I saw an ad for the second season of this show and I watched the trailer. It being a Netflix trailer, it did a great job of not actually conveying much about what the show is actually about. So I had to do further research.
"You" is a thriller-y show about a guy who's... who has some violent/murderous/dark tendencies but also happens to be quite handsome and charming when necessary. Just like any good serial killer... I surmised that this show might end up including a murder element.
Since I'm always looking at people and thinking they look like other people, the actor who plays the main character (who is quite good looking, wow!) looks like a combination of John Mayer and Hugh Dancy. And/or he looks sort of like Ted Bundy, or rather, Zac Efron's recent portrayal of Ted Bundy... Coincidentally, in retrospect, I think he also looks like some guy in one of my classes who I never spoke to (alas! And he seemed decently intelligent too... [this is why I'm going to be an old maid...]).
I've only watched the first episode now, but I'll probably watch further until I get tired of the show, perhaps. It seems captivating enough for me to keep watching. I still haven't gotten to watching the season one finale of Ozark, much less start on season two...
It does have a bit of a scripted feel to it, in that there are elements of it that seem quite predictable, and some of the characters don't seem to have much depth, but it was still an enjoyable watch. There's heavy monologuing via voiceover by the main character, which is sort of an interesting element; I can't really think of any other shows I've seen that feature that. Grey's Anatomy or Station 19 might be the closest, but the VO monologues in those shows serve as bookends to the episodes, not peppered in throughout.
The main character is rather judgmental and cynical and misanthropic -- the misanthropy is very House-esque, I thought. Since I also can be judgmental and cynical at times, I can relate to the guy being like that. He also has stalkerish tendencies, as do I (to some extent: I love people-watching and occasionally give in to doing very mildly stalkerish things, but nothing on the level of sneaking into someone's house and looking through their stuff).
Anyways, I still have the rest of the first season to watch at some point and there's going to be a second season coming out later this week. Such timing! But so far, this show seems decently watchable.
Tuesday, December 24, 2019
Saturday, December 7, 2019
Postsecret review 16
It's been awhile since I've done one of these, but I looked at the current secrets and they seem rather interesting, so here are my comments!
"Sometimes, when I'm extremely bored (like I was at this wedding), I like to imagine that I've already reached the end of my life and there I begged God for just a few more hours. He agreed. And sent me here. It makes a big difference." [over a photo from a wedding] This is an interesting/unusual idea and mildly quaint too...
"I don't care how smart, educated or successful you are: if you're an adult obsessed with Disney I think you're creepy." I can more or less agree with this, although I'm not sure I'd personally use the word creepy to describe it... juvenile is a more accurate term, to me.
"I have devoted my life helping others... But no matter how many lives I save, I cannot forget the faces of those I couldn't. Some memories never fade..." [with a ballpoint pen sketch of a firefighter's helmet marked "Killeen FD Firefighter 292" and the word "PTSD"] Grim.
"I don't like telling people to call the suicide hotline because when I needed them they were busy." Also grim.
"I used to put people in jail for drugs, and then go in the bathroom to do my drugs." What a twist!
"I have never told my husband, I had a child before we got togeter" [sic] Ooh, secrets... also coincidentally, related to some recent reading I did.
"Actually I wasn't on a business trip. I was in the psych ward." Also twisty.
"This is what I fantasize about. I'm a guy." [over a photo of a romantic wedding scene with bride and groom kissing in front of a church] That's cute and even somewhat sweet.
"Alcohol has now officially taken over my life." Also grim... I hope I don't become an alcoholic or a drug addict. I kind of wonder how one becomes an alcoholic... many people are able to drink without it becoming a problem, but for those who it is a problem for, why is that so? How does it happen?
"I don't think people truly appreciate what troops do for us until someone in their life becomes a part of it all." I suppose I can understand this. However, I happened to read something recently about the military committing atrocities in the Middle East, so that's one of the things they do (or at least, have done), under the guise of protecting freedom... I think we should abolish the military.
"At our nation's capitol [sic], in our national history museum all of the souvenirs are made in a different country!" This is an interesting observation. I'm not really sure if it counts as a secret, but still, interesting observation. I also wonder if it's completely factual. Perhaps the statement is an exaggeration and there are some souvenirs for sale that are made in the US... next time I'm there, I'll try to remember and check. Obligatory mention that I don't appreciate security theater but I'll have to remember to leave my scissors at home if I decide to go to the national history museum...
"I'm starting to think these nut-jobs might actually be onto something" [over a brochure {?} that says "Attend Scientology Sunday Service"] That's something else! I do wonder how one comes to believe that the Scientologists might actually be onto something....
"I wish I were fat so I could be a Torrid model. I think they're gorgeous." [over a photo of what presumably is a Torrid model] Well, this is different...
"Sometimes, when I'm extremely bored (like I was at this wedding), I like to imagine that I've already reached the end of my life and there I begged God for just a few more hours. He agreed. And sent me here. It makes a big difference." [over a photo from a wedding] This is an interesting/unusual idea and mildly quaint too...
"I don't care how smart, educated or successful you are: if you're an adult obsessed with Disney I think you're creepy." I can more or less agree with this, although I'm not sure I'd personally use the word creepy to describe it... juvenile is a more accurate term, to me.
"I have devoted my life helping others... But no matter how many lives I save, I cannot forget the faces of those I couldn't. Some memories never fade..." [with a ballpoint pen sketch of a firefighter's helmet marked "Killeen FD Firefighter 292" and the word "PTSD"] Grim.
"I don't like telling people to call the suicide hotline because when I needed them they were busy." Also grim.
"I used to put people in jail for drugs, and then go in the bathroom to do my drugs." What a twist!
"I have never told my husband, I had a child before we got togeter" [sic] Ooh, secrets... also coincidentally, related to some recent reading I did.
"Actually I wasn't on a business trip. I was in the psych ward." Also twisty.
"This is what I fantasize about. I'm a guy." [over a photo of a romantic wedding scene with bride and groom kissing in front of a church] That's cute and even somewhat sweet.
"Alcohol has now officially taken over my life." Also grim... I hope I don't become an alcoholic or a drug addict. I kind of wonder how one becomes an alcoholic... many people are able to drink without it becoming a problem, but for those who it is a problem for, why is that so? How does it happen?
"I don't think people truly appreciate what troops do for us until someone in their life becomes a part of it all." I suppose I can understand this. However, I happened to read something recently about the military committing atrocities in the Middle East, so that's one of the things they do (or at least, have done), under the guise of protecting freedom... I think we should abolish the military.
"At our nation's capitol [sic], in our national history museum all of the souvenirs are made in a different country!" This is an interesting observation. I'm not really sure if it counts as a secret, but still, interesting observation. I also wonder if it's completely factual. Perhaps the statement is an exaggeration and there are some souvenirs for sale that are made in the US... next time I'm there, I'll try to remember and check. Obligatory mention that I don't appreciate security theater but I'll have to remember to leave my scissors at home if I decide to go to the national history museum...
"I'm starting to think these nut-jobs might actually be onto something" [over a brochure {?} that says "Attend Scientology Sunday Service"] That's something else! I do wonder how one comes to believe that the Scientologists might actually be onto something....
"I wish I were fat so I could be a Torrid model. I think they're gorgeous." [over a photo of what presumably is a Torrid model] Well, this is different...
Book review: Run Away by Harlan Coben
I was looking at the books in Costco when I happened upon this one and decided to take a peek at it. It had a rather gripping writing style, so I started reading it and was able to finish it in one afternoon/evening -- over the span of maybe 4-ish hours of reading time. It was a pretty zippy read.
The premise of Run Away is that a man's daughter has gone missing and he wants to find her. She happens to be a drug addict. There are lots of twisty plot twists in this novel, which keep the suspense dialed up. I found them to be well-placed and not too unbelievable.
It was set very contemporarily; lots of instances of particularly modern technology and culture/issues. Stuff that people living 2019 would be familiar with. That was interesting, as I don't think I've really read any other books (recently, at least) that have been set in a time period so up-to-the-moment.
It had hints of Prisoners, the Millenium trilogy and Netflix's show Ozark, even. Prisoners for the family/mystery of child's disappearance element, Ozark for the happy/somewhat wealthy [ie definitely upper middle class, if not more] family disrupted by unfortunate events/getting involved with something shady, and Millenium trilogy because of the mystery/thriller genre.
It reminded me of Millenium,** but flashier (more dramatic, I suppose, and the writing style itself as well), if you will. Millenium was more of a slow burn and more measured in style (although still quite good!). Stieg Larsson's writing style had more of a focus on various background context information and minute details. The writing style also had a bit more of a terse tone.*
If you like twisty suspenseful stuff with a dose of murder and mystery that involves particularly contemporary issues in its plot, this would probably be an enjoyable read. It's not high literature, but it's probably at least a step or so above romance novels...
At the end, there was a short acknowledgment section where the author thanked a series of people for donating to charities, and in return he used their names for characters in the book. I found that somewhat interesting, since I don't think I've read any acknowledgments that mention something like that before. I personally could not write a fictional book and use the names of people I actually know or even know of. I'd think too much about the actual person with the name I used for a character while writing the book. I would need characters to be as blank of slates as possible, so they can't have names that I already have strong impressions/associations of because they're names of people I know (of). I also wouldn't use names of people I actually know personally, unless I was purposefully including/writing a (probably relatively minor) character based on them.
There was a particular plot element that led me to wonder about a theoretical scenario, which I don't want to reveal too casually here. Spoilers to follow: //If you had a kid, yet never saw the kid grow up (and therefore did not know what exactly they looked like), would you be able to recognize them if you happened to randomly see them in public somewhere when they were grown? Suppose you know who the other parent is and what they (in this case, father, but I suppose it could go the other way too) looked like as well. Generally speaking, people tend to have a decently strong familial resemblance to others they're biologically related to. Look at the Kennedy family or really most other families out there. Siblings tend to resemble each other and children tend to resemble their parents at least to some degree. Therefore, I'd think that someone might possibly be able to recognize a theoretical long lost child, but who knows... I tried looking up about this kind of thing, but didn't quite find what I had hoped. In any case, it's certainly an interesting thing to ponder.***
**digression/tangent: I've read a few other mystery/thriller/crime novels by Scandinavian authors in hopes I'd find one on par with Stieg Larsson's work, but I never really did. Not that the ones I read were horribly bad, they just weren't Millenium trilogy levels of spectacular.
***additional tangent: I also have wondered in the past about how common it is for someone to move back into a home they lived in previously. Not in the sense of moving back in with one's parents, but living in a given home, moving somewhere else, then eventually ending up moving back to the original home after it's had a period of having different residents than the original person mentioned initially. I looked up about this before and did manage to find one case where a family had regretted selling their home, and then was able to buy it back and move back into it maybe a year (not terribly long) after they had initially sold it. [further tangent: there's a line in Smile Like You Mean It that's vaguely related to this concept]
*I had to go look up the difference between tone and voice. Voice is more akin to a given person's idiolect -- phrases or quirks of their writing or speech. Words they tend to use or don't use. Their pattern(s) of writing or speech, basically. Voice can vary depending on the context -- I have a particular voice I write this blog in, yet I have a different, more buttoned-up voice if I'm writing a News Article.
Tone is more of something like... angry. Or happy. Lighthearted. Sarcastic. Sad. Enthusiastic. Appreciative. Formal. And so on. It has more to do with how writing/speech comes across to others.
Further reading from Grammarly's blog: Tone vs. Voice and more specifically on Tone
author's note: although I'm aware that AP Style instructs that titles of compositions are in quotation marks, I didn't feel like using those conventions here.
The premise of Run Away is that a man's daughter has gone missing and he wants to find her. She happens to be a drug addict. There are lots of twisty plot twists in this novel, which keep the suspense dialed up. I found them to be well-placed and not too unbelievable.
It was set very contemporarily; lots of instances of particularly modern technology and culture/issues. Stuff that people living 2019 would be familiar with. That was interesting, as I don't think I've really read any other books (recently, at least) that have been set in a time period so up-to-the-moment.
It had hints of Prisoners, the Millenium trilogy and Netflix's show Ozark, even. Prisoners for the family/mystery of child's disappearance element, Ozark for the happy/somewhat wealthy [ie definitely upper middle class, if not more] family disrupted by unfortunate events/getting involved with something shady, and Millenium trilogy because of the mystery/thriller genre.
