About five months ago I got the digital converter box so my TV doesn't become a piece of expensive decoration next february. And with that converter comes all sorts of new digital subchannels. Since all the TV stations went digital they have much more room on their airwaves for more channels. These are subchannels. A few of them are just 24 hour weather, sports and traffic with a little box on the side for infomercials and stuff. And then there's ION, PBS and TBN(The Jesus Network, all Jesus all the time) that have upwards of four or five. PBS has the main programming and PBS-2 is CREATE which is mostly cooking and DiY type shows. PBS-3 is WORLD and is mostly documentaries about war and science and other worldly type things. And PBS-4 is just a classical radio station from ASU where the local PBS beams in from with pretty pictures of the Arizona desert.
Of those four subchannels I watch CREATE the most. And one show I really love to watch is Rick Steves' Europe. It seems like it's on 3 or 4 times a day with only one as a repeat(usually). Rick Steves is a professional traveler but he also looks like your typical tourist, he could be a high school biology teacher or an accountant. In other words; kind of nerdy. An average episode has him dressed in pair of comfortable shoes, kahki pants and polo shirt with a back pack slung over his shoulder and a small grin. A grin that seems to say, "I can't believe I'm being payed to do this."
He's been all over Europe and knows all the special tourist tricks and just enough of the local language to buy things, ask for directions and where the nearest toilet is. He also knows all the hidden spots that aren't big tourism draws but are still damn beautiful just the same. Each episode has him exploring a different city and the areas around it. He'll pick up a friend who knows the city or sometimes a random but helpful native and explore the best that city has to offer. We're also treated to a little history lesson at the same time. The show is kind of a DiY in the sense that Rick Steves gives you all this info as if you're about to fly out there the next day. But each episode is also like a post card, you know... the one that say's, "Wish you were here." By the end I feel jealous that he's out there exploring different cultures and I'm just sitting at home in my boxers watching him. But one day I'll get out there and see the world.
Japan first, though... for Kt.
Coming up is part 2: America's Test Kitchen, hosted by Dwight Schrute's Father.
Sunday, October 5, 2008
Saturday, October 4, 2008
Indiana Jones and the... meh
Ain't It Cool News had a rather brief article about a fifth Indiana Jones movie. Not much was said, just that Harrison Ford mentioned Lucas was hard at work on a new one and that, "it's crazy but great." Being a HUGE Indy fan, I was totally confident that a fourth one would be kick ass. Sure, Harrison was older, but it was being helmed by Spielberg and he assured fans that he was making it for us and that he would not dissapoint. And my confidence strengthened after seeing the very first trailer for Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. But I am came out of the movie wondering what it was I just saw. Because it certainly was not an Indiana Jones movie. The very first trailer and those two or three minutes in the actual film, that was Indiana Jones. I could go in depth on what I disliked about it but that would take a very long time. Instead, I'll discuss what I did like about it.
The first 30-40 minutes.
That's about it.
The action in those first thirty minutes or so felt more like the first trilogy then action in the rest of the movie. That jeep chase in the jungle does not hold a candle to the chases in Raiders and Last Crusade. Those were actually on location instead of a set(Was it on a set? It really felt like it was. I could be wrong..) And I loved the little hints of what Indy was up to in the years following the Last Crusades. I almost got teary eyed at the music cue from Last Crusade when Indy lamented about the death of his father and Marcus Brody.
One thing I will harp on, though, is the absence of Sallah. Brody was dead because Denholm Elliot lost his battle to AIDS in 1992. And Sean Connery opted not to return as Indy Sr. because he enjoyed retirment so much. But we could have had Sallah. Sure, we got Marion, but I would have been in Nerdvanna if Indy had been reunited with Marion AND Sallah. The character of Mac, the dusty brit who switched sides more than Anne Heche, felt like it was originally written as Sallah. And his betrayal at the beginning would have been more heartbreaking because we already knew him. And the only way Sallah would ever betray Indy would be if his litter of children were at threat. Sallah could have told Indy what was up in the trunk in the very beginning and Indy would have understood and went along with it. That would have been much better than what we got. *sigh* Sallah could have made that film. Or at least made it just a little better. Oh well.
So, now that I hear about a fifth Indiana Jones, I'm not setting my expectations too high. Oh, I'll see it. What kind of Indy fan boy would I be if I didn't go see an Indiana Jones movie. But I won't expect anything great. And hopefully, I'll be proven wrong. Indiana Jones and the Something of Something could be kick ass.
