I did something last night I didn't think I'd go -- give up famboy material such as Ironman 2 or the rehashed Gladiator wannabe "Robin Hood" and see Letters to Juliet instead. It was the lack of intelligence the other movies threatened me with that shaped the decision. Plus being with my old friend Kim, who's tolerated many a monster/fighter movie already.
The start was very girlpal esque, Juliet's Window is a this tight little spot in Verona where distraught people, mostly females, write letters of their situations and stick them to the wall. Then the Secretaries of Juliet take in the letters and respond to each and everyone of them.
Our main girl, Sophie, blonde and beautiful but nowhere near over-the-top glamorous (extra points here) follows them when they're collecting letters, and says she wants in. Also has a dream to be a writer, not a mere fact checker, for the local paper she works with. Ta da, chance to write.
She follows them, after friendly meetings, and finds a letter 50 years old in a brick inside the wall. She answers it, hoping against hope that the recipient stick resides at the listed address, and of course gets a response (or the movie would've ended). Claire, the writer of the original note, shows up with her grandson to find out who wrote the letter and find her missing man, Lorenzo Bortelini.
Her disgustingly rude grandson, a fantasticly handsome Australian actor of Home and Away, has joined his granny for the quest. They hit it off. Only Sophie has a fiancee who's an easy write off from the script as he's always off to wine tasting and mushroom and food, being a chef.
They look everywhere and don't find him, Claire and Attractive Male grow closer, eventually kiss and then they split ways when they find a particular Lorenzo sitting in a grace. "Too much emotional wear and tear", ya know?
They find the guy before Sophie returns home.
This is really a love note to Italy, gorgeously shot and it looks good and it isn't so disgustingly lovely-dovey like many a chick-flick. I actually enjoyed this and could laugh when Claire and Sophie ganged up against Attractive Male Lead to get him to shoo off, leaving the girls to talk.
She returns to New York with her story of Clair's finding, then gets invited to the wedding and heads back. They get together.
Simple and not selling love as the greatest virtue in the world, ever, bar none. More telling the story of how love is merely as durable as you are, if not moreso, and such it's never too late.
Want minireviews of the other movies I didn't watch?
Ironman 2 - Tony Stark saves the day in metal.
Robin Hood - we're all left with a "But they already MADE Gladiator" feel in our mouths
XXXX? - I honestly can't remember the fourth option that there was.
Friday, May 14, 2010
Monday, May 10, 2010
The soul is a cheat, constantly.
Thinking momentarily on the habit/knowledge/usefullness of robots, and making them (I was searching for Daft Punk images) I recalled a quote from a while back some afficionado said about the intelligence of robots:
"If you put together all the brains of the all the robots that exist, you'd get something as smart as a lobotomised cockroach."
Damning to be sure, but it gave me pause to consider why it's so fucking hard. Then I looked at myself and realised: I have no idea how I work, and we're trying to replicate THAT--self awareness. If we don't even know how to create that we surely can't replicate it in anything else, much less anything metalic and rubbery, instead of organic. For that matter we have proof that organic doesn't even dictate that intelligence/self awareness be present, ala trees, shrubs, and most of mount Druitt.
So I say the identity we all have, this soul we fixate on, is God, or our creators, or bloody luck's, easy-cheat way of saying "Oh yeah? Well they can think for themselves too, yeah!"
Honestly, to think further on it eyes developed because of sight, limbs because of a need of motion. EMOtions, therefore, and identity, formed as a response to something else, fellow-being interaction. Fellow-being not excluding animals and such, but communicating anything else with intelligence you come in contact with.
Emo is the ability to measure self worth. Influence is the ability to alter yours (or anothers) and the control of that usually determines a winner in this game we're all playing, in which no one actually remembers putting that $2 coin into the machine blinking "Insert coin to play."
Hense, the soul is a cheat. That's why we can't explain it, it doesn't bear examination.
Love you all.
"If you put together all the brains of the all the robots that exist, you'd get something as smart as a lobotomised cockroach."
Damning to be sure, but it gave me pause to consider why it's so fucking hard. Then I looked at myself and realised: I have no idea how I work, and we're trying to replicate THAT--self awareness. If we don't even know how to create that we surely can't replicate it in anything else, much less anything metalic and rubbery, instead of organic. For that matter we have proof that organic doesn't even dictate that intelligence/self awareness be present, ala trees, shrubs, and most of mount Druitt.