It reminded me of Millenium,** but flashier (more dramatic, I suppose, and the writing style itself as well), if you will. Millenium was more of a slow burn and more measured in style (although still quite good!). Stieg Larsson's writing style had more of a focus on various background context information and minute details. The writing style also had a bit more of a terse tone.*
If you like twisty suspenseful stuff with a dose of murder and mystery that involves particularly contemporary issues in its plot, this would probably be an enjoyable read. It's not high literature, but it's probably at least a step or so above romance novels...
At the end, there was a short acknowledgment section where the author thanked a series of people for donating to charities, and in return he used their names for characters in the book. I found that somewhat interesting, since I don't think I've read any acknowledgments that mention something like that before. I personally could not write a fictional book and use the names of people I actually know or even know of. I'd think too much about the actual person with the name I used for a character while writing the book. I would need characters to be as blank of slates as possible, so they can't have names that I already have strong impressions/associations of because they're names of people I know (of). I also wouldn't use names of people I actually know personally, unless I was purposefully including/writing a (probably relatively minor) character based on them.
There was a particular plot element that led me to wonder about a theoretical scenario, which I don't want to reveal too casually here. Spoilers to follow: //If you had a kid, yet never saw the kid grow up (and therefore did not know what exactly they looked like), would you be able to recognize them if you happened to randomly see them in public somewhere when they were grown? Suppose you know who the other parent is and what they (in this case, father, but I suppose it could go the other way too) looked like as well. Generally speaking, people tend to have a decently strong familial resemblance to others they're biologically related to. Look at the Kennedy family or really most other families out there. Siblings tend to resemble each other and children tend to resemble their parents at least to some degree. Therefore, I'd think that someone might possibly be able to recognize a theoretical long lost child, but who knows... I tried looking up about this kind of thing, but didn't quite find what I had hoped. In any case, it's certainly an interesting thing to ponder.***
**digression/tangent: I've read a few other mystery/thriller/crime novels by Scandinavian authors in hopes I'd find one on par with Stieg Larsson's work, but I never really did. Not that the ones I read were horribly bad, they just weren't Millenium trilogy levels of spectacular.
***additional tangent: I also have wondered in the past about how common it is for someone to move back into a home they lived in previously. Not in the sense of moving back in with one's parents, but living in a given home, moving somewhere else, then eventually ending up moving back to the original home after it's had a period of having different residents than the original person mentioned initially. I looked up about this before and did manage to find one case where a family had regretted selling their home, and then was able to buy it back and move back into it maybe a year (not terribly long) after they had initially sold it. [further tangent: there's a line in Smile Like You Mean It that's vaguely related to this concept]
*I had to go look up the difference between tone and voice. Voice is more akin to a given person's idiolect -- phrases or quirks of their writing or speech. Words they tend to use or don't use. Their pattern(s) of writing or speech, basically. Voice can vary depending on the context -- I have a particular voice I write this blog in, yet I have a different, more buttoned-up voice if I'm writing a News Article.
Tone is more of something like... angry. Or happy. Lighthearted. Sarcastic. Sad. Enthusiastic. Appreciative. Formal. And so on. It has more to do with how writing/speech comes across to others.
Further reading from Grammarly's blog: Tone vs. Voice and more specifically on Tone
author's note: although I'm aware that AP Style instructs that titles of compositions are in quotation marks, I didn't feel like using those conventions here.
Thursday, November 28, 2019
Movie review: Taxi Driver
Another (famous) movie I can add to my list of having watched. Conveniently, it's currently on Netflix. For some reason I woke up in the middle of the night (sort of, 4:30 a.m.) and couldn't go back to sleep, so I decided I'd try to find something to watch. Taxi Driver seemed like it could potentially be an interesting watch and it's also famous, so I figured I should watch it since it feels like one's supposed to have familiarity with famous movies like such. (I also want to watch American Psycho, but I kind of am waiting until I read the book first...)
Anyways, it was an interesting movie. Netflix rated it as a 92% match, whatever that's supposed to mean. I suppose they were rather correct though; I did like the movie. I hadn't realized that Martin Scorsese's directing career extended all the way back to 1976. I have liked some of his other work, such as The Departed and Shutter Island (he also directed The Wolf of Wall Street, which I also should watch at some point... and which also features Leonardo DiCaprio).
The movie is set in the 70s, presumably contemporarily to when it was released. The 70s aesthetic and fashions you can see in the movie were interesting to me and it makes me want to go to the thrift store and buy some 70s clothes... although perhaps I could cobble together an outfit out of some stuff I already have.
I liked the cinematography; it was nice and measured, particularly the various scenes of the nighttime taxi driving. Visually, I liked the movie. (I can't quite think of movies where I distinctly disliked the cinematography -- maybe No Country For Old Men, but I just generally hated that movie overall, not specifically due to the cinematography).
In tandem with the cinematography, I also liked the soundtrack/score -- again, it had a measured/meditative feel to it and contributed to the atmosphere of the movie.
Obviously watching this movie in 2019 is a bit of a trip; there are various outdated things that we don't do/have anymore. Typewriters, payphones, having to go to a record store when someone tells you about a song... I wonder if a present-day remake or movie with a similar premise would be able to have the same effect as Taxi Driver. I guess in a present-day version, the eponymous taxi driver would probably drive for a ride-hail app... Taxi Driver was contemporary to the time it was released, so obviously the sense of outdatedness I get watching it now, decades later, was not present for people who saw it back then. And maybe I shouldn't say outdatedness; that has a bit of a negative connotation yet I don't mean it in a negative way. Maybe retro is a more fitting term.
I thought that maybe this movie might have some kind of funky twist at the end, but it didn't. Still, it was an interesting and worthwhile watch. It was also a bit more tame, in a way, than some other movies I've seen. I thought that maybe it might be a bit more suspenseful and thrilling and/or have more action or something, although it didn't. Not that this was a bad thing; it was just a somewhat calmer movie than I thought it might be.
I guess what I mean is that I thought it might have more conflict, or rather, more drawn-out conflict/conflict that was less subdued. Subdued is a good word to describe it I think. This movie wasn't an emotional or action rollercoaster as some others are, movies that are really intense. Most of the conflict in this movie happened in succinct bursts, with very quick falling action phases.
I was not really familiar with this movie at all before watching it; I read a brief blurb about it to give me an idea of the premise, but otherwise I just knew that it's apparently a famous movie. I think at some point I might've read that it's supposed to be a commentary on American society in the post-Vietnam era, although I don't remember the details.
I think it's interesting to view media and consider how or what it reflects about the time period it was made in. What is it portraying, and how does it portray said subject. The tv shows and movies that are being produced today or within the last few years are a reflection of our current era.
I got the feeling that Robert De Niro, in this film, looks like someone, but I can't figure out who. I know that I'd watched another movie in the past that he was also in (albeit older) so that's why he could look vaguely familiar, but I'm not quite sure that's it... I'm always thinking that people look like other people, so this shouldn't be too surprising. (edit: he also apparently was in The Deer Hunter, which I've seen a portion of)
It was in the same vein as various other movies I like: the other Martin Scorsese films I mentioned above, The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, Prisoners, even Requiem for a Dream, etc. I seem to like movies that are darker/grittier thematically. If it fits in the genre psychological thriller, it's probably my thing. I'm not really sure where I got my taste in movies; I watch stuff that my mother would have absolutely no interest in.
Come to think of it, this movie also reminded me a bit of Nightcrawler (which Jake Gyllenhaal is in). So I went to go look up and see if Nightcrawler was influenced by Taxi Driver, and it seems like it was -- the poster strongly alludes to Taxi Driver's poster:
Anyways, it was an interesting movie. Netflix rated it as a 92% match, whatever that's supposed to mean. I suppose they were rather correct though; I did like the movie. I hadn't realized that Martin Scorsese's directing career extended all the way back to 1976. I have liked some of his other work, such as The Departed and Shutter Island (he also directed The Wolf of Wall Street, which I also should watch at some point... and which also features Leonardo DiCaprio).
The movie is set in the 70s, presumably contemporarily to when it was released. The 70s aesthetic and fashions you can see in the movie were interesting to me and it makes me want to go to the thrift store and buy some 70s clothes... although perhaps I could cobble together an outfit out of some stuff I already have.
I liked the cinematography; it was nice and measured, particularly the various scenes of the nighttime taxi driving. Visually, I liked the movie. (I can't quite think of movies where I distinctly disliked the cinematography -- maybe No Country For Old Men, but I just generally hated that movie overall, not specifically due to the cinematography).
In tandem with the cinematography, I also liked the soundtrack/score -- again, it had a measured/meditative feel to it and contributed to the atmosphere of the movie.
Obviously watching this movie in 2019 is a bit of a trip; there are various outdated things that we don't do/have anymore. Typewriters, payphones, having to go to a record store when someone tells you about a song... I wonder if a present-day remake or movie with a similar premise would be able to have the same effect as Taxi Driver. I guess in a present-day version, the eponymous taxi driver would probably drive for a ride-hail app... Taxi Driver was contemporary to the time it was released, so obviously the sense of outdatedness I get watching it now, decades later, was not present for people who saw it back then. And maybe I shouldn't say outdatedness; that has a bit of a negative connotation yet I don't mean it in a negative way. Maybe retro is a more fitting term.
I thought that maybe this movie might have some kind of funky twist at the end, but it didn't. Still, it was an interesting and worthwhile watch. It was also a bit more tame, in a way, than some other movies I've seen. I thought that maybe it might be a bit more suspenseful and thrilling and/or have more action or something, although it didn't. Not that this was a bad thing; it was just a somewhat calmer movie than I thought it might be.
I guess what I mean is that I thought it might have more conflict, or rather, more drawn-out conflict/conflict that was less subdued. Subdued is a good word to describe it I think. This movie wasn't an emotional or action rollercoaster as some others are, movies that are really intense. Most of the conflict in this movie happened in succinct bursts, with very quick falling action phases.
I was not really familiar with this movie at all before watching it; I read a brief blurb about it to give me an idea of the premise, but otherwise I just knew that it's apparently a famous movie. I think at some point I might've read that it's supposed to be a commentary on American society in the post-Vietnam era, although I don't remember the details.
I think it's interesting to view media and consider how or what it reflects about the time period it was made in. What is it portraying, and how does it portray said subject. The tv shows and movies that are being produced today or within the last few years are a reflection of our current era.
I got the feeling that Robert De Niro, in this film, looks like someone, but I can't figure out who. I know that I'd watched another movie in the past that he was also in (albeit older) so that's why he could look vaguely familiar, but I'm not quite sure that's it... I'm always thinking that people look like other people, so this shouldn't be too surprising. (edit: he also apparently was in The Deer Hunter, which I've seen a portion of)
It was in the same vein as various other movies I like: the other Martin Scorsese films I mentioned above, The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, Prisoners, even Requiem for a Dream, etc. I seem to like movies that are darker/grittier thematically. If it fits in the genre psychological thriller, it's probably my thing. I'm not really sure where I got my taste in movies; I watch stuff that my mother would have absolutely no interest in.
Come to think of it, this movie also reminded me a bit of Nightcrawler (which Jake Gyllenhaal is in). So I went to go look up and see if Nightcrawler was influenced by Taxi Driver, and it seems like it was -- the poster strongly alludes to Taxi Driver's poster:
Friday, November 22, 2019
TV show review: Portlandia
A few weeks ago I started watching this show. It is a semi-abstract/surreal comedy series, featuring two actors/comedians who play a wide assortment of different characters. I'm nearly at the end and I haven't gotten sick of it yet, so I think I can be confident in calling this a Good Show.
The premise is that it takes place in Portland and is (at times) a satire of the culture there. It's... difficult to convey the nature of the show in words. I think it's the kind of thing that you really have to watch in order to grasp.
It might not be for everyone, but I've liked it. It's a nice mindless watch; a bit more offbeat/quirky than Parks and Rec or the American Office. (weaknesses: eczema) It's been quite awhile since I watched either version of The Office, although to my recollection, the UK version has a drier sense of humor. The American version is... not terrible, but definitely overrated. (it's a good thing Russia doesn't exist anymore)
So far, the best episodes of Portlandia I remember have been:
Spyke Drives
Nina's Birthday
No-Fo-O-Fo-Bridge
Pull-Out King
Getting Away
The Story of Toni and Candace
Healthcare
Pickathon
Lance is Smart
ETA: Amore and Rose Route. Open Relationship specifically for the gleefully surreal and dark "Snails" sketch. That's got to be one of my favorites.