But it probably won't.
The first 30-40 minutes.
That's about it.
The action in those first thirty minutes or so felt more like the first trilogy then action in the rest of the movie. That jeep chase in the jungle does not hold a candle to the chases in Raiders and Last Crusade. Those were actually on location instead of a set(Was it on a set? It really felt like it was. I could be wrong..) And I loved the little hints of what Indy was up to in the years following the Last Crusades. I almost got teary eyed at the music cue from Last Crusade when Indy lamented about the death of his father and Marcus Brody.
One thing I will harp on, though, is the absence of Sallah. Brody was dead because Denholm Elliot lost his battle to AIDS in 1992. And Sean Connery opted not to return as Indy Sr. because he enjoyed retirment so much. But we could have had Sallah. Sure, we got Marion, but I would have been in Nerdvanna if Indy had been reunited with Marion AND Sallah. The character of Mac, the dusty brit who switched sides more than Anne Heche, felt like it was originally written as Sallah. And his betrayal at the beginning would have been more heartbreaking because we already knew him. And the only way Sallah would ever betray Indy would be if his litter of children were at threat. Sallah could have told Indy what was up in the trunk in the very beginning and Indy would have understood and went along with it. That would have been much better than what we got. *sigh* Sallah could have made that film. Or at least made it just a little better. Oh well.
So, now that I hear about a fifth Indiana Jones, I'm not setting my expectations too high. Oh, I'll see it. What kind of Indy fan boy would I be if I didn't go see an Indiana Jones movie. But I won't expect anything great. And hopefully, I'll be proven wrong. Indiana Jones and the Something of Something could be kick ass.
But it probably won't.
Wednesday, October 1, 2008
Keep your scanners peeled.
I haven't seen it yet, but the new Knight Rider looks bad.
Painfully bad.
It looks so bad that I have no desire to see it. I mean, it could be very good, but I don't think so. Which is a shame because I LOVED the original. What's not to love about The Hoff cruising around in a talking car and fighting crime? It's pure cheesy 80's goodness. When I was little, I dreamed of being shot in the face and then nursed back to health by a dying rich guy and given his face and then the key's to the BEST CAR EVER. What little boy doesn't dream of that? I don't think I want to know a little boy who doesn't. Not that I want to know little boys... anway... I digest.
What makes the new series look bad is well... everything. It looks too spyish for one thing. Michael Knight was not a spy. He was, *takes on a deep voice* "A lone crusader in a dangerous world." The new KITT is too flashy and looks like he doesn't even need a pilot, he could just rid the world of criminals who operate above the law himself. Michael Knight and the original KITT had a symbiotic relationship. Michael Knight could do what KITT couldn't and vise versa. Michael could go undercover as a drug dealer to save the governer's daughter and KITT could launch a rocket at a wall to give him a quick exit. And another thing, Mr. Feeny was a better voice than Val Kilmer. He sounded enough like a computer but still had that british sassyness that could put Michael in his place. Val sounds like HAL from 2001. Boring.
Bottom line, America?
If you want to watch a kick ass Knight Rider, go back in time to 1982.
Or... you could get the four seasons on DVD.
Grab your stick!
So, this is my first post on this blog and I'd thought I'd nerd out about some really good news.
They're making a Ghostbusters 3!!!!
And...
Bill Murry will reprise his role of Dr. Peter Venkman and... he's actually excited about doing it!!!!
I remember the night I first saw the original Ghostbusters. It was the night after Thanks Giving and I was either 9 or 10. It was on TV and all the good parts had been altered or removed completely to protect the fragile minds of TV viewers. But, I didn't care. There were bright lights and creepy noises and hideous ghosts flying around the screen. I was in heaven sitting there munching on Turkey Day leftovers and watching three of the funniest guys ever and one slightly amusing but totally cool black dude battle spectres and Demon Gods with nuclear powered backpacks. That night a nerd was born in front of that dusty television set. A nerd who dreamed of catching slimy ghosts in his lazer lasso and trapping them in a small containment box. A nerd who hoped to be at least half as hillarious as Bill Murray was in that movie. In my opinion, the Original Ghostbuster remains the best high-concept big budget comedy movie to this day. Oh, Tropic Thunder came close. It came very close. But nothing will ever top the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man marching down the streets of New York. Or Sigourney Weaver sprawled out in her bed in a slinky orange number panting like an over sexed dog and declaring that, "There is no Dana, only Zuul."
