love" makes very heavy use of synthesizers and electronic noises to create a sound that just hadn't really been ever heard before, but was on the verge of exploding all over the place. "Tainted Love" is practically THE definitive 80's song, from a musical perspective. Memorable, singable lyrics, an unusual sound, a dancable, clappable beat. Any dance club with an 80s night had better plan on playing this one at least once a week for perpetuity.

Just to delve into societal context briefly, this song came out just as the AIDS epidemic was starting to get noticed. Though it was not written about AIDS, the parrallels are obvious.

Then in 1993, the song briefly regained its place in the forefront of American consciousness in 1993 with this Levis commercial. It's odd, because though I remember loving it at the time, the commercial now seems far more dated than the song itself.

Come On Eileen, (Partial Video)

Do I even have to explain this one?

Like "Tainted Love", I've included it primarily for how it musically embodies everything we mean when we talk about "80's music". Unusual instrumentation. Bouncy beat. Lyrics about awkward lust. And of course, what may be the single best-ever example of total nonsense words sung as though they are legitimate lyrics.

I challenge you to listen to this song and not sing along to the last "Too-ra-Loo-ra, Too-ra-Loo-rye-aye!"

If you can do it, you have no music in your soul.

And that makes five. Whew! That was a lot of work, but a lot of fun just the same.

So, what do you all think? Am I on the mark or way off base? Did I forget some infinitely superior example or just leave out your favorite? Comment, damn you!

.

Remember Das Keyboard, the keyboard for Communists?

Well, at last, there's a special keyboard, made just for pirates.

What's happening a week from now, you ask?

Well, Monday, September 19th is the Official Talk Like A Pirate Day!

Be sure to wear your eyepatch and brush up on your "Arrr's".

.

The Bad News Bears

I remember the original version of this film fondly, but I haven’t seen it in probably fifteen years. So I’m not really going to make much of an attempt to compare the two. My general impression is that it’s a pretty faithful remake of the same film, not really covering much new ground, but simply updating the story to modern-day, and turning up the “inappropriate conduct by children” knob a few notches, to keep pace with today’s culture. After all, a ten-year-old saying “hell” just isn’t as shocking these days.

Anyway, how is the film? Pretty good, but what struck me more than anything was a surprising amount of moral complexity. Sure Billy Bob Thornton is funny and watching him pour out a non-alcoholic beer so that he can refill the can with whisky is pretty entertaining. Sure the kids are cute and funny, even when they’re fighting. And sure, the classic formula of the sports movie is just as effective today as when the original was around. (Though of course, both versions subvert the formula in a fairly dramatic way that ventures into spoiler territory that I won’t go into here in case you had a deprived childhood.)

So the movie works just fine on that level, and why shouldn't it? It was directed by Richard Linklater, a fantastic filmmaker who has made many great films, most recently, the wonderful School of Rock and Before Sunset. Though this film isn't quite as good as either of those, you can still tell that he didn't phone it in. Just take a look at the way he takes what could have been a black-and-white, paint-by-numbers sports comedy, and made it into something that actually makes you think.

For example, Greg Kinnear's fantastic turn as Ray, the snobby, arrogant jerk of an opposing coach. He's the sort of guy that makes you want to just punch him in the face, even when, technically, he hasn't actually done anything to you.

He's the one that teaches his team that winning is the only thing while at the same time coating his words with a saccharine layer of political correctness. He's the one that suggests the Bears resign from the league after their first game "so that they don't keep embarrassing themselves like this." He's the one that keeps flattering Buttermaker (Thornton) and saying how much he respects the time Buttermaker spent in the major leagues. He does this up until Buttermaker sees through his BS and tells him where he can go. At which point Buttermaker becomes a "drunk, washed-up never-was."

So, an unredeemable jerk, right? He even proves it by yelling so aggressively at his own son on the pitcher's mound that his son actually falls over backwards in fear.

A total monster, right?

But wait, why was he so angry? Because his son, after being told to walk a batter, beaned him instead. Ray is furious. "You never throw at the batter! You could have hurt him!"

So yes, he's a jerk, and yes he's an overcompetitive asshole, but he doesn't play dirty, and though it's certainly not high on his list of priorities, he actually does care about the kids on both teams.

