There’s been a lot of hoopla in the news lately about NASA’s probe, Cassini-Huygens, and its visit to Saturn. I grew up reading science fiction novels and I’m fascinated that in our current exploration of Mars and Saturn we could be on the verge of discovering life (albeit of the single-celled variety) on other planets and moons in our solar system. If a discovery like that is verified, I can only hope that the public consciousness will then latch onto what might be out in the near infinity beyond.

Despite working in a department that actually rebroadcasts the NASA channel; I regrettably have very little time to pursue all the latest news of their findings. Still, the bits and pieces that I catch online and on the news are intriguing; what’s more, they sparked a memory I had of doing some research on the Cassini probe back in 1997 while I was still in college.

This is where being an amateur archivist pays off. I was able to dig up an old CD-ROM backup of the screamin’ 90Mhz Pentium (with 16MB of RAM, and an impossible-to-fill 730MB hard drive, baby!) I had throughout my college career. Written for Freshman Comp. (taken in, yes, my senior year), this is an unexciting, compare-and-contrast, research paper, but I thought I’d post it here for nostalgic purposes and for a look back at the NASA hoopla of seven years ago.
Continue Reading »

Getting back into the groove at work and then faced with a busy 4th of July weekend hasn’t left me much time to write in my web log. I still want to do a write up on the family reunion, but that will have to wait. Today is July 1st, and it’s time to take a look at my Photoblog statistics again.

Here’s the quick lowdown:

June 2004: 83 visitors, 160 visits
May 2004: 37 visitors, 116 visits
April 2004: 21 visitors, 60 visits

On the surface it looks as though I’ve yet again doubled the number of unique hits on the site, but the straight numbers are a little misleading. About 18 to 20 of those 83 hits are probably from ‘blog indices verifying my site when I initially signed up with them at the beginning of the month. Still, even taking that into account, it looks as though registering was worth the effort as the indices do seem to help boost the overall number of unique visits.

As you can see from the image to the left, most of the incoming visits are still coming from my web log. That makes sense, considering I do these write ups each month (not to mention the link on this page directly to the photoblog.) The big surprise, though, came in the last couple days of the month when I logged almost as many visits from http://www.le-cam.org. I visited their site, but I still have no idea why they linked to me! If you can make heads or tails of that particular French rowing fan site (or more importantly, if you can find the link back to my photoblog), please clue me in!

Interestingly, it doesn’t appear as if anyone arrived at my site this month via the results of a web search query. After last month, I expected to see quite a few more Google hits on the site, but I guess those “Sally Lightfoot Crab” keywords were just a fluke.

For July, I know I should be exploring a new tactic, but I think I’m going to continue as is. Rather than try to rationalize a reason why, I’m just going to admit that I’m feeling lazy. I still want to submit the site to search engines, but I think that should be further down the line. I also have at least three other plans, but they’re going to involve a lot of motivation I don’t currently have. (I want to research and implement automated RSS feeds, create html metatags for each entry, and submit every picture to Photo.net.) All those sound like too much work too soon after my vacation, so I think I’ll just let it ride for another month.

Hey, you know what? Even a falloff in the number of hits would tell me something… Oh, that’s right. I wasn’t going to rationalize. Never mind.

—

Two P.S.’s: First: Yes, I know it’s not July 1st anymore (despite what the first paragraph above says). I’m having terrible cable modem troubles and haven’t been able to reliably connect to the web. The good news is that tech support will be here “sometime within 24 to 72 hours.” Second: Props to Mike for helping me figure out why the last three entries are showing up on the front page of my blog — I completely spaced the fact that Greymatter operates by date rather than by entry. (I posted the last three entries on the same day — just before going on vacation — before immediately closing them. When it came time to update the photoblog, I could simply hop online and open each entry again.) Fear not… the photoblog should fix itself with the next update.

When I hear that Stephen Spielberg is directing a new movie, for some reason I automatically think it’ll fall into one of two categories: Action flicks (Indiana Jones, E.T. The Extra Terrestrial, Jaws, A.I.) or Fishing-for-Academy-Awards dramas (Schindler’s List, Empire of the Sun, Amistad). After seeing the Terminal, I’m reminded that he’s more frequently dipping into another category that’s difficult to ascribe a name. Let’s call it the Throwaway Story.