So I say the identity we all have, this soul we fixate on, is God, or our creators, or bloody luck's, easy-cheat way of saying "Oh yeah? Well they can think for themselves too, yeah!"
Honestly, to think further on it eyes developed because of sight, limbs because of a need of motion. EMOtions, therefore, and identity, formed as a response to something else, fellow-being interaction. Fellow-being not excluding animals and such, but communicating anything else with intelligence you come in contact with.
Emo is the ability to measure self worth. Influence is the ability to alter yours (or anothers) and the control of that usually determines a winner in this game we're all playing, in which no one actually remembers putting that $2 coin into the machine blinking "Insert coin to play."
Hense, the soul is a cheat. That's why we can't explain it, it doesn't bear examination.
Love you all.
Sunday, May 2, 2010
Judging, Constantly
I recently regained my level 1s for Judging. The last major event I was at before that was head judging a PTQ something. One of the players got DQ'd by myself and my back up of judges, for "lying to a tournament official" based on the information he'd provided regarding his method of shuffling. The pain of the experience, for all involved, sticks as pointedly in my mind as does my own first win in a three player game back in high school during lunch.
I hadn't judged for two years since, but it wasn't the event itself that caused the absence. I'd personally had enough of the drama of judging, which is really the hardboiling of everything you do and don't get respected for, or taken seriously. The problem players, the grateful judges, the feeling good about learning good leadership/organisation skills plus, and mostly of all, the lack of playing a very fun game.
So I left the game, played much more often, and still sucked just as hard. For some reason in the recent year my game has picked up wonderfully, and I've returned to judging. A main reason is to experience new sets without putting money down, being a povo uni student. The better playing is just because I'm a great deal better then I was.
The funny thing about this Yeah, Constantly update is how a judge [or myself] views a new set coming out. Rather then what new cards are about, I'm interested in what new interactions are going to break my games, which questions I'll have to answer time and time again, and guessing [with 75% win] which cards are going to need errata. Walking Atlas, for example, was a no-brainer.
Seeing the new Eldrazi was particularly fun, as everyone leapt to possible solutions to these monsters. You can Terror them, but not Emrakul. You can couterspell them, but you'll still give 3 cards, vindicate or an extra turn to your opponent. Though I found a card which deals with Eldrazi, abilities and all:
Time Stop
Knowing the rules and how to truly mess around with the cards is the extra delicious that comes with being a judge. Of course we're wrong at times, or inaccurate, but we're essential to run the tournaments. Other then that, we're also tooling around with the extra section of Magic the casual players seem to miss -- the nuts and bolts.
/judge rant.
I hadn't judged for two years since, but it wasn't the event itself that caused the absence. I'd personally had enough of the drama of judging, which is really the hardboiling of everything you do and don't get respected for, or taken seriously. The problem players, the grateful judges, the feeling good about learning good leadership/organisation skills plus, and mostly of all, the lack of playing a very fun game.
So I left the game, played much more often, and still sucked just as hard. For some reason in the recent year my game has picked up wonderfully, and I've returned to judging. A main reason is to experience new sets without putting money down, being a povo uni student. The better playing is just because I'm a great deal better then I was.
The funny thing about this Yeah, Constantly update is how a judge [or myself] views a new set coming out. Rather then what new cards are about, I'm interested in what new interactions are going to break my games, which questions I'll have to answer time and time again, and guessing [with 75% win] which cards are going to need errata. Walking Atlas, for example, was a no-brainer.
Seeing the new Eldrazi was particularly fun, as everyone leapt to possible solutions to these monsters. You can Terror them, but not Emrakul. You can couterspell them, but you'll still give 3 cards, vindicate or an extra turn to your opponent. Though I found a card which deals with Eldrazi, abilities and all:
Time Stop
Knowing the rules and how to truly mess around with the cards is the extra delicious that comes with being a judge. Of course we're wrong at times, or inaccurate, but we're essential to run the tournaments. Other then that, we're also tooling around with the extra section of Magic the casual players seem to miss -- the nuts and bolts.
/judge rant.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