Even more striking is the moral grey areas that Buttermaker goes through. At first, the Bears are so bad that the only reasonable goal is simple improvement. At that stage, it's pretty easy to say "Win or lose, just do your best." But when they improve so much that the championship, and Ray's big trophy starts looking like a real possibility, suddenly, it's important that you beat him. He's such a jerk, you want to rub it in his face. You want to prove that his way of coaching isn't the only way to win. But soon, beating him becomes so important that you're screaming at a ten-year-old for dropping a pop-fly, or telling an eleven-year-old to "take one for the team."

In Buttermaker's zeal to triumph over Ray's arrogance and ruthless attitude, he starts acting just like him. Suddenly, the whole idea of what lessons these kids are supposed to be learning is called into question. What should these kids be taking away from their time in little league? Should it be that the the less-talented players should just keep their heads down, staying out of the way for the good of the team? Should it be that everyone should get to play even if it means the whole team loses?

Teaching ambition, teamwork and healthy competitive spirit is important, but how far can you take it without forgetting that these are kids playing a game?

(I want to take a moment here to quote a great line that doesn't directly relate to the above, but addresses a similar parantal quandary. Buttermaker suggests to one mother that, what with all the classes and activities her son is in, she doesn't ever actually spend any time with him, and doesn't really know him. "Are you telling me how to raise my kid?" she asks. "No," he replies. "But somebody should.")

I don't mean to be falling down solidly on either side of the issues I mentioned above. I only wanted to demonstrate the sorts of issues that this movie addresses. For a paint-by-numbers sports comedy, that's surprisingly sophisticated.

.

As far as raunchy sex comedies go, The 40 Year Old Virgin was truly a breath of fresh air. So many of the films in this genre come across as mean-spirited, frequently misogynistic and homophobic, basically nothing more than puerile attempts at making horny teenagers snicker.

Which is not to say that they can’t be a lot of fun anyway. I think there’s a little horny teenager in all of us, so sometimes those movies can be an entertaining way to spend a couple of hours.

Still, when I see a movie like this one, it just makes me realize how much better the others could be. The 40-Year-Old Virgin may not be the funniest raunchy sex comedy I’ve ever seen, though it might just be the best. How hard you laugh is not the only criteria with which we can judge the quality of a film, and this one delivers compelling sympathetic characters, an interesting, identifiable story, and a satisfying climax.

Oh, and it’s funny too, of course. I had a lot of fun with this one, but what I liked about it more than anything was that they weren’t laughs that made me feel guilty afterward. Steve Carrell’s character in this movie isn’t made out to be a complete freak who should be ridiculed. He’s a nice guy, a little awkward, a little shy, who, after a few bad experiences, simply stopped trying. Now, it’s still funny, but in a lesser film, he would have been, well, Napoleon Dynamite + 25 years. A hopeless nerd who pretty much brings it all on himself through his own actions.

In this film, he’s not a freak. He’s a guy with a problem. Furthermore, his more “experienced” friends who make it their mission in life to end his virgin-status, are demonstrated to be just as, if not more, screwed up as he is.

Gosh, I’m making this sound like a heartwarming touchy-feely thing, which it is, I guess, but that’s not to say it’s short of laughs. I guess I’m just emphasizing the heartwarming part because it’s so unusual. That’s what makes this movie stand out.

Raunchy sex comedies are a dime-a-dozen, mostly all just tired variations on the same theme. They can be entertaining just the same, but aside from laughing at the jokes, I bet you won’t still be thinking about the characters when the movie’s over. I bet you won’t feel like you actually learned something about the human condition.

Society sometimes makes it seem shameful to be inexperienced, but the other side of the “experience” coin is “baggage.” What a delight to find a film that can take an honest look at that and still manage to be funny at the same time.

.

So why should you see March of the Penguins? Well, for starters, to see all the cute penguins. Also you can… um, well, because of the…

Okay, pretty much the only reason to see it is to see all the cute penguins.

Want to see some cute penguins? Then go see March of the Penguins. It delivers.

That’s not to say it’s 100% cute. Penguins live in just about the most inhospitable environment on earth, and that they survive there is like the anecdote about the talking dog. It’s not that it speaks well, it’s just amazing that it speaks at all.

I mean, holy $#!T! These penguins are freaking crazy! Sure, they manage to survive well enough to maintain their population down there in Antarctica, but surely there’s an easier place to raise a chick. Basically the parents take turns starving for weeks at a time in order to shuttle food back and forth from the ocean to the only place where the ice is thick enough for the eggs to not fall through.

