Tonight Jamie and I were discussing CERN's Large Hadron Collider, and it's possibilities for accidentally ending life, the universe and everything. And it was one of those instances where I felt a little bad, because we had wildly differing opinions regarding the possibilities of the worst case scenario.
I guess I made reference to the fact that if the Hadron Collider does, in fact, end Everything, I was okay with that.
I am, I think, in the minority on this one.
It boils down to a few things:
1) If I'm gonna be ended, I would prefer it happen by my atoms spontaneously zipping away from one another at the speed of light rather than, say, eating bad clams or something.
2) At least we were trying to learn something when we'd end the universe rather than getting into some petty political squabble that, frankly, isn't that important, and so we all wind up waiting twenty minutes for the rockets to come down on our heads.
3) I have nothing planned for next week, anyway
In some ways, I am intellectually aware that my survival instincts can't deal with the abstraction of sudden proton reversal, and I just can't get worked up about this Hadron Collider stuff. But having grown up under the threat of imminent nuclear war which could break out at any time and end the world twenty times over... I've kinda been figuring on reaping the whirlwind in some firey blaze since I was in first grade. Thanks, TV.
Anyhow, I'm about as worried about this as I am about the end times coming in 2012. With the added bonus of: hey, I could be sitting at my desk reading e-mail from Randy, and.. zip... that's it. We all get blue screened. There's nothing I can do about 99% of the ways we could go, and if you have to pick one... again, sudden protonic reversal seems not all that bad.
I also suggested to Jamie that even if the universe does end, all that energy has to go somewhere, and so in a trillion years of linear time, most likely we'll all be back doing exactly the same thing when the universe simply recreates itself, following roughly the same pattern.
Sure, we might be giant flagella-wielding manta rays or something as random circumstances effect minute changes in progress... but I'm pretty sure the universe, even destroyed, will sort itself out without us. I mean, we're just recombinant DNA packages swimming in a soft atmosphere passing data back and forth to one another, when you get down to it. Sort of just little self-running programs collecting and analyzing data and passing it on through DNA or sensory-based transfer (for now). In the grand scope of things, we're a blip in the infinite and not even a picamoment in the cosmic timeline, so...
Yeah. I'm not too worried.
The LHC is part of Machine: Earth, of the Solar System. If the systems running on Machine: Earth bluescreen, well, the universe will figure its way out somehow beyond our miniscule comprehension. There is cosmic-level systems support, I assure you.
And for all we know, this is but a reboot in which we've already been here countless times, and this is the one time we've gotten it right, so when they fire up the LHC, this time its smooth sailing.
You gotta think positive about these things.
Anyhoo, here's Yakko Warner putting things into perspective (and song):
Tuesday, September 09, 2008
Superman Animated and New Gods
Before anyone gets their panties in a bunch, Jack Kirby's "New Gods" aren't some religious whatzit. It refers to Kirby's crazy-bizarre ideas regarding a celestial race of beings spawned from the wars of celestial beings who may or may not have been the same or precursors to mythological figures of Earth culture. It's hazy.
But what you also need to know is: The New Gods are awesome.
If I tried to explain this scene, I would never do it justice...
But this weekend, while watching an old episode of the animated Superman show from the 1990's, I was reminded of how Timm's crew recognized that the show was a great opportunity to bring in Kirby's Fourth World characters. After all, they'd first been introduced in "Superman's Pal, Jimmy Olsen" (no, really. I have the issue.), so a Superman cartoon was a great excuse for them to bring these characters to the small screen.
Here's the nickel tour of how The New Gods stuff works:
The traded babies? Orion and Scott "Mr. Miracle" Free. Just FYI.
Keep in mind, this was just one of Kirby's ideas. The man is responsible for:
The Fantastic Four
Dr. Doom
The X-Men
Captain America
Thor
and I could keep going... But, suffice it to say, The Fourth World/ New Gods concepts were a later-era Kirby creation, dreamed up during a period when he was coming up with whole worlds between breakfast and lunch.
I posted the clip above because it's a pretty good summation of The New Gods, and I find Orion to be an underappreciated DC character. I have to thank WB animation for giving Orion his due.
Timm's team would carry Darkseid and Co. through as a major force in their DCU cartoons until the very final episode, providing for some of the best stories in what was a phenomenal set of series.
Anyway, if WB is looking for a mythology and villain for the relaunch of the Superman movies? And they want dark?
But what you also need to know is: The New Gods are awesome.
If I tried to explain this scene, I would never do it justice...
But this weekend, while watching an old episode of the animated Superman show from the 1990's, I was reminded of how Timm's crew recognized that the show was a great opportunity to bring in Kirby's Fourth World characters. After all, they'd first been introduced in "Superman's Pal, Jimmy Olsen" (no, really. I have the issue.), so a Superman cartoon was a great excuse for them to bring these characters to the small screen.
Here's the nickel tour of how The New Gods stuff works:
The traded babies? Orion and Scott "Mr. Miracle" Free. Just FYI.
Keep in mind, this was just one of Kirby's ideas. The man is responsible for:
The Fantastic Four
Dr. Doom
The X-Men
Captain America
Thor
and I could keep going... But, suffice it to say, The Fourth World/ New Gods concepts were a later-era Kirby creation, dreamed up during a period when he was coming up with whole worlds between breakfast and lunch.
I posted the clip above because it's a pretty good summation of The New Gods, and I find Orion to be an underappreciated DC character. I have to thank WB animation for giving Orion his due.
Timm's team would carry Darkseid and Co. through as a major force in their DCU cartoons until the very final episode, providing for some of the best stories in what was a phenomenal set of series.
Anyway, if WB is looking for a mythology and villain for the relaunch of the Superman movies? And they want dark?
Monday, September 08, 2008
Simon to run in Terry Fox thingamajig
Simon is in some sort of Canadian foot race where he'll be raising money to research cancer. Leaguers should support Simon as he participates in the Terry Fox Run 2008.
Whenever I hear the name of Terry Fox, I am reminded of the set of books called Value Tales my mom got me as a kid about famous people who represented various values and virtues a good little kid was supposed to internalize. Its how I learned about Jackie Robinson as a kid, Terry Fox, Ben Franklin, Harriet Tubman... we must have had three dozen of those books. They came mail order, and it was always a big day when we'd get them in the mail (shortly after we quit getting Sweet Pickles).
I looked it up, and... looks like you parents could be landing these books for your kids. go here. (Terry Fox has, ironically, been left out by the new publishers.)
Anyway, I'll always remember the Terry Fox book because... well, here's Wikipedia on Terry Fox.
So, anyway... you may be a lazy SOB, but Terry wasn't, and Simon isn't... so give a donation, Leaguers.
Whenever I hear the name of Terry Fox, I am reminded of the set of books called Value Tales my mom got me as a kid about famous people who represented various values and virtues a good little kid was supposed to internalize. Its how I learned about Jackie Robinson as a kid, Terry Fox, Ben Franklin, Harriet Tubman... we must have had three dozen of those books. They came mail order, and it was always a big day when we'd get them in the mail (shortly after we quit getting Sweet Pickles).
I looked it up, and... looks like you parents could be landing these books for your kids. go here. (Terry Fox has, ironically, been left out by the new publishers.)
Anyway, I'll always remember the Terry Fox book because... well, here's Wikipedia on Terry Fox.
So, anyway... you may be a lazy SOB, but Terry wasn't, and Simon isn't... so give a donation, Leaguers.
