shadowkat: (Default)
Mother: I've nothing to say.
Me (in my snarky tone of voice): Well, I've things to say, whether you find any of them interesting or not...

Mother cackles with laughter.

***
Thoughts on Writing

I've managed to slice away over 200 pages from the novel that I'm revising. It was 890 pages, it is now 670 pages. It's actually not as hard as I expected.

Meanwhile, I've decided to write a prelude novel to the science-fiction novel that I was working on prior to the pandemic. The hardest bit about writing science fiction and fantasy (for me, your mileage may vary on this) is the world-building. Too much, you turn folks off, too little, you turn folks off, don't get it right, you turn folks off. Science fiction and fantasy fans are unfortunately insanely detail oriented, so that's the other problem.

Some people love world-building. They actually prefer it to developing character, story, plot, or anything else. Which is a problem with a lot of sci-fantasy novels - there's no real plot or character development, and you kind of get bogged down in the world building.

Anyhow, we'll see where it goes. Since I'm writing it in first person - I may be able to handwave a few things.

***

Thoughts on Dungeons and Dragons and role playing games.

Dungeons & Dragons is a fantasy role-playing game that was originally created by American game designers Ernest Gary Gygax and David Arneson and published by by Tactical Studies Rules, Inc. (TSR) in 1974. Before D&D was the game as we know it, it grew out of a medieval war game called Chainmail.

Book Riot - when was dungeons and dragons invented

Interesting, I thought it was much later than that? I didn't see it until the 1980s. But I was also only eight in 1974, and we weren't really playing board games like that back then. We did play adventure and role playing games - but not with costumes as such, and usually made them up ourselves. There was no book. No rules. It was spontaneous. Read more... )

I doubt I'd have enjoyed D&D that much:
Read more... )

I do like solo games - like Redecor and Wordl. I also loved Tetris. Dominoes. Anything with matching of patterns or matching colors, words, pictures, tiles. I'd probably be good at Mai-john. I also like strategy games, such as chess or backgammon or Clue.

But anything with an embarrassment or humiliation quotient - no.

***
Shen Yun

They've been advertising the heck out of Shen Yun. I considered going once, but a friend explained to me that it was cult. Stepping into the Uncanny Unsettling World of Shen-Yun.

But you do get inundated with the advertising in New York City around January through April. It's on subways, shopkeepers doors, and on television ads. They certainly know how to market themselves - which alone gives me pause.

***

Thoughts on Books

I'm reading "Magic Tides" by Ilona Andrews - which is told in two points of view for a change, Curran's and Kate's. It's a sequel to the previous series.

The good news? It sparked my own imagination and story - the post-apocalyptic science fiction I was writing pre-pandemic. So I may continue.
Anything that sparks the creative juices.

The Magic Series by Andrews isn't for everyone. If militaristic post-apocalyptic fiction doesn't work for you - best to skip. I like the world-building, and how the writer does it without going into too much detail, but enough to make it feel real and interesting. Also how she manages to skirt around issues like linguistics, and utilizes lesser known mythologies like the Babylonian, Asian, Egyptian and Russian. Too many fantasy novels fall into Judeo-Christian mythos or Grecian, this goes in a different direction. But the protagonist is snarky, and married to a lion shape-shifter. There's no yearning. No angst. They are married - so no, oh, I want him but can I? I like the exploration of a marriage for a change. It's a nice change of pace and kind of innovative. No will they or won't they, and less emphasis on sex. I like their banter, but both are super-powerful, so? Not for everyone. Then again, is anything?

Bride by Alix Harrow - isn't working for me. Read more... )

Yellowface by RF. Kuang - I'm kind of bored? Read more... )

X-men by Gerry Dugan - I think the difficulty I have with this writer's take on the series and the other current ones is a lack of focus? In some respects, I like it. But in others - a twenty page comic is not a lot of space for multiple stories and action. It feels a bit scattered. Also far too many characters.

Thoughts on the boat-load of articles on Narcissism via Internet Web Browsers

There a lot of articles on narcissism online. Microsoft Edge, my workplace internet browser, keeps throwing them at me. I must be doing something that is making it pull those? That and lists of horror films. There are at least three films coming out that focus on spiders. Unrelated sub-tangent on spider films - note no pictures of spiders, I'm terrified of them, you won't see any photos of spiders in this journal ever, just in case you were worried about that for any reason. )

But the "narcissism" (I struggle spelling that word. Can one be a narcissist if they can't spell narcissism? It's the number of s's that throws me off. I either want to add another s or subtract one) articles are annoying (note they aren't journal studies or the medical articles, but cheap journalistic ones thrown at me by a work web browser). rant about narcissist articles )
shadowkat: (Default)
Decided to see the movie Tar with Wales today.

Discovered much to my annoyance, that Wales is a very noisy and somewhat animated movie partner. During the movie, she sighed, cursed, grabbed my arm, and exclaimed "Oh God" or "Oh my God" or "Shit".

I, on the other hand, was fairly quiet in comparison.

It wasn't too big an issue - and I didn't complain about it. If anything it made the movie more interesting. But I did worry a little about the people around us.

The movie itself is a Todd Field film, and much like his other films focuses on an anti-hero and takes the audience deep inside this character's point of view. It's more of an extended character sketch - focusing on one character's emotional, mental, physical arc. Considering it was focusing only one character - it could have been a lot tighter. The movie was three hours long, and felt at times interminable. Wales and I agreed on that - actually we agreed on everything about the film.

I'm not sure it was the best film for me to see today mood wise. I might have been better off with Ticket to Paradise, this one felt a bit like a horror movie. But, I was curious about the movie - the reviews had indicated that it was a fun and twisty tour de force. (It wasn't. I'm beginning to think these reviewers are on something.)

The set-up is Lydia Tar, top composer, who studied with Leonard Bernstein, actions are starting to catch up with her. spoilers )
Bits of the film remind me a lot of Black Swan - so if you hated that film, I doubt you'd like this one. It's not an easy film to watch at times. And it ends oddly.

But it does stay with me. I'd have preferred one that didn't, though, this weekend.

[I was admittedly distracted during it by a recent loss in my family - another one. My cousin died this weekend. So I kept thinking about him and his Mom off and on all day long. Grief isn't a straight line or time line or linear in anyway, it is best described as a spiral. Circling up and down.]

***

Just finished watching Peripheral the Amazon Prime series adapted from William Gibson's cybernetic science fiction thriller. It's good. But I also adore William Gibson's writing. He's among my favorite sci-fi writers - among the few, I'd put in the literary category of sci-fi. Hard science, with something to say, and falling more in the speculative category.

Peripheral is about two gamers in Appalachia who make their money playing video game simulations. Flynn is excellent at them - and uses her brother's avatar to play. She's female and can't play as herself - but she can play as him or in a male body. And she gets to higher levels than he does.