Anyways, Portlandia + Arrested Development pretty much comprise the entirety of my comedy consumption these days. Occasionally I might watch one of the later-night shows -- I think Seth Meyers is somewhat superior to the others I've watched in the past. He reminds me the most of Jon Stewart's Daily Show.
ETA Dec. 24: Alrighty, I've finished Portlandia (for the most part -- I skipped a few episodes here and there if they seemed boring, but I might go back and watch them later). Overall it's a decent show, but sometimes it's hit or miss. There are definitely episodes/sketches that stand out as better than the others. Some/many are forgettable. It is not like Arrested Development in which *all* of the episodes (well, that I've seen. Haven't watched the appended newer seasons) are good.
The premise is that it takes place in Portland and is (at times) a satire of the culture there. It's... difficult to convey the nature of the show in words. I think it's the kind of thing that you really have to watch in order to grasp.
It might not be for everyone, but I've liked it. It's a nice mindless watch; a bit more offbeat/quirky than Parks and Rec or the American Office. (weaknesses: eczema) It's been quite awhile since I watched either version of The Office, although to my recollection, the UK version has a drier sense of humor. The American version is... not terrible, but definitely overrated. (it's a good thing Russia doesn't exist anymore)
So far, the best episodes of Portlandia I remember have been:
Spyke Drives
Nina's Birthday
No-Fo-O-Fo-Bridge
Pull-Out King
Getting Away
The Story of Toni and Candace
Healthcare
Pickathon
Lance is Smart
ETA: Amore and Rose Route. Open Relationship specifically for the gleefully surreal and dark "Snails" sketch. That's got to be one of my favorites.
Anyways, Portlandia + Arrested Development pretty much comprise the entirety of my comedy consumption these days. Occasionally I might watch one of the later-night shows -- I think Seth Meyers is somewhat superior to the others I've watched in the past. He reminds me the most of Jon Stewart's Daily Show.
ETA Dec. 24: Alrighty, I've finished Portlandia (for the most part -- I skipped a few episodes here and there if they seemed boring, but I might go back and watch them later). Overall it's a decent show, but sometimes it's hit or miss. There are definitely episodes/sketches that stand out as better than the others. Some/many are forgettable. It is not like Arrested Development in which *all* of the episodes (well, that I've seen. Haven't watched the appended newer seasons) are good.
Sunday, September 29, 2019
Product review: Teflon bone folder or folding bone
I ordered this thing on Amazon because I needed to order a second item in order to qualify for free shipping. After about two days of tortured dithering and indecision about what second item I should buy, I remembered that perhaps I could use an actual folding bone. So that's how I ended up with this thing.
The product: "Mr HobNob Teflon Bone Folder" (this is *not* an affiliate link, so I don't care whether or not you decide to also purchase one of these for yourself) Apparently my Amazon account doesn't meet the qualifications to leave a review, so... here's my review. Also, I figured I could be more long-winded here.
3 stars.
What is a folding bone?
A folding bone is used for various papercrafts; in my case, I use one for origami. It saves my fingernails from getting torn up due to pressing down folds. Apparently, folding bones can also be used for cardmaking.
Before acquiring this actual folding bone, I'd just use my fingernails or a makeshift folding bone that was a repurposed milk jug handle punchout. You can find these sometimes scattered on the floor/shelves of a dairy case at the grocery store or Costco; that's where I've collected mine. They are small pieces of plastic about the size of a thumb.
So how do you like the actual folding bone?
I tried this out briefly and it's functional, although heavier than I expected or was used to (the milk jug punchouts are quite lightweight). The material and therefore folding edge seems to be kind of soft and after making only a few folds, it was shredding a little. I worry that it'll get a lot more shredded/worn if I use it frequently.
It is 6.75 inches long, .75 inches wide and about 3/8 in. thick. It's relatively hefty and definitely has a weighty feel to it, but it's not necessarily too heavy. When it came, it had a few small marks on it and I had expected that it'd be completely new and fresh-looking. The marks don't affect performance and are just an aesthetic concern.
Suppposedly the benefit of a teflon folding bone is that it won't leave marks on paper, but I never really cared about that. It might be interesting to try folding bones made from other materials.
I would probably give this thing 3 stars; it works as intended, although I wish the edge wouldn't shred even after just using it briefly. I decided that if I didn't like this that much for use as an actual folding bone, I could always just use it as a hair stick, which is what I'm doing now.
As a folding bone, due to the shredding/wearing issue, it might be closer to 2 stars, but for my hair, I like it a lot, so as a hair stick, 5 stars.
The product: "Mr HobNob Teflon Bone Folder" (this is *not* an affiliate link, so I don't care whether or not you decide to also purchase one of these for yourself) Apparently my Amazon account doesn't meet the qualifications to leave a review, so... here's my review. Also, I figured I could be more long-winded here.
3 stars.
What is a folding bone?
A folding bone is used for various papercrafts; in my case, I use one for origami. It saves my fingernails from getting torn up due to pressing down folds. Apparently, folding bones can also be used for cardmaking.
Before acquiring this actual folding bone, I'd just use my fingernails or a makeshift folding bone that was a repurposed milk jug handle punchout. You can find these sometimes scattered on the floor/shelves of a dairy case at the grocery store or Costco; that's where I've collected mine. They are small pieces of plastic about the size of a thumb.
So how do you like the actual folding bone?
I tried this out briefly and it's functional, although heavier than I expected or was used to (the milk jug punchouts are quite lightweight). The material and therefore folding edge seems to be kind of soft and after making only a few folds, it was shredding a little. I worry that it'll get a lot more shredded/worn if I use it frequently.
It is 6.75 inches long, .75 inches wide and about 3/8 in. thick. It's relatively hefty and definitely has a weighty feel to it, but it's not necessarily too heavy. When it came, it had a few small marks on it and I had expected that it'd be completely new and fresh-looking. The marks don't affect performance and are just an aesthetic concern.
Suppposedly the benefit of a teflon folding bone is that it won't leave marks on paper, but I never really cared about that. It might be interesting to try folding bones made from other materials.
I would probably give this thing 3 stars; it works as intended, although I wish the edge wouldn't shred even after just using it briefly. I decided that if I didn't like this that much for use as an actual folding bone, I could always just use it as a hair stick, which is what I'm doing now.
As a folding bone, due to the shredding/wearing issue, it might be closer to 2 stars, but for my hair, I like it a lot, so as a hair stick, 5 stars.
Monday, September 9, 2019
James Iha's hair
I briefly mentioned James Iha in a recent post in relation to something that someone else had written on their own blog about him. I felt that said thing was similar to something I could see myself writing, hence why I had mentioned it.
I also think that James Iha had some pretty interesting/cool hairstyles back in the day... "I really love
your hairdo, yeah/I'm glad you like mine too/See what looking pretty cool will get ya?"*
* this is not a Smashing Pumpkins song; it's a Dandy Warhols song. CTT had an interesting hairstyle back in the day as well. Those interesting little wispy sideburns. His more recent hippie hairstyle is... maybe less than flattering. But it's his hair. He can do what he wants with it.
Part of me wants to try a James Iha hairstyle, particularly the one he had where two pieces at the front/center of his head were bleached. It's different and unconventional, but interesting. He also had various other semi-bleached styles. I found an interesting interview where he talked a bit about his hairstyles...
"Interviewer: Can you tell me about your hair history?
James: My hair history. That’s kind of a dodgy subject. My hair history. I don’t know why my hair is such a big thing. I guess I’m like Bon Jovi or something. I just have this insane hair thing on my head. It just used to be green, used to be red, used to be blue, then I put all these skunk stripes in it. I just thought I looked too normal so I just sort of did something to it. But now I’m so sick or seeing myself this way that I think I’m just going to chop all the crazy stuff of and get a like normal Supercuts cut. I think that would be more rebellious, that would be more punk rock than dyed hair.
Interviewer: Do you mean a business cut?
James: Just like a regular guy hair cut. Whatever that is. Which is something normal. I’m sick of looking unnormal."
The rest of the interview is also relatively interesting. He comes across as a bit aloof, but in a way it's kind of amusing.
This lady bleached her hair into a James Iha style! I'm not sure if there's a specific name for it, or if this can just be known as a James Iha hairstyle. I wonder how different it would look on me since my hair is a lot longer.
I also think that James Iha had some pretty interesting/cool hairstyles back in the day... "I really love
your hairdo, yeah/I'm glad you like mine too/See what looking pretty cool will get ya?"*
* this is not a Smashing Pumpkins song; it's a Dandy Warhols song. CTT had an interesting hairstyle back in the day as well. Those interesting little wispy sideburns. His more recent hippie hairstyle is... maybe less than flattering. But it's his hair. He can do what he wants with it.
Part of me wants to try a James Iha hairstyle, particularly the one he had where two pieces at the front/center of his head were bleached. It's different and unconventional, but interesting. He also had various other semi-bleached styles. I found an interesting interview where he talked a bit about his hairstyles...
"Interviewer: Can you tell me about your hair history?
James: My hair history. That’s kind of a dodgy subject. My hair history. I don’t know why my hair is such a big thing. I guess I’m like Bon Jovi or something. I just have this insane hair thing on my head. It just used to be green, used to be red, used to be blue, then I put all these skunk stripes in it. I just thought I looked too normal so I just sort of did something to it. But now I’m so sick or seeing myself this way that I think I’m just going to chop all the crazy stuff of and get a like normal Supercuts cut. I think that would be more rebellious, that would be more punk rock than dyed hair.
Interviewer: Do you mean a business cut?
James: Just like a regular guy hair cut. Whatever that is. Which is something normal. I’m sick of looking unnormal."
The rest of the interview is also relatively interesting. He comes across as a bit aloof, but in a way it's kind of amusing.
This lady bleached her hair into a James Iha style! I'm not sure if there's a specific name for it, or if this can just be known as a James Iha hairstyle. I wonder how different it would look on me since my hair is a lot longer.
The perfect water bottle
I sense this becoming another quest, like my quest for the perfect messenger bag (Patagonia Half Mass and Minimass, forever).
The last couple of years I've been more hydrated than I ever was before, since I started carrying around with me and drinking from a water bottle. I used to not particularly like the flavor of water, but it seems that now I find it amenable.
Anyways, being very much a form-follows-function kind of person, this means I demand *functionality* from my water bottle, as I do with other things I'm picky about (mechanical pencils, messenger bags...)
Ideal features (bottle designers, listen up!!):
Dishwasher safe
Drinking spout with flip top
Plastic
700ml to 1L capacity
Aesthetically appealing
Will fit in the side pocket of my Minimass (and Half Mass)
Can fit in a standard bicycle bottle cage
Wide enough opening so you can add ice
The last couple of things are slightly less important but would be nice.
The water bottle that I've been using, which has most of these features, has been a smartwater 1L with flip top drinking spout added from a different size smartwater bottle (the flip tops only come on the 700ml size, I think). These are meant as single-use bottles, but I think they hold up remarkably well to reuse (even if perhaps it's not exactly good to reuse single-use bottles for chemical reasons or whatnot). Although I'm pretty happy with my current bottle choice, it would be nice to have a bottle that's actually meant to be reused. If smartwater sold a reusable, slightly sturdier version of their 700ml size bottle, I'd be all over that. Although I realize their business is predicated on selling single-use bottles.
Why a drinking spout and flip-top is great
A drinking spout is a bit easier to drink out of, in my opinion, and the flip-top is more convenient to open than a typical screw top. The flip-top also serves to protect the drinking spout from getting dirty. The smartwater flip-tops seem to be pretty durable and the top hasn't broken off on me yet, and I've even put them through the dishwasher on the top rack and they've turned out fine. Once, a top did come apart after an unspecified time of prolonged use, but overall the design is solid.
I don't get why reusable bottle designers can't come up with what's basically a slightly more rugged smartwater bottle? Looking at you, Contigo and Nalgene... etc. etc. etc.
seems like other people share my affinity for the wonderful functionality and form of the smartwater bottle
The last couple of years I've been more hydrated than I ever was before, since I started carrying around with me and drinking from a water bottle. I used to not particularly like the flavor of water, but it seems that now I find it amenable.
Anyways, being very much a form-follows-function kind of person, this means I demand *functionality* from my water bottle, as I do with other things I'm picky about (mechanical pencils, messenger bags...)
Ideal features (bottle designers, listen up!!):
Dishwasher safe
Drinking spout with flip top
Plastic
700ml to 1L capacity
Aesthetically appealing
Will fit in the side pocket of my Minimass (and Half Mass)
Can fit in a standard bicycle bottle cage
Wide enough opening so you can add ice
The last couple of things are slightly less important but would be nice.
