blahblahblahblahblspacer

blahblahblahblahblspacer

Damn you, Colin!

May 22, 2009
R. Batty @ 12:39 pm


I guess you can't have a good idea and expect that no one else will come up with it sooner or later. It has finally come to pass that someone has made a zombie movie from the perspective of a zombie.


http://www.cnn.com/2009/SHOWBIZ/Movies/05/21/Colin/index.html

I was dreaming of making just such a film at least 7 years ago, but I guess you can’t copyright dreams. Or short stories that you never finished. Ugh. What further chaps my ass that the fellow who did turn *my* idea into a film managed to do it on no budget (even though the CNN article is a bit misleading since the guy seemed to have some connected friends giving him supplies. And no mention of where he got the camera and other equipment. Not for $70, I assure you) and distributers are chomping at the bit to pick the film up.

Damn. Damn. Damn!

Eye Can See

May 17, 2009
R. Batty @ 6:43 pm


I actually came across this guy back in January or February, but I didn't remember that I took the picture until now. Anyway, I was in the car with dragonslayer heading to Chuck’s Southern Comforts Cafe (which was excellent, btw) when we unexpectedly ran across this fellow. I have to say, even after the Great Road Trip across the country, I don’t think anything we saw was quite as amazing as this giant Indian wearing eyeglasses with an “Eye Can See You” sign. Yes, I did photoshop this picture, but only to compensate for the fact that I took the worst picture ever of this amazing sign. What can I say? I was totally unprepared and I’d never used my camera phone before.

Star Trek = Meh.

May 12, 2009
R. Batty @ 3:53 pm


UPDATE! Lest it be said that I cannot laugh at myself, check out this Onion review. (FYI: they’re just making up the part about the Klingons. There weren’t any in the film!)
http://www.theonion.com/content/video/trekkies_bash_new_star_trek_film?utm_source=videoembed

The advantage of being in a history and philosophy of science program is that you are almost guaranteed to have a bunch of sci-fi loving nerds for friends who will be excited about things like new Star Trek movies.

So the gang and I headed out to the theater today to check it out. Now, I should say upfront that I was never much of a fan of the original series. I was of the TNG generation, but I know Kirk, Spock, Uhura, McCoy, tribbles, etc., and I thought it could be interesting to make a film looking at the original crew’s early days in the academy. Still, I had no expectations of this being a great film, or even a good one. I expected a rather trite action film with some Star Trek fanservice slapped on top of it, and that’s essentially what I got.

That being said, I thought the film was fairly well done for what it was. The plot made absolutely no sense, but the action moved so quickly that you didn’t really have time to stop and think about how nonsensical it was. The effects and visual design of the film were tight and consistent, I didn’t find any moments were I was completely jarred out of the film by blatant visual inconsistencies (like when films run amok with the cgi).

I know this sounds almost like an endorsement, which I’m sure shocks many of you who think my complete and total disdain for many popular movies (Star Wars prequels, LOTR, Sisterhood of the Traveling Pants 2–I’m looking at you!) is somehow unjustified, and you expected me to be unjustifiably critical of this film as well. But I think I’m neither unjustified in hating movies that are blatantly bad movies. Nor would I say I was endorsing the Star Trek film. Rather, what I’m saying is that I can see that it fits in a particular genre of film (action), and for that genre it is well done. But is it a Star Trek movie? Is it a good movie? No. It is clearly neither.

Why isn’t it a Star Trek movie?
Because one of the things at the heart of all the Star Trek series was a willingness to contemplate and engage with difficult ethical dilemmas. Sure, some of those dilemmas were deeper than others. And yes, in a feel-good family friendly series, the solution to those dilemmas was almost always a cop-out in which miraculously all parties could be happily appeased. But that too was part of the mythos of Star Trek, that belief in a future in which sagacity and technology could actually solve problems instead of just create them.

Is there any hint of genuine ethical dilemma, or the slightest hint of philosophical contemplation in this film? Not really. There is the scene when Kirk is being asked to defend his cheating on the Kobayashi Maru test, but both the situation and the characters’ responses to it are pulled almost entirely from Star Trek II. So not only is the one interesting ethical dilemma in the film entirely recycled from films past, but the tension of the moment is instantaneously diffused and forgotten when the entire academy gets called up for an emergency mission to Vulcan. Suddenly, the incommensurable Kirk “I don’t believe in a no win situation”/Spock “you must learn to face fate and face fear” divide becomes nothing more than a cute plot device. Oh no! Kirk is on probation. How is McCoy going to smuggle him on board the Enterprise?