Little does she know that the game they are playing in 2032 is taking place in real time in London in 2099. The new headset she puts on - places her in an Avatar's mechanical body in 2099, where she feels his pain, etc, even if she just the puppeteer pulling his strings.

Well produced, acted, and with great F/X, the first episode was even better than expected. If a tad long. Amazon likes to do 85 minute episodes or episodes that are much longer than 45 minutes to an hour.
shadowkat: (Default)
1. Well, Rings of Power inspired me to buy "The Lord of the Rings" on Kindle for $15.99. Which is a bit of a deal. It's the 75th anniversary edition - and I was reading the introductory material prior to buying it. Apparently there were multiple revisions - because the publishers kept publishing it with all sorts of errors. In the US, they replaced various spellings. Such as dwarfs as opposed to dwarves, and elfin as opposed to elfven. In short they corrected his British spelling.

Tolkien was particular about his spellings - because he was creating a new language and world, and deliberately using old English spellings. But the damn publishers copy-editors and line editors felt the need to correct him.

They also abridged things. Left items out.

As a result, there were multiple versions - and the earliest editions weren't accurate. Finally, he got a corrected version - the one he wanted out, and this is apparently that one? I don't know.

I also fell down a bit of a rabbit hole - looking through the old Rankin Bass cartoon adaptations of the Hobbit and The Return of the King. The Hobbit was in the public domain - so they could adapt without the estates permission (which seemed odd to me - since the other items aren't, not sure how it fell into the public domain? Unless Youtuber was wrong about that - which would make more sense.) The 1978 Hobbit Film, and 1980 Return of the King by Rankin Bass, plus the Ralph Baski Lord of the Rings - I saw in the 1980s. Well except for the Hobbit, which I saw in 1978 - after I'd read the book. It was on ABC Sunday Night. As a child - I adored it. I don't know if the cartoon holds up well now - the animation maybe doesn't, but the rest of it does. They had excellent vocal talent - with Richard Boone as the voice of Smaug, John Huston as Gandalf, Orson Bean as Bilbo, and Otto Preminger as Thorin. Plus it follows the book very closely, far more closely in some respects than Jackson's version.

And if Rankin/Bass sounds familiar? It's because they are responsible for all the stop-motion animated Christmas specials of the late 1960s and 70s including: Rudolph the Red Nosed Reindeer, Year with a Santa Clause, Santa Clause is Coming to Town, and Little Drummer Boy. (Those specials had the vocal talents of Hollywood royalty - Mickey Rooney, Fred Astair, Burl Ives, among them.) I don't know how they attracted old Hollywood Royalty to these things.

Here's an clip of the Rankin Bass Hobbit.



The 1978 film was a musical, it had musical numbers throughout, including The Hobbit theme "The Greatest Adventure". (Return of the King adaptation was similar). Some of the songs from the 1970s film made it into Peter Jackson's film, and one of the songs, I think played over the end credits of the Jackson films.

The songs that made it into Jackson's film included "Over the Misty Mountains", "The Lonely Mountain", and the Dwarves song in Bilbo Baggin's kitchen while doing the dishes.

Here's a few examples of both versions back to back..

Rankin Bass original version of the song  )

Peter Jackson's version of the same song in live action Hobbit )

Another one...

Original... Rankin Bass version
Rankin Bass Version of  )

Jackson Live Adaptation of What Bilbo Baggins Hates )

Oh the "What Bilbo Baggins Hates" was actually in the book and written by Tolkien, along with Over Misty Mountains...Tolkien was a poet.

Here's Tolkien singing "What Bilbo Baggins Hates" - so this was apparently written by Tolkien not Rankin/Bass, which explains why Jackson used it.

I thought it was Rankin/Bass because Rankin Bass did songs for everything in The Hobbit, including the Spider. They even did songs to the Return of the King, which I'm not certain works, but they did it anyhow.

Old Fat Spider from The Hobbit Soundtrack

The songs sound like children's folk songs. Here's a link to them.

This is the rare original soundtrack from The Hobbit (1977) animated by Rankin/Bass. Music by Maury Laws, vocals by Glenn Yarbrough. Full track list:
Read more... )

Rings of Power is distinctive for the strong female roles, which seem to be more in the background in Tolkien's works. In Rings, they've been brought front and center, with the male characters more in the background. Which may be why I liked it better? It had some strong female leads, and very likable ones.

Rings female characters - who are rather compelling include: Galdarial (the elfven warrior), Dia (the wife of the Dwarf Prince), Norie (the Harfoot who befriends the Stranger), and Myriel, the Numerian Queen Regent, also Browyn, who bravely leads her people in a seemingly futile battle against an orc army.

Oh and here's the Return of the King Songs by Rankin Bass, and possibly Tolkien - this was considered the worst of the films. I think they did a portion of it as an ABC special in the 1980s, because I remember watching it - I also remember it being a lot better than this.


2. Making some headway through Andy Wier's Project Hail Mary - which I'd describe as hard science fiction - or realist hard science fiction. Weir is more interested in the mechanics and how, then necessarily why or what. And I'm thinking he's an engineer or a mad science teacher.

I'm only 25% of the way through - but I feel like I've been reading forever. Yet, it is compelling. The set up? The sun is slowly dimming because a type of alien life is draining energy from it - to empower itself to go to Venus and procreate. They need to find a way to stop this mindless parasite - so they send a team to a distant star to investigate why it's not been affected in the same way the sun is - Tau Ceti. The story starts when the protagonist wakes up from some sort of medically induced coma on a space ship. His crew is dead. He's alone, and he has to figure out why he's there and what he needs to do - only one problem his brain is kind of mush from the coma. Slowly his memories seep back - and when they do, he flashes back on what happened to bring him there and why. It's a story told in flashback, with a present threat informed by those flashbacks.

Right now, he's trying to figure out what appears to be an alien space ship has sent him. It's a small, incredibly hot cylinder that stinks of ammonia.

***
shadowkat: (Default)
Or happy Memorial Day? Seems odd to say that. Time was I visited the graves with my Gran on this day - but that was over twenty some years past. (She died in 09, and I moved in 96, so...the last time I did that was probably 1994 or 95. Now my mother's cousin A visits Liberty, Mo once a year, at Memorial Day, to do it. I don't know who will do it when she passes, she's eighty. [No, it won't be me - can't drive and you kind of have to. Well that and I've an aversion to the mid-west.]

Didn't do much today outside of robot vacuum, and watch television. It was hot. I did make it to the grocery store and back - mainly for lunch items, and got a sick sinus headache for my efforts.

***

Television

1. Crimson Peak by Guillimoro Del Toro (whose name I can't spell). It stars Tom Hiddleston, Jessica Chastain, Mia Waswachowski, Jim Beaver, and Charlie Hunam. Hiddleston and Chastain pretty much own the movie.

It kind of reminds me of Dragonwyck, except with a murderous sister and incest. Or basically it's Bluebeard but with a murderous sister.