The water bottle that I've been using, which has most of these features, has been a smartwater 1L with flip top drinking spout added from a different size smartwater bottle (the flip tops only come on the 700ml size, I think). These are meant as single-use bottles, but I think they hold up remarkably well to reuse (even if perhaps it's not exactly good to reuse single-use bottles for chemical reasons or whatnot). Although I'm pretty happy with my current bottle choice, it would be nice to have a bottle that's actually meant to be reused. If smartwater sold a reusable, slightly sturdier version of their 700ml size bottle, I'd be all over that. Although I realize their business is predicated on selling single-use bottles.
Why a drinking spout and flip-top is great
A drinking spout is a bit easier to drink out of, in my opinion, and the flip-top is more convenient to open than a typical screw top. The flip-top also serves to protect the drinking spout from getting dirty. The smartwater flip-tops seem to be pretty durable and the top hasn't broken off on me yet, and I've even put them through the dishwasher on the top rack and they've turned out fine. Once, a top did come apart after an unspecified time of prolonged use, but overall the design is solid.
I don't get why reusable bottle designers can't come up with what's basically a slightly more rugged smartwater bottle? Looking at you, Contigo and Nalgene... etc. etc. etc.
seems like other people share my affinity for the wonderful functionality and form of the smartwater bottle
Wednesday, September 4, 2019
Things that other people have written that I could almost see myself writing
This is... the kind of thing I could almost see myself writing... "A list of topics that went through my head last night while watching the Dandy Warhols."
Also, this about James Iha (of the Smashing Pumpkins, which I don't particularly care for, but I digress) which I happened to come across awhile back in the past... it's somewhat quite something else when you read someone else's random writing and think that you could see yourself writing a similar thing, style and/or topic-wise...
Obscure and at least mildly obsessive thoughts about various topics is my jam. (I haven't watched any Peter Sarsgaard movies lately, alas, and "An Education" isn't on Netflix anymore... alas indeed. Maybe I should rewatch Shattered Glass. What a great movie. Are you mad at me?)
To a somewhat lesser extent, the Jake Gyllenhaal newsletter (look it up!) also kinda seemed like something I might do, although her writing style/voice was a bit more different than mine, compared to the first two examples.
What I have been doing lately (rather than watching more Peter Sarsgaard movies) is rewatching copious amounts of Arrested Development and wondering why no one's ever interviewed Jason Bateman about his cycling habits!! Inquiring minds want to know! Or at least my inquiring mind does.
Speaking of the Smashing Pumpkins... back in 2014 (apparently; I had to look it up) they released an album titled "Monuments to an Elegy," which I remembered that I had attempted to listen to, to see what it was like. For some reason I did that. I don't remember liking it. I decided to try and listen to one of the songs now, to revisit it and see what I thought... nope, still don't like it, and wow, I don't like Billy Corgan's voice!! 1979 is an okay song and sometimes I even feel like listening to it, but whoa, his voice is not a particularly appealing one... I supposed you could say that the Smashing Pumpkins are overrated.
Also, this about James Iha (of the Smashing Pumpkins, which I don't particularly care for, but I digress) which I happened to come across awhile back in the past... it's somewhat quite something else when you read someone else's random writing and think that you could see yourself writing a similar thing, style and/or topic-wise...
Obscure and at least mildly obsessive thoughts about various topics is my jam. (I haven't watched any Peter Sarsgaard movies lately, alas, and "An Education" isn't on Netflix anymore... alas indeed. Maybe I should rewatch Shattered Glass. What a great movie. Are you mad at me?)
To a somewhat lesser extent, the Jake Gyllenhaal newsletter (look it up!) also kinda seemed like something I might do, although her writing style/voice was a bit more different than mine, compared to the first two examples.
What I have been doing lately (rather than watching more Peter Sarsgaard movies) is rewatching copious amounts of Arrested Development and wondering why no one's ever interviewed Jason Bateman about his cycling habits!! Inquiring minds want to know! Or at least my inquiring mind does.
Speaking of the Smashing Pumpkins... back in 2014 (apparently; I had to look it up) they released an album titled "Monuments to an Elegy," which I remembered that I had attempted to listen to, to see what it was like. For some reason I did that. I don't remember liking it. I decided to try and listen to one of the songs now, to revisit it and see what I thought... nope, still don't like it, and wow, I don't like Billy Corgan's voice!! 1979 is an okay song and sometimes I even feel like listening to it, but whoa, his voice is not a particularly appealing one... I supposed you could say that the Smashing Pumpkins are overrated.
Monday, September 2, 2019
DIY planner concept for organization and productivity
How to be more productive, potentially. This may or may not work for you, and you may not care to go to the effort of DIY-ing a planner.
In an effort to be more productive, awhile back I decided to start DIY-ing a planner, since the store-bought ones weren't really cutting it for me.
The typical store-bought planner layout has a full monthly calendar split over two pages at the beginning of each month, which I generally never used. If I were going to use a full monthly calendar, I'd use a wall version.
Then, it has each week split over two pages, divided by day with a section for each, where you have a couple inches of space to write. This is the layout distilled to its most basic elements. There might be other layouts out there, but I haven't used those.
The aforementioned layout doesn't organize me in a way that's most effective. I found that it's more useful to me to have a detailed day by day schedule written out, with more general notes/tasks/items written in a weekly section that is on a single page. A couple inches is not enough to write out and schedule a full day's tasks.
There are Cambridge brand planners/appointment books that have sections to schedule out each day, but I'm only aware of these coming in a full notebook size, and I'm used to my planners being more compact. Plus, for something you have to carry around, smaller and more portable is better. I still have enough space to write what I need.
Supplies:
A small notebook (approximately 6"x8" is good for me)
Straightedge (technically optional, but it helps to make things look neater)
Writing utensils
The specific notebook selection will depend on your personal preferences. I prefer only sturdy spiral-bound notebooks with sturdy hard or plastic covers and lined pages. The writing utensils you use to layout the planner also depend on your personal preferences. You can make it as colorful or boring as you want. I find it helpful to use at least one separate color/writing utensil for the general layout markings and another for the actual notes and plans.
Weekly section
Divide one page in half vertically and draw a line. Then draw lines to divide it into thirds horizontally, resulting in 6 boxes. This is the weekly section. The weekend days are combined into one box. Label each box with the date. I use the "Monday [day #] [month, abbreviated]" format. At the top of the page, I write which week it is as "Week of [date] to [date]"
Write general information for each day in the corresponding box. Like if you have a meeting or appointment or task that needs to be done or something that was assigned in class.
Daily scheduling section
Use a separate page for each day. At the top, write the date.
Down the side, draw a vertical line slightly indented from the left side. Along the left side, write times by the hour. I use every other line and write the hours. Depending on when you start/end your days, you can tailor the time range you use. I write only down to 5 p.m. and everything past that is consolidated.
Schedule out your days here. I write when I plan to wake up and when I need to leave to go somewhere, when applicable (usually if it's a change from my normal routine). Write in when your classes are if you're in college. Write in meetings, appointments, social plans, things you want to remember, other things you want/plan to get done at a given time that day, etc. Since there is a full page for each day, you can be specific and go into relative detail here.
Optional: Monthly section.
Use one page, turn the notebook around so the spiral is at the top. Divide into 4 or 5 sections for the weeks, then 7 sections for the days. Label.
The DIY planner is flexible, so you can also use it for general notes if necessary by simply using the next blank page. I usually only layout the daily pages a day or so in advance to allow for flexibility.
In an effort to be more productive, awhile back I decided to start DIY-ing a planner, since the store-bought ones weren't really cutting it for me.
The typical store-bought planner layout has a full monthly calendar split over two pages at the beginning of each month, which I generally never used. If I were going to use a full monthly calendar, I'd use a wall version.
Then, it has each week split over two pages, divided by day with a section for each, where you have a couple inches of space to write. This is the layout distilled to its most basic elements. There might be other layouts out there, but I haven't used those.
The aforementioned layout doesn't organize me in a way that's most effective. I found that it's more useful to me to have a detailed day by day schedule written out, with more general notes/tasks/items written in a weekly section that is on a single page. A couple inches is not enough to write out and schedule a full day's tasks.
There are Cambridge brand planners/appointment books that have sections to schedule out each day, but I'm only aware of these coming in a full notebook size, and I'm used to my planners being more compact. Plus, for something you have to carry around, smaller and more portable is better. I still have enough space to write what I need.
Supplies:
A small notebook (approximately 6"x8" is good for me)
Straightedge (technically optional, but it helps to make things look neater)
Writing utensils
The specific notebook selection will depend on your personal preferences. I prefer only sturdy spiral-bound notebooks with sturdy hard or plastic covers and lined pages. The writing utensils you use to layout the planner also depend on your personal preferences. You can make it as colorful or boring as you want. I find it helpful to use at least one separate color/writing utensil for the general layout markings and another for the actual notes and plans.
Weekly section
Divide one page in half vertically and draw a line. Then draw lines to divide it into thirds horizontally, resulting in 6 boxes. This is the weekly section. The weekend days are combined into one box. Label each box with the date. I use the "Monday [day #] [month, abbreviated]" format. At the top of the page, I write which week it is as "Week of [date] to [date]"
Write general information for each day in the corresponding box. Like if you have a meeting or appointment or task that needs to be done or something that was assigned in class.
Daily scheduling section
Use a separate page for each day. At the top, write the date.
Down the side, draw a vertical line slightly indented from the left side. Along the left side, write times by the hour. I use every other line and write the hours. Depending on when you start/end your days, you can tailor the time range you use. I write only down to 5 p.m. and everything past that is consolidated.
Schedule out your days here. I write when I plan to wake up and when I need to leave to go somewhere, when applicable (usually if it's a change from my normal routine). Write in when your classes are if you're in college. Write in meetings, appointments, social plans, things you want to remember, other things you want/plan to get done at a given time that day, etc. Since there is a full page for each day, you can be specific and go into relative detail here.
Optional: Monthly section.
Use one page, turn the notebook around so the spiral is at the top. Divide into 4 or 5 sections for the weeks, then 7 sections for the days. Label.
The DIY planner is flexible, so you can also use it for general notes if necessary by simply using the next blank page. I usually only layout the daily pages a day or so in advance to allow for flexibility.
Sunday, September 1, 2019
Music review: classic rock, I guess
Yesterday I watched a marching band performance; the theme for that show was Woodstock, so they played songs that apparently were played at Woodstock. Two of them had eccentric/inscrutable/"abstract" titles, or so I thought. Titles don't really necessarily convey a ton of information about a song, especially if you have no idea what corresponding the lyrics are.
Hence, the titles "Proud Mary" and "Pinball Wizard" seemed very abstract and inscrutable to me. I thought maybe they were supposed to be metaphorical or something, but I was thinking too deeply about it. Neither are actually metaphorical. The phrases are eccentric/unusual enough that I thought they could be metaphorical. More straightforward phrases as song titles are less prone to such thoughts.
"Proud Mary" is actually an impressively boring and sedate song when not arranged for band, i.e., the original Creedence Clearwater Revival version (as a tangent, I had to look up the etymology of that band name. It's on Wikipedia). It was way more boring than I expected it'd be after hearing it played by a marching band. Kind of like how the Killers ripped off part of a Smiths song and massively improved on it! [ETA: the Dandy Warhols ripped off (or, 'paid homage to') part of a David Bowie song and also improved on it]
I thought, "Proud Mary, what the hell is that supposed to mean? Is it a person? Who is she?" I thought maybe it had some weird religious aspect to it also. Turns out in the song it's the name of a boat...
Bad Moon Rising, the only other CCR song I know of -- it's jauntier and therefore somewhat less bad/boring, but I still wouldn't go out of my way to listen to it; the only reason I care is because the Killers have covered this song in the past.
Pinball Wizard I also thought could be a metaphorical title, because it's an odd/unusual phrase, but it isn't metaphorical. The song apparently is about some guy who's very good at pinball... how insipid, I thought.
Admittedly, perhaps a title like "Not If You Were the Last Junkie On Earth" could also be considered insipid, but that song is pretty amusing, to me... and the music video!
"New Dawn Fades," while somewhat abstract, provides concrete imagery. As a phrase new (adj., self-explanatory), dawn, (noun, also self-explanatory), fades (verb, self-explanatory too!) conveys an idea. New dawn fades. A new dawn that's fading. While the title isn't mentioned in the song, I think that it fits with the whole Joy Division theme.