After that moment, it’s all pretty clear cut good guys versus bad guys film. The villain in the film probably has the most nonsensical motive of all movie villains ever, and the fact that his crew just follows him on his planet destroying rampage tests the limits of one’s belief in the absolute loyalty of a crew to their commander. Spoiler explaining why the villain’s motivation makes no sense: Nero, like the rest of his Romulan people, is counting on Spock to save their planet from imminent destruction. Spock fails. Planet is destroyed. Temporal anomaly is created that sucks both Nero and Spock’s ship backward in time. Instead of saying, “hey, now that we’ve gone back in time, we can warn the Romulan people and they can save themselves from destruction,” Nero decides to torture Spock, destroy Vulcan, and destroy the Federation for the destruction of Romulus which never happens. Can we say, wtf?

Another reason why it’s not really a Star Trek film: because Star Trek was about the characters. It took show after show to craft personalities that, love them or hate them, were an important part of why you kept watching every week. This film basically stands on the shoulders of giants and creates silly caricatures of their work. Sure, it’s nice to see an Uhura with a mind of her own, even though that glimmer of personality, intelligence, and strength leads nowhere in the end. Kirk, however, is as bratty and inscrutable as ever (sure, there’s a scene where we’re told he’s a genius, but his actions never betray a motive beyond that of making trouble and purposefully getting under everyone’s skin). McCoy’s crustiness only serves to make him a vehicle for one-liners and comic relief. Scotty, too, is only about the brogue and the comedic quips. The only character who is interestingly developed is Spock, but his development is undermined by the fact that the whole premise of the movie is to get Kirk into the captain’s chair.

This is amazingly unfortunate, given that the movie throws all canon out the window by telling the story in which an alternate timeline becomes reality. This could have been done to some real purpose, to show us a world in which Spock takes command of the Enterprise and Kirk learns to be the first mate. Spoiler: But for some reason, despite the fact that Spock Prime (that is, the Spock from the future who has lived out the Star Trek universe as it has been told in the tv series and movies) knows the timeline of his universe has been catastrophically altered, his only concern is to make sure the Enterprise is manned by the crew we know and love. Yep, even though creating temporal anomalies and traveling back in time is as simple as making a black hole with a little Red Matter (ie, unexplained black hole making goo) and flying into it, no one suggests for one second going back in time to stop the destruction of Vulcan and saving it’s 6 billion some inhabitants from instantaneous death. Nope. All anyone cares about is making Kirk captain of the Enterprise so he can stop the bad guy.

But now I’m starting to digress into the problems with the plot of the movie, which are so extensive they require a separate list to recount. Suffice it to say, that even though Star Trek has often had weakly written episodes and, in its later years became far too reliant on resorting to time travel when they were out of good plot ideas, this movie’s plot puts all others to shame in terms of it’s sheer stupidity and sloppiness. But again, I feel like the filmmakers were counting on the rapid pace and breathtaking visual thrills to distract from the fact that it was utterly void of genuine content. And it does largely work for this reason. You come out of the theater thinking, “wow. What just happened?” And presumably, most theater goers won’t bother to actually try and answer that question. It’s only if you do that you realize what a dissatisfying mess the whole thing really is.

And that’s why I consider it not just a bad Star Trek movie, but a bad movie in general. The movie is essentially a night on the town with a cheap paid escort: you pay your money for 2 hours of eye-candy, but the conversation is vapid and disappointing. Now, some theatergoers, will be perfectly content investing in nothing more than the mile a minute thrill ride of a film. But if you like a little substance to go with your pretty moving pictures, you’re going to have to look elsewhere.

Locoweed: over 100 years of mystery

May 5, 2009
R. Batty @ 10:44 pm

Everyone knows that when cows eat locoweed, then they done stampede.* But apparently, it was once believed that locoweed would drive humans permanently insane as well.


Am J Psychiatry, Oct 1898; 55: 275 - 281.

The article goes on to cite various medical sources refuting the popular belief that locoweed could cause insanity in humans. Doctors are such killjoys.

*This knowledge was popularized by the semi-famous “Pome” written in the 1990s by an obscure poet going only by the name of Sam: “The cows done et the locoweed and then they done stampeded. Ah hollered, ‘Git the shotgun, Pa!’ but they’d already trampled Ma.”

World +1

April 14, 2009
R. Batty @ 12:05 pm


Ladies and gentlemen, please give a warm welcome to one of the newest members of humankind, Liam Thomas.


“Thank you, thank you. No applause necessary, folks.”