This is a common trope. The only thing Del Toro does differently is he has the brother and sister in love, and incestuous, and he kind of focuses on the sister's love for the brother - having her state at the end, that love makes monsters of us all.

The difficulty with this film is honestly the difficulty with all of Del Toro's films - he's more interested in his lovable monsters than the human characters. Also he tends to go for visual style over characterization or plot.

At any rate, it's not a scary film - it's more of a romantic gothic film? But in the vein of Dragonwyck not Jane Eyre.

Some nice visual imagery though.

[Available on Netflix, everywhere else you have to spend money for it.]

2. The Offer - via Paramount Plus. This is a series about the making of The Godfather. The principle characters are Al Ruddy (portrayed by Miles Teller - who took the role from Arnie Hammer, gee, guess why?), Robert Evans (Mathew Goode), Bettye McCart (Juno Temple), Mario Puzo, Francis Fort Coppla, and a producer portrayed by Burn Gorman.

It's okay. It's pretty much Paramount Studios and Hollywood during the late 1960s early 70s. Robert Redford, Frank Sinatra (who hated The Godfather), Mia Farrow, Ali McGraw, and various others pop up. And it focuses on the difficulties of getting a movie made, and producing it. The focus or central characters are the producers.

3. Star Trek : Strange New Worlds - it has almost the same credits music and entry signature as the Original Trek - with Pike making it up and giving voice to it. This is basically Star Trek or the voyages of the Enterprise with Christopher Pike, before James T. Kirk took over his crew.
It has Uhura, Spock, and Lt. Samuel Kirk. I like the cast. Also Ethan Peck makes a great Spock.

First episode was interesting, and there's some tension in the series - due to Pike's vision on Discovery of his horrific death and paralysis. (Which most Star Trek fans, or anyone who has seen the Star Trek episode "The Cage"/"The Menagerie" - that is referenced in Star Trek : Discovery, and shows Pike's fate. It's a disturbing episode in the original canon, and I'd love it if they were to undo it.) Anyhow Pike fears this ending, and his fear is affecting some of his decision making, until one of his officers gives him an epiphany of sorts - "those who fear death are more likely to live longer and survive longer than those who don't. If you can't see your death or imagine it, the quicker it will happen."

Also the episode references the classic film "The Day the Earth Stood Still" with the Enterprise playing a role that is similar to the aliens in the classic film.

3. Picard - I made the colossal mistake of watching the first episdoe of S2 (which is easy to do on these streaming channels which assume you've seen the first season already, I hadn't.) So I was confused by it.
I kept thinking - okay who are these characters and why are they doing whatever it is that they are doing? Also, why is Picard so messed up? And why did Q show up.

I just have to watch S1 first to understand it, apparently.

S2 is playing games with time travel and alternate timelines. I get the feeling Picard is playing into the temporal wars that are referenced in Star Trek Discovery.

What I like about the Star Trek franchise - and why I prefer it to the Star Wars franchise - is it kind of branched out more and created new characters, while at the same time building upon the old ones. Also it has managed to resolve and complete its character arcs in a satisfying fashion. With all of the original actors involved. We get all of Lt. Spock's history, including his back story (in Discovery and Strange New Worlds), all of Kirk's, all of Picard's, pretty everyones. And they weren't afraid to branch out and character new characters.

Add to all of the above? Trak is consistent, and explains the inconsistencies well.

Star Wars franchise - only works well when it veers completely away from the Skywalker/Solo clan. Mandalorian and Rogue One were for the most part pretty good. But the films that center on that clan with the exception of the first three films, and maybe Force Awakens, are a mess. As are the series.

Trek in sharp contrast has for the most part been fairly consistent. And rewarded long-time viewers with satisfying endings for their favs.

***

On the book front - I downloaded a lot of free gothic romances to the Kindle. There were four or five of them - rec'd by a blogger who hunted for modern writers of gothic romance that were good. The three that cost something - I ignored, one was Dragonwyck by Anya Seton (moustache twirling sociopathic love interest/villain and simpering, somewhat stupid, damsel in distress - with a young doctor who saves her - kind of a dumb version of Crimson Peak - hard pass), and the other was Jane (basically Jane Eyre with a Reclusive Rock Star - screamed New Adult, and hard pass), there was also one that was clearly the beginning of a mystery series and featured a serial killer (another hard pass).

Finished "Stitch in Time" - which Crimson Peak kind of reminded me of, except I liked Stitch better. Felt Stitch was a touch less cliche. Although both were problematic in that they followed common tropes. And Stitch felt a touch sexist, misogynistic in its trope. I know the author thought she was being clever with the twist, but I'd have gone the way I originally thought she was going - to be honest. This had the same problem that Crimson Peak had (without the incest, and the brother isn't nasty and is older, and rather sane). Stitch also focused more on the romantic and less on the horrific.

Will state that I agree with many of the reviewers in that Stich is among the few time travel stories that actually worked for me. Mainly because the heroine is not permitted much past the hero, so can't affect the timeline easily. Okay worked for the most part - it didn't bug me the way most of these time travel stories do.

Off to bed. Hopefully I won't wake up five times in the night like I have the last few nights. The disrupted sleep is resulting in irritability and increased tiredness.
shadowkat: (Default)
Finally a beautiful day, clear blue sky, almost not clouds, in the low sixties. I took a walk around Greenwood Cemetery today to celebrate. Not a long walk. About two miles. Sat for a bit and read a contemporary romance novel rec'd by Cat Sebastian, took in the sunshine, and the birds, and the buzz of insects. Also the whistling of sirens that never seemed to end. A constant of pandemic city life...some days worse than others, although such sounds existed prior to the pandemic.



Also a constant I've discovered with fanboard moderators? They fail to appreciate my dead-pan wit. It goes over their heads. Doesn't matter the fandom. Twitter seems to be more appreciative, also dreamwidth.

And once again, someone suggested doing a gratitude journal. I tried the jar approach but I keep forgetting. And I've tried the gratitude journal but keep forgetting. I'm not good at remembering to do certain things. Basically anything that is the least bit ritualistic - I forget to do. I think my brain is hardwired to forget this sort of thing. What can I say? I'm bad cult material? Or religious material?

On Twitter someone asked if an Atheist could be religious? (They spelled Atheist wrong, but I ignored that - it's Twitter and a hard word to spell.) I resisted the urge to respond - "yes, of course. I know a lot of church-going Atheists. Actually some Atheists are better at the whole church thing than the Theists are. I'm a Theist who kind of swings towards Agnostic on occasion and back again, but I'm more spiritual than religious. I don't really do anything religiously - I'm not wired that way.

