Movie reviews, random thoughts, and pie.
Hi there. I’ve talked previously in this space about my foot surgery, and I said I’d post a picture of the nail, so here it is. I’ve set it against a standard sized prescription bottle to try to give a sense of scale.
Yeah, I can’t believe something that big was in my foot, either.
(This post is also testing the Flickr blogging feature, and my new Fujifilm F31fd, which I barely know how to use.)
[tags]flickr, surgery, table nail[/tags]
For years now I’ve wanted to leave Microsoft Word–it’s the kludgiest app on my Mac that I use regularly, and it always feels like I’m using a badly callibrated bazooka to
shoot at flies. I’m really interested in Pages 2 for regular writing and Scrivener for prose.
So it was with particular interest that I read Steven Poole’s very well written farewell to Word. Nicely written piece that I agree with 110 percent. I remember Word 5.1a on my old Macintosh Centris 610. It really was a great word processor to use because it stayed out of the way. Word 6 was, by contrast, a terrible disaster that no-one at Microsoft apparently actually used, and it only got worse from there.
[tags]mac, macintosh, macs, macintoshes, software, word, microsoft word, microsoft, apple, apple pages, scrivener, writing[/tags]
Users of the BitTorrent file-sharing protocol* on Mac OS X might be interested to know Xtorrent 1.1 is out. It boasts improved stability and increased download speed, among other features. I tested it out last night and I’m really impressed, so much so that I’ve already bought a license. It downloads faster than either Bits on Wheels or Azureus in my anecdotal test, and doesn’t eat up my system resources the way those two clients always did (after running either overnight I usually had to restart my computer before it was usable again).
The interface is simple and easy to understand, and the settings are plentiful and easy to adjust. It’s not really missing any features I feel like I need, though I’ve yet to figure out how to check the percentage done on a specific file (though it does show when a file has been completed). That might just be me being an idiot though, so I’m not going to count it as a negative. even if it’s not a supported feature, no big deal. It’s more of a convenience than anything else. Without a doubt, it’s the easiest to use, most Mac-like BT client I’ve used.
And what can probably be said to be its killer feature is the built in torrent search functionality. Out of the box it simultaneously searches Google and Yahoo, though it’s possible to easily add more engines easily. Results are presented in an application window, and all it takes to download one is a double-click. The .torrent file itself is downloaded in the background and the information is loaded into the program automatically. The .torrent file itself is deleted as it is no longer needed.
It also supports torrentcasting, which is a way of using bittorrent to automatically download files embedded in RSS streams.
*This protocol has plenty of legal uses. I’m not advocating piracy. Please don’t sue me. Thank you.
I should note that by blogging about this software release, I will be allowed to participate in the NewsFire 2 private beta. So in essence, I’m participating in a benign (in my view) viral marketing venture. I am not making any money off this arrangement. I would still mention Xtorrent even if I wasn’t, though, because the software is that awesome.
[tags]macintosh, mac, software, bittorrent, bit torrent, torrentcast, torrentcasting, xtorrent, mac os x, os x, azureus, bits on wheels, newsfire, rss, really simple syndication[/tags]
My family is, by and large, into antiques. One of my aunts actually works at an antique store (furniture, dolls, knick-knacks, a gorgeous blue-green 1950s bicycle hanging from the ceiling by chains that no-one’s bought in at least 12 years, etc.). I’ve never really been into this kind of antique quite as much, probably in part because I moved to Dallas (and away from the antique store) when I was seven. The fact that I’m a bit clumsy and tend to break fragile things if I’m not very careful also makes me less likely to want to be surrounded on all sides by expensive fragile things.
That said, as I’ve gotten older I’ve grown more of an appreciation for this kind of stuff, and my antique bug has always manifested itself in the form of a love of computer antiques (which I count as anything before Windows and the Mac became mainstream), which I love. Before the Windows/Mac hegemony, computing was really a lot more like the Wild West in terms of innovation and discovery of new technology than it is today, and part of me wishes I could’ve been around for that. It was surely an exciting time. I don’t get too nostalgic because I love my 21st century computer technology, but I quite regularly get jealous of those people who create their own personal antique machine museums. I’d have probably picked up an antique machine before, but I really have neither the money nor the space for such a hobby. I do have a How Computers Work book from the early 1980s aimed at parents wanting to buy their children computers, picked up from the antique store where my aunt works. It contains information on “microcomputers” that contain exciting new technology like “hard drives.” There’s even a bunch of BASIC listings, because that was the time when you pretty much had to learn to program to get the most out of your machine.
Too bad it’s not still that way. A lot of people would have a much better understanding of technology.