Calling The Terminal a throwaway story isn’t a bad review, it’s just my way of saying that the movie is simply about a bunch of stuff that happens. Apparently it’s loosely based on real life events just like Spielberg Throwaway Story: Catch Me If You Can. Tom Hanks, who was an FBI agent in the latter, now plays a very different character in Viktor Navorski, a citizen of the make-believe country of Krakozia. When his plane lands at JFK in New York, he discovers that his country has erupted in civil war, that the United States will not issue him a visa nor return him to his country, and that until his government is legitimately recognized, he will be unable to leave the “international transit lounge.”

It’s a testament to Steven Spielberg’s abilities as a director that he was able to perfectly pace a two-hour movie on such a thin premise. Although most of the group I saw the movie with complained about its length, I thought that he spent just enough time what he needed to: Viktor conquering the language barrier, Viktor figuring out the airport’s dynamics, Viktor meeting and making friends, falling in love, and finding a job.

For a Spielberg movie, though, I came away with a surprising number of nit-picks. I thought that the portrayal of Viktor’s comprehension level was a bit too high (admittedly, perhaps this bothers me only because I’ve taken the time to learn another language). Also, the head INS agent came across as a bit too harsh in his extreme dislike for Viktor, and yet he wouldn’t take advantage of certain opportunities to get rid of him.

On the plus side, I was pleasantly surprised to guess wrong on the reason for Viktor’s visit to the States and I commend Spielberg for shying away from a typical Hollywood ending with at least a couple of his relationships with his friends.

The Terminal is a nice, neat little movie. It’s funny in all the right places, makes you want to cry here and there, and even has a worthy villian to hate. Thankfully, it doesn’t make a Big Statement on life, culture, politics, or anything else, and I think its lack of a Message is what makes it charming. In the years to come, I’ll bet that The Terminal will be one of those movies that we’ll see over and over again on cable TV.

Trivial Thought: Has anyone else noticed Spielberg’s recent propensity for the extreme backlighting of characters? I wonder if it’s intentional. And that reminds me: What was up with that fountain?
What did I find worthwhile about the movie? It’s a study in cinematic pacing – not to mention set design and extras coordination on a massive scale!
Would I recommend the movie? Yes.
Will I buy it on DVD? Doubtful. It was a good movie, but probably won’t stand up to multiple viewings.

Overall Summer Movie Ranking
Shrek 2
The Day After Tomorrow
The Terminal
The Chronicles of Riddick
Troy
Van Helsing
The Stepford Wives

I have to be careful in writing about The Stepford Wives, because if you go in knowing what it’s about, it can be a very predictable movie. This isn’t normally a movie I’d see, especially in a movie theater, but I had a few reasons:

I really like the new theater on the Outer Banks.
The movie was listed in the paper as a Sci-fi/Drama/Comedy.
Mathew Broderick is pretty cool and
Nicole Kidman is pretty hot.

Dang. It’s hard to write about this movie without spoiling anything. Let’s just say that the introduction to Nicole Kidman’s character was too lengthy, characters were completely dropped (the kids), the writers didn’t even make an effort to make the science believable, and the ending felt tacked on. I think I read somewhere that this was a remake of an older movie. Perhaps they were constrained by that.

The best I can say about The Stepford Wives is that it was a “cute” movie.

Trivial Thought: The twist at the end must have been an attempt to alleviate the predictablity of the movie.
What did I find worthwhile about the movie? Christopher Walken is always fun to watch and Mathew Broderick is still pretty cool.
Would I recommend the movie? No.
Will I buy it on DVD? No.

Overall Summer Movie Ranking
Shrek 2
The Day After Tomorrow
The Chronicles of Riddick
Troy
Van Helsing
The Stepford Wives *

(* Ranking these movies is harder than I thought! I’m going with a “What would I rather see again?” approach. For instance, I’d rather see Van Helsing again than The Stepford Wives, even though The Stepford Wives is a better movie. Same goes for The Chronicles of Riddick and Troy. Obviously this will be an extremely subjective ranking!)