"With or Without You" (U2) is pretty... straightforward as well, I think.
Color me not so big on classic rock. Or at least some of it. "She's a Rainbow," which I heard in a car commercial (I don't really get what this song has to do with advertising cars) is a pretty decent song though.
Hence, the titles "Proud Mary" and "Pinball Wizard" seemed very abstract and inscrutable to me. I thought maybe they were supposed to be metaphorical or something, but I was thinking too deeply about it. Neither are actually metaphorical. The phrases are eccentric/unusual enough that I thought they could be metaphorical. More straightforward phrases as song titles are less prone to such thoughts.
"Proud Mary" is actually an impressively boring and sedate song when not arranged for band, i.e., the original Creedence Clearwater Revival version (as a tangent, I had to look up the etymology of that band name. It's on Wikipedia). It was way more boring than I expected it'd be after hearing it played by a marching band. Kind of like how the Killers ripped off part of a Smiths song and massively improved on it! [ETA: the Dandy Warhols ripped off (or, 'paid homage to') part of a David Bowie song and also improved on it]
I thought, "Proud Mary, what the hell is that supposed to mean? Is it a person? Who is she?" I thought maybe it had some weird religious aspect to it also. Turns out in the song it's the name of a boat...
Bad Moon Rising, the only other CCR song I know of -- it's jauntier and therefore somewhat less bad/boring, but I still wouldn't go out of my way to listen to it; the only reason I care is because the Killers have covered this song in the past.
Pinball Wizard I also thought could be a metaphorical title, because it's an odd/unusual phrase, but it isn't metaphorical. The song apparently is about some guy who's very good at pinball... how insipid, I thought.
Admittedly, perhaps a title like "Not If You Were the Last Junkie On Earth" could also be considered insipid, but that song is pretty amusing, to me... and the music video!
"New Dawn Fades," while somewhat abstract, provides concrete imagery. As a phrase new (adj., self-explanatory), dawn, (noun, also self-explanatory), fades (verb, self-explanatory too!) conveys an idea. New dawn fades. A new dawn that's fading. While the title isn't mentioned in the song, I think that it fits with the whole Joy Division theme.
"With or Without You" (U2) is pretty... straightforward as well, I think.
Color me not so big on classic rock. Or at least some of it. "She's a Rainbow," which I heard in a car commercial (I don't really get what this song has to do with advertising cars) is a pretty decent song though.
Friday, August 9, 2019
Review: part of Netflix's Ozark
A few more episodes in... I'm nearing the end of the first season and I haven't gotten bored yet; I'm still curious about what'll happen with the characters.
The show stumbles a bit in places with the pacing; at times it seems to drag and I think it probably could've been trimmed down to, say, 8 episodes as opposed to 10. Episode 8 is a backstory/flashback episode depicting the initial events from 10 years ago that led the characters to end up in their current situation. While I think it was useful to shed light on this backstory, I think it might've worked better had various bits been incorporated into at least some of the preceding episodes of the season, rather than putting it all in a single episode, nearly at the end of the season.
In episode 7 (I think? Maybe it was 6), there's a scene where Marty is riding a bike, which is somewhat reminiscent of Michael Bluth biking in Arrested Development. However, somehow in AD Michael actually looks sort of cool when he bikes, yet in Ozark, Marty looks kinda dorky while doing it. In AD, Michael rides an 80s Schwinn road bike. In Ozark, Marty rides a contemporary Specialized hybrid-esque looking bike. At least I think it said Specialized. In AD, Michael rides for transportation purposes; in Ozark, Marty rides seemingly for recreation.
Seeing this scene of another character of Jason Bateman's riding a bike made me wonder if there's something about him and bikes, so I had to look it up. I could only find one or two interviews that mentioned it briefly; apparently he's an avid cyclist. So I wonder if Michael biking in AD was his idea, or if the writers came up with it on their own. Seeing as he's a producer on Ozark, I'm guessing perhaps it was indeed his idea there to have a scene with Marty biking.
I can't believe there hasn't even been a short/portion of an interview of Jason Bateman specifically about biking...
We'll see how the rest of the show goes. At its best moments, it's pretty riveting, although at times it does feel a bit slow and/or slightly poorly thought-out. What's interesting about watching this after being very familiar with Jason Bateman's performance in AD is that he's capable of doing quite a bit of depth with a character, which you just don't really tend to get in a comedy.
ETA: Episode 9: definitely one of the better ones as the show builds up to what presumably will be the season's climax during the final episode. There was a cool song played over the end credits of this episode too. There was one scene that brought to mind "There's always money in the banana stand!" from Arrested Development... pacing/plotting still stumbles slightly in places; sometimes a particular plot point will skip an episode and then after that, the show comes back to it, which makes for a slightly disjointed/hampered viewing experience.
The show stumbles a bit in places with the pacing; at times it seems to drag and I think it probably could've been trimmed down to, say, 8 episodes as opposed to 10. Episode 8 is a backstory/flashback episode depicting the initial events from 10 years ago that led the characters to end up in their current situation. While I think it was useful to shed light on this backstory, I think it might've worked better had various bits been incorporated into at least some of the preceding episodes of the season, rather than putting it all in a single episode, nearly at the end of the season.
In episode 7 (I think? Maybe it was 6), there's a scene where Marty is riding a bike, which is somewhat reminiscent of Michael Bluth biking in Arrested Development. However, somehow in AD Michael actually looks sort of cool when he bikes, yet in Ozark, Marty looks kinda dorky while doing it. In AD, Michael rides an 80s Schwinn road bike. In Ozark, Marty rides a contemporary Specialized hybrid-esque looking bike. At least I think it said Specialized. In AD, Michael rides for transportation purposes; in Ozark, Marty rides seemingly for recreation.
Seeing this scene of another character of Jason Bateman's riding a bike made me wonder if there's something about him and bikes, so I had to look it up. I could only find one or two interviews that mentioned it briefly; apparently he's an avid cyclist. So I wonder if Michael biking in AD was his idea, or if the writers came up with it on their own. Seeing as he's a producer on Ozark, I'm guessing perhaps it was indeed his idea there to have a scene with Marty biking.
I can't believe there hasn't even been a short/portion of an interview of Jason Bateman specifically about biking...
We'll see how the rest of the show goes. At its best moments, it's pretty riveting, although at times it does feel a bit slow and/or slightly poorly thought-out. What's interesting about watching this after being very familiar with Jason Bateman's performance in AD is that he's capable of doing quite a bit of depth with a character, which you just don't really tend to get in a comedy.
ETA: Episode 9: definitely one of the better ones as the show builds up to what presumably will be the season's climax during the final episode. There was a cool song played over the end credits of this episode too. There was one scene that brought to mind "There's always money in the banana stand!" from Arrested Development... pacing/plotting still stumbles slightly in places; sometimes a particular plot point will skip an episode and then after that, the show comes back to it, which makes for a slightly disjointed/hampered viewing experience.
Tuesday, August 6, 2019
Movie review: Equilibrium
This movie happened to be on Netflix and the single-sentence summary (usually those manage to tell you nearly nothing about a given movie/show) seemed interesting. Plus it starred Christian Bale, who's an at least somewhat famous actor. So I thought I'd give it a shot.
It turned out to be a movie that I liked, even almost a little better than I expected. It didn't have a ton of depth, but it was interesting enough and slick-looking. Cool aesthetics. Visually, the aesthetic of the movie I would describe as "industrial minimalist semi-grunge, with slight neoclassical tones." That may be a description that only makes sense to me.
It's a dystopian/sci-fi movie. The settings/architecture were sort of a minimalist industrial look -- vaguely Brutalist in some ways/places, but not all of it was fully Brutalist. Visually it was an interesting-looking movie.
The premise, as described by Netflix: "In a dystopian future, a totalitarian regime maintains peace by subduing the population with a drug, and displays of emotion are punishable by death." This is actually one of the better/more descriptive Netflix descriptions and is basically accurate.
The movie seemed a bit like a mishmash of two classic dystopian/science fiction novels, Fahrenheit 451 and 1984. Also with a helping of Star Wars on the side. So it was a bit derivative, but it was a perfectly decent movie. There was even a touch of A Clockwork Orange (perhaps coincidental) with some music by lovely lovely Ludwig Van having a part in one scene.
I don't remember if I've seen anything else with Christian Bale in it. I think he's known for playing Batman? Or something like that. [American Psycho, The Machinist, both of which I should watch, The Prestige, also Batman like I suspected] In this movie he reminded me of an assortment of other actors, including Jake Gyllenhaal (think Nightcrawler), Jared Leto (Requiem for a Dream), and Benedict Cumberbatch (BBC Sherlock, etc), among others.
There were a number of artful fight scenes in this movie, consisting of an interesting theatrical combination of martial arts and gun battles. There was one scene involving something somewhat fencing-esque. I do wonder how much the actor(s) (namely Christian Bale) had to train/rehearse/practice the choreography for these fight scenes.
It wasn't a particularly mind-blowingly profound movie or anything, and most likely not Christian Bale's most acclaimed work, but again, it was perfectly decent, visually striking/interesting and the premise about living in a society where people are unable to have emotions was interesting enough.
It turned out to be a movie that I liked, even almost a little better than I expected. It didn't have a ton of depth, but it was interesting enough and slick-looking. Cool aesthetics. Visually, the aesthetic of the movie I would describe as "industrial minimalist semi-grunge, with slight neoclassical tones." That may be a description that only makes sense to me.
It's a dystopian/sci-fi movie. The settings/architecture were sort of a minimalist industrial look -- vaguely Brutalist in some ways/places, but not all of it was fully Brutalist. Visually it was an interesting-looking movie.
The premise, as described by Netflix: "In a dystopian future, a totalitarian regime maintains peace by subduing the population with a drug, and displays of emotion are punishable by death." This is actually one of the better/more descriptive Netflix descriptions and is basically accurate.
The movie seemed a bit like a mishmash of two classic dystopian/science fiction novels, Fahrenheit 451 and 1984. Also with a helping of Star Wars on the side. So it was a bit derivative, but it was a perfectly decent movie. There was even a touch of A Clockwork Orange (perhaps coincidental) with some music by lovely lovely Ludwig Van having a part in one scene.
I don't remember if I've seen anything else with Christian Bale in it. I think he's known for playing Batman? Or something like that. [American Psycho, The Machinist, both of which I should watch, The Prestige, also Batman like I suspected] In this movie he reminded me of an assortment of other actors, including Jake Gyllenhaal (think Nightcrawler), Jared Leto (Requiem for a Dream), and Benedict Cumberbatch (BBC Sherlock, etc), among others.
There were a number of artful fight scenes in this movie, consisting of an interesting theatrical combination of martial arts and gun battles. There was one scene involving something somewhat fencing-esque. I do wonder how much the actor(s) (namely Christian Bale) had to train/rehearse/practice the choreography for these fight scenes.
It wasn't a particularly mind-blowingly profound movie or anything, and most likely not Christian Bale's most acclaimed work, but again, it was perfectly decent, visually striking/interesting and the premise about living in a society where people are unable to have emotions was interesting enough.
Thursday, August 1, 2019
Review: Netflix assortment
Netflix has quite a number of original, Netflix-exclusive shows/movies, most of which I've refrained from watching since a) there are an absolute ton of them and I wouldn't have time and b) the majority of them don't seem to be interesting enough to be worthwhile watching.
Yet: I started watching a recently released animated anthology series, which has been... a mixed bag, but I've only seen a few episodes so far. I also started watching the show Ozark, because Jason Bateman, and by extension, Arrested Development, which I love.
Love, Death and Robots: an animated anthology series; each episode is pretty short and they're all done by different people, so they have wide-ranging plots and animation styles. Makes for nice bite-size watching material. More to say about this once I finish watching all the episodes, most likely.
Ozark: this show isn't that new, but I only started watching it now. I've only watched the first episode so far, which was decent enough that I think I'll continue watching it.
It stars Jason Bateman, otherwise known as Michael Bluth from Arrested Development. He's one of those actors that I have very much the impression of that particular role for him, so I thought it'd be kind of hard for me to watch a different thing where he's playing a different character; I'd just see him as Michael Bluth. Not that he's a bad actor, but some actors are just like that. I think I'd have a hard time watching something with Steve Carrell in it without seeing him as Michael Scott from The Office.
I did see him a bit as Michael Bluth; quite a lot of the delivery of his lines in Ozark was very reminiscent of Michael. Unsurprisingly, I suppose, since that's just how his voice is and there's not really anything he can do about that, since in this show he isn't supposed to have some kind of unusual accent.
The show itself reminded me of a variety of other things I've watched in various aspects. The cinematography was reminiscent of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo; very cinematic for a tv show, I thought. It was also pretty blue, which I also remember TGWTDT being. The tone of the show reminded me a bit of NBC's Hannibal, and/or The Killing -- measured. Plot-wise, it was semi-similar to How to Get Away With Murder, perhaps. One of the characters in Ozark is played by the same actor that plays a semi-minor character in HTGAWM.
In a way, Ozark kind of made me think of an alternative universe Michael Bluth. (Jason Bateman's character in Ozark even has the same initials and name syllabilization as Michael Bluth) An alternative universe Michael who's darker, a bit more grim and more cynical. I guess maybe that impression is just due to the nature of the show; Ozark is supposed to be a crime drama whereas Arrested Development is an atypical comedy. Michael's character seems a bit more... noble. He at least tries/desires to be a good person at least some of the time, even if he's kind of sanctimonious (something you realize a bit into the show, though compared to his family members, he's the least crazy).
This cool song is used at the end of the first episode, which reminded me of House MD since I generally liked the music used in that show back when I watched it. Initially, I thought it was by some indie band, but then I looked it up and it turned out to be by Radiohead... in a way, it's sort of similar to the song Madness by Muse.
More thoughts on Ozark as I continue to watch it.
Velvet Buzzsaw: a movie, starring Jake Gyllenhaal, among others. It has to do with art; Jake plays an art critic. I think it was supposed to be sort of a satire, but it wasn't exactly the most effective satire. Jake Gyllenhaal was alright, but the movie itself was mediocre, which is about what I had expected. I watched it one day because I was bored and wanted to kill some time. I did wonder about the various artworks in the movie; if they were actual artworks that had been sourced to be in the movie, or if the props department conceived of and created all of them.
Ozark, a few more episodes in: Still can't shake the Michael Bluth impression, which isn't so terrible; Jason Bateman's character in Ozark is more or less an alternative universe version of Michael in a darker, non-comedy show. Michael minus the rest of his family, set in the Ozarks, involved with shady business with a drug cartel, instead of George Sr.'s antics.
Part of it is just the way that he talks, and his mannerisms/vocal mannerisms (which I guess falls under "the way that he talks"). It's sort of trippy though, to have AD so in-mind while watching Ozark. But it's also kind of impossible to have it out of mind, if you've rewatched AD as much as I have. Anyways, onward and upward...
Obviously his character dresses a bit differently in this show; it's set more currently so the early 2000s fashions would be out of date. He wears tighter-fitting shirts, as is the trend these days, not the billowing numbers of past decades (see also: Stephen Glass shirt)... He also wears darker colors, I've noticed.
Michael Bluth wore mostly whites and light blue shirts, unsurprisingly given his role as a businessman for his family's housing company. Martin in Ozark wears darker colors -- navy, burgundy, even a dark blueish plaid. Clothing that looks a bit more rumpled/disheveled, somewhat less polished. I assume the costume design was intentional.
Further reading: https://melmagazine.com/en-us/story/with-ozark-jason-bateman-mixes-michael-bluth-with-walter-white
I do maybe sort of wish the show were a bit shorter/faster-paced; as it is, it definitely seems like a slow burn, and I'm kind of impatient. Anyways, we'll see. Assuming the second season is also 10 episodes, that means ~20 hours of watching. Supposedly there's supposed to be a third season at some point, so hopefully the second season doesn't leave off on a crazy cliffhanger and then I have to wait some unknown amount of time for the next one..... another reason why I'm not so big on Netflix-exclusive shows. That means you, Mindhunter. Good show, but I thought there'd be a second season ages ago...
Yet: I started watching a recently released animated anthology series, which has been... a mixed bag, but I've only seen a few episodes so far. I also started watching the show Ozark, because Jason Bateman, and by extension, Arrested Development, which I love.
Love, Death and Robots: an animated anthology series; each episode is pretty short and they're all done by different people, so they have wide-ranging plots and animation styles. Makes for nice bite-size watching material. More to say about this once I finish watching all the episodes, most likely.
Ozark: this show isn't that new, but I only started watching it now. I've only watched the first episode so far, which was decent enough that I think I'll continue watching it.
It stars Jason Bateman, otherwise known as Michael Bluth from Arrested Development. He's one of those actors that I have very much the impression of that particular role for him, so I thought it'd be kind of hard for me to watch a different thing where he's playing a different character; I'd just see him as Michael Bluth. Not that he's a bad actor, but some actors are just like that. I think I'd have a hard time watching something with Steve Carrell in it without seeing him as Michael Scott from The Office.
I did see him a bit as Michael Bluth; quite a lot of the delivery of his lines in Ozark was very reminiscent of Michael. Unsurprisingly, I suppose, since that's just how his voice is and there's not really anything he can do about that, since in this show he isn't supposed to have some kind of unusual accent.
The show itself reminded me of a variety of other things I've watched in various aspects. The cinematography was reminiscent of The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo; very cinematic for a tv show, I thought. It was also pretty blue, which I also remember TGWTDT being. The tone of the show reminded me a bit of NBC's Hannibal, and/or The Killing -- measured. Plot-wise, it was semi-similar to How to Get Away With Murder, perhaps. One of the characters in Ozark is played by the same actor that plays a semi-minor character in HTGAWM.
In a way, Ozark kind of made me think of an alternative universe Michael Bluth. (Jason Bateman's character in Ozark even has the same initials and name syllabilization as Michael Bluth) An alternative universe Michael who's darker, a bit more grim and more cynical. I guess maybe that impression is just due to the nature of the show; Ozark is supposed to be a crime drama whereas Arrested Development is an atypical comedy. Michael's character seems a bit more... noble. He at least tries/desires to be a good person at least some of the time, even if he's kind of sanctimonious (something you realize a bit into the show, though compared to his family members, he's the least crazy).
This cool song is used at the end of the first episode, which reminded me of House MD since I generally liked the music used in that show back when I watched it. Initially, I thought it was by some indie band, but then I looked it up and it turned out to be by Radiohead... in a way, it's sort of similar to the song Madness by Muse.
More thoughts on Ozark as I continue to watch it.
Velvet Buzzsaw: a movie, starring Jake Gyllenhaal, among others. It has to do with art; Jake plays an art critic. I think it was supposed to be sort of a satire, but it wasn't exactly the most effective satire. Jake Gyllenhaal was alright, but the movie itself was mediocre, which is about what I had expected. I watched it one day because I was bored and wanted to kill some time. I did wonder about the various artworks in the movie; if they were actual artworks that had been sourced to be in the movie, or if the props department conceived of and created all of them.
Ozark, a few more episodes in: Still can't shake the Michael Bluth impression, which isn't so terrible; Jason Bateman's character in Ozark is more or less an alternative universe version of Michael in a darker, non-comedy show. Michael minus the rest of his family, set in the Ozarks, involved with shady business with a drug cartel, instead of George Sr.'s antics.
Part of it is just the way that he talks, and his mannerisms/vocal mannerisms (which I guess falls under "the way that he talks"). It's sort of trippy though, to have AD so in-mind while watching Ozark. But it's also kind of impossible to have it out of mind, if you've rewatched AD as much as I have. Anyways, onward and upward...
Obviously his character dresses a bit differently in this show; it's set more currently so the early 2000s fashions would be out of date. He wears tighter-fitting shirts, as is the trend these days, not the billowing numbers of past decades (see also: Stephen Glass shirt)... He also wears darker colors, I've noticed.
Michael Bluth wore mostly whites and light blue shirts, unsurprisingly given his role as a businessman for his family's housing company. Martin in Ozark wears darker colors -- navy, burgundy, even a dark blueish plaid. Clothing that looks a bit more rumpled/disheveled, somewhat less polished. I assume the costume design was intentional.
Further reading: https://melmagazine.com/en-us/story/with-ozark-jason-bateman-mixes-michael-bluth-with-walter-white
I do maybe sort of wish the show were a bit shorter/faster-paced; as it is, it definitely seems like a slow burn, and I'm kind of impatient. Anyways, we'll see. Assuming the second season is also 10 episodes, that means ~20 hours of watching. Supposedly there's supposed to be a third season at some point, so hopefully the second season doesn't leave off on a crazy cliffhanger and then I have to wait some unknown amount of time for the next one..... another reason why I'm not so big on Netflix-exclusive shows. That means you, Mindhunter. Good show, but I thought there'd be a second season ages ago...
Monday, July 1, 2019
Movie review: Platoon
This movie apparently was recently added to Netflix, I think. In any case, I hadn't seen it in the past and now I have. Save for The Deer Hunter and The Things They Carried, (I think there's a movie of that? I know there's a book) I think I've now seen all the major Vietnam War movies. My personal favorites of those have been We Were Soldiers and Full Metal Jacket. I've intentionally tried to forget Apocalypse Now; it was an awful movie and I hated it just as much as I hated the source material, Heart of Darkness.
Anyways. This one, Platoon, I'd been aware of for some time yet only now got around to watching. I wasn't entirely sure what exactly to expect, except that the movie was set during the Vietnam War. Initially, the movie didn't seem to have much of a plot, but the plot becomes clearer as the movie progresses. Perhaps you could say the plot is a little more abstract than in the other movies. It basically begins with a cold open as the central character arrives in Vietnam, minimal exposition in the traditional sense.
It stars Charlie Sheen, who vaguely resembles Tom Cruise, and also I think a mix of him and Jason Bateman. I think it was Charlie Sheen's father, Martin Sheen who was in Apocalypse Now, so I guess in the back of my mind, son resembled father (unsurprisingly).
It's interesting how each movie depicts a different slice of/take on the events of the Vietnam War. We Were Soldiers I'd describe as artful, almost, in a way, particularly due to the score/soundtrack for the battle scenes. Platoon was more raw, more brutal, in a way. No graceful/artful flourishes like in We Were Soldiers. Full Metal Jacket was different in a Kubrickian way (admittedly, the only other real reference for Kubrick's work I have is A Clockwork Orange, having also disliked and intentionally tried to forget The Shining), in that it definitely feels like a Kubrick film.
War is hell, as having watched all these various war movies has confirmed for me (I think "War is hell" is a quote from Full Metal Jacket somewhere). Platoon takes place entirely in Vietnam, unlike We Were Soldiers and Full Metal Jacket (and Born on the Fourth of July, the other Vietnam War movie I've seen yet haven't mentioned here yet).
Although this movie had a slightly abstract front end and I couldn't initially really tell where the plot was going, in the end. I did end up liking it. It depicts and focuses on the group dynamics within the group of soldiers portrayed, particularly conflicts amongst them as well as camaraderie (in some cases). It's perhaps a bit more character driven, in that the focus of the plot deals with the individual natures of the various characters and how they do or don't get along with each other while fighting the war.
I'm not sure if it was based off real events, and if so, to what extent [edit: yes, it was based off the director's experiences]. In the somewhat abstract beginning, the pacing seemed a bit slow, but when it came to what I assumed (correctly) was the climax, there was some brief falling action afterward as you'd expect to occur based on a traditional plot arc.
The focus on internal conflicts within the band of soldiers was interesting since none of the other war movies I've seen have had that be such an integral part of the plot. Full Metal Jacket perhaps touches on it a bit (particularly in the first act during the boot camp, where Joker becomes responsible for making sure Vincent's character improves) and I think there's also a scene or two in Jarhead regarding such things, but it's not the focus of those films.
There was a character named Elias in this movie, who had an interesting and important role, although so as not to spoil anything I won't say more about that, except that I think that's a nice name, although Ian is still my top favorite.
Although I've said in the past that I don't exactly like war movies, maybe I do like them after all?? (gasp) At least some of them. My main focus with regards to war movies would be: about the Vietnam War, very famous (even if they're about other wars, such as Saving Private Ryan) and/or starring an actor I like (such as Peter Sarsgaard and Jake Gyllenhaal in Jarhead [maybe I should rewatch this... it's been awhile since I last saw it]).
At the moment, I think I'd rank my top favorite Vietnam War movies in this order:
We Were Soldiers (I thought it made a particularly unique impression due to the music/score/soundtrack)
Full Metal Jacket (the Kubrick factor)
Platoon
Wednesday, June 5, 2019
Birds needing a new home
Sometimes I peruse the local Craigslist listings when I'm bored, for light reading purposes. Occasionally I'll find one that's particularly interesting/nicely-written, such as this one for a pair of birds needing a new home:
"I need to find a permanent loving home for these bonded Sun Conures.
They should not be separated. She wouldn't know a life without him...and he would be totally distraught without her.
In a nutshell, I have other birds and the conures are becoming increasingly intolerant of them....attacking, dive bombing, etc. My wife also has grown intolerant of them...and it's causing issues for us, frankly. They also clearly hate their cage arrangement, but I cannot find a practical solution better than what they have. I think they just hate living near the others. When I take them out of town to my parents, they are fantastic! They are also great when boarded.
The female is only 2 years old. The male is 5 years old. The female is still a little bit fearful of hands, but she does step up and loves to snuggle on the couch. The male has a huge personality -- but he is very protective of her.
I've probably explained enough here. I love them dearly. I just know they will ultimately be happier in a different environment. Even though I spoil them somewhat, I feel like they're captive here anymore...they seem so unhappy. Time for a major change. I also believe they will end up breeding, which I'm not really encouraging here at my home.
Experience with birds will go a long way. I wouldn't recommend this pair if you've never had birds before. You will need to be patient at first, but they will quickly get adjusted and learn to trust you. I can give you lots of pointers to help the transition. Otherwise, I know they will be great pets...and possibly a breeder pair once she comes of age.
I'm asking a rehoming fee, but very reasonable. If you are serious, email me and we can discuss it. I do not have a cage to give you with them...because it's a double stack cage and I have other birds in it. Should be easy to come up with a good cage for them...and I can help guide you if needed."
"I need to find a permanent loving home for these bonded Sun Conures.
They should not be separated. She wouldn't know a life without him...and he would be totally distraught without her.
In a nutshell, I have other birds and the conures are becoming increasingly intolerant of them....attacking, dive bombing, etc. My wife also has grown intolerant of them...and it's causing issues for us, frankly. They also clearly hate their cage arrangement, but I cannot find a practical solution better than what they have. I think they just hate living near the others. When I take them out of town to my parents, they are fantastic! They are also great when boarded.
The female is only 2 years old. The male is 5 years old. The female is still a little bit fearful of hands, but she does step up and loves to snuggle on the couch. The male has a huge personality -- but he is very protective of her.
I've probably explained enough here. I love them dearly. I just know they will ultimately be happier in a different environment. Even though I spoil them somewhat, I feel like they're captive here anymore...they seem so unhappy. Time for a major change. I also believe they will end up breeding, which I'm not really encouraging here at my home.
Experience with birds will go a long way. I wouldn't recommend this pair if you've never had birds before. You will need to be patient at first, but they will quickly get adjusted and learn to trust you. I can give you lots of pointers to help the transition. Otherwise, I know they will be great pets...and possibly a breeder pair once she comes of age.
I'm asking a rehoming fee, but very reasonable. If you are serious, email me and we can discuss it. I do not have a cage to give you with them...because it's a double stack cage and I have other birds in it. Should be easy to come up with a good cage for them...and I can help guide you if needed."
Sunday, April 7, 2019
Movie review: We Were Soldiers
Whoa.
I watched this movie somewhat on a whim; I had seen the tail end of one movie that happened to be on television and was trying to find something else to watch since I didn't feel like watching Breaking Dawn, which was what had come on after the aforementioned movie. So I decided to look at what was on the DVR, and We Were Soldiers was one of the movies, so I decided I might as well watch it.
So I did. I really liked it, actually. It was quite something. It's a Vietnam War movie. I know I've claimed in the past that I'm not a particular fan of war movies, yet for some reason I still watch them. I've seen Saving Private Ryan (Tom Hanks and Matt Damon), Full Metal Jacket (Vincent D'Onofrio, somewhat briefly), Apocalypse Now, Born on the Fourth of July (Tom Cruise), Jarhead (Peter Sarsgaard and Jake Gyllenhaal, among others) and maybe a couple others I'm forgetting. A small part of The Deer Hunter. Some of these I liked or disliked more than others (Apocalypse Now, for example, I thought was a colossal waste of time... three whole hours!!!). Saving Private Ryan lived up to its reputation of being a famous movie, Full Metal Jacket grew on me, somewhat surprisingly, Born on the Fourth of July was a bit of a different take on war movies, Jarhead was also good and I enjoyed the fact that Peter Sarsgaard was in it. But I digress.
Back to We Were Soldiers. For awhile I've felt that I should try to learn more about the Vietnam War, by various means. Some of that includes watching movies about/set during it. Within the last year, I also watched the PBS Vietnam War documentary series which I found to be highly informative, although I feel like I should've taken notes. One of the things that stuck with me from that documentary series was the shade of green of the American military uniforms -- I just thought it looked quite nice, so I wanted to get something in that same shade of green, ideally also in a similar style to the uniform shirts. Some time after watching the series, I happened to find a jacket matching those criteria at the thrift store! That was cool, even though it's not a Vietnam-era jacket. And it's comically large, but I've safety-pinned it to take in the back and have rolled the sleeve cuffs to somewhat mitigate that. The pockets are out of this world, especially for someone used to women's clothing. I wouldn't even really have to carry a purse if I wore that jacket! I haven't worn it much yet because it's not super warm and also doesn't have a hood (so no use for rain), but as spring proceeds hopefully I can get some use out of it. It'd be cool if I could get my hands on some replica 60s antiwar buttons to put on it. And a Bobby Kennedy for president button. That'd be cool.
That was a bit of a digression too. I really liked the movie; I think it's on the same level as Saving Private Ryan, and I think maybe it even edges out Saving Private Ryan slightly, as far as subject matter goes -- the Vietnam War interests me a bit more than World War II does. Both movies were pretty brutal/gruesome in parts, both definitely had me holding my breath and my heart racing during a number of the battle scenes.
I think the title of this movie is nicely poetic, which you don't always get with war movies -- "We Were Soldiers Once... and Young" being the full phrase/title of the book the movie was based on. It reminds me of some kind of poem. (maybe it actually is from a poem?)
This movie was actually a somewhat unique/different take on war movies due to some of the cinematic techniques utilized in it. I really liked the music/scoring/soundtrack -- it really enhanced the movie and it was done in a way that I think is sort of unconventional for war movies, or at least as far as the other ones I've seen go. The music/soundtrack/scoring was graceful and orchestral. In a number of scenes/parts of scenes, the score would be the prominent audio and the sounds of the battle were faint/in the background, which created an interesting dramatic effect; again, something that I don't think is that common in the genre of war movies. Sometimes the motion would be slowed down as well. I guess what I'm trying to get at here is that the juxtaposition of the graceful, orchestral music and the chaos and violence of a battle was quite striking to me.
The movie has a beginning section set at a military base in the US as the soldiers prepare to be sent off to war. Then most of the rest of it is set during the course of a single battle -- Ia Drang in 1965. It was based on real events; some of the names I recognized from prior reading/documentary-watching. Maybe halfway through the movie, at some point in the middle, a journalist -- war correspondent -- shows up to cover the battle. I wasn't quite expecting that, but that was kind of a cool touch since I would like to become a journalist myself, although not necessarily a war correspondent. While it could be interesting to be a war correspondent in the present day (covering the Middle East, most likely -- like Arwa Damon, who is pretty badass and whose work I should pay more attention to) or could have been interesting to have been a war correspondent in the Vietnam War, I think it would be/have been interesting in a terrifying way. The whole aspect of being in the middle of a war and all. We Were Soldiers conveyed that pretty well. The journalist portrayed in this movie was Joe Galloway, whose name sounded familiar so I must've read about him in the past or saw him mentioned in the Vietnam War documentary series. More accurately, he was a photojournalist, and in the movie he's depicted as taking photos with a Nikon (!) camera, which was also sort of an interesting thing since I happen to have a Nikon camera. It really did make me wonder what it might've been like to actually be a Vietnam War correspondent. And also about media ethics in that context.
As an aside, I've also read about Vietnam War reenactments, which I think is an interesting concept because that's not the most common war to reenact. Yet there are some people who do indeed reenact it and there's actually a documentary about them ("In Country") that I should watch at some point. The people who were making said documentary had to dress up and act as period-appropriate war correspondents (although they were allowed to use their modern camera equiment) during the reenactment, which I thought was pretty cool -- perhaps someday I could participate in a reenactment like that.
I said/thought to myself "holy fuck" a number of times during the course of watching this movie, it was that intense. But it was quite a good movie, and honestly I'd be open to watching it again. I'm not quite sure I'd really want to watch Saving Private Ryan again; I think I mentioned that in my review of that movie right after I had watched it, which you can find on this blog somewhere. I've read that some people consider Requiem for a Dream to be a movie that they only want to watch once and never again, although that one I have rewatched a number of times and would rewatch it more in the future if the mood strikes me and I have the time for it.
In a way, I'd say the movie kind of felt like a mix of Saving Private Ryan, Full Metal Jacket (mostly setting-wise), and Requiem for a Dream -- it had a similar rawness like Requiem.
The cinematography differed a bit from the other Vietnam War movies I've seen. Perhaps this was at least in part because We Were Soldiers was a 2002 movie, and the others were made earlier in time -- Full Metal Jacket was 1987, Apocalyse Now was 1979. Those two movies, I remember the cinematography as being more saturated/vibrant, in terms of colors. We Were Soldiers had a color palette of mainly warmer greens, which was also sort of different, because I feel like the other two movies had slightly cooler greens. In a few scenes, you could see that blood had splashed onto the lens of the camera a little bit, which was sort of an interesting touch.
The end of it was well-done and I will admit that I cried a little bit. I usually do not cry about movies, although I can recall crying a bit towards the end of watching Titanic once.
Throughout the movie are interspersed scenes of the military wives back at home, and I thought their clothes were interesting -- mid-60s fashions for housewives, so not the more hippie-ish stuff that younger people, like college students would have worn during that era.
I've written nearly all of this fresh from watching the movie (I had to go look up the name of the specific battle this movie was based on), so now I'm going to go read a bit about the background of it and perhaps gain some additional context/knowledge about its production and that kind of thing. And find the name of that somewhat haunting song played over a few of the scenes.
[^^^ approximately 1600 words! ^^^]
I watched this movie somewhat on a whim; I had seen the tail end of one movie that happened to be on television and was trying to find something else to watch since I didn't feel like watching Breaking Dawn, which was what had come on after the aforementioned movie. So I decided to look at what was on the DVR, and We Were Soldiers was one of the movies, so I decided I might as well watch it.
So I did. I really liked it, actually. It was quite something. It's a Vietnam War movie. I know I've claimed in the past that I'm not a particular fan of war movies, yet for some reason I still watch them. I've seen Saving Private Ryan (Tom Hanks and Matt Damon), Full Metal Jacket (Vincent D'Onofrio, somewhat briefly), Apocalypse Now, Born on the Fourth of July (Tom Cruise), Jarhead (Peter Sarsgaard and Jake Gyllenhaal, among others) and maybe a couple others I'm forgetting. A small part of The Deer Hunter. Some of these I liked or disliked more than others (Apocalypse Now, for example, I thought was a colossal waste of time... three whole hours!!!). Saving Private Ryan lived up to its reputation of being a famous movie, Full Metal Jacket grew on me, somewhat surprisingly, Born on the Fourth of July was a bit of a different take on war movies, Jarhead was also good and I enjoyed the fact that Peter Sarsgaard was in it. But I digress.
Back to We Were Soldiers. For awhile I've felt that I should try to learn more about the Vietnam War, by various means. Some of that includes watching movies about/set during it. Within the last year, I also watched the PBS Vietnam War documentary series which I found to be highly informative, although I feel like I should've taken notes. One of the things that stuck with me from that documentary series was the shade of green of the American military uniforms -- I just thought it looked quite nice, so I wanted to get something in that same shade of green, ideally also in a similar style to the uniform shirts. Some time after watching the series, I happened to find a jacket matching those criteria at the thrift store! That was cool, even though it's not a Vietnam-era jacket. And it's comically large, but I've safety-pinned it to take in the back and have rolled the sleeve cuffs to somewhat mitigate that. The pockets are out of this world, especially for someone used to women's clothing. I wouldn't even really have to carry a purse if I wore that jacket! I haven't worn it much yet because it's not super warm and also doesn't have a hood (so no use for rain), but as spring proceeds hopefully I can get some use out of it. It'd be cool if I could get my hands on some replica 60s antiwar buttons to put on it. And a Bobby Kennedy for president button. That'd be cool.