***

I'm kind of re-watching David Lynch's 1984 Dune on HBO Max - and I'd forgotten who was in the original, or the incredibly cheesy special effects and set design. Not to mention the horrid acting, direction, and dear god, ugly costumes and creature effects. It's really dated and does not stand the test of time at all well (also its kind of gross in places, and with a lot of bad direction - hammy in some spots, I stopped watching after they got past where the 2021 film ended. Plot wise the two films are very similar up to a point. The current version just does Book 1 of Dune, or the first third of the book, while the 1984 version did the entire book in two hours and fifty three minutes.

1984 Adaptation of Dune...complete with cheesy 1980s special effects... )

I liked the 2021 film better. This is just awful. That said, the plot is admittedly easier to follow (it's not a dark film at all - if anything it is over lit.) There's more action, and the pacing is slightly better. And the escape of Lady Jessica and Paul is harder - they are also confronted by the Harkonnons and manhandled. Also part of the reason I had no problem figuring out what was happening in the current version is I saw this one in the 80s and remembered a lot of it. It's kind of funny in places. But, I'm feeling sorry for Jurgen Prochnow, Max Von Syndow, and Patrick Stewart (who apparently got early training on dealing with sci-fi craziness from this).

**

My father is in the hospital again. Read more... )

***

NYPD according to the news only had 34 cops go out sick, with the rest getting vaccines. And 81% of the City Workers got vaccinated in response to the vaccine mandates put in place by the Mayor. So the mandates are working.

Tomorrow is election day in the US, please remember to vote.

Random Photo of the Day...

shadowkat: (Default)
As long-promised, I finally got around to seeing Dune last night. I had to revive my HBO subscription, because apparently it would let me see what was offered but not allow me to watch anything. So I did it through my Roku television platform. (This actually justified getting the ROKU Smart Television as opposed to the FIRE Smart Television - if I was still on the Fire Stick? I'd not have been able to do it, since HBO didn't renew its agreement with Amazon.)

After much deliberation on the matter - I chose to watch it on HBO Max as opposed to the movie theater. I can always watch it in the movie theater later in the month, if so desired (although unlikely).

As luck would have it? Wales called this morning and told me she'd love to see Dune in the theaters. I told her that I wished she'd told me that a week ago, also I had a feeling she'd be bored by it. It's hard sci-fi, with a lot of exposition.

This bodes the following question - or the only one I had when reading everyone's reviews of the film - do you absolutely need to see this film in a movie theater to enjoy it?

Well, it depends. (Which is pretty much how most folks answered that question.)

1. What size television you have at home and if it is HDTV or higher?

This is a very dark film, a lot of it takes place at night - I'd say in fact 60-75% of it appears to be shot at night, and/or in darkened rooms. So, you won't be able to see it on a small television set, or one that doesn't have the ability to brighten or darken the picture. [There's one particular scene towards the end that I barely could see - and it may have been clearer in a movie theater. Granted it's a scene I don't care about seeing one way or the other, but you might. spoiler )

Also, it's shot in a manner that requires a big screen television or movie theater screen. There's a scene where we see a hand sticking up from the sand in the desert and the sheer scope. OR another, where we see the huge scope of Arrakis, the city on Dune, and the people in relation to it. It's shot for IMAX. So wide screen visuals. This works fine for 55 inch and up, not so much for anything below that.

I can think of a couple of scenes that would not work on my old television sets. The aforementioned bits where we see the armies, the desert, and the sandworms. Also, like I said before - most of the film is at night. We have a scene where the Bene Gesserit (Jessica's Order of Female Mystics) arrives on her home planet - that is at night, the only light from the space ship and the clouded moons, with rain and wind...we see their vague shapes scampering in a group forward, lit only by the space ship behind them. I don't think that scene works well on a small screen.

2. If you have a big screen television is it better to see in the theaters?

Unless you are "really" into cinematography, and lighting, and well subtle film score and film editing - it's not necessary. (In other words a film geek.) Lord of the Rings this isn't. Nor is it Lawrence of Arabia, or for that matter 2001: A Space Odyssey. Or even Star Wars for that matter. It's more Game of Thrones.

I thought about it for Hans Zimmer's soundtrack. But the soundtrack isn't that big a deal. I barely noticed it, and I've watched a lot of films with noticeable soundtracks on my television including Hamilton, Snyder's Justice League, Game of Thrones, Star Wars, Sense and Sensibility, etc. Also, I had the sound turned up and on theater setting.

3. Despite all of the above, would it work better in a theater?

I don't really know? I think this is mainly a subjective thing? I mean it depends on your own personal comfort level regarding movie theaters right now? I can't do movie theaters yet, and preferred seeing it at home. And from what I saw on-screen, I didn't feel cheated in any way. Your mileage may vary.

That said, the following factors may make a difference in how you view it and if you decide to view it:

It's hard sci-fi, with heavy mystical philosophical leanings, so in other words? Not really much of an action film, and not really much of space film either. (Both are in it, just not the central focus?)

It's well-done, and well-made, and they don't use a lot of CGI - like Snyder did with Justice League, Villenevue (sp?) used film stock not digital to make the film, which is why they are telling folks to see it in the theater...but my eye didn't pick up on it.

Another comparison to Justice League? Also to Game of Thrones? It's a dark film, the color scheme is varying shades of black, white, grey, and beige, we do get varying sparks of blood red (it's actual blood) and sky blue (eye color only) which really stand out, since they are the only colors we see outside of black, gray, sandy yellow aka beige and white.

This is not a colorful film.

[ETA - since everyone appears to be commenting on that last line - clarification? It's not a colorful book. The film shouldn't be colorful. That was Lynch's mistake with the 1984 film - it was too colorful and over-the-top. Dune isn't a colorful book. It's not meant to be.]

4. What about plot? Will I be bored? Is it exposition heavy? Would it be better to watch at home, take breaks, rewind, etc? Does it help if you've read the book first?

One of my many Cousins complained online that it lacked plot. I don't think that's true, but I can see why he felt that way. Like I said above, under #3, it's not really an action film. The book isn't either. There's a reason the book was so difficult to adapt, and has to a degree defied adaptations. It's more of a cerebral book than visual one. Heavy emphasis on world building and character, with a convoluted political plot. There are appendixes, and it has its own language, religion, political schematic, etc. As a result, there's a lot exposition in the first film - in order to get to the plot, and the plot kind of gets lost within the exposition. Because of this - it kind of helps if you've read the book at some point?

I read the book over thirty years ago. Sometime around 1981 or 82, I never really got around to re-reading it, mainly because I was so obsessed with it in the 1980s, that I kind of devoured and memorized it. I also saw both of the previous adaptations. (This is by far and away the best adaptation that I've seen to date, and the best casting. The casting was surprisingly spot on.) Note? I only read the first book, and around the age of 14 or 15 years of age. I couldn't get into the others - mostly because they didn't have much plot at all, and were all about the world-building, so 15 year old me got bogged down and kind of bored. (I was geeky, just not that geeky.)