Okay, let’s get one thing out of the way: I really liked Pitch Black. It was the sort of B-grade, sci-fi sleeper hit that even the critics seemed to like because, I like to think, it took itself seriously. Decent creature effects, a couple of good scare moments, and a twist ending was all it took to launch Vin Diesel’s career.

Watching Riddick in the sequel, though, makes you wonder how Vin made it this far. When an action hero character starts spouting of witty one-liners, I begin to wonder who should be blamed. Was it the script? Does the actor’s ego play a part? Does the director or studio think that a movie won’t last in the public’s consciousness without a sound bite that can be repeated endlessly on a middle school playground? I don’t get it. Maybe the answer is in XXX – I missed that movie.

The Chronicles of Riddick borrows only a bit from the original Pitch Black. Three characters make a comeback and, I think, a certain prison that was mentioned in the first movie is now the setting for a full act in Riddick. The rest of the movie is an attempt to create a literal universe of setting with only a smattering of backstory dialog combined with a plethora of special effects. In my opinion, The Chronicles of Riddick could only have been a success if it had been broken up into more movies.

Whenever I see a mess like this, I inevitably think back (fondly) to The Fifth Element. The biggest accomplishment of that movie was its ability, it just over two hours, to create a robust universe that seemed fully fleshed out and internally consistent. I wish that Riddick had spent more time working on that and less time working on fight scenes. I didn’t care about the characters – I wanted to know what the hell the “Underverse” was all about! What were those cool panther beasts and how did Riddick get their eyes? How does black, smoky, heat ripples propel a ship and what were the motivations of the mutinous “Necromongers?”

I’m sorry. I really wanted to like The Chronicles of Riddick – I do so enjoy my sci-fi. But when the most interesting characters were either downplayed or killed off and so much of the crucial backstory was simply glossed over, there doesn’t leave a lot left to savor. I do hope for another movie in the series, if only to flesh out the universe more. The ending they wrote obviously had a sequel in mind, but unfortunately I can’t imagine that it’ll ever be made. Vin Diesel will probably ask for more money than his rapidly sinking career will command and unless The Chronicles of Riddick does much better at the box office than I think it will, it will have a hard time recovering the money spent on his salary and the (admittedly good) special effects.

You know what would be cool, though? Continuing the story with Return-of-the-King Guy and his power-hungry girlfriend.

Trivial Thought: I’m sorry, 700 degrees is just not that hot.
What did I find worthwhile about the movie? The special effects, again. (Must be summer.) I also liked what little of the backstory I could gleam. Seems like it could be pretty interesting.
Would I recommend the movie? Only if you’re a diehard science fiction fan.
Will I buy it on DVD? Tough one. If so, only because I already own Pitch Black.

Overall Summer Movie Ranking
Shrek 2
The Day After Tomorrow
The Chronicles of Riddick
Troy
Van Helsing

I was a big fan of the original Shrek. Ever since I shelled out $800 for a copy of LightWave 3D v.4.0, I have avidly awaited the arrival of new, computer-animated movies. The Disney/Pixar ones are good (A Bug’s Life, Toy Story, Finding Nemo), but often cater just a little too much to the kids for my taste. Dreamworks/PDI (Antz, Shrek) haven’t shied away from a PG-13 rating and I commend them for that. There’s a big difference between sprinkling in a couple jokes to placate the adults who are stuck in the theater with their kids versus writing a movie for adults. My views will likely change if and when I ever have children, but for now I’ll take the adult humor every time.

Shrek came out around the same time as Pixar’s Monster’s Inc., and because they were both computer-generated movies, they invited the typical visual comparisons. Deciding which you like better isn’t easy. Take A Bug’s Life vs. Antz, for instance. You have to take into account that the two studios made stylistic decisions about their movies (i.e., Disney’s pastels vs. PDI’s realism.) Pixar is the easy choice, but I always thought that the original Shrek raised the bar not only in their environmental renderings, but also in character animation. Shrek could have had no plot at all and I would still have enjoyed watching the characters interact in their make-believe world.