Recluse Weekend
As some of you know, Jamie was out of town from Friday morning until Sunday afternoon. Jamie returned to Lawton for the weekend for a high school reunion (which was sort of informal, and a "girls who grew up together" sort of thing, and so I did not attend).
Jamie's absence left me in a curious position.
As a married gent, it is not often that I am left to my own devices for such an extended period. We enjoy spending time together, and as such, neither of us ever get too weird and Gollem-like.
But rather than run around and fill my weekend with social-butterfly-ness, making friends entertain me, I spent quiet time with the pets. Watched some TV, an episode of Mad Men, read a stack of comics, and worked on my long-suffering prose piece. I'm still pretty embarrassed about the whole thing, but I did get some pages done, which I haven't in a long, long time. It's odd to talk about it, but I figure if I talk about it here, maybe I'll feel like I can keep moving forward.
Plus, I spent time trying to figure out if Matthew Sweet was dead. (He is not.)
I did try an experiment to see if I could make it all day Saturday without leaving the house, but that fizzled when I went stir-crazy and went to Target for dog food.
Plus, I was involved in a post-car-wreck phone-relay scenario with Letty & Juan and Lauren & Steven. I think Lauren is okay. Hopefully she'll pop up and tell us.
Aside from that, I just watched the UT game and took Mel and Lucy for a nice, long walk (I don't want to screw it up by talking about it, but the temperatures have been nice at night here lately).
Today I hung out with Jason a bit, watched some pro-ball (hooray, Cowboys!), and was happy to see Jamie returned to me in one piece. Mostly, I just missed her. It is nice to have her home.
Jamie's absence left me in a curious position.
As a married gent, it is not often that I am left to my own devices for such an extended period. We enjoy spending time together, and as such, neither of us ever get too weird and Gollem-like.
But rather than run around and fill my weekend with social-butterfly-ness, making friends entertain me, I spent quiet time with the pets. Watched some TV, an episode of Mad Men, read a stack of comics, and worked on my long-suffering prose piece. I'm still pretty embarrassed about the whole thing, but I did get some pages done, which I haven't in a long, long time. It's odd to talk about it, but I figure if I talk about it here, maybe I'll feel like I can keep moving forward.
Plus, I spent time trying to figure out if Matthew Sweet was dead. (He is not.)
I did try an experiment to see if I could make it all day Saturday without leaving the house, but that fizzled when I went stir-crazy and went to Target for dog food.
Plus, I was involved in a post-car-wreck phone-relay scenario with Letty & Juan and Lauren & Steven. I think Lauren is okay. Hopefully she'll pop up and tell us.
Aside from that, I just watched the UT game and took Mel and Lucy for a nice, long walk (I don't want to screw it up by talking about it, but the temperatures have been nice at night here lately).
Today I hung out with Jason a bit, watched some pro-ball (hooray, Cowboys!), and was happy to see Jamie returned to me in one piece. Mostly, I just missed her. It is nice to have her home.
Sunday, September 07, 2008
Press arrests at Convention
My old college pal Robb was one of the protesters arrested in New York at the 2004 Republican Convention. For those of us who assume that we're living in a country of a fairly solid system, and where the cops are there as servants of the community (as well as lawyers, etc...) Robb's story is a reminder how quickly that can turn on a dime. But, it's also one of how little dissent is tolerated.
Robb was never injured, by the way, or anything like that. But he did get the good cop/ bad cop interrogation room treatment. And for those of you who know Robb, in some ways, I feel almost sorry for the cops in trying to get him to play along (or even get what they were up to.).
This morning on PBS's "Now", they had a story on Amy Goodman, a reporter for "Democracy Now". It didn't get too much play during the Republican Convention, but St. Paul saw some significant protests last week.
Now, I don't want for readers to assume I agree with the protesters, or think that smashing windows is, in any way, a good idea. I know those protesters have no idea how badly their message plays when they take things that direction, and don't really get "it".
But I don't care what your slant is as a reporter. The story surrounding Goodman's arrest and the arrest of her crew should be shocking to everyone.
Unfortunately, "Democracy Now!" is not a mainstream news organization. That doesn't indicate they are an illegitimate organization, or that the political leanings of their organization were even known or the press status of the crew was acknowledged by the police. They could have been working for "The Christian Science Monitor" for all the cops noticed.
Goodman was texted from her post on the floor of the Convention that her team had been arrested while covering a protest. The footage is her rushing out to the police line to see what's going on.
Here's the producer getting arrested. Note, she is wearing press credentials and shouting "Press" repeatedly.
Apparently after this the cops, dissatisfied with her prone position, put a knee in her back and dragged her across the asphalt, getting her face cut up.
Curiously, the St. Paul police are "investigating" the incident, not to see if the police in question acted out of turn, but whether or not they should drop the charges against the "Democracy Now!" team.
All of this was preceded, I should note, by the iWitness video team being arrested BEFORE the convention even started. iWitness video is a watchdog organization that records police action in potentially volatile situations (such as the RNC 2004). They were raided before the convention for, essentially, the potential trouble the St. Paul/ Minneapolis police felt they could create. The charge? The cops claim that there was a reported "hostage" situation they were investigating...
I know some Leaguers will believe that Goodman and the iWitness folks aren't any different from any other hippie protesters. And, of course, protesters get what they deserve. But, keep in mind, "Democracy Now!" was a credentialed, accredited, badge-wearing crew. Goodman also states that a Secret Service agent came by AFTER she was in cuffs and took her credentials off her neck without her permission.
I'm not pointing at the RNC for culpability, instead I would point toward recent trends in how protesters are being handled, and how the St. Paul police is being instructed to handle protesters by the FBI, Secret Service, etc... And how that's spread now, indiscriminately, to the press.
Leaguers, this is seriously, seriously messed up. I don't really know why NBC, ABC, CNN, Fox, etc... aren't covering the "Democracy Now!" story, but I would guess they're far more focused right now on the actual candidates and enjoying the comforts those candidates extend to the press corps.
But if reporters now have to worry about not just getting arrested (and getting roughed up despite no signs of resisting arrest), is that something we're comfortable with...?
Washington Post
Seattle Post Intelligencer
USA Today
iWitness video
For how not to stage a protest (you dingbats) read here
Robb was never injured, by the way, or anything like that. But he did get the good cop/ bad cop interrogation room treatment. And for those of you who know Robb, in some ways, I feel almost sorry for the cops in trying to get him to play along (or even get what they were up to.).
This morning on PBS's "Now", they had a story on Amy Goodman, a reporter for "Democracy Now". It didn't get too much play during the Republican Convention, but St. Paul saw some significant protests last week.
Now, I don't want for readers to assume I agree with the protesters, or think that smashing windows is, in any way, a good idea. I know those protesters have no idea how badly their message plays when they take things that direction, and don't really get "it".
But I don't care what your slant is as a reporter. The story surrounding Goodman's arrest and the arrest of her crew should be shocking to everyone.
Unfortunately, "Democracy Now!" is not a mainstream news organization. That doesn't indicate they are an illegitimate organization, or that the political leanings of their organization were even known or the press status of the crew was acknowledged by the police. They could have been working for "The Christian Science Monitor" for all the cops noticed.
Goodman was texted from her post on the floor of the Convention that her team had been arrested while covering a protest. The footage is her rushing out to the police line to see what's going on.
Here's the producer getting arrested. Note, she is wearing press credentials and shouting "Press" repeatedly.