So it’s important to be aware before taking really little kids that some of the penguins die. Including some of the uber-cute babies. I don’t think that’s a reason not to take kids to see it, but it would be better to know its coming and not be taken off-guard.

So that aside noted, boy are there ever some cute penguins in this movie! The penguin is one of nature’s inherently silly-looking creatures. Think of it, thousands of them waddling across the ice in long single-file lines, occasionally flopping over onto their bellies and scooting along by pushing with their toes. Tiny bright-eyed baby penguins sitting on top of their daddy’s feet to stay off the ice and protected from the wind by the soft folds of their dad’s feathery belly. Occasionally sticking their head out to peep for food. How could you not want to see this movie?

I should also mention that the film has some great, if extremely anthropomorphizing, voice-over narration from Morgan Freeman, explaining some of the more bizarre things we see the penguins doing on screen. It also features some truly breathtaking landscapes, (icescapes?) and scenery.

On the whole, it doesn’t really advance the human condition, but it’s a fun, sweet documentary and a must for anyone who likes animals.

Did I mention the cute penguins?

.

Next up: Land of the Dead


I think I built this one up too much in my head before seeing it. This effect was probably exacerbated (What does that mean?) to some extent by the several unsuccessful attempts I made at seeing this before finally catching it at the $1.50 second-run theater.

That’s not to say it isn’t good. It is, but I guess I’d just been expecting something classic. Something iconic. It’s good, but it’s not iconic.

George A. Romero, of course, invented the zombie genre. The idea of reanimated corpses wasn’t new, but his Night of the Living Dead defined the cinematic zombie as we now know them and practically established the “trapped-in-a-farmhouse” horror sub-genre all by itself.

He followed it up with Dawn of the Dead,(Note: This is the original 1978 version, not the fun, but flawed 2004 remake.) which took the original premise and cranked it up a notch or two, adding a sharp layer of social satire along the way. ) Why do the zombies flock to the shopping mall? Well, as one of the characters suggests, they sort of remember. The mall used to be something important in their lives.

The third film, Day of the Dead, was really a more classic sequel, in the sense that it expanded on and continued the story, but didn’t really contribute any substantial new elements, except for Bub, a zombie subjected to numerous experiments by a military scientist, and demonstrates that the zombies do retain some semblance of memory and thought, as well as the ability to learn, even if dramatically reduced from their original levels. Day of the Dead, however, did not really feel like a new movie so much as it felt like watching the most recent episode of a TV show. More stuff happens, but the essential situation does not change except in the most superficial ways.

The fourth and most recent film, Land of the Dead, is an improvement in that regard, as well as in the re-emergence of the satiric elements that had made Dawn so good. It’s not that good though. I’d say that any zombie movie fan ought to see it, and not just for the sake of completeness but because it is actually pretty good. But you shouldn’t go in expecting something to knock your socks off.

As the film opens, we see that the thousands of zombies have started a sort of society. It is extremely rudimentary and mostly mimicked, but the zombies do seem to be developing some sort of community with one another. (Unfortunately, it is pretty clear by this point that the zombies will not just eventually run out of steam, as the characters in earlier films hoped.)

Humans (at least the ones in this film) live inside a barricaded city. They’ve managed to clear a significant area and have the borders sufficiently protected as to not be a major concern so much as an occasional irritation. But as is so often true, all throughout human history, the society layers itself into the have’s and have-not’s. The have’s, let by an oddly subdued Dennis Hopper, live in Fiddler’s Green, a high-rise with nearly all the comforts of home-as-it-was. Restaurants, shopping, booze, everything you could ask for. But of course, all that stuff has to come from somewhere, since nobody is manufacturing anything anymore. So the rich employ the poor to risk their lives, venturing out into the unprotected world to scavenge. But this is not a system where the hard-working entrepreneur can climb the ladder, as is made painfully clear to Cholo, (John Leguizamo). Nor is it a place where useful people are allowed to go their own way, not when they can be extorted to stick around. But if the poor in the city are poor, at least they have something to eat and somewhere to sleep. What then, are we to make of the zombies? They are seen by the residents of Fiddler’s Green to be largely the equivalent of uncooperative peasants.

So when things go bad, (and of course they do,) it’s not simply because the zombies manage to infiltrate the system, it’s because the corruption of the human city begins to rot itself out from within.

On the whole, the film has some cool images, the gore is pretty good, the make-up is good. (Though I was disappointed by my inabil