Don’t forget to give Kim over at francophoney a big congrats for successfully pushing that bad boy out. And now I guess I better get working on that baby present that I started months ago and never finished. Go me :-P

Really people

March 28, 2009
R. Batty @ 5:53 pm

I appreciate a good ghost story every now and then. I enjoy freaking myself out watching those stupid tv shows about haunted places and listening to people tell stories about "unexplainable" things that have happened to them. But this is just weak.

Victorian ‘ghost’ picked up by Google Street View


“Ghost” my ass.

This is not a ghost. I know people think google is going to unlock all the mysteries of the universe from the lost city of Atlantis to Area 51. And maybe someday, they will produced some genuinely unexplainable images. But is it really possible that no one can tell the woman in this picture is clearly Mary Poppins? No, seriously.

CLEARLY.
MARY.
POPPINS.

Fictional characters cannot be ghosts. Q.E.D.
Lord, people are dense. :-P

I already knew this

March 8, 2009
R. Batty @ 11:52 am

But reading about it in the New York Times just makes it that much more real, and that much more depressing.

Doctoral Candidates Anticipate Hard Times

By PATRICIA COHEN
Published: March 6, 2009

Chris Pieper began looking for an academic job in sociology about six months ago, sending off about two dozen application packets. The results so far? Two telephone interviews, and no employment offers.

“About half of all the rejection letters I’ve received mentioned the poor economy as contributing to their decision,” said Mr. Pieper, 34, who is getting his doctorate from the University of Texas, Austin. “Some simply canceled the search because they found the funding for the position didn’t come through. Others changed their tenure-track jobs to adjunct or instructor positions.”

“Many of the universities I applied to received more than 300 applications,” he added.

Mr. Pieper is not alone. Fulltime faculty jobs have not been easy to come by in recent decades, but this year the new crop of Ph.D. candidates is finding the prospects worse than ever. Public universities are bracing for severe cuts as state legislatures grapple with yawning deficits. At the same time, even the wealthiest private colleges have seen their endowments sink and donations slacken since the financial crisis. So a chill has set in at many higher education institutions, where partial or full-fledge hiring freezes have been imposed.

A survey by the American Historical Association, for example, found that the number of history departments recruiting new professors this year is down 15 percent, while the American Mathematical Association’s largest list of job postings has dropped more than 25 percent from last year.

“This is a year of no jobs,” said Catherine Stimpson, the dean of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences at New York University. Ph.D.s are stacked up, she said, “like planes hovering over La Guardia.”

The anticipated wave of retirements by faculty members who are 60-something is likely to slow as retirement savings accounts and pensions wither, administrators and professors say. That means that some students who have finished postdoctoral fellowships and who expected to leave for faculty positions are staying put for another year, which in turn closes off an option for other graduate students coming up the ladder.

“I was encouraged to aim very high initially, but as I have watched more and more jobs pulled, I am worried about whether I can even get a postdoc,” said Vanessa Svihla, 33, a graduate student in science education at the University of Texas, Austin. She is defending her dissertation next month. “Amidst all the normal stress of finishing a dissertation and trying to get publications out, hiring freezes are a bit overwhelming,” she said.

Although some people think that graduate school is a good place to wait out a crash, some undergraduates said they had either canceled or postponed plans to enter graduate school this fall because of the bad economy or their inability to get student loans.

Aisha Hadlock, 21, a senior at Oberlin College who majored in Islamic studies, decided to delay graduate school for at least a year. “I don’t have the financial means to support myself through grad school in this economy, and grants and loans are so hard to get right now,” Ms. Hadlock said. The types of programs that offer generous financial aid “will be overrun with applicants,” she added.

Andrew Delbanco, the chairman of the American studies program at Columbia University, said that the system producing graduate students was increasingly out of sync with the system hiring them.

“It’s been obvious for some time — witness the unionization movement — that graduate students are caught between the old model of apprentice scholars and the new reality of insecure laborers with uncertain employment prospects,” Mr. Delbanco said. “Among the effects of the financial crisis will clearly be shrinkage both in graduate fellowships and in entry-level academic positions, so the prospects for aspiring Ph.D.’s are getting even bleaker.”

Many in the humanities fear that their fields are going to suffer most. Humanities professors are already among the lowest-paid faculty members, according to the Humanities Indicators Prototype, a new, decade-long effort to establish a database of information led by the American Academy of Arts and Sciences.

What’s more, nearly half of all the positions are part time — with no job security and no benefits — a situation that many educators expect to worsen.

Many students now finishing their doctorates began working on them when the economy was in much better shape. It often takes about nine years to complete a dissertation in English, said Louis Menand, an English professor at Harvard, explaining that students have to devote so many hours to teaching and making money that they don’t have time left over to write.