Apparently after this the cops, dissatisfied with her prone position, put a knee in her back and dragged her across the asphalt, getting her face cut up.
Curiously, the St. Paul police are "investigating" the incident, not to see if the police in question acted out of turn, but whether or not they should drop the charges against the "Democracy Now!" team.
All of this was preceded, I should note, by the iWitness video team being arrested BEFORE the convention even started. iWitness video is a watchdog organization that records police action in potentially volatile situations (such as the RNC 2004). They were raided before the convention for, essentially, the potential trouble the St. Paul/ Minneapolis police felt they could create. The charge? The cops claim that there was a reported "hostage" situation they were investigating...
I know some Leaguers will believe that Goodman and the iWitness folks aren't any different from any other hippie protesters. And, of course, protesters get what they deserve. But, keep in mind, "Democracy Now!" was a credentialed, accredited, badge-wearing crew. Goodman also states that a Secret Service agent came by AFTER she was in cuffs and took her credentials off her neck without her permission.
I'm not pointing at the RNC for culpability, instead I would point toward recent trends in how protesters are being handled, and how the St. Paul police is being instructed to handle protesters by the FBI, Secret Service, etc... And how that's spread now, indiscriminately, to the press.
Leaguers, this is seriously, seriously messed up. I don't really know why NBC, ABC, CNN, Fox, etc... aren't covering the "Democracy Now!" story, but I would guess they're far more focused right now on the actual candidates and enjoying the comforts those candidates extend to the press corps.
But if reporters now have to worry about not just getting arrested (and getting roughed up despite no signs of resisting arrest), is that something we're comfortable with...?
Washington Post
Seattle Post Intelligencer
USA Today
iWitness video
For how not to stage a protest (you dingbats) read here
Saturday, September 06, 2008
People I have Mistakenly Believed Were Dead
Actor R. Lee Ermey. The drill sergeant from "Full Metal Jacket". I thought he died two years ago, but it doesn't appear that's the case.
This Guy from my my Church when I was about 14. I totally got my retirees mixed up, and thought the wrong guy died. So I'm sitting in the hallway at church, and here comes the dead guy in white robes walking toward me... Well, as I mentioned, it was a case of mistaken identity, and the other guy was in the choir. But for about ten seconds there, I thought the dude was haunting the @#$% out of me.
Zsa Zsa Gabor. Apparently... still alive.
Musician Matthew Sweet. I have no idea why I thought Sweet was dead, but I was surprised to see he had a new album in a recent issue of Entertainment Weekly. He could have been pulling a Tupac, I suppose. But a quick Wikipedia check indicates the guy is still alive.
New Kids on the Block. Apparently still hangin' tough. They have a new album, too.
Dracula.
Have you ever thought someone (famous or otherwise) was dead, but they weren't?
This Guy from my my Church when I was about 14. I totally got my retirees mixed up, and thought the wrong guy died. So I'm sitting in the hallway at church, and here comes the dead guy in white robes walking toward me... Well, as I mentioned, it was a case of mistaken identity, and the other guy was in the choir. But for about ten seconds there, I thought the dude was haunting the @#$% out of me.
Zsa Zsa Gabor. Apparently... still alive.
Musician Matthew Sweet. I have no idea why I thought Sweet was dead, but I was surprised to see he had a new album in a recent issue of Entertainment Weekly. He could have been pulling a Tupac, I suppose. But a quick Wikipedia check indicates the guy is still alive.
New Kids on the Block. Apparently still hangin' tough. They have a new album, too.
Dracula.
Have you ever thought someone (famous or otherwise) was dead, but they weren't?
Friday, September 05, 2008
Some Quick Stuff for Friday
A) If you don't watch Venture Bros., I can't help you.
B) DC has really been trying to figure out how to capitalize on the kid's market. It looks like they're combining the ideas of "Tiny Titans" (the comic series I recommend for, literally, everybody) and their Super Friends line of toys and comic. `
They're introducing DCU Elementary at some point soon, which will feature the mainstays of the DCU re-imagined as kids in school.
Why is Wonder WOman/ Girl just sitting there?
I can't tell you how brilliant I find this image.
The DCU Elementary clearly isn't too hip yet to that whole "integration" thing. Seriously, DC?
This is a technical thing, but DC Comics is currently in a legal dispute with the Siegel family regarding ownership of the character "Superboy", which led to the removal of the 90's-introduced Superboy from the DCU proper. I wonder what they'll call Clark?
C) Apparently a teacher is trying to get copies of DC's "Kingdom Come" for his ESL class. I don't know if kids unfamiliar with comics will get all the bits and pieces, or appreciate the statement against the excesses of 90's-era comics...
But its also a great story without all that stuff, too... Anyway, this is another comics-related chairty sort of thing, but the guy is asking for a lot less money.
Here.
D) Every once in a while I really wish I were in New York. Apparently there's going to be an original all-tap-dance opera about Superheroes coming to the Big Apple as part of a festival. Were I there, I would be all over this.
B) DC has really been trying to figure out how to capitalize on the kid's market. It looks like they're combining the ideas of "Tiny Titans" (the comic series I recommend for, literally, everybody) and their Super Friends line of toys and comic. `
They're introducing DCU Elementary at some point soon, which will feature the mainstays of the DCU re-imagined as kids in school.
Why is Wonder WOman/ Girl just sitting there?
I can't tell you how brilliant I find this image.
The DCU Elementary clearly isn't too hip yet to that whole "integration" thing. Seriously, DC?
This is a technical thing, but DC Comics is currently in a legal dispute with the Siegel family regarding ownership of the character "Superboy", which led to the removal of the 90's-introduced Superboy from the DCU proper. I wonder what they'll call Clark?
C) Apparently a teacher is trying to get copies of DC's "Kingdom Come" for his ESL class. I don't know if kids unfamiliar with comics will get all the bits and pieces, or appreciate the statement against the excesses of 90's-era comics...
But its also a great story without all that stuff, too... Anyway, this is another comics-related chairty sort of thing, but the guy is asking for a lot less money.
Here.
D) Every once in a while I really wish I were in New York. Apparently there's going to be an original all-tap-dance opera about Superheroes coming to the Big Apple as part of a festival. Were I there, I would be all over this.
Wednesday, September 03, 2008
ABC Family's "The Middleman"
It is way, way too late for this post as I'm not sure there are even any episodes left for this show in its first season.
But that doesn't mean I won't give it a League salute, anyway.
The Middleman is about our hero, Wendy Watson, who has been recruited as the sidekick for an operative who stands as "The Middleman" between humanity and the bizarre and arcane forces at work to destroy/ conquer/ hassle the world. Wendy's artist roommate from her pre-Middle-life, and the various artists sharing her illegal sublet are also all main and recurring characters. As well as The Middleman's robotic assistant, Ida.
The League has to give the show the highest marks.
Leads Matt Keeslar and Natalie Morales are both great in their respective roles as The Middleman (no other name is given) and Wendy Watson. Keeslar's Middleman is an outdated brand of milk drinking, profanity-eschewing guy in the white hat, while Morales's Dub-Dub is dead-pan perfect no matter how bizarre the threat.
The bottom-line in development for the show is: fun.
Wendy and The Middleman pose as employees of "The Jolly Fats Wehawkins Temp Agency", a job so dull sounding that nobody is really that interested in what they actually do. And meanwhile spin improbable identities to investigate the various sites effected by the paranormal.
Whether facing down zombie-fish, alien invaders posing as boy bands, or cursed hand puppets, nobody really takes things too seriously. What shouldn't work about the show, but does, is the ongoing subplots, from Wendy Watson's roommate falling for her boss, to the annoying son of the landlord, Pip... it all hangs together in a way unique for any show.
Sure, it helps if you have a background rich in sci-fi, comics, action movies, etc... And can catch the rapidfire delivery of throw-away pop references.
Mary Pat Gleason as Ida is pretty awesome
Anyhow, you crew seem like the sort of folks this show is aimed at, and I'd love to see the program get another season. So help me out and watch the show, too.
Look for it on ABC Family on Monday evenings.
But that doesn't mean I won't give it a League salute, anyway.
The Middleman is about our hero, Wendy Watson, who has been recruited as the sidekick for an operative who stands as "The Middleman" between humanity and the bizarre and arcane forces at work to destroy/ conquer/ hassle the world. Wendy's artist roommate from her pre-Middle-life, and the various artists sharing her illegal sublet are also all main and recurring characters. As well as The Middleman's robotic assistant, Ida.
The League has to give the show the highest marks.
Leads Matt Keeslar and Natalie Morales are both great in their respective roles as The Middleman (no other name is given) and Wendy Watson. Keeslar's Middleman is an outdated brand of milk drinking, profanity-eschewing guy in the white hat, while Morales's Dub-Dub is dead-pan perfect no matter how bizarre the threat.
The bottom-line in development for the show is: fun.
Wendy and The Middleman pose as employees of "The Jolly Fats Wehawkins Temp Agency", a job so dull sounding that nobody is really that interested in what they actually do. And meanwhile spin improbable identities to investigate the various sites effected by the paranormal.
Whether facing down zombie-fish, alien invaders posing as boy bands, or cursed hand puppets, nobody really takes things too seriously. What shouldn't work about the show, but does, is the ongoing subplots, from Wendy Watson's roommate falling for her boss, to the annoying son of the landlord, Pip... it all hangs together in a way unique for any show.
Sure, it helps if you have a background rich in sci-fi, comics, action movies, etc... And can catch the rapidfire delivery of throw-away pop references.
Mary Pat Gleason as Ida is pretty awesome
Anyhow, you crew seem like the sort of folks this show is aimed at, and I'd love to see the program get another season. So help me out and watch the show, too.
Look for it on ABC Family on Monday evenings.
Quick Post
Hey. Well, I don't have much time to post, so, you know, enjoy the archives, and ponder this:
Jamie's pal from her days in frontier town Lawton, Oklahoma, is here. Rebecca lives in Nashville these days. Anyhoo, it'd be kind of weird and rude for me to sit here and blog while she's here.
So...
Ya'll rock on.
Jamie's pal from her days in frontier town Lawton, Oklahoma, is here. Rebecca lives in Nashville these days. Anyhoo, it'd be kind of weird and rude for me to sit here and blog while she's here.
So...
Ya'll rock on.
Superman Inspired Goodness?
It seems that JLA and Identity Crisis writer Brad Meltzer has started the ball rolling on a great, multi-pronged project.
He's involved with an organization called "Ordinary People Change the World", which invites people from all walks of life to engage in civic responsibility and help others.
Meltzer has started a group, or sub-group, called "The Siegel and Shuster Society" which is working to raise funds toward the preservation of the home Jerry Siegel lived in through his twenties, and where he was living when he developed the idea for Superman. Read more here.
I think its worth noting that Meltzer hasn't just focused on the preservation of the Siegel home, but has hitched the Siegel and Shuster Society to the greater effort of Ordinary People Change the World, encouraging folks to find other ways in which they can help their community.
Meltzer had teamed with a number of comic professionals to obtain items for bid whose proceeds will benefit the Siegel and Shuster Society, and begin restoration of the century-old home in Cleveland. The items are all, invariably, awesome. Which means I can't actually afford any of them, but you can also just donate, or purchase a shirt from the Society (which will also help out).
Keep in mind, they aren't trying to make a museum out of the house (yet). They're trying to get the house into better shape for the couple who actually lives in the house every day.
Figure out a way in which you can participate.
He's involved with an organization called "Ordinary People Change the World", which invites people from all walks of life to engage in civic responsibility and help others.
Meltzer has started a group, or sub-group, called "The Siegel and Shuster Society" which is working to raise funds toward the preservation of the home Jerry Siegel lived in through his twenties, and where he was living when he developed the idea for Superman. Read more here.
I think its worth noting that Meltzer hasn't just focused on the preservation of the Siegel home, but has hitched the Siegel and Shuster Society to the greater effort of Ordinary People Change the World, encouraging folks to find other ways in which they can help their community.
Meltzer had teamed with a number of comic professionals to obtain items for bid whose proceeds will benefit the Siegel and Shuster Society, and begin restoration of the century-old home in Cleveland. The items are all, invariably, awesome. Which means I can't actually afford any of them, but you can also just donate, or purchase a shirt from the Society (which will also help out).
Keep in mind, they aren't trying to make a museum out of the house (yet). They're trying to get the house into better shape for the couple who actually lives in the house every day.
Figure out a way in which you can participate.
Tuesday, September 02, 2008
Out of Africa
So yesterday I watched a movie I'd DVR'd over the weekend "Out of Africa".
It was a movie I was pretty sure I'd seen before, but realized I'd only seen a few bits, and running at 2 hours, 45 minutes, I had seen only a snippet.
The story is based on the book and, roughly, life of Karen Blixen (pen name Isak Denisen), and her years living on and running a farm in Kenya from the mid 1910's to 1931.
The cast is led by Meryl Streep and Robert Redford, who were revered (for right or wrong) during the 1980's in a way that is no longer in practice for a mass audience, although internet noise may be giving me a false impression, what with how many sites insist I love Megan Fox of Transformers fame. And it's not hard to see how Streep gained the reputation she's still riding, even when she partakes in more whimsical movies like "Mamma Mia!" these days.
The pacing is glacial, but still engaging. Director Sydney Pollack (whose only other work I've seen is "Tootsie" and "Jeremiah Johnson"), doesn't quite insist on the dreamlike state of a Terrence Malick movie, but lets the wide open setting of the African foothills and the years in which the story occurs dictate the pacing of the story.
The story shouldn't have been the sort of thing I would normally get wrapped up in. In many ways, its a domestic melodrama that happens to stretch over years among aristocrats acting as lords of the manor, pushing back against the march of progress. And, were I thinking of a paper to write in film school, most certainly one could have a field day comparing and contrasting Scarlett from "Gone with the Wind" and Karen Blixen.
Streep's Blixen, accurate or not, is a powerful character, and is most likely the sort of role actresses are seeking when they complain that there are no good roles written for women. What's daunting in our post-PC era is guessing how the relationships actually worked with the colonists and the folks already living on the land which they carved up. But the messy relations of the colonists, and especially Blixen's relationship with Denys Hatton are easy enough to buy into without the usual eye-rolling moments of romantic plots.
While watching the movie it struck me how seldom I take time for movies that don't star superheroes, robots, aliens and/ or gorillas. Maybe a good part of that is my intolerance for the movie crowds that I recall putting up with at the multiplex in Gilbert, Arizona when we'd go see movies like "The Aviator" (which I really wanted to see), or even a flashier movie like "Chicago".
I also made a comment to Jamie, as the movie was wrapping, that they really don't make movies like "Out of Africa" anymore. Jamie disagreed, and in retrospect, I have to agree with her. I just don't go see a wide variety of movies anymore.
I sent Jamie with Nicole to go see "Atonement" without me, but I honestly don't know how it stacks up. Sometimes its better to let the "epics" stand some test of time rather than walking into a movie that is desperately trying to emulate greater movies, and just doesn't really pull it off.
I was burned out by the "Upstairs, Downstairs" type films, and movies about crossing over class lines in British society that, really... Until someone has something new to say about the caste system of early 20th Century Britain, don't call me, I'll call you, "Gosford Park".
Your mileage may vary for "There Will be Blood" (Steven), but at least the movie unapologetically set its own pacing and wasn't afraid to tell a multi-year story. Curious that movies that are so formal in so many other ways from a technical standpoint are most often the ones that bend the rules of hard pacing Hollywood so adores.
And I'm not one to usually buy into epic love stories. Because I get terribly impatient with people I actually know in romantic entanglements, I really don't want to see two people pine for each other for 2 hours on screen. And maybe Blixen's direct approach to the romance in her story won me over for that exact reason. It makes the arc of the whole thing feel that much less like Hollywood machinery.
Perhaps as the fall begins to roll out "serious" movies, I might quit being The Grinch and try something a bit out of my comfort zone.
Jason will be delighted to hear lions appear several times in the course of the movie.
It was a movie I was pretty sure I'd seen before, but realized I'd only seen a few bits, and running at 2 hours, 45 minutes, I had seen only a snippet.
The story is based on the book and, roughly, life of Karen Blixen (pen name Isak Denisen), and her years living on and running a farm in Kenya from the mid 1910's to 1931.
The cast is led by Meryl Streep and Robert Redford, who were revered (for right or wrong) during the 1980's in a way that is no longer in practice for a mass audience, although internet noise may be giving me a false impression, what with how many sites insist I love Megan Fox of Transformers fame. And it's not hard to see how Streep gained the reputation she's still riding, even when she partakes in more whimsical movies like "Mamma Mia!" these days.
The pacing is glacial, but still engaging. Director Sydney Pollack (whose only other work I've seen is "Tootsie" and "Jeremiah Johnson"), doesn't quite insist on the dreamlike state of a Terrence Malick movie, but lets the wide open setting of the African foothills and the years in which the story occurs dictate the pacing of the story.
The story shouldn't have been the sort of thing I would normally get wrapped up in. In many ways, its a domestic melodrama that happens to stretch over years among aristocrats acting as lords of the manor, pushing back against the march of progress. And, were I thinking of a paper to write in film school, most certainly one could have a field day comparing and contrasting Scarlett from "Gone with the Wind" and Karen Blixen.
Streep's Blixen, accurate or not, is a powerful character, and is most likely the sort of role actresses are seeking when they complain that there are no good roles written for women. What's daunting in our post-PC era is guessing how the relationships actually worked with the colonists and the folks already living on the land which they carved up. But the messy relations of the colonists, and especially Blixen's relationship with Denys Hatton are easy enough to buy into without the usual eye-rolling moments of romantic plots.
While watching the movie it struck me how seldom I take time for movies that don't star superheroes, robots, aliens and/ or gorillas. Maybe a good part of that is my intolerance for the movie crowds that I recall putting up with at the multiplex in Gilbert, Arizona when we'd go see movies like "The Aviator" (which I really wanted to see), or even a flashier movie like "Chicago".
I also made a comment to Jamie, as the movie was wrapping, that they really don't make movies like "Out of Africa" anymore. Jamie disagreed, and in retrospect, I have to agree with her. I just don't go see a wide variety of movies anymore.
I sent Jamie with Nicole to go see "Atonement" without me, but I honestly don't know how it stacks up. Sometimes its better to let the "epics" stand some test of time rather than walking into a movie that is desperately trying to emulate greater movies, and just doesn't really pull it off.
I was burned out by the "Upstairs, Downstairs" type films, and movies about crossing over class lines in British society that, really... Until someone has something new to say about the caste system of early 20th Century Britain, don't call me, I'll call you, "Gosford Park".
Your mileage may vary for "There Will be Blood" (Steven), but at least the movie unapologetically set its own pacing and wasn't afraid to tell a multi-year story. Curious that movies that are so formal in so many other ways from a technical standpoint are most often the ones that bend the rules of hard pacing Hollywood so adores.
And I'm not one to usually buy into epic love stories. Because I get terribly impatient with people I actually know in romantic entanglements, I really don't want to see two people pine for each other for 2 hours on screen. And maybe Blixen's direct approach to the romance in her story won me over for that exact reason. It makes the arc of the whole thing feel that much less like Hollywood machinery.
Perhaps as the fall begins to roll out "serious" movies, I might quit being The Grinch and try something a bit out of my comfort zone.
Jason will be delighted to hear lions appear several times in the course of the movie.
Movie Trailers now 100% less Awesome
Movie trailer voiceover maestro Don LaFontaine has passed on.
An article here.
yeah, it's the "In a world..." guy.
I am sad to hear this news. Not only was LaFontaine only 68, but we'll now be denied the voice my generation associates with the movies.
Godspeed, sir. May your merging with the infinite be as exciting as your voiceovers.
An article here.
yeah, it's the "In a world..." guy.
I am sad to hear this news. Not only was LaFontaine only 68, but we'll now be denied the voice my generation associates with the movies.
Godspeed, sir. May your merging with the infinite be as exciting as your voiceovers.
Monday, September 01, 2008
Unpolitical Comic Fodder
A new post up about the value of a single vision within the DCU.
The REAL news is that Leaguer Simon has joined up at Comic Fodder. He's reviewing collections and trades, I think, which will fill a HUGE gap in the Comic Fodder galaxy of stars.
Here's his first post on Ellis and Cassaday's "Planetary".
The REAL news is that Leaguer Simon has joined up at Comic Fodder. He's reviewing collections and trades, I think, which will fill a HUGE gap in the Comic Fodder galaxy of stars.
Here's his first post on Ellis and Cassaday's "Planetary".
Sunday, August 31, 2008
Getting Political
Ahhhh... It's that time in a young country's life when so many things are due for a change. That country keeps hearing about "Change" and may even be discovering girls (on the ticket).
For folks newer to the site, here's some background:
The site was originally a bit more political. I was deeply dissatisfied with the Bush administration and the push to war in Iraq (do not equate this with a push into Afghanistan or other Al Qaeda related pushes of the day). The American press was rolling over for talking point dispatches, and more than I was bothered by Bush's strategies, I was deeply bothered by the way the press was happy to play along.
I should note, the force singly most responsible for the creation of League of Melbotis is a thought-provoking conservative in his own right. And while he and I could disagree, there was always an opportunity for me to see things from a new angle. I have no idea if he felt the same way, but that was something I could take away from it.
That's really all I ask out of political discussion. Rational discourse. Keep the emotion to a limited degree (I've been known to get pretty hot about certain issues, I confess), and trying not to deny logic in an argument.
I started LoM in the Boogeyman Era of politics, where the call of the day was "If you don't support X, you hate America", "If you don't buy into Y, you hate our troops", "If you don't agree to Z, you hate freedom", and, my favorite "You're trying to appease the terrorists!". No other time in the history of man has the phrase "appease" been bandied about so much.
For me, the end result of the Bush/ Cable News era, sadly, has been a sneering cynicism about politics in general. Cynicism = bad. If you find our system goofy, go live in Canada, right? Whatever.
Instead, it's been a 7 year lesson in watching the entire populace (who supposedly took high school civics) look the other direction as the law and basic decency have been put to the curb for expediency.