Ghostbusters 3 had been stuck in development Hell ever since the Ghostbusters 2 hit the theaters. The main thing holding it up was Bill Murray's refusal to pick up the stick again. He wasn't too happy with the second one(And neither was I. It was good, but not Ghostbusters 1 good.) and felt that a third one would marr the classicness of the first one even more. Bill Murray contends that the first 40 minutes of the original is some of the best stuff he's ever been associated with but now that the wounds of the second one are healed and his voice work re-iginited his passion for the story, he is excited about the prospect of making another now. Ghostbusters 2 was an interesting movie in the sense that it felt more like the third movie. In fact, most of my friends kept saying it was the third one but when asked what the plot of the second one was couldn't say. The movie picked up five years after the first and they are slowly coming to terms with the fact that they are now has-beens. The second one would have been better if they were smack dab in the middle of their fame. They just saved the world from total destruction and are reveling in their super-star status. Let them be Gods for an hour or so and then have something major happen that strips them of their fame. That would have been a good sequel. I think anway.
It's been nearly 20 years since the Ray and Peter, Egon and Ernie Hudson defeated that guy in the painting with the big head and his creepy french cohort who seriously wanted to make it with Sigourney. I am confident that enough time has passed that they have learned from their mistakes and are ready to come back in full swing. And I'm sure that Bill Murray is going to make sure that this one will at least be as good as the original(Hell, it could possibly top it, but I'm not gonna hold my breath). Mr. Murray is very protective of that first movie and would fight to keep any sequel from further tarnishing the original, the classic, the masterpiece that was Ghostbusters.
Okay, I have exercised the nerdiness from my body and I should be okay.
For now...
They're making a Ghostbusters 3!!!!
And...
Bill Murry will reprise his role of Dr. Peter Venkman and... he's actually excited about doing it!!!!
I remember the night I first saw the original Ghostbusters. It was the night after Thanks Giving and I was either 9 or 10. It was on TV and all the good parts had been altered or removed completely to protect the fragile minds of TV viewers. But, I didn't care. There were bright lights and creepy noises and hideous ghosts flying around the screen. I was in heaven sitting there munching on Turkey Day leftovers and watching three of the funniest guys ever and one slightly amusing but totally cool black dude battle spectres and Demon Gods with nuclear powered backpacks. That night a nerd was born in front of that dusty television set. A nerd who dreamed of catching slimy ghosts in his lazer lasso and trapping them in a small containment box. A nerd who hoped to be at least half as hillarious as Bill Murray was in that movie. In my opinion, the Original Ghostbuster remains the best high-concept big budget comedy movie to this day. Oh, Tropic Thunder came close. It came very close. But nothing will ever top the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man marching down the streets of New York. Or Sigourney Weaver sprawled out in her bed in a slinky orange number panting like an over sexed dog and declaring that, "There is no Dana, only Zuul."
Ghostbusters 3 had been stuck in development Hell ever since the Ghostbusters 2 hit the theaters. The main thing holding it up was Bill Murray's refusal to pick up the stick again. He wasn't too happy with the second one(And neither was I. It was good, but not Ghostbusters 1 good.) and felt that a third one would marr the classicness of the first one even more. Bill Murray contends that the first 40 minutes of the original is some of the best stuff he's ever been associated with but now that the wounds of the second one are healed and his voice work re-iginited his passion for the story, he is excited about the prospect of making another now. Ghostbusters 2 was an interesting movie in the sense that it felt more like the third movie. In fact, most of my friends kept saying it was the third one but when asked what the plot of the second one was couldn't say. The movie picked up five years after the first and they are slowly coming to terms with the fact that they are now has-beens. The second one would have been better if they were smack dab in the middle of their fame. They just saved the world from total destruction and are reveling in their super-star status. Let them be Gods for an hour or so and then have something major happen that strips them of their fame. That would have been a good sequel. I think anway.
It's been nearly 20 years since the Ray and Peter, Egon and Ernie Hudson defeated that guy in the painting with the big head and his creepy french cohort who seriously wanted to make it with Sigourney. I am confident that enough time has passed that they have learned from their mistakes and are ready to come back in full swing. And I'm sure that Bill Murray is going to make sure that this one will at least be as good as the original(Hell, it could possibly top it, but I'm not gonna hold my breath). Mr. Murray is very protective of that first movie and would fight to keep any sequel from further tarnishing the original, the classic, the masterpiece that was Ghostbusters.
Okay, I have exercised the nerdiness from my body and I should be okay.
For now...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