Anyhow, as I watched the film, the book began to come back to me - and I could visualize it in my head - which helped greatly. The film follows what I remember from the book. (Which is admittedly vague - since I read the book thirty years ago, but helped.)

So - if you are expecting a space opera or an action film? This is not it. It's far more interested in explaining to you in detail how a stultsuit (Freemen) suit works, the necessity of spice, and showing Paul training, visions of the future, and the military might of these families. Also what sandworms are. Like I said - lots of exposition.

Personally? I found it to be compelling - but that sort of thing turns me on. It is not for everyone. [I explained this to my friend Wales, who is a cinemaphile and wanted to see it for the visuals, I explained that the visuals are basically a lot of women in black running through the rain backlit by a space ship (which yes, cool, I rewound a couple of times, but not for everyone), sandstorm that goes on for ten minutes, and watching sand rumple underneath a sand streaked sky. Lawrence of Arabia, it's not.

It drags in places...I honestly thought they went overboard with Paul and his visions. I'd have cut it back a bit? And I didn't need to see all the over-shots of the military on Harkonnon, Caladon and Arrakis. I get the feeling they were very proud of their set design and wanted to show it off?

And, it would have helped if a good portion of the action/suspense sequences didn't happen in the dark? (This may have been less of an issue in the movie theater, I don't know.)

So that may have been why the plot got lost on my cousin? Also, about 50-60% of the film is exposition or the set-up for the plot.

The plot? It's not really that complicated. Typical boy's hero's journey.

plot spoilers )

**

Overall? I enjoyed the movie. I found it compelling, far more so than expected. And seeing it on HBO Max helped, because I could take bathroom breaks, and rewind to pick up errant pieces of dialogue. The dialogue isn't easy to hear in spots.

It reminded me of why I enjoyed the book. It has some nice little philosophical quotes here and there,Spoiler )

But I think you can enjoy it on HBO Max, depending on the size of your home theater options? Also, keep in mind it's not an action film, it is more world building and character focused with a slower pace. And filmed in dark corridors, with a dark color palette. Cinematography wise? Some excellent and gripping shots. But nothing you've not seen before.

Y2/D227

Oct. 29th, 2021 07:30 pm
shadowkat: (Default)
Took the day off, actually taking Monday off as well, and Tuesday is a paid holiday. Crazy Org gives us Election Day off via our Union's Collective Bargaining Agreement.

Considering watching "Dune" tonight on HBO MAX - I discovered that I still have it. Which kind of surprised me. I thought it was gone because of Amazon? Although I'd been watching it via the app, not via Amazon for a long time now.

I realized in various discussions with folks who'd seen it, that I don't care all that much whether I see Dune in the movie theater or on my 55 inch television set. Actually I might be able to pay better attention to it at home, less distractions. And...I'm not ready to go back to the movies just yet.

On Twitter - Courtney Milan said something interesting about mental health...

We are all going to handle the crushing fear and worry that comes from the moments we are living through in different ways. Those ways are not all compatible. Some people use humor. Some people vent. Some people find joy in small things.

Courtney Milan T-Rex
[profile] courtneymilan
·
Oct 26
Whatever you are doing to keep yourself sane and present and fighting in this moment—you’re doing it right. You’re okay.


After reading this - I realized I've used all of the above. I've muted people online, swung away from some folks and towards others. And others have done the same with me. I'm keeping me sane.

I am not ready to sit in a darkened movie theater with complete strangers, by myself. It's not happening. Maybe church first - that's just an hour, and has strict rules, and I know most of the people. Granted, the movie theaters also have strict rules now - you get "reserved seats" and ahead of time. Also, must be vaccinated and wear a mask. But I don't want to. It's probably worth noting that I don't live near any movie theaters any longer, and this would require a 30 minute subway ride and 20 minute walk to get to them, on semi-busy sidewalks and trains. It's not a leisurely drive with a friend, parking, and voila.

Regarding Dune? An old social media friend has been posting the following articles on it, on FB:
Read more... )
I may watch it this weekend. But I'm ambivalent. I don't know why. I think I've just lost interest? I did read it ages ago, way back in 1981. I was in junior high at the time. It doesn't age that well, and is kind of dated. Also, from what I've read - Lucas may have been inspired by it to do Star Wars. A lot of folks think Star Wars is basically Dune, so too did Frank Herbert at the time, who attempted to sue Lucas over it. He got nowhere of course. Because honestly the basic idea isn't that original, how it is written or done is. Having read Dune, seen two adaptations, and all the Star Wars films...I don't see the resemblance, unless I squint and work hard at it. But I could do that with a lot of things.

I'm actually more excited about seeing Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings on Disney Plus in November. Also the Eternals. So there you go.

**

It's raining. Or was. But stopped. Gloomy today. Gloomy tomorrow. I'm hoping to take a walk down Abmerle and Argyll street tomorrow or Sunday, to see the Halloween House, before they take everything down. I keep planning on going, and forgetting. If I do go, I'll take photos.

**

Random Photo of the Night..



shadowkat: (work/reading)
1. For fans of Claudia Black and Farscape, also Dune: This whole Twitter Thread

2. #GoodOmens season 2 is now officially in production

[profile] neilhimself



https://www.radiotimes.com/tv/sci-fi/good-omens-season-2/

Or go HERE for details - from Neil Gaiman's Journal.

3. The Liberal PJack-o-lanternet Balloon liked
Kelly D
[profile] kellda
I live in a big city. There are NO EMPTY SHELVES. Stop pushing this narrative, media.


ME: "Replying to
[profile] kellda
I live in NYC and yes there are empty shelves at Wallgreens. I saw them today - they took all the ice cream, Russell Stovers Halloween Candies, and the toilet bowl cleaner. Plus all the single paper towels."

4. God (on Twitter): What makes you instantly gain respect for someone?
Me: Random acts of kindness?

5. connectpoliticditto.
[profile] cpoliticditto "The worst movie I’ve ever paid to see in a movie theater: Waterworld. "

Can anyone top that?

ME: Either Batman and Robin or Speed 2.

Anyone else?? [Please try not to pick one I love, because that would be annoying - here I'll help: Ladyhawk, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, and Must Love Dogs are off the menu.]

6. Possibly the only pun that's made me laugh...

"Mechanical armWinter SoldierMechanical arm Water waveFlag of IrelandFlag of Scotland
[profile] tm_manu_forti
·
3h
My daughter asked me who my favorite vampire was. I said "The guy from Sesame Street". She said, "He doesn't count". I said, "I can assure you he can"


7. Horror movies that traumatized you as a child?

Poltergiest - it did not help that I had a walk in closet and a weeping Willow tree that hit my window constantly.

Mother took us to see it in the movie theater - she doesn't find horror films scary and was kind of making fun of it.

I have not been able to get through Alien, The Fly (either version), or
Altered States.