Worse, possibly, it's ingrained in me a cynicism about party loyalists of any stripe. If folks will believe anything That Guy says, why should I believe anything Our Guy says?
It's sort of left me with the impression that we are not so far away from our silver-back respecting primate cousins. There's a reason that against all logic, we spent 100,000 years erecting kings to live in palaces while we toiled on turnip farms and paid them taxes, believing God himself had selected Our Guy for the job. When push came to shove, if we backed Our Guy and adorned him in jewels and let him kick the crap out of us, maybe when the jerks from the other side of the island showed up to kill us and take our turnips, our belief that Our Guy was the REAL guy (and not THEIR jewel adorned guy, who was so obviously a jerk) God would help us smite our enemies.
And because winners tend to write history, sure, God was on our side.
Despite our proclamations of love for the system, I'm not convinced we're not all secret monarchists at heart, in search of a king (or queen). We choose our candidates by how they support the lifestyle we believe we (and everyone else) should be living. We don't look to candidates to change our ways with new and challenging ideas. Every four years is a chance to crown new royalty, and to feel some small victory when or if the victor is the one who confirms our preconceived notions.
If Our Guy wins, things will be better for everyone. He will protect our turnips. Or at least the way we think turnips should be raised and distributed. If the other guy wins, we'll all be turnipless.
The improvement in the situation is that we have an opportunity to choose which guy we're going to go with on this turnip situation very four harvests.
A bit of personal frustration I find in myself is that I absolutely have knee-jerk reactions, and despite the abundance of information available on candidates and their game plans for the future that I came to a decision so quickly regarding who was My Guy. I found myself rationalizing criticisms of My Guy, and backing shakier criticisms against All Those Other Guys. As it's become Our Guy vs. Their Guy (and Our Guy-1 vs. Their Guy-1), things are starting to get serious.
But I don't take any of the candidates all that seriously. You can't.
I often have no idea if My Guy's plans will work. It's just that My Guy's plans sound more like something I'd do than The Other Guy's plans. When I hear our two candidates talking about their energy plans, is it really that shocking that the solution they came up with matches the preconceived notions of their party faithful? Is the science behind what their saying a legitimate response? Why the @#$% are we asking politicians (of all people) how we should be moving forward with energy solutions? Why aren't we finding out what the facts and science are from someone who doesn't have a political stake in this stuff (such as Ms. Paris Hilton)?
We're looking to our Officially Anointed and Elected Sun Gods to pretend they know how to do everything from run international tariff laws to understanding the complex issues behind our natural resources. Luckily, they gladly fake authority and certainty on such topics, and we go right along with it, mostly because it fulfills the conclusions we've already come to.
I quit talking politics on the site because, honestly, it totally wears me out. I say "red", someone else chimes in to say "blue", someone else says "you don't understand colors, moron", and yet another person says "God only likes blue." And the truth is, we're all right and we're all wrong. We won't ever live in a state of utter hegemony in which we're all moving the same direction and the same solutions work for everyone. (You can try this, but then you're a big, spooky country where people tend to disappear when they disagree.)
The fact is, it's a single vote I'll cast in November. In a state that is massively, proudly Republican, it totally doesn't matter what I think (no matter who I vote for). The arcane and out-dated workings of the electoral college tell me that voting in National Politics is, in fact, pointless. And with the results of the 2000 Election, I'm kind of inclined to think the whole thing is so astonishingly flawed that its going to come down to the fact that we have a Republican-placed Supreme Court, anyway.
It doesn't mean I won't vote. It's just... you know, I'm not completely dumb nor overly illogical. And it sure as hell beats the alternative of not having any say. That's been our lot for the vast, vast majority of human history. And, I don't think too kindly of that particular right being infringed upon.
So I vote more for the ritual of the thing, and because I have hope that one day a vote will actually count for something (we do live in a Republic after all, not a true democracy. But things change.). And that my vote can be a reminder to The Other Guy, if My Guy does lose (and he probably will), that nobody walks into office on a 100% mandate. Anyone taking the Oval Office should remember that almost half the country didn't want to see them in office, and keep that in mind when they start making decisions.
But I'll be dipped if that's what I see actually happen. It's hard to not believe the monkeys howling your name and dropping all those red and blue balloons (all for you!) in those first 100 days. You get to be festooned in jewels and tell the whole country that despite the council's decisions regarding turnip planting, you're not agreeing to plant any turnips until they start growing them and distributing turnips in the way you see fit...
We choose our kings and queens in odd ways and maybe by asking the wrong questions. And certainly by expecting them to be all knowing and seeing with their army of advisors. I don't know what criteria we should be using to make our decisions, but too often we seem to make our decisions based on someone else's checklist. And maybe that's what needs to change a bit.
A quick PS: I am neither for or against Sarah Palin, Joe Biden or anyone else seeking office. I've given Palin a hard time the past few days here at LoM and Steanso's blog. This is not to suggest anything about Palin (other than that probably Photoshopped pics with accompanying taglines are amusing). Here's a hoax link.
I could care less about Sarah Palin or Joe Biden other than their official capacities, and more or less the same about McCain and Obama. If you are in some way related to any of these people and become offended by future links regarding stuff I find funny, then my apologies. Any hang up other readers have regarding the sun god worship of candidates is their own.
I assure you, all of this will get stupider before it gets better.
For folks newer to the site, here's some background:
The site was originally a bit more political. I was deeply dissatisfied with the Bush administration and the push to war in Iraq (do not equate this with a push into Afghanistan or other Al Qaeda related pushes of the day). The American press was rolling over for talking point dispatches, and more than I was bothered by Bush's strategies, I was deeply bothered by the way the press was happy to play along.
I should note, the force singly most responsible for the creation of League of Melbotis is a thought-provoking conservative in his own right. And while he and I could disagree, there was always an opportunity for me to see things from a new angle. I have no idea if he felt the same way, but that was something I could take away from it.
That's really all I ask out of political discussion. Rational discourse. Keep the emotion to a limited degree (I've been known to get pretty hot about certain issues, I confess), and trying not to deny logic in an argument.
I started LoM in the Boogeyman Era of politics, where the call of the day was "If you don't support X, you hate America", "If you don't buy into Y, you hate our troops", "If you don't agree to Z, you hate freedom", and, my favorite "You're trying to appease the terrorists!". No other time in the history of man has the phrase "appease" been bandied about so much.
For me, the end result of the Bush/ Cable News era, sadly, has been a sneering cynicism about politics in general. Cynicism = bad. If you find our system goofy, go live in Canada, right? Whatever.
Instead, it's been a 7 year lesson in watching the entire populace (who supposedly took high school civics) look the other direction as the law and basic decency have been put to the curb for expediency.
Worse, possibly, it's ingrained in me a cynicism about party loyalists of any stripe. If folks will believe anything That Guy says, why should I believe anything Our Guy says?
It's sort of left me with the impression that we are not so far away from our silver-back respecting primate cousins. There's a reason that against all logic, we spent 100,000 years erecting kings to live in palaces while we toiled on turnip farms and paid them taxes, believing God himself had selected Our Guy for the job. When push came to shove, if we backed Our Guy and adorned him in jewels and let him kick the crap out of us, maybe when the jerks from the other side of the island showed up to kill us and take our turnips, our belief that Our Guy was the REAL guy (and not THEIR jewel adorned guy, who was so obviously a jerk) God would help us smite our enemies.
And because winners tend to write history, sure, God was on our side.
Despite our proclamations of love for the system, I'm not convinced we're not all secret monarchists at heart, in search of a king (or queen). We choose our candidates by how they support the lifestyle we believe we (and everyone else) should be living. We don't look to candidates to change our ways with new and challenging ideas. Every four years is a chance to crown new royalty, and to feel some small victory when or if the victor is the one who confirms our preconceived notions.
If Our Guy wins, things will be better for everyone. He will protect our turnips. Or at least the way we think turnips should be raised and distributed. If the other guy wins, we'll all be turnipless.
The improvement in the situation is that we have an opportunity to choose which guy we're going to go with on this turnip situation very four harvests.
A bit of personal frustration I find in myself is that I absolutely have knee-jerk reactions, and despite the abundance of information available on candidates and their game plans for the future that I came to a decision so quickly regarding who was My Guy. I found myself rationalizing criticisms of My Guy, and backing shakier criticisms against All Those Other Guys. As it's become Our Guy vs. Their Guy (and Our Guy-1 vs. Their Guy-1), things are starting to get serious.
But I don't take any of the candidates all that seriously. You can't.
I often have no idea if My Guy's plans will work. It's just that My Guy's plans sound more like something I'd do than The Other Guy's plans. When I hear our two candidates talking about their energy plans, is it really that shocking that the solution they came up with matches the preconceived notions of their party faithful? Is the science behind what their saying a legitimate response? Why the @#$% are we asking politicians (of all people) how we should be moving forward with energy solutions? Why aren't we finding out what the facts and science are from someone who doesn't have a political stake in this stuff (such as Ms. Paris Hilton)?
We're looking to our Officially Anointed and Elected Sun Gods to pretend they know how to do everything from run international tariff laws to understanding the complex issues behind our natural resources. Luckily, they gladly fake authority and certainty on such topics, and we go right along with it, mostly because it fulfills the conclusions we've already come to.
I quit talking politics on the site because, honestly, it totally wears me out. I say "red", someone else chimes in to say "blue", someone else says "you don't understand colors, moron", and yet another person says "God only likes blue." And the truth is, we're all right and we're all wrong. We won't ever live in a state of utter hegemony in which we're all moving the same direction and the same solutions work for everyone. (You can try this, but then you're a big, spooky country where people tend to disappear when they disagree.)
The fact is, it's a single vote I'll cast in November. In a state that is massively, proudly Republican, it totally doesn't matter what I think (no matter who I vote for). The arcane and out-dated workings of the electoral college tell me that voting in National Politics is, in fact, pointless. And with the results of the 2000 Election, I'm kind of inclined to think the whole thing is so astonishingly flawed that its going to come down to the fact that we have a Republican-placed Supreme Court, anyway.
It doesn't mean I won't vote. It's just... you know, I'm not completely dumb nor overly illogical. And it sure as hell beats the alternative of not having any say. That's been our lot for the vast, vast majority of human history. And, I don't think too kindly of that particular right being infringed upon.
So I vote more for the ritual of the thing, and because I have hope that one day a vote will actually count for something (we do live in a Republic after all, not a true democracy. But things change.). And that my vote can be a reminder to The Other Guy, if My Guy does lose (and he probably will), that nobody walks into office on a 100% mandate. Anyone taking the Oval Office should remember that almost half the country didn't want to see them in office, and keep that in mind when they start making decisions.
But I'll be dipped if that's what I see actually happen. It's hard to not believe the monkeys howling your name and dropping all those red and blue balloons (all for you!) in those first 100 days. You get to be festooned in jewels and tell the whole country that despite the council's decisions regarding turnip planting, you're not agreeing to plant any turnips until they start growing them and distributing turnips in the way you see fit...
We choose our kings and queens in odd ways and maybe by asking the wrong questions. And certainly by expecting them to be all knowing and seeing with their army of advisors. I don't know what criteria we should be using to make our decisions, but too often we seem to make our decisions based on someone else's checklist. And maybe that's what needs to change a bit.
A quick PS: I am neither for or against Sarah Palin, Joe Biden or anyone else seeking office. I've given Palin a hard time the past few days here at LoM and Steanso's blog. This is not to suggest anything about Palin (other than that probably Photoshopped pics with accompanying taglines are amusing). Here's a hoax link.
I could care less about Sarah Palin or Joe Biden other than their official capacities, and more or less the same about McCain and Obama. If you are in some way related to any of these people and become offended by future links regarding stuff I find funny, then my apologies. Any hang up other readers have regarding the sun god worship of candidates is their own.
I assure you, all of this will get stupider before it gets better.
UT Wins (not a huge surprise)
I don't like the word "fun". People use it to the point that it's almost meaningless. Not everything is equal shades of "fun". Such as going to the comic shop is, indeed, "fun", but it's still really looking for stuff to read that you hope will be even more "fun". Going out to grab a bite with pals is, indeed, "fun". But so is a quiet dinner with Jamie.
If the eskimos have 200,000 words for snow, why are we stuck with one word for "fun"? There should be a scale.
Anyway, all of this is to say that on the fun-scale, I have to rate the UT game very, very high. Yeah, our seats were incredibly high up. We literally walked up ten-flights worth of ramps to get to section 116. But our view was actually really nice, and we could see the Jumbotron and side-mounted scoreboards just fine.
The crowd was great, UT played really well (I have no worries about McCoy's readiness this season. The boy is looking top-notch.), the band was in top form, and we even enjoyed a breeze in our very high seats.
The crew I went to the game with was comprised of myself, my folks and David. David hadn't ever been to UT game (or college game, I think), and its been well over a decade since I've been to a UT game.
The additions to UT stadium since I last went are pretty awesome. Sure, they could use an escalator to the 10th floor, but it's an amazing facility. And football live is genuinely great to watch, especially with a hyped-up, hometown crowd.
For the record, this was UT playing it's annual "bring in the smaller school so we can pummel them and whip our fans into a frenzy" game. UT defeated Florida Atlantic 52-10. Florida Atlantic had no running game to speak of, but did find the weak spots in our secondary in their passing game. Hopefully that can be corrected by the time we play Arkansas.
Man, I'm tired. I'm going to bed.
Hook 'Em.
If the eskimos have 200,000 words for snow, why are we stuck with one word for "fun"? There should be a scale.
Anyway, all of this is to say that on the fun-scale, I have to rate the UT game very, very high. Yeah, our seats were incredibly high up. We literally walked up ten-flights worth of ramps to get to section 116. But our view was actually really nice, and we could see the Jumbotron and side-mounted scoreboards just fine.
The crowd was great, UT played really well (I have no worries about McCoy's readiness this season. The boy is looking top-notch.), the band was in top form, and we even enjoyed a breeze in our very high seats.
The crew I went to the game with was comprised of myself, my folks and David. David hadn't ever been to UT game (or college game, I think), and its been well over a decade since I've been to a UT game.
The additions to UT stadium since I last went are pretty awesome. Sure, they could use an escalator to the 10th floor, but it's an amazing facility. And football live is genuinely great to watch, especially with a hyped-up, hometown crowd.
For the record, this was UT playing it's annual "bring in the smaller school so we can pummel them and whip our fans into a frenzy" game. UT defeated Florida Atlantic 52-10. Florida Atlantic had no running game to speak of, but did find the weak spots in our secondary in their passing game. Hopefully that can be corrected by the time we play Arkansas.
Man, I'm tired. I'm going to bed.
Hook 'Em.
Saturday, August 30, 2008
Friday, August 29, 2008
From the Cabela's Catalog
Simon will be confused by this post as these sorts of hats are, as I understand it, common headwear in Canada.
This item retails at Cabela's for $250, and in no way will make you look completely insane.
In case you're wondering: Yeah, that's a real, dead coyote. You can tell, because the only color they offer? COYOTE.
From the reviews:
"I have purchased a number of fur hats in my day but this is by far the warmest and most comfortable. Not only does it keep the back of my head warm but you can wrap the legs around your face to block the wind. The only reason this hat did not receive 5 stars is due to the fact that I was attacked by a bird thinking it was wounded prey while I was out for a walk. A rare but unfortunate occurrence when wearing an animal pelt on your head. Also great in the rain. Didn't smell at all after it was wet and it makes a great present. I'm getting one for my wife."
That lady is going to feel so @#$%ing lucky.
I just like how their model could be The League with a beard. It's like seeing a parallel Earth where The League has finally snapped.
Special thanks to Denby for the link
Papa Johns Fulfills Dream of Cowboys Fans Everywhere
I'm going all middle school on this one, but...
Skip to about 26 seconds in:
I like how someone taught the kid to really lean into it.
Skip to about 26 seconds in:
I like how someone taught the kid to really lean into it.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Agenda Advertising
Have you seen the Harry and Louise ads?
They're running now, and are sort of interesting. Watch the subtext of the ads, because while they're talking "affordable healthcare", they don't really define what they mean by "affordable healthcare", but they DO ask that that "everyone" be brought to the table. They also throw up several organizational logos, to suggest some sort of official capacity, I guess.
The website is even MORE vague. Which, as we all know in 2008, is usually a sign that something is up.
But the organizations who've thrown in with the ads at least SEEM invested in affordable healthcare. A quick perusal of the sites doesn't give much more than the typical "we are committed to quality, affordable healthcare, blah... blah... blah..."
I'm honestly not sure what that means.
Given the history of Harry and Louise in a series of ads that were a part of the defeat of the Clinton's attempt at universal health care circa 1993, could it be the same agencies are nervous about what the Dems are going to try to do if they win the election regarding healthcare?
I honestly have no idea at all where this will go... but its going to be interesting to watch to see how the campaign unfolds. What I will find deeply disappointing will be if it's the ol' bait-n-switch with Harry and Louise, and the big solution they're pitching is "things are great! why change the system?"
Agenda advertising is really hitting the airwaves from all kinds of NGO's. And that's not necessarily a bad thing. If you have an agenda you think can gain traction from getting your message in the mix (energy, healthcare, etc...), then why not?
I have my opinions on all this healthcare stuff, but that's for another day.
A completely different kind of agenda ad
Remember Nick and Norm?
Oh, where to start...?
I have this vision of a room full of middle-aged white guys who are so very sick of hearing their kids coming back from college and arguing with them over politics, etc... And wish these kids would just shut the hell up and listen to their old man. What sort of catharsis must these guys have felt when this ad ran, and the young man just caves to the unshakable argument of "It's a FACT."
So, why did the ad campaign fail? (The ads were, btw, apparently a horrible failure.)
A) Obviously Norm was a horrible jack-ass to Nick. And therefore the viewer. You don't sell anything, including an idea, by acting like a pedantic jerk. Even in the context of late 2001.
B) The ads never bothered to actually provide viewers with facts validating their claim. That would have been handy and not increased my cynicism regarding their claims. F-A-C-T. Fact.
C) In a round-about way, the Nick and Norm ads made a really good argument for legalizing drugs. If its legal, at least you can guess you're not buying your goofballs from terrorists and everybody wins. No more money to terrorists, no more money enforcing unworkable laws and the funding from the war on drugs can go to the war or terror. FACT. And Nick can still go buy his dope without the guilt that his goofballs are putting bullets in a rifle somewhere. FACT.
I can't tell you how appalling I found this ad campaign.
You can probably draw some parallel to the success of the ad campaign to how well folks in a free society like being talked to like a punk 13 year old kid getting disciplined by weekend-dad.
Sadly, the "listen to your father" approach, then backing it with half-truths and non-truths (we'll call them "lies") was a hallmark of the government of the era. I'll let you ponder the certainty of WMD's for a moment...
Honestly, I want a little of whatever these theantidrug.com ad guys were smoking if they thought this was going to convince the stoners of the world to put down their bongs for freedom.
They're running now, and are sort of interesting. Watch the subtext of the ads, because while they're talking "affordable healthcare", they don't really define what they mean by "affordable healthcare", but they DO ask that that "everyone" be brought to the table. They also throw up several organizational logos, to suggest some sort of official capacity, I guess.
The website is even MORE vague. Which, as we all know in 2008, is usually a sign that something is up.
But the organizations who've thrown in with the ads at least SEEM invested in affordable healthcare. A quick perusal of the sites doesn't give much more than the typical "we are committed to quality, affordable healthcare, blah... blah... blah..."
I'm honestly not sure what that means.
Given the history of Harry and Louise in a series of ads that were a part of the defeat of the Clinton's attempt at universal health care circa 1993, could it be the same agencies are nervous about what the Dems are going to try to do if they win the election regarding healthcare?
I honestly have no idea at all where this will go... but its going to be interesting to watch to see how the campaign unfolds. What I will find deeply disappointing will be if it's the ol' bait-n-switch with Harry and Louise, and the big solution they're pitching is "things are great! why change the system?"
Agenda advertising is really hitting the airwaves from all kinds of NGO's. And that's not necessarily a bad thing. If you have an agenda you think can gain traction from getting your message in the mix (energy, healthcare, etc...), then why not?
I have my opinions on all this healthcare stuff, but that's for another day.
A completely different kind of agenda ad
Remember Nick and Norm?
Oh, where to start...?
I have this vision of a room full of middle-aged white guys who are so very sick of hearing their kids coming back from college and arguing with them over politics, etc... And wish these kids would just shut the hell up and listen to their old man. What sort of catharsis must these guys have felt when this ad ran, and the young man just caves to the unshakable argument of "It's a FACT."
So, why did the ad campaign fail? (The ads were, btw, apparently a horrible failure.)
A) Obviously Norm was a horrible jack-ass to Nick. And therefore the viewer. You don't sell anything, including an idea, by acting like a pedantic jerk. Even in the context of late 2001.
B) The ads never bothered to actually provide viewers with facts validating their claim. That would have been handy and not increased my cynicism regarding their claims. F-A-C-T. Fact.
C) In a round-about way, the Nick and Norm ads made a really good argument for legalizing drugs. If its legal, at least you can guess you're not buying your goofballs from terrorists and everybody wins. No more money to terrorists, no more money enforcing unworkable laws and the funding from the war on drugs can go to the war or terror. FACT. And Nick can still go buy his dope without the guilt that his goofballs are putting bullets in a rifle somewhere. FACT.
I can't tell you how appalling I found this ad campaign.
You can probably draw some parallel to the success of the ad campaign to how well folks in a free society like being talked to like a punk 13 year old kid getting disciplined by weekend-dad.
Sadly, the "listen to your father" approach, then backing it with half-truths and non-truths (we'll call them "lies") was a hallmark of the government of the era. I'll let you ponder the certainty of WMD's for a moment...
Honestly, I want a little of whatever these theantidrug.com ad guys were smoking if they thought this was going to convince the stoners of the world to put down their bongs for freedom.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)