William Pannapacker, an associate professor of English at Hope College in Holland, Mich., who writes a column for The Chronicle of Higher Education under the name Thomas Benton, has frequently tried to dissuade undergraduates from pursuing a graduate degree in the humanities. He is convinced that the recession will push universities to trim the number of tenure-track jobs further.

“It’s hard to tell young people that universities recognize that their idealism and energy — and lack of information — are an exploitable resource,” he wrote in a recent column. “If you cannot find a tenure-track position, your university will no longer court you; it will pretend you do not exist and will act as if your unemployability is entirely your fault.”

Unless you are independently wealthy or really well connected, don’t apply, he advised.

Margaret Peacock, 35, who spent eight years on her dissertation in Soviet history at the University of Texas, is one of the lucky ones. A winner of a federal Fulbright-Hays scholarship and the mother of three children, Ms. Peacock just accepted a tenure-track job at the University of Alabama. At the historian association’s convention in January, she said that a number of people who sat on hiring committees told her that they were pressing to complete faculty searches this year partly because “they are worried that there will be no budget for new hires” in the future.

“I also know that many of the offers being made by departments to their chosen candidates are not as generous as they have been in past years, with higher teaching loads and less room to negotiate salary,” Ms. Peacock added. Americanists seem to be having a much tougher time now than those specializing in other historical areas, she said. “I am becoming increasingly convinced that I got in under the wire.”

In the past 30 years, public and private money dedicated to the humanities has also significantly declined. The budget for the National Endowment for the Humanities is roughly a third of what it was at the high point of 1979, after adjusting for inflation, according to the Humanities Indicators data, though stimulus money may raise that figure.

Only 13 percent, or about $16 million, makes its way into scholarly projects. And unlike the National Science Foundation and the National Institutes for Health, the humanities endowment does not give awards to postdoctoral students.

Of course the humanities don’t require labs and expensive equipment, but as Leslie Berlowitz, the chief executive of the arts and sciences academy, notes, the humanities suffer more from across-the-board cuts because those professors are much less able to generate financing outside of the university, unlike the hard and social sciences. Such scholars also find fewer job opportunities outside of academia.

Mr. Pieper is still looking but he is discouraged. “The timing of this downturn was exactly wrong for my entering the academic market, and there’s no guarantee it will be better next year,” he said. “It takes a long time for these situations to right themselves.”

At my next dinner party

February 27, 2009
R. Batty @ 10:16 pm

I guess this has been making the rounds on the interwebs for a while, but I only just caught wind of it and, well, clearly this is something I need to serve at my next Halloween party!


Mmmm, cholesterol-filled braaaaaaains!

I admit, the fact that it contains 1000+% of your recommended daily dose of cholesterol is a little frightening, but isn’t that just part of its appeal? You can read more about tasty pork brains here.

StarCraft PWNZ LOTR

February 11, 2009
R. Batty @ 1:42 pm

This is why I love my alma mater:

UC Berkeley’s StarCraft 101

happy birthday to me

February 10, 2009
R. Batty @ 12:28 am

It’s been almost a week since I got back from Berlin and I’m still not really back on the work wagon yet. But do I really need to be? I mean, at least not until after my birthday, right?

So today’s celebratory events included: 1) brownies for breakfast, 2) dinner with friends 3) getting a freakin’ ice cream maker from Jess and 4) going downtown to see the Swedish vampire film Let the Right One In.

Now, not to turn this birthday post into an extensive film review, but I have to say that Let the Right One In was both highly enjoyable and seriously messed up. I don’t really know how to accurately describe it. In ways, it reminded me of Fargo with the bleak, icy landscapes and the gruesome black humor. Yet, it definitely takes that formula down a darker path. Maybe it’s because the movie centers on children rather than adults and completely subverts any notion of the innocence of youth. But without doubt the movie exploits the fact that sociopathic children are so much more disturbing than sociopathic adults. And that I think is what really makes the film chilling–it’s not the vampires that are frightening, but the brutal and senseless harm that the entirely human characters perform on one another. In a way, the sudden moments of intense vampiric violence in the film are a relief from the tense and twisted atmosphere that is the protagonist Oskar’s daily life.

Overall, I found the film quite enjoyable, although I wouldn’t recommend it to everyone. It definitely doesn’t into either a horror or a romance genre, as most other vampire films do. Instead, it’s an intense psychological drama punctuated by dark humor and visually stunning scenes of mayhem. Sweet.

Next Page »
























Got Battitude? Prove it.