Exorcist on the other hand didn't bother me that much at all. The Shining traumatized me in college - mainly because I saw it in a huge dorm, during a Winter Break in Colorado, where no one was on my floor but me, and the carpet was the same color as the hotels, as were the halls. The other film that traumatized me was Nightmare on Elm Street.

People on Twitter apparently had problems with..."Event Horizon" - which is a film I never made it through. It was gory and weird, and about a spaceship that goes to hell and came back. (I don't like gore.) They also had issues with The Descent.

8. And THIS clip from the Munsters.

9. Statue of Thomas Jefferson will be removed from City Council Chambers finally and moved to the NY Historical Society on a Long-Term Loan

10. Apparently British media blowhard and Simon Cowell wannabee, Piers Morgan, was upset that the Rolling Stones chose to drop Brown Sugar from their current tour. They dropped it because of its questionable and offensive lyrics that promoted the horrors of slavery.

I didn't remember the lyrics...at all. Except the refrain, "just around midnight." So I looked it up...
lyrics to Brown Sugar )

Oh dear god. I'd say those are extremely offensive and cringe-inducing lyrics, wouldn't you? Jeeze.

What's amazing is I never noticed them before now.

Okay maybe not that amazing - I just listened to it again - and the only lyrics I can make out are "You should have heard, Just Around Midnight" and "Brown Sugar, how come you taste so good? Just Like a Young Girl Should" - that's it. I never could make out half of the Rolling Stones lyrics, they always got lost in the sound of the instrumentation.

Crap.

11. US Military may get a dog-like robot armed with a sniper rifle

Just what we need. Seriously, doesn't anyone watch science fiction films?
shadowkat: (Default)
I've finally watched all six episodes of The Nevers. The best episode is actually the last one, which was written by Jane Espenson and directed by someone I've not heard of, and reviewed by Phillipa Gossellet.
(Whedon had on foot out the door at this point.)

I'm not crazy about the series, and its unlikely I'll continue with it - if it makes it to a second season.

Before I continue with a review? I was blown away by this article, which is an interview with Claudia Black, who guest stars in episode 6 of The Nevers.

Claudia Black on Her Surprise 'The Nevers' Role, the Joss Whedon Situation, and Breaking the Cycles of Trauma

While Black didn't witness anything untoward in regards to Whedon's behavior on the set, she states that it was clear he was under a lot of pressure, and things had begun to dissolve. And just because no one reported anything, didn't necessarily mean it wasn't there. And there was a heavy feeling that everyone had to cater to Whedon and see his vision through - which doesn't tend to lend itself to a successful work environment.

excerpt )

The Nevers - Review

There's aspects of this series I enjoyed, but not enough to hold my interest to continue. The problem is two-fold, too many characters, and too much focus on a somewhat trite and convoluted plot, that utilizes sci-tropes and gimmicks that tend to irritate me.

Frankly the series had some of the same problems that I had with Marvel Agents of Shield. Which I kept giving up on.

Thematically? It's fine. A little preachy in places - characters like to launch into long monologues and sermonize. I get bored and my attention wanders.

Lacks the humor of Whedon's earlier series. (Or it has jokes, but they flew over my head.)

What worked? I found the lead character of Mrs. True interesting, she's complicated and well-played by Laura Donnelly (and in a guest role - Claudia Black).

Also, the concept of people obtaining odd and often inconvenient super-powers was a nice one - if heavily borrowed from Marvel Comics.

But outside of Mrs. True, I kept losing track of the characters, and everyone mumbles. I had to use close-captioning at various points. Ben Chaplin's cop is rather interesting, and written smartly for once. But everyone else is just kind of there.

Also, Claudia Black is excellent in episode six, which is an intentional mind-fuck of an episode. I was kind of spoiled on it, because I read the article with Black. Also, I could kind of see it coming - since the series structurally reminds me a great deal of Marvel Agents of Shield and Dollhouse. But watching Black made me want to re-watch Farscape. (I adore Claudia Black.)

What doesn't work?

Everything else. But it's worth stating that there are a couple of sci-fi tropes that I've grown weary of, and this has pretty much all of them.
I'd list them, but I'd be spoiling you on the series more than I already have.

It's very busy, and when we get to the great reveal - it's not that interesting. I was disappointed, mainly because I'd seen it done elsewhere far better. spoilers )
shadowkat: (Default)
1. Watching S3 The Expanse -- 3.7-3.10. And, it's not as good as S2. (S2 arc is 2.7-3.6. Next arc begins on 3.7 and will end most likely with 4.6, unless they end it with 3.13. Since Syfy cancelled it and Amazon picked it up. New season is either in November or December 2019 (this year).

Warning -- if you didn't like Miller, he pops up again as a ghostly hologram in S3, which I sort of knew about ahead of time, because I was reading the books. And had read the teaser for the book this season is based on. It basically stated that they brought Miller's ghost back to help Holden solve a problem.

I'm almost done, three episodes to go. But I don't like it as much as the prior one, and find the plot and characters slightly aggravating. This season has a lot in common with S1 in that regard.

But there are quite a few bright points. I like all the characters for the most part, Holden is more likable. And the themes are interesting. Also David Straighthorn and Thomas Jane are guest stars. Elizabeth Mitchell is full time. But Christiane is terribly missed. Also, I'm definitely hooked on the series now. I care about all the main characters and the series has a definite Ursula Le Quinn Carry-Bag Story Arc vibe to it. It's hard sci-fi with a lot of character development mixed in, and more ensemble with a collaborative feel to it. Not to mention quite different than most of the science fiction on at the moment.

2. All caught up on S1 of The Good Fight, which I found to be more frustrating than enjoyable. The Bernie Maddox Ponzie Scheme plot line is annoying. Apparently this is gone by season 2, which may mean that Season 2 and 3 are better seasons? The story is interesting, when Maia and the Ponzie scheme aren't front and center. I realize this is the writer's attempt to replace the Alicia cheating scandal in The Good Wife, with another victim to power story thread. But...it's not working for me.

I do however adore Eli Gold's daughter apprenticing to be an investigator. That subplot is quite fun. As is, Lucca's arc for the most part. And Diane's. But Maia is dragging it down.
shadowkat: (work/reading)
1. What I Just Finished Reading

Just finished Powers of X by Jonathan Hickman and R.B Silva, which frankly blew me away. It's chapter 2 in Hickman's reboot of the X-men. Which really can be read without any knowledge of the X-men verse whatsoever.

I really went in with low expectations. The last six years of X-men comics have been abysmal, with bits of genuis here and there. Brian Michael Bendis run on the comics was rather interesting, until he ran out of steam, and Marvel decided to dump the X-men in favor of the Inhumans. So the plotting sort went into the ground and then some. If any series was in desperate need of reviving or rebooting, it was the X-men.

But it's not like they haven't rebooted it before as most fans will attest. And often horribly, and often repetitively.