That was a bit of a digression too. I really liked the movie; I think it's on the same level as Saving Private Ryan, and I think maybe it even edges out Saving Private Ryan slightly, as far as subject matter goes -- the Vietnam War interests me a bit more than World War II does. Both movies were pretty brutal/gruesome in parts, both definitely had me holding my breath and my heart racing during a number of the battle scenes.
I think the title of this movie is nicely poetic, which you don't always get with war movies -- "We Were Soldiers Once... and Young" being the full phrase/title of the book the movie was based on. It reminds me of some kind of poem. (maybe it actually is from a poem?)
This movie was actually a somewhat unique/different take on war movies due to some of the cinematic techniques utilized in it. I really liked the music/scoring/soundtrack -- it really enhanced the movie and it was done in a way that I think is sort of unconventional for war movies, or at least as far as the other ones I've seen go. The music/soundtrack/scoring was graceful and orchestral. In a number of scenes/parts of scenes, the score would be the prominent audio and the sounds of the battle were faint/in the background, which created an interesting dramatic effect; again, something that I don't think is that common in the genre of war movies. Sometimes the motion would be slowed down as well. I guess what I'm trying to get at here is that the juxtaposition of the graceful, orchestral music and the chaos and violence of a battle was quite striking to me.
The movie has a beginning section set at a military base in the US as the soldiers prepare to be sent off to war. Then most of the rest of it is set during the course of a single battle -- Ia Drang in 1965. It was based on real events; some of the names I recognized from prior reading/documentary-watching. Maybe halfway through the movie, at some point in the middle, a journalist -- war correspondent -- shows up to cover the battle. I wasn't quite expecting that, but that was kind of a cool touch since I would like to become a journalist myself, although not necessarily a war correspondent. While it could be interesting to be a war correspondent in the present day (covering the Middle East, most likely -- like Arwa Damon, who is pretty badass and whose work I should pay more attention to) or could have been interesting to have been a war correspondent in the Vietnam War, I think it would be/have been interesting in a terrifying way. The whole aspect of being in the middle of a war and all. We Were Soldiers conveyed that pretty well. The journalist portrayed in this movie was Joe Galloway, whose name sounded familiar so I must've read about him in the past or saw him mentioned in the Vietnam War documentary series. More accurately, he was a photojournalist, and in the movie he's depicted as taking photos with a Nikon (!) camera, which was also sort of an interesting thing since I happen to have a Nikon camera. It really did make me wonder what it might've been like to actually be a Vietnam War correspondent. And also about media ethics in that context.
As an aside, I've also read about Vietnam War reenactments, which I think is an interesting concept because that's not the most common war to reenact. Yet there are some people who do indeed reenact it and there's actually a documentary about them ("In Country") that I should watch at some point. The people who were making said documentary had to dress up and act as period-appropriate war correspondents (although they were allowed to use their modern camera equiment) during the reenactment, which I thought was pretty cool -- perhaps someday I could participate in a reenactment like that.
I said/thought to myself "holy fuck" a number of times during the course of watching this movie, it was that intense. But it was quite a good movie, and honestly I'd be open to watching it again. I'm not quite sure I'd really want to watch Saving Private Ryan again; I think I mentioned that in my review of that movie right after I had watched it, which you can find on this blog somewhere. I've read that some people consider Requiem for a Dream to be a movie that they only want to watch once and never again, although that one I have rewatched a number of times and would rewatch it more in the future if the mood strikes me and I have the time for it.
In a way, I'd say the movie kind of felt like a mix of Saving Private Ryan, Full Metal Jacket (mostly setting-wise), and Requiem for a Dream -- it had a similar rawness like Requiem.
The cinematography differed a bit from the other Vietnam War movies I've seen. Perhaps this was at least in part because We Were Soldiers was a 2002 movie, and the others were made earlier in time -- Full Metal Jacket was 1987, Apocalyse Now was 1979. Those two movies, I remember the cinematography as being more saturated/vibrant, in terms of colors. We Were Soldiers had a color palette of mainly warmer greens, which was also sort of different, because I feel like the other two movies had slightly cooler greens. In a few scenes, you could see that blood had splashed onto the lens of the camera a little bit, which was sort of an interesting touch.
The end of it was well-done and I will admit that I cried a little bit. I usually do not cry about movies, although I can recall crying a bit towards the end of watching Titanic once.
Throughout the movie are interspersed scenes of the military wives back at home, and I thought their clothes were interesting -- mid-60s fashions for housewives, so not the more hippie-ish stuff that younger people, like college students would have worn during that era.
I've written nearly all of this fresh from watching the movie (I had to go look up the name of the specific battle this movie was based on), so now I'm going to go read a bit about the background of it and perhaps gain some additional context/knowledge about its production and that kind of thing. And find the name of that somewhat haunting song played over a few of the scenes.
[^^^ approximately 1600 words! ^^^]
Saturday, February 2, 2019
Movie review: The Departed
I finally got around to watching this movie. I had been meaning/wanting to watch it for the longest time -- currently it conveniently happens to be on Netflix. Leonardo DiCaprio AND Matt Damon are in this movie during their prime (now they're kind of getting a little old...), which makes it doubly appealing.
Some other famous actors like Jack Nicholson are in the movie too, but I think he's weird looking so I don't go out of my way to watch movies he's in. The Shining was a weird movie, and dare I say, bad, even though it's famous and was directed by the famous director Stanley Kubrick. I watched it thinking it might be good because it's famous and I thought I should give more of Kubrick's work a look after watching Full Metal Jacket, but The Shining has disabused me of that notion. (well, I still might give A Clockwork Orange a try since it's also famous and maybe Eyes Wide Shut because Tom Cruise, but we'll see)
The Departed was directed by Martin Scorsese, also a famous director and who has done a number of movies with Leonardo DiCaprio, including Shutter Island which I thought was quite good and mind-fucky in a good way. Directors whose work I've enjoyed I do try to watch other movies they've done -- David Fincher (The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo), Martin Scorsese (Shutter Island), Darren Aronofsky (Requiem for a Dream), and I think maybe one other guy whose name I'm forgetting. I realize this set of directors has a diversity problem (as do famous directors in general), so if anyone wants to point me to dark thriller type movies directed by women and/or people of color, that'd be fun -- always worth it to expand one's horizons like such. I really should probably try to watch more movies directed by people other than (usually old) white men. I guess Boys Don't Cry is a start; that one was directed by a woman. Aside from that I can't really think of any others off the top of my head. Maybe I could become a movie director???
Back on topic, although the issue of diversity (really, in pretty much any field) is an important one. The Departed was a good movie, although it wasn't spectacularly mind-blowing in the way Shutter Island was and it didn't leave as much of an impression on me as Requiem for a Dream. Regardless, it was pretty solid and I wasn't disappointed -- I didn't think it was a waste of 2 and a half hours. This means it was better than, say, No Country for Old Men which I do think was a waste of time to watch and was a disappointment. While we're at it, Zodiac was also a disappointment (it could've been way better!!)
It was a pretty brutal/violent movie but I don't really mind that -- kind of comes with the territory/subject matter. It's actually at least the third movie set in Boston that I've watched which I thought was sort of interesting to note. The others have been Spotlight (about journalists) and Black Mass (based on a true story about mobsters with a brief Peter Sarsgaard appearance).
Matt Damon and Leo were good in their roles although I thought perhaps Leo's character could've been developed a little more -- the movie could've been a bit longer to include something like that. I also found the ending a little anticlimactic, actually -- I think I would've preferred a different ending, something that has a bit more panache. Although I can see why they decided to have it end the way it did.
It vaguely reminded me a bit of Heat, but I think I liked this movie better -- I feel like Heat kind of dragged a bit but The Departed kept up a nice suspenseful pace, lots of deceit/deception. It could've been a bit more suspenseful -- I suppose perhaps I wish it had more of a sense that the stakes were higher. Yes, it could've been more suspenseful.
Overall, perfectly decent movie, not a waste of time, Leo and Matt were good, although I think there was a little room for improvement. It wasn't mind-blowing, but I'm glad I watched it. I liked it better than Black Mass which was also focused on the subject of mobsters in Boston. 4/5
Oh, and there was a cool-looking Brutalist building featured briefly -- I think it might have been supposed to be the police headquarters or something.
I just looked it up -- I had been wondering if The Departed was based on a true story at all and if so, to what extent, and it turns out it was! It was based on the same people/characters featured in Black Mass, so that's kind of interesting... a fictionalized take on that scenario whereas Black Mass was explicitly based on actual people/events.
I still have not watched Inception, also starring Leo. Years ago (literally!) I got it on DVD but still I have not seen it. You'd think this one would be next on my list.
Also, as a rhetorical question, is Leonardo DiCaprio or Matt Damon a better actor/more famous? Perhaps one is the better actor as well as more famous, or maybe it's split, or maybe they're about equal.
Some other famous actors like Jack Nicholson are in the movie too, but I think he's weird looking so I don't go out of my way to watch movies he's in. The Shining was a weird movie, and dare I say, bad, even though it's famous and was directed by the famous director Stanley Kubrick. I watched it thinking it might be good because it's famous and I thought I should give more of Kubrick's work a look after watching Full Metal Jacket, but The Shining has disabused me of that notion. (well, I still might give A Clockwork Orange a try since it's also famous and maybe Eyes Wide Shut because Tom Cruise, but we'll see)
The Departed was directed by Martin Scorsese, also a famous director and who has done a number of movies with Leonardo DiCaprio, including Shutter Island which I thought was quite good and mind-fucky in a good way. Directors whose work I've enjoyed I do try to watch other movies they've done -- David Fincher (The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo), Martin Scorsese (Shutter Island), Darren Aronofsky (Requiem for a Dream), and I think maybe one other guy whose name I'm forgetting. I realize this set of directors has a diversity problem (as do famous directors in general), so if anyone wants to point me to dark thriller type movies directed by women and/or people of color, that'd be fun -- always worth it to expand one's horizons like such. I really should probably try to watch more movies directed by people other than (usually old) white men. I guess Boys Don't Cry is a start; that one was directed by a woman. Aside from that I can't really think of any others off the top of my head. Maybe I could become a movie director???
Back on topic, although the issue of diversity (really, in pretty much any field) is an important one. The Departed was a good movie, although it wasn't spectacularly mind-blowing in the way Shutter Island was and it didn't leave as much of an impression on me as Requiem for a Dream. Regardless, it was pretty solid and I wasn't disappointed -- I didn't think it was a waste of 2 and a half hours. This means it was better than, say, No Country for Old Men which I do think was a waste of time to watch and was a disappointment. While we're at it, Zodiac was also a disappointment (it could've been way better!!)
It was a pretty brutal/violent movie but I don't really mind that -- kind of comes with the territory/subject matter. It's actually at least the third movie set in Boston that I've watched which I thought was sort of interesting to note. The others have been Spotlight (about journalists) and Black Mass (based on a true story about mobsters with a brief Peter Sarsgaard appearance).
Matt Damon and Leo were good in their roles although I thought perhaps Leo's character could've been developed a little more -- the movie could've been a bit longer to include something like that. I also found the ending a little anticlimactic, actually -- I think I would've preferred a different ending, something that has a bit more panache. Although I can see why they decided to have it end the way it did.
It vaguely reminded me a bit of Heat, but I think I liked this movie better -- I feel like Heat kind of dragged a bit but The Departed kept up a nice suspenseful pace, lots of deceit/deception. It could've been a bit more suspenseful -- I suppose perhaps I wish it had more of a sense that the stakes were higher. Yes, it could've been more suspenseful.
Overall, perfectly decent movie, not a waste of time, Leo and Matt were good, although I think there was a little room for improvement. It wasn't mind-blowing, but I'm glad I watched it. I liked it better than Black Mass which was also focused on the subject of mobsters in Boston. 4/5
Oh, and there was a cool-looking Brutalist building featured briefly -- I think it might have been supposed to be the police headquarters or something.
I just looked it up -- I had been wondering if The Departed was based on a true story at all and if so, to what extent, and it turns out it was! It was based on the same people/characters featured in Black Mass, so that's kind of interesting... a fictionalized take on that scenario whereas Black Mass was explicitly based on actual people/events.
I still have not watched Inception, also starring Leo. Years ago (literally!) I got it on DVD but still I have not seen it. You'd think this one would be next on my list.
Also, as a rhetorical question, is Leonardo DiCaprio or Matt Damon a better actor/more famous? Perhaps one is the better actor as well as more famous, or maybe it's split, or maybe they're about equal.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)