Anyhow, the reason I bring all this up is because John Gruber over at Daring Fireball* linked to a very well done set of scans of the original Macintosh User Manual. Take a look at that: it was the instruction manual sent with every single one of the original Macintosh 128k computers in 1984. You hear about how much more effort was put into things and how much nicer they were back in the day, but this is still kind of hard to believe. I mean, look at that. I’ve seen magazines that don’t look that nice. And now when you buy a Windows PC you’re lucky to even get a full restore disk included in the box**. Forget printed manuals. One of the downsides of transitioning from a hobbyist pursuit to a commodity, I fear.
So, anyone else have some good computer nostalgia stories/thoughts?
*This is, oddly, not the strangest name for a Mac related website. See Drunken Batman.
**You can make your own restore disks, but that’s hardly the point. I just dropped a several hundred (thousand?) on a new system, and I’m still expected to make recovery disks. (As a sidenote, Macs don’t include recovery disks. They include full system installation DVDs with recovery capabilities, which is even better. When was the last time you bought a computer that came with a full (not upgrade or restore) copy of Windows? Does anyone even sell computers that come with said full copies?)
[tags]mac, macs, macintosh, macintoshes, apple history, apple, marketing, book, manual, instruction manual, nostalgia, old tech, old technology[/tags]
I’ve toasted more than one piece of hardware (including a not inexpensive scanner) by plugging in the wrong AC adapter before, but I always consider that kind of thing an unfortunate mistake. I just read about the concept of a “mechanical virus“, which is a bit more insidious.
Just goes to show: being kind to your connectors, both on the cables and on your equipment, not only keeps your technological investment in good shape, but prevents spreading accidental (and very difficult to notice) damage to your friends and associates, potentially causing damage on an exponential scale.
(Of course, I’ve always been especially careful handling other people’s equipment solely because it’s not mine and the consequences of my doing something stupid would effect, perhaps financially, someone else. It’s easier to shrug off doing something destructive when you do it to yourself.)
After reading this, I can’t help but reflect on how easy to damage some of these ports are, when they really don’t have to be. Witness the robustness of the old NES/SNES controller plugs, USB plugs, and shaped Firewire ports, all of which prevent the user from inserting/withdrawing a connector in a damaging way. (Theoretically. Damage is always possible if the user is strong enough and careless enough, but it should be really difficult to do by accident in normal, careful usage scenarios.)
[tags]computers, computer, mac, macs, macintosh, macintosh, port, ports, hardware, connector, connectors, usb, firewire, snes, nes[/tags]
Logos are important. A drab company or product name (e.g.: Apple Computer) can be made infinitely more iconic and memorable with the proper visual aid. Thus art and design are critical elements of brand image and advertising. Choosing colors, shapes, sizes–incredible amounts of time can go into choosing the most minute of details just to get the right effect.
But sometimes, the stars and planets align just right to produce a result no one expected and no one noticed until it was too late. And even more rarely these unintended results can be far more noticeable and iconic than the intended design.
Such is the case with this Mac dealer. Thanks to Fake Steve for drawing my attention to this.
(If you’re confused at what it’s supposed to say, tilt your head to the left.)
[tags]apple, mac, neon, sign, neon sign[/tags]
It’s been two weeks since my procedure to have the surgical nail removed from my foot, and I went back today to have the stitches removed.
There was a lot more string up inside my scar than I ever guessed. And he had to dig it out. Not exactly pleasant, but overall not too bad at all, compared to some of the stuff I’ve had done to me. It bled a bit, my foot’s sore, and now I’ve got “tape stitches,” those little band-aid things that fall off on their own in about a week. I’ve also got permission to get my foot wet/submerged again, so no more grooming gymnastics in the mornings. I should also stop feeling odd shooting pains like I felt whenever I stretched the stitches. Glee.
And no, I didn’t keep the string.
As a side note, I was surprised just how much surgical twine resembles fishing line. It even feels the same.
[tags]stitches[/tags]
Over the last couple weeks, I’ve been finding more and more parody movie trailers on YouTube that I really like: cut up and or heavily edited slices of a movie (or TV show, or several movies/TV shows in combination) to create a theatre-style preview trailer that presents the movie as something entirely different from what it actually is. For instance, Mary Poppins recut as a horror movie. I thought it might be fun to share some of my favorites with ya’ll. I found some of these thanks to recommendations by John Wolbers.
I’m going to put the trailers behind a cut to save bandwidth and space.
[tags]youtube, movies, parodies, parody, spoof, spoofs, little miss sunshine, mary poppins, titanic[/tags]
Users over at the Wordpress.com hosted blog site just got access to a new Wordpress.com Facebook App that updates your feed every time you post a new entry on your blog. This is a really cool feature, and I find it especially attractive, as I have a Facebook account solely for keeping up with friends from university, but use this site for all my communication with the outside world. I don’t find the Facebook Notes application especially intuitive, and double posting everything to Facebook is not appealing, especially since I use Wordpress categories and Technorati tags to keep things organized.
Unfortunately, this particular app is not available for self-hosted Wordpress installations, like mine, but I decided to Google around and found WordBook, a WP plugin/Facebook app that does the exact same thing. I’m really happy about this, as up till now there’s been a total disconnect between my FB and this blog. The only downside is there’s no way to retroactively go back and put the entire recent history of my posting on Facebook, but I can live with that. Actually, yes, it does, on the profile page. This is even more awesome than originally thought.
(I should point out that one can always use Facebook Notes combined with a blog RSS feed, but this is a very kludgy solution, as Facebook sometimes doesn’t update its RSS feeds for weeks at a time, and it takes several clicks to get to the actual blog entries this way. Entirely too kludgy for my tastes.)
[tags]wordpress, wordpress.com, facebook, wordbook, plugins, plugin[/tags]
Back in 2003, when 3 megapixel point and shoot cameras were considered totally wicked, I bought my first digicam, a Pentax Optio S. I’m not going to pretend I knew what I was doing; I basically just went into a camera store and talked to the salesman for a while about what I wanted to do (occasional snapshots with the ability to make nice prints, small footprint), and that’s what I ended up with. I also bought a giant (for the time) SD card and a nice leather carrying case, so I’m sure the salesman loved me. I used it for years, and it was good. I got great prints with it (as long as I never went over 4×6, which was fine), and we all used it a lot because it was so small and easy to carry. I didn’t pay attention to the digital camera market for years, as I’m far more of a computer hardware/software nerd than an audio-visual person.
Then my camera got stolen, sometime this past spring. I’m still not certain by whom, and I can’t even prove it really happened, but the fact remains that one day it was in my on-campus apartment, and one day it disappeared and I never found it again, even when I moved out. Unless it was struck by the All-Spark one day and came to life and ran off, someone had to have taken it. I didn’t get too upset though; I had some money saved up, and I thought it might be a good opportunity to shop for a new one. (I make no secret of the fact I like expensive tech toys, but once I buy something I pretty much use it until it falls apart/becomes too obsolete to work. I think of my technology as an investment.)
Let me preface everything that follows by saying I’m a digital camera neophyte, and I didn’t really start learning anything about how they work or what separates the good from the bad until mid-late May, so this is at best an expression of my current level of understanding that might be useful to those in a similar situation. At worst, it’s the ranting of someone who’s got no idea what they’re talking about and is completely overwhelmed by the sheer difficulty of picking out a camera and actually feeling like it’s a good camera to buy. If I am understanding something wrongly, please let me know.
After a few days of shopping around the internets, I became convinced I should’ve majored in digital cameras. It’s really amazing(ly frustrating) how complicated these devices are, and picking a good one is sadly not as simple as looking at who has the most megapixels. In fact, this is just about the worst thing to do: witness the Megapixel Myth. I really suggest reading the entire article (it’s not that long) to get a good idea of what I’m talking about, but the short story is more megapixels don’t necessarily mean better pictures, and in fact can lead to worse results if you’re not careful. But since this number is the one most easily graspable in digicam specs, camera manufacturers have made a habit of upping the MPs to make their products more exciting for shoppers with bigger-is-better mindsets, which work in most other product categories, but not consumer-level digital cameras.
Here’s the important bit (that the article goes over in great detail): a sensor inside a digital camera has one photosite for each pixel in an image. So, for a 3 MP image, it’s got roughly three million photosites. The bigger the sensor, the bigger each photosite, allowing the camera to capture more light for better color, better depth-of-field, less noise, etc. Smaller sensors also mean reduced performance/more noise at high ISOs (increased sensitivity of the sensor for faster shutter speeds and/or better performance in low light), because the sensors just aren’t big enough to capture enough data to produce anything that isn’t a noisy mess. Even at low ISOs, you run the risk of seeing less detail in general because the sensor just isn’t big enough to see it. All these new cameras that offer 8-12 megapixels on the cheap tend to use teeny-tiny sensors with even smaller photosites that, because of their size, are nosier, less detailed, shallower, etc. And even then, all these cameras do lots of processing on the raw image in software before the picture is saved to compensate for the tiny sensor. In a lot of cases, a 6 MP camera with a bigger sensor will deliver pictures of much higher quality than a 12 megapixel camera with a sensor roughly the size of two ants standing next to each other. This is how Digital SLRs (those giant professional cameras) work. A 6MP Digital SLR will beat out the latest and greatest picket cam with double the MP count because the DLSR’s sensor is comparatively huge (there are other factors like lenses to consider as well, but this is a big one).
I’m not the only one that’s found themselves boggling over this. Tim Bray, programmer at Sun who’s doing some really cool stuff with Atom and Atom Publishing, chronicles a similar search for a new camera. He eventually settled on a Canon A710 IS.