Hickman doesn't do that. Instead he goes off in a completely different direction lifting the series to literary levels in the process. It may be too soon to get excited, this is only chapter 2 in the series. But, it's written in such an innovative narrative style, and drawn in one, that I can't help but get excited about it. A comic done well -- is a beautiful thing.

And...as I wrote on Good Reads? Frigging hell, that was a good read.

If I were to refer a science fiction fan to one superhero or Marvel comic -- I'd refer them to House of X and Powers of X, which are basically, Chapter 1, then Chapter 2 in a series. Also you don't need to know the back story of the X-men at all -- it works on its own as an interesting speculative science fiction series. Read more... )

2. What I'm reading now?


We Sold Our Souls by Grady Hendrix -- which is starting to piss me off. While reading it on the train ride home, my blood pressure was slowly sky-rocketing.

I've been staying away from anything that pisses me off. (I'm not sure I need to explain why, do I?)

The story is about Kris (Aka Christine, she goes by Kris) who basically got screwed out of her music, her liviliehood and any career in music by a bunch of boys, who signed a lucrative contract -- so the front-man could steal her work and make a killing elsewhere. It's a horror novel, or tongue firmly in cheek horror novel, about a hard-driving metal band. Kris reminds me a bit of Joan Jett, except if she took up with a bunch of boys instead of cool gals. The writer doesn't appear to like men very much -- and he is one, so...that's interesting. I've been noticing a trend lately with a lot of male writers -- is as if their reaction to the current state of affairs is prominent loathing of the straight male gender.

(Eh, I know and work with a lot of cool men, so I think they need to lighten up, and stop generalizing. Treat people as individuals, not part of a group.)
plot spoilers )

The Mighty Thor by Jason Aaron and R. Dautman is, by stark contrast, wickedly good. It's a political thriller, fantasy, and story about cancer and female empowerment all rolled up in one. Once again the guys are not shown in the best of lights. Fellas? You aren't that bad.

Loki is rather interesting in this version -- and I'm beginning to understand the Loki/Jane Foster fanfic after reading the first two-three chapters of it. Loki fights Jane as a woman. And tells her that he wants to do something other than just fight this time around, she, of course doesn't trust him as far as she can throw him. (With good reason, he's kidnapped her numerous times and tried to kill her. Once threatened to fee her to a pet tiger.)

The art is quite good. Good art is key in these books. To all comics writers and editors everywhere -- do not skimp on the art, and make sure it works with the writer.

3. What I'm reading next?

Since I'm getting fed up with "We Sold Our Souls" -- seriously, I've no clue what the ladies/reviewers on SmartBitches.com are smoking. They keep recing books that look great and they say are great, but just annoy me. Anyhow -- since I'm getting fed up with this book -- I may borrow "Little Fires Everywhere" from the Library...assuming I can get it from the Library. I don't really want to buy it. I got enough books.
I need to start borrowing them, which is what I'm doing with a lot of comics on comicxology.

4. Unrelated to the above and the subject..but on my mind. My teeth hurt. Read more... )

5. I told Chidi today that I wanted to take a writer's retreat to Montreal (by train). (But alas, the Universe won't let me, since it doesn't appear to exist. There are retreats in Banff and Toronto, but I don't want to go there.)

Chidi: Are you a writer?
Me: Yes.
Chidi: What do you write?
Me: Fiction.
Chidi: Why don't you share it?
ME: I do share it. I published a novel and everything.
Chidi: You did? (he's shocked. And looks it up after I give him the title, etc. Chidi is momentarily impressed then racing off to an unrelated topic. Speaking to Chidi is akin to speaking to my mother -- he jumps from one unrelated track to another, it's hard to keep up...the man has the attention span of a puppy. I wanted to say gnat, but honestly do we know how long a gnat's attention span is? No we do not.)
shadowkat: (tv slut)
It's funny, or maybe not so funny, the things that I read online that inspire a post. Sometimes it's something as simple as a random comment to a spoilery review of a new movie that I peeked at.

The random comment: "Why do you like Bladerunner? I never understood the cult appeal of that film."

Why do we like what we like? It's an interesting question. Not everyone can easily answer. Clint Eastwood was once asked why he liked the films he did. And his response: "I just like them, I don't feel the need to think too hard about it. And does it matter? I just like what I like." Not everyone is introspective or reflective about these sorts of things.

I saw BladeRunner -- the original version with Rutguer Hauer, Daryl Hannah, Harrison Ford and Scean Young in the early 1980s, when it first premiered in theaters. My mother took me to it, and it was just us and about twenty other people in the theater. We loved it so much we drug the rest of the family to it soon after. (We were to repeat the experience shortly thereafter with Back to the Future -- a film neither of us were overtly fond of and had rated poorly in the pre-screening that we went to, but people loved for whatever reason. My mother found Back to the Future to be predictable and rather silly, cringe-inducing in places. My father however enjoyed it tremendously. And we saw the sequels in the theaters -- but movies were admittedly much cheaper back then.)

I asked my mother what it was about Bladerunner that she loved.
spoilers for Original Bladerunner ending )

But, as I write this I wonder as I often have in the past why it is important to try to explain what may well be the inexplicable. There are just some things we can't explain to someone else. They either get it or they don't. And when they do? It's magic. Isn't it? And when they don't? We feel that much more alone somehow...on a rooftop, in the rain, as time drifts by us, our memories flying upwards into the sky.
shadowkat: (tv slut)
This just has to be shared...

Seven New Earth Sized Planets with Water Have Been Discovered in the Trappist-1 System and May House Alien Lifeforms.

Trappist by the way stands for The Transiting Planets and Planetesimals Small Telescope (TRAPPIST) in Chile, which initially detected three of the planets in May 2016.

Now this is the part made me laugh...and got me pondering...and feel the need to share with everyone.



If advanced intelligent life has evolved in the TRAPPIST-1 system, they could already have detected our radio and television transmissions. Our broadcasts of Happy Days, Three’s Company, and Charlie’s Angels are arriving there now. Our own SETI (the Search for Extra- terrestrial Intelligence) has monitored the TRAPPIST-1 system for any artificial radio signals but so far has not detected any alien transmissions. Further surveys however, will be conducted in the future.

While a great many Earth-sized extra-solar planets (exoplanets, for short) have already been catalogued, this discovery brings us another step closer to answering one of the big questions in the universe. Are we alone?


Okay, admittedly they probably did this back in the 1970s, but they couldn't have found anything better to broadcast than Happy Days, Three's Company and Charlie's Angels? I mean come on...there had to have been something...what about Star Trek? Granted I'm not sure Twilight Zone, Doctor Who, or Six Million Dollar Man would have been a good idea.

Anyhow this got me to pondering..."What three television series would I broadcast out into space? Keeping in mind that this may be the only information that an alien race in the universe receives about my species?"

It also inspired me to add a conversation about Charlies Angels to my sci-fi novel. While working on solving a technical issue, an alien and a human engineer discuss Charlie's Angels.