Creating a sequel to a movie like that must be difficult. Because your target audience is already familiar with the world, you’re not much able to tamper with the look. Instead of wow’ing everyone with fabulous things they’ve never seen before, you’re instead forced to try to wow them with everything they’re already familiar with. In this Hollywood day and age, it’s almost too much to ask of studios to continue with traditional storytelling devices, like say, character development. But in Shrek 2, that’s not only what they did, but also what made the movie so great. Rare for a sequel, main characters in Shrek 2 undergo significant changes even while new characters are introduced.

Speaking of newly introduced characters, I was thoroughly expecting to hate Antonio Banderas’ Puss In Boots. Perhaps it was because the previews didn’t mesh very well with what I’d heard the critics saying about the character, I don’t know, but I found myself literally laughing myself to tears in the scene where he meets Shrek. In fact, one of the reasons I feel confident that everyone will like Shrek 2 is the way in which it made me laugh. No small feat, considering the mood I was in after putting my wife on a plane out of the country earlier that same day.

Shrek 2 is great, start to finish. I wonder if it’ll even be possible for another summer movie (Spiderman 2? The Village?) to beat it in my insignificant rankings. Oh, and before I forget, make sure you stay through the credits if you want to catch a tiny Donkey epilogue.

Trivial thought: Interesting how some of the best jokes were just background (Stonehenge? Justin? Starbucks? Hilarious!)
What did I find worthwhile about the movie? The animation, the environment, the new renderings. The climatic fight scene (reminded me fondly of the adrenalized escape from the dragon in the first Shrek!) And, of course, Puss In Boots was so cool that I want to create a fan site for him.
Would I recommend the movie? To strangers on the street!
Will I buy it on DVD? The day it comes out!

Overall Summer Movie Ranking
Shrek 2
The Day After Tomorrow
Troy
Van Helsing

I’ve always had a special place in my heart for disaster movies. I don’t quite know why, but I think it has something to do with exploring the idea of “what would one do in a bad situation?” What I don’t like about disaster movies is that they’ve grown so terribly formulaic. Step 1. Establish a wide range of characters. Step 2. Introduce catastrophe. Step 3. Bring together those characters still alive. Step 4. Characters overcome disaster. I often wonder if there might not be a better formula.

The premise of the Day After Tomorrow has to do with the effects of global warming. For the purposes of a two-hour movie time limit, the consequences of our collective industrial actions were unrealistically compressed into a handful of days, rather than decades. This is, of course, assuming that you accept the premise that polar ice melts will cause super-duper-storms in the first place.

Whatever. It was enough to set the stage for disastrous special effects and a father-son adversity/reunion story. “Disastrous” in the sense of the effects showing disasters, naturally. “Naturally” as in natural disasters. Heh.

That’s where the movie shines. Don’t get me wrong, some of the characters are okay. Some aren’t (for instance, I never felt anything for Little Leukemia Boy, and I wanted more closure on the scientists in Scotland). But make no mistake, the disasters are the draw in this movie and most of them are pretty good. If you’ve seen the previews, you already know about the geographically strange tornadoes, the big flood, and the super-cold temperatures. I did, going in, but for some reason I thought there would be more variety to the natural disasters. Engaging my powers of 20/20 hindsight, I don’t know why that is, though. It’s not like global warming is going to result in volcanic eruptions or big earthquakes.

The best thing I can say about The Day After Tomorrow is that I was able to suspend my disbelief and lose myself in the story. I truly wanted to know what would happen next and – unlike Troy, for instance – I was never thinking about when the movie was going to end. And that’s probably a good thing, considering the moral with which they beat you over the head just before the closing credits. Up until the last couple minutes, it was a diverting summer film… and then, WHAP-WHAP! Watch out all you Republicans – Roland Emmerich has a message. Sigh.

Trivial Thought: Did you notice that all the wolves were completely computer generated? Interesting, that.
What did I find worthwhile about the movie? The special effects, of course. That and poking holes in the movie’s “science.”
Would I recommend the movie? If you like disaster movies, yes. If you’re a Republican, no.
Will I buy it on DVD? Probably, although it may come down to the special features list.

Overall Summer Movie Ranking
The Day After Tomorrow
Troy
Van Helsing