So the trick, in my humble, frustrated opinion, is to find a camera with a good megapixel-to-sensor-size ratio. As an example, my Pentax had a 1/1.25″ sensor and took beautiful shots because the photosites were comparatively large. The same size sensor is in use today in pocket cams with more than double the MP count, and you can bet they’re noisy as all get out in low-light/large print situations. Even figuring out what the sensor size is on a camera is a challenge: most manufacturers don’t print that kind of information on the box, and you’ve got to go hunting at digital camera review sites, and even when you find the info, it’s hard to understand. Consumer digital cameras express their sensor sizes in fractional inches as shown, and if you’re looking at DSLRs, you’re talking about millimeters squared (though if you’re shopping for a DLSR, you’re probably not reading this). That being said, more megapixels does mean more ability to crop a photo (zoom into one possibly very small area of it and still be able to make a decent print). But again, a small sensor will be limiting here.
Add to that that digital SLR cameras have gotten so much cheaper over the last several years. Camera companies just aren’t making prosumer (big sensor/nice lense/etc.) point and shoots like they used to, because they think that anyone who cares that much will just go for one of the “cheap” SLRs. This is faulty logic, as the cheapest pro-cam is still in the 700-800 dollar range, not including the lense(s). Those cameras are are also about the same size as my head–my old Pentax would fit in an Altoids box. While I don’t need something that small, I would like something that would fit in my pants pocket. (I don’t really think the kind of camera I want is so advanced that it needs to be in any way categorized as “pro,” but that just goes to show how much the camera makers have lowered the expectations of consumers.
Why am I worried about all this so much?
As I said before, I view technology as an investment, and I like to feel like I’m getting a good price-performance balance whenever I buy something. I don’t want to spend a couple hundred bucks or more (camera, case, memory, taxes/shipping, etc. adds up quickly) for something that only performs so-so, or with features I can’t even use. What’s the point of having a high ISO camera when the sensor’s so small that every time you try to take pictures in low light you end up with overly noisy garbage, or 12 megapixels when the sensor can only make really nice pictures with quality set to 6 MP? Why even sell a camera with modes that will always produce noisy, grainy, ugly pictures that you’ll never want to keep? Worse yet, those that don’t know any better might just assume it’s their computer/printer/whatever causing the quality issue and drive themselves crazy trying to fix something that can’t be helped. I’ve accepted that I’m not going to be able to get a camera without a movie mode, which I don’t really want, but there’s no reason I should have to settle for mediocre performance in normal situations. I want to just be able to pick up my camera in any situation and take a good picture without having to worry about manual settings, secure in the knowledge I could print an 8×10 if I wanted without it looking like a painting. For the average person, taking good photos should be a brainless or near-brainless activity.
Yeah, right. I’ve also come to accept that whatever camera I get, I will have to learn how to use some of the manual settings (white balance, exposure, iso, scene modes, etc.) to get the best results. Cameras just aren’t smart enough to do it all on their own (e.g.: auto mode), though they can get almost all the way there. For most people, most of the time–myself included, that’s more than good enough.
So, what to buy?
Despite all this (or maybe because of it) I have managed to find a couple good looking cameras with good sensor/MP ratios I’d be happy to own for years to come. I’m going to list them here, but I’d love to hear your recommendations if you’ve got any. I’m still looking around, so I might end up adding more to this list.
Right now I really like the F31fd, and am coming really close to wanting to buy it. I just wish I had time to see the results from DPR’s f50fd review, whenever it comes down. I’d feel like an idiot spending money on a discontinued camera only to find out its replacement model was better (as unlikely as that is, given the f50fd’s smaller, non SuperCCD sensor and 12MP pixel count).
I wonder how many people skip all this and just get PhotoCDs with their regular film cameras.
[tags]digital photography, digicams, digital cameras, digicam, digital cameras, megapixel, megapixels, prosumer, sensor, pentax, optio s, canon, fuji, fujifilm, s6000fd, fuji s6000fd, fujifilm 6000fd, fuji f31fd, fujifilm f31fd[/tags]
As a rule, I generally avoid Hot Topic stores, though I can’t say exactly why. Just some sort of instinctual aversion. Or it may be that their prices are exorbitantly high and for the most part I’m way out of the target demographic. Be that as it may, they do have some cool merchandise related to the new Transformers movie. Not too cheesy and well-made looking. So I went looking around and found that they do in fact have a lot of stuff I like (mostly retro merchandise). I thought it might be fun to share some links to some of my favorite stuff. Just ’cause I can’t get any of it right now doesn’t mean somebody else doesn’t have some disposable income they’re looking to spend on some cool gear. (On a slightly strange note, they also seem to carry a variety of grindhouse film-related merchandise. Right next to the disturbing Hello Kitty hot pants. The fact I think this is only slightly strange probably says something bad about my mental state.)
And while we’re talking about these so called “hot pants,” who are they trying to fool? I have briefs bigger than that. And don’t tell me they actually mean for these things to be worn as underwear, because they advertise their undergarments as undergarments. I think this is part of my instinctual aversion: this is not the kind of clothing I would want my theoretical child wearing, and that’s exactly who it’s marketed to. Unless there’s a large demographic of 20-30-somethings that want Bambi and Mickey Mouse and Hello Kitty on their crotch that I don’t know about. I probably don’t want to know.
I’m also quite frankly stunned at the huge amount of merchandise related to Disney’s Bambi.
Anyhow, on with the geeking out over cool shirts below the cut.
[tags]hot topic, shopping, grindhouse, hello kitty, bambi, transformers, bumblebee, disney, kermit, kermit the frog, darkwing duck, nintendo, legend of zelda, triforce, mario, mega man, princess peach, link, animaniacs, pinky and the brain, flcl, lord canti, canti, futurama, bender, ninja turtles, teenage mutant ninja turtles, splinter, tmnt, evil dead, ash[/tags]
Continue reading ‘Hot Topic, I am in Fear and Awe and Terror of You.’
Like I said in my last post, I haven’t been blogging for 2.5 months. When I brought up my blog today in Safari, I noticed a link to one of those really unseemly internet gambling sites (as opposed to the more above board ones that don’t have an “I’m scamming you” aura). I didn’t put this link in place, so obviously I was more than a bit concerned. Someone had to have done it, so I went in and looked at my registered user list. Using google to check the email addresses, every one of them checked out, except for one: johnsmithuswe@gmail.com. When I googled it, I found this and this. Ominous.
Long story short, this is some sort of bot that will either delete or modify your blog in adverse ways. Be sure and check for it under the email addresses listed in the articles (especially if you’re getting a lot of extra spam comments or otherwise strange things are happening) and blast it out if it’s there. WP 2.2.2 is a security update, so I’m guessing (hoping) it closes whatever holes allowed this behavior.
I’m just glad my blog didn’t get taken over by porn peddlers. I spend a lot of time trying to get my family to read this thing, and now the signature for most of my email messages contains a link here. Including email I send to my former professors. Eek.
[tags]wordpress, security, exploit, bot, spam, hack, crack, security update, update[/tags]
Wow. Two-and-a-half months without an update. So much for putting up something at least once a week, hmm? I’m still not sure anyone actually reads this space, so I could very well be burbling into the void, but that’s hardly an excuse. I could say not much particularly blog-worthy has happened, but that wouldn’t be at all truthful, though I’ve certainly been less active since graduation. I’ve spent the last few months just kind of decompressing after the conclusion of spring semester. Which brings me to my first point.
University Graduation
On Saturday, 12 May 2007, I graduated from my university with a BA magna cum laude in Computer Science, with a Political Science minor. The day was tiring, as I got to the ceremony at noon and it didn’t finish until five* (counting the photo session in the 95 degree heat, which was less than pleasant since we were all in black gowns, but I digress). My high school councillor was among the guests and one of the first to arrive, which was very fortunate, as after four years of intensive liberal arts education I proved myself unequal to the task of properly dressing myself in my graduation robes without help. In my defense, I had lots of attachments to worry about (honor cords, medallions, flaming swords, etc.**).
It was a lot of fun, especially since most of my family and a good number of my friends showed up for the after-party in my apartment. I’ve got lots of pictures. Someday, I might post some of them if I can get digital versions. I think someone’s got them on CD.
Odd things: We were never instructed to flip our tassels, so we never did. There was some reason this was done, but I can’t remember why. No one threw their hats in the air, either. I’m not sure if it was because we were just sedate, or because that was the only part of the whole gown ensemble we were actually allowed to keep (aside from honor cords and medalions) and people were being sentimental.
*The ceremony itself didn’t start until two, but I was allowed to come early and get situated since I have some mobility issues, which was really great. I’m really glad they let me, but I was a bit stiff by the end. I also kept getting my robe tangled up in my walker. Thankfully, there were two very nice people standing near either ramp to/from the stage that helped me get untangled. No Dick Van Dyke moments for me.
**One of these things does not belong.
SMU and Health Updates
I was granted deferral status from SMU for health reasons. I won’t begin attending until August 2008, which will give me time to work on some health stuff I’ve put off for a while. I’ve already started, as on August 10 I had a very large surgical table nail removed from my right foot. It’s left over from a Triple Arthrodesis in 2001. When I had the surgery done I was told the nail could stay in even after all the bones fused back together, forever if I wanted. Which I liked, since the idea of having another surgery so soon after the last one was not appealing. For the last several months though, it started to bug me and be more than a little painful. It was easier to see under the skin than it used to be, too. I can only guess it was starting to shift loose. Anyhow, I decided to have it removed. Really painless surgery, all things considered. No cast (just an ace bandage), and no weight for five days. I’m still not getting it wet, but that’s no problem. If only every surgery could be this easy. As soon as I find a camera, I’ll post a picture of the nail. It was much bigger than I expected it to be.
[tags]triple arthrodesis, SMU, graduation[/tags]
Found a theme I really like (finally), but it doesn’t seem to be WordPress 2.2 compatible. For the moment, all widgets are offline. I’m trying to fix this as quickly as possible.
On the subject of widgets, do ya’ll like having the twitter thing along the side along with the daily digest posts, or should I ditch the digests?
I caught the 1:55 showing of Spider-Man 3 with a friend yesterday. I don’t trust myself to write an in-depth review without being entirely too spoilerific, but I figured I could share a few thoughts.
Plot spoilers follow, so read at your own risk.
Overall impression: 3.7 out of 5
How did we get to this point?
Every Spider-Man movie has seemed to have a strong overarching question at its core that the story tries to solve. The first was simple: What would happen if a geeky kid got superpowers? It really just covers the initial stage of learning why such powers must be used responsibly (a difficult lesson in Peter’s case) and the idea of heroic self-sacrifice as crucial.
The second film expands on these ideas and stabilizes them. In the first film Peter accepted that there must be consequences and trade-offs, but in the second he’s taken this to an extreme to the point where everything’s coming apart around him. The idea here is to show how a superhero must strike a healthy compromise between his heroic duties, friends, family, love life, and his own personal needs. It’s no good to be a selfless lonely champion if you burn yourself out. By the end of the movie Peter seems to have learned this lesson well, which leads us into Spider-Man 3, which might as well be called a psychological drama.
When SM3 opens, it’s immediately obvious that Peter has reached a point of balance between his normal and heroic lives that was not present in the first two films. He’s happy and fulfilled and doing quite well in his relationship with Mary Jane. His movements and fighting style are smoother, more intricate, and more complex: he’s learned a lot since the first movie, and he’s finally starting to really resemble the capable hero we comic-book fans are on such good terms with.
Where are we, exactly?
And that’s actually the problem: things are going too well for him. In the continuity of the movies, from the death of his uncle to this point Peter has never really lost a fight. He’s managed to save his aunt and MJ every time they were threatened, and things have generally gone his way.
This has led him to have one trait his comic-book counterpart (who seems to suffer one personal disaster after another) does not. He’s just a bit too proud, and a bit too arrogant and overconfident. He’s a great hero, to be sure, but I think it’s important to remember that true heroes will never give themselves that label. This movie, I think, is concerned with the final bit of Peter’s metamorphosis into a more complete Spider-Man: the realization that he is not always right or infallible, that he will make mistakes and terrible things will happen, and he will have to learn to forgive both himself and those who’ve wronged him, and acknowledge those he himself has wrong. It is, in short, a critical and necessary re-affirmation of his humanity.
Yet, one does not simply wake-up and realize they have lost touch with their human side. For this to happen Peter must be brought very low, and this explains the movie’s dark tone. Events, some his own making and some not, systematically combine to tear his happy life to shreds, and Peter is too out of touch with himself and those around him to recognize the dangers, instead allowing himself to descend into his own darkness. This movie is as much about the fight between Peter and his inner demons as it is about Spidey and his latest rogues, and neither fight is very pretty. The tone is dark as pitch in places, and if you’re anything like me you’ll be sitting there trying to mentally convince our hero not to travel down his current path. Even the moment in which he comes back to the light is painful, as its set in motion by a rather shocking, painful-to-watch event. But he does, and in the end a more stable, humble hero emerges.
Diamonds in the Rough
As usual for Spidey movies, this one is made by the minor characters that help compose Peter’s universe. Parker’s landlord and his daughter stuck out particuarly in my mind. She’s actually one of my top five favorite characters at this point, and she can’t have spoken more than 1000 words in the last three films. JJ Jameson is continuing to be developed as a grey, nicer-than-he-wants-to-admit character, as opposed to the one-dimensional jerk he’s so often presented as in other mediums (especially the Spider-Man animated series). I really like that. Eddie Brock (Venom) is delightfully unsympathetic and smarmy even before he becomes completely evil, and his attempts to compete professionally with Peter provide some very interesting moments. After seeing the movie, I really like the Sandman, who I wasn’t familiar with before I saw the film. I had read some other reviews that painted him as too simplistic and flat, but I don’t think that’s it at all. He is, indeed, a simple man–not the larger than life characters we’re used to after seeing Doc Ock, Harry, and the Green Goblin–with a simple, laudable mission. Given the effect he has on Peter and vice-versa, he’s arguably one of the most important characters in any of the three films. Harry Osborne is believable both as evil incarnate and penitent hero. Without these interesting characters to blunt the impact, watching Peter struggle with his own darkness might have been too overpowering. May Parker was her usual powerful, understated self, and as usual we didn’t see nearly enough of her.
Visuals and Effects
As usual, these were all stunning. Things in Peter’s New York were bright and alive and just seemed to jump off the screen…except for when they needed to be moody and dark. Then they left you feeling like there was a cloud hanging over the theatre. The soundtrack is likewise excellent.
Negatives
The ending is rather abrupt, and leaves the status of Peter and MJ’s relationship somewhat vague. As usual, the writers killed off a character or two that I didn’t think really needed to die. At this point I want a Spider-Man 4 not for the sake of itself, but because I feel there are a few loose ends that really, really need to be tied up. This would be a terrible movie to end the franchise on. Harry Osborne’s character was also sadly underused. I would have liked to have seen more of him, and I’m not at all pleased with his role in the finale. He’s essentially written out of any future sequels at this point, which is a shame when his character obviously had so much potential.
Worth seeing?
If you’re a Spider-Man fan, the answer is a definite yes. The Harry Osborne stuff alone is worth the price of admission, as the path taken with him is quite different from the one in comic book canon. As I said above, it’s a different sort of Spidey movie, so it’ll be a different experience than the first two. The tone is significantly darker, the violence more brutal, and some of the things Peter does while under the influence of the Venom symbiote are more than slightly questionable–there was more than one spot where I cringed–and it’s a bit slower paced. If you’re considering taking a little one to see this film, think carefully about it. The PG-13 rating is well deserved, and it’s closer to R than PG, in my opinion. If you think your child is too young to see violence that leaves physical scars or excessive brutality, or people with serious relationship issues, this probably is not the film for them.
[tags]spider-man, spider man, spiderman, spider-man 3, spiderman 3, spider man 3, review, movie review[/tags]
I was listening to a podcast of Leo Laporte’s KFI program (The Tech Guy), and shared his surprise and shock when he found out about Google Web History, which, if enabled, keeps track of every site you’ve ever visited through a Google search, including the dates and times of the visits. Every. Single. One. Additionally, if you’ve got the Google Web Toolbar installed, every single site you visit, even if you don’t get there through Google, is added to your history.
I can see where this would be a useful feature–if you wanted it. It’s password protected, and you have to sign into Google to use it. However, if you’re the type that leaves themselves signed into Google all the time, and someone else sits down at your computer, they could conceivably see everything you’ve looked at since Web History started tracking you.
Since this service is apparently added to your account (and possibly enabled–Laporte’s account was tracking him, but mine was not) automatically and without your knowledge, this is a potential major breech of privacy. Bad form on Google’s part for not sending out an email to registered users or at least printing some sort of message about it on signed-in users’ iGoogle pages.
If you’re concerned about this, some useful links.
As a sidenote, the Google Accounts help system seems to run on Python, at least partly. Cool.
[tags]google, google web history, privacy, leo laporte[/tags]
Edited 13 March 2008 12:25 CDT: Noticed some strange grammar errors/missing words on my local copy and wanted to make sure they weren’t present on the net.
I’ve been aware of (and disgusted by) this Mary Jane “Comiquette” for about a week, and meaning to post on it, but I kept putting it off. I’m not including the actual image in this post because looking at it for more than 30 seconds makes me cringe and more than a little angry. Aside from that, it’s just not something I want displayed on a site that amounts to my primary presence on the entire Internet.
Fandom seemed to be doing an excellent job of vocalizing our collective outrage. As a warning, some of the links on that page lead to pages written by very pissed-off, if not highly eloquent people, so there might be a spot of profanity. I link to it not because I want ya’ll to read all of it, but because I want you to get an idea of how many people are talking about this across the comics-oriented part of the blogosphere. At first, I didn’t feel I really needed to add to the discussion, as so many eloquent people, some of whom I have the honor to know at least tangentially, had taken up the challenge with wit, intelligence, and well thought out critiques. If you’re not into comics but want to know what all the fuss is about, I’d suggest this short entry from one of the founders of Girl-Wonder, a network of sites dedicated to the positive, empowered depiction of women and girls in the comic industry.
But as the week went on, I thought more about it, and came up with some things about this that bother me that aren’t being mentioned anywhere else (that I’ve seen) or that I’d like to expound on. Then, I turned on MSNBC this morning and saw that the whole thing had finally hit the news–I first saw it at 11:25AM CST, and it’s been repeated several times throughout the day. One of the “experts” they had on, a comic book store owner, basically said the statue was okay because it was a) a very expensive statue aimed at adults and b) corresponded to Mary Jane’s current self-image, as she’s a supermodel/actress. So, apparently, according to this guy, it’s okay so long as children don’t see it, and also, for those of us who didn’t know, Mary Jane’s self-image is not that of a Vogue-class model and Broadway actress, but is somewhere closer to stereotypical hypersexualized trailer trash, which is all you can logically take away from this statue without a certain measure of delusion coming into play. Given the fact that Spider Man and Mary Jane are the Marvel equivilent of Superman and Lois Lane, this is an absolutely terrible excuse.
Needless to say, my anger, which had boiled down to exasperation, was re-ignited, and I’m writing this as a catharsis as much as anything else.
Why This is Important to Me
There are a few reasons why I’m taking the time to write all this. Most immediately, the statue doesn’t represent the character of Mary Jane I’ve come to appreciate as a Spider-Man fan. For that matter, I can’t imagine Peter ever expecting her to dress that way. Secondly, this is symptomatic of the larger sexism and mysogny in the comic book industry. There’s a reason I feel slightly embarrassed about being comic aficionado, and it has nothing to do with the stories and everything to do with the fact that this sort of display is entirely too common and I’d rather not have to deal with people looking at me like I’m reading porn when I happen to be caught with an issue of … anything. This statue just happens to be so egregious in its offense that it managed to make the national news. Still, it provides an opportunity to express dissatisfaction with this sort of behavior, as many of its flaws (e.g.: dumping logic and established characterization for the sake of hypersexualization) are endemic of the industry at large. I’m not sure what the solution is, as money talks and too many people are willing to buy this sort of trash for the content creators to be fiscally motivated to commit to positive change, but I do know that spreading awareness must be part of that solution.
One of the big justifications I frequently see for this sort of hypersexuality is the assertion that comic book women aren’t real, so whatever’s done to them or however they’re dressed doesn’t matter. But the thing is, comic books, movies, and television are pervasive enough that they may influence how (some, especially younger) readers perceive reality and expect it to be. In this context, I do not believe I need to explain why this statue sends an undesirable message. Those that argue it’s for adults not children don’t seem to realize that if a young person were to see this in an adult’s collection–and make no mistake, at 130 bucks this thing is meant to be displayed–they would assume it was an acceptable thing to have around. That’s not a message I think anyone should even potentially be sending. You could argue that the solution is to not let kids see the thing (or anything like it) but if it’s not something you want a child to see because it’s inappropriate, what exactly is it you’re selling if not a sexually exploitive piece?
Let me make a quick inductive comparison. The person on the left there is Doreen Green, otherwise known as Squirrel Girl. She’s one of my favorite (and also sadly underused) teenage superheroes, and happens to be 15 or 16 years old–it’s hard to be exactly sure with comics. Now, with her age in mind, try to picture her in a pose similar the one presented in the Mary Jane statue. You’re likely left with some level of unease and distaste. Why, if according to the manufacturer there’s nothing wrong with this sort of thing? It’s inappropriate because of her age, which can only be the case if it’s an explicitly sexualized pose, even if it’s not necessarily pornography. The Mary Jane statue is therefore not simply aimed at adult consumers in terms of price range, as the manufacturer suggests, but deals with adult subject matter, and should be either acknowledged as such, or preferably not sold at all. It should not be represented as the mainstream view of this character, as this gives a wrong impression not only of the comics but of those of us who read them that find this sort of thing offensive.
That’s pretty much my argument in a nutshell. There are some individual points I want to address for those interested, but I am aware that not everyone will want to read more about this, as what follows will be a closer examination of the incongruities of the statue itself and the coverage it’s received in the news, so I’m placing the rest of this entry under a cut.
[tags]comics, comic books, spider-man, spider man, mary jane, mary jane watson, statue, sexism, misogyny, marvel, msnbc, news media, statuette, Sideshow Collectibles, squirrel girl, censorship[/tags]
Continue reading ‘Sexism in Comics: The Mary Jane Watson Statue’
According to this, WordPress will be a part of the Google Summer of Code this year. Looks like a lot of backend stuff is on the agenda, but I’m especially excited about the idea of threaded comments being included in WordPress’ core. I’d much rather have this feature fully integrated and built in than have to rely on plugins, even though an excellent plugin for threading exists. (I’m still debating whether or not I want to install BTC or wait on this internal threading implementation, which may or may not materialize this summer.
Technorati Tags:
wordpress, google, summer of code
As some of you may know, I am very much interested in patent law and internet/computer law, especially in areas where they intersect. This interest is in fact what led me to decide, approximately two years ago, to apply to law school in the first place. I picked SMU because of it’s strength and reputation in this field.
I am aware, however, that intellectual property (IP) is a vast, nebulous field that covers a lot of different things, and when I tell people I want to do “patent law” or “intellectual property law” I could be talking about approx