"Who is this Charlie?" asks the alien.

"He's a billionaire who hires three woman to work as his investigative team."

"Yes, I gathered that. But why would beautiful women work for a guy who just calls them on the phone and never appears face to face?"

"He pays them lots of money, you'd be surprised what people used to do for money."

"Actually, no. We sort of counted on that. How do you think we managed to invade and conguer your planet successfully. And while puzzling, the billionaire worship does explain your choice of Donald Trump as President. We had wondered about that. Not that it would have mattered. We would have invaded regardless. But back to Charlies Angels - why are they called Angels?"


I still need to work on that. But it does inspire all sorts of delightful sci-fi fiction dialogue doesn't it? I mean can you imagine what an alien race would make of Happy Days, Charlies Angels and Three's Company? They must think we're terribly sexist.

Also, if you had to choose three television serials to broadcast into space to alien worlds, which would you pick? I mean this is your job and you have to do it. Choose three, and think about the consequences. (Ie, I don't think the Walking Dead, A Handmaid's Tale, American Gods or Game of Thrones would be a good idea. Then again, they might scare off the aliens...so who knows.)
shadowkat: (Default)
1. Just finished watching Chess in Concert on Quello Concert App, which has a 7 day free trail before you have to subscribe. I don't think I will. There's not a lot on it.

Chess is the probably the reason I ended up watching Head on Buffy, but who knows? I saw him as The American, Freddy Trumper in the London Cast edition of Chess in the summer of 1988.

Here he is singing Pity the Child from that performance, except you just get the voice recording. I fell in love with him. And when he popped up in the Taster's Choice commercials and then later VR5, followed him. Wasn't really interested in Buffy that much, having seen and been disappointed in the film version, but at that point I was a fan of ASH and basically following him around the television set. VR5 (which had also starred Lori Singer or Darly Hannah, Michael Easten, and Head, was cancelled. Head popped over to Buffy, and so did I.

Anyhow, Chess and I have a bit of a history.

In 1986....strands of it floated from a boy's dorm room on same floor I was living on. Read more... )

2.) Started reading Witches of Karres by John Schmitz and surprise, surprise, I'm actually enjoying it. Was a little worried after all the good press, that I wouldn't. I went in with low expectations. It feels vaguely familiar in places, which is either because various sci-fi writers have ripped off the plot or I read it when I was a teenager and have forgot. Probably the latter.
Did read a lot of books by Andre Norton that I've forgotten the names of and most of the plot. Have vague recollections of them. The only ones I remember usually resonated for me in some way or really stood out because they were different or they were made into a movie or play.

* Lord of the Rings, the Hobbit (movies and play, I was in the Hobbit in the 6th Grade, played the Great Goblin. I was a very tall sixth grader and I can pitch my voice deep. I'm a deep alto. Wasn't going to cut it as a dwarf. And I towered over the high school boy (wickedly cute) who played the Hobbit.)

* CS Lewis Chronicles of Narnia

* The Westing Game

* The Witches of Worm by Zelphia Keatley Snyder -- it scared the shit out of me at the time, that's one creepy novel

* The Chronicles of Thomas Covenant by Stephan R. Donaldson

* The Dragon Riders of Pern

* Restoree by Anne McCaffrey

* Ship Who Sang by Anne McCaffrey

* Wizard of Earthsea by Ursula Le Quinn

* Dune by Frank Herbet

* Escape to Witch Mountain

* The Wolves of Willoughby Chase

* The Darkest Rising Books by Suzanne Cooper

Don't remember the rest. I read a ton, and pretty much everything I could get my hands on. I read all my parents books, all my brother's books, all the books at my grandparents house, at the library.

See, I had troubles learning how to read and desperately wanted to learn. Read more... )
shadowkat: (Default)
Raining. Back aches, or rather neck. Tired of the rain. I'm one of those people who requires sunlight. I feel like a plant. A carnivorous plant. Less so than before. As I get older, red meat is harder to digest for some reason. Actually a lot of foods are harder to digest. What's up with that?

Finished watching the six episode series Mars on the National Geographic Channel. It's available on demand -- if you have cable and want to check it out. Do I recommend? Eh. It depends on what you like. The series is oddly told -- or has a rather innovative, if jarring, narrative structure. It's based on the book "How We Populate Mars", along with "Packing for Mars", and intertwined with the "scripted" narrative about a trip to create a settlement on Mars in 2033, is a present day documentary detailing how they got there - specifically the science behind the fiction, or what would be required to get to Mars, what risks are entailed, and what is currently being done to make this happen. In short, it's a bit like watching television novella with academic and scientific footnotes. Very odd experience. I found it a bit jarring, much in the same way that I find reading books with footnotes jarring. Mainly because I'm incapable of ignoring the footnotes, and so disrupt my reading to look at them. Here, you don't have much choice. At various breaks in the action, you jump back in time to a documentary explaining the science behind it.

In the second episode, we have the death of the commanding officer on Mars juxtaposed with the deaths on the Space Shuttle Columbia, Apollo 13, and a man who is spending a year in space, while his daughter explains how much she misses him. This is interspersed with interview footage of the team journeying to Mars. I got a bit lost in that episode, or rather my attention kept wandering.

It does get better. The series is at its best when they are problem solving. The human relationships feel a bit stilted. Mainly because the format doesn't quite lend itself to human relations. Way too much telling and not enough showing in that area. But with the problem solving, the juxtaposition of documentary with scripted story -- of what it would be like to go to Mars, does work. Like I said, it's a bit similar to reading a sci-fi novel with footnotes.

Captivated me enough to stick with it. Partly because I am a bit of a space nerd. I find the whole idea of journeying to a distant planet fascinating. And the science behind it -- compelling.
But I'm not sure you'd enjoy it if you weren't a space nerd.

Okay, off to bed. I'm up writing past 9 again. Can't help myself. I write better at night for some reason. Takes a while for my thoughts to gell, and they tend to do it best when I'm relaxed, which is at night.
shadowkat: (chesire cat)
So here's my completely mindless and spontaneous pop culture fandom war poll. The questions pertain to wars that I've seen on fan boards and live journal posts since 2002. I could only post 15 questions. So that left out a few cool ones. All the questions - I've seen heated discussions about online, believe it or not, that's why they came to mind. I mean a couple of people really hate or love some of these choices with a PASSION, almost as if their very lives depended on it. Also, you have to make a choice, no, indecisive wish-washy - oh I love everyone. Because what's the fun in that? You can skip questions of course. Outside of that? No real rules.

And since I posted it, I'll take it too. Although, you probably can already guess most of my answers. ;-) (ETA: on the last question - I wavered. I like both, and I read one more than the one I picked, at least recently, but that's mostly because the other requires too much brain-power, and I'm mentally drained at the moment.)

[Poll #1164928]
Page generated Jul. 20th, 2025 05:39 pm
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios