Zero Angel Richardson's Blog, page 12
December 6, 2014
thoughts of the day
This week I somehow managed to pull three all-nighters.
There was some blank spaces in there where I'm pretty sure I lost consciousness or at least all rational thought, but I pulled through it and thankfully had most of a weekend to coma my way to functioning again.
I'm pretty impressed that my almost-30 body was able to do something that I doubt I would have been able to do as a teenager. So yeah, go me.
In other news, I still don't know if I'll be gainfully employed anywhere from Tuesday on. I'm not sure how I'll handle being fired twice from the same job in less than 6 months when both instances have been the single-best employment experience of my life and have fundamentally changed something within me.
And then there's the other thing. An email. Saying what a great teacher I am, and the opportunity to work at the same rate but more hours.
I'm continually impressed with the fact that adjunct professors work so hard and do so much for so little, but I get it. It's like being a drug addict. Once you're in the cycle, it's damn hard to get out of.
Anyone in academia looks down on you like it's somehow your fault that you are stuck in such a lousy situation. Anyone outside of academia sees nothing but an academic, which have a reputation from the tenured professors of being lazy. You end up doing what you originally wanted to do, but at a wage that leaves many adjunct professors either on public assistance or working at multiple institutions just to stay afloat.
Before YSU decided that me earning them $170K a year after they paid my salary wasn't enough to justify paying healthcare costs for me, I was making something like $50K working at 3 institutions and I thought I was doing good for some reason, even though I was working an absurd number of hours.
I have a seriously great, seriously fantastic, seriously worthwhile job. One that I can make a bigger difference at than I could possibly imagine I could just teaching a few thousand students. It's genuine, it's good for the soul, and it pays me a wage that I don't have to hate myself for. I am doing my damnedest to ensure that it continues.
Because adjunct professor wages make you hate yourself. Look up any sort of abuse. Eventually you start to believe you deserve the abuse. Eventually being paid so much less than you are worth catches up to you.
I always think of myself as having a strong mind and above rationalizing and the petty psychological traps that other humans fall prey to, but I didn't realize how much being an adjunct professor was killing me until the Affordable Care Act came through. Until the gross injustice of what they were proposing fell down on me like a cut Sword of Damocles. One that had been hanging over my head for so long that I didn't even realize it.
And then they doubled down when no one was looking.
There was some blank spaces in there where I'm pretty sure I lost consciousness or at least all rational thought, but I pulled through it and thankfully had most of a weekend to coma my way to functioning again.
I'm pretty impressed that my almost-30 body was able to do something that I doubt I would have been able to do as a teenager. So yeah, go me.
In other news, I still don't know if I'll be gainfully employed anywhere from Tuesday on. I'm not sure how I'll handle being fired twice from the same job in less than 6 months when both instances have been the single-best employment experience of my life and have fundamentally changed something within me.
And then there's the other thing. An email. Saying what a great teacher I am, and the opportunity to work at the same rate but more hours.
I'm continually impressed with the fact that adjunct professors work so hard and do so much for so little, but I get it. It's like being a drug addict. Once you're in the cycle, it's damn hard to get out of.
Anyone in academia looks down on you like it's somehow your fault that you are stuck in such a lousy situation. Anyone outside of academia sees nothing but an academic, which have a reputation from the tenured professors of being lazy. You end up doing what you originally wanted to do, but at a wage that leaves many adjunct professors either on public assistance or working at multiple institutions just to stay afloat.
Before YSU decided that me earning them $170K a year after they paid my salary wasn't enough to justify paying healthcare costs for me, I was making something like $50K working at 3 institutions and I thought I was doing good for some reason, even though I was working an absurd number of hours.
I have a seriously great, seriously fantastic, seriously worthwhile job. One that I can make a bigger difference at than I could possibly imagine I could just teaching a few thousand students. It's genuine, it's good for the soul, and it pays me a wage that I don't have to hate myself for. I am doing my damnedest to ensure that it continues.
Because adjunct professor wages make you hate yourself. Look up any sort of abuse. Eventually you start to believe you deserve the abuse. Eventually being paid so much less than you are worth catches up to you.
I always think of myself as having a strong mind and above rationalizing and the petty psychological traps that other humans fall prey to, but I didn't realize how much being an adjunct professor was killing me until the Affordable Care Act came through. Until the gross injustice of what they were proposing fell down on me like a cut Sword of Damocles. One that had been hanging over my head for so long that I didn't even realize it.
And then they doubled down when no one was looking.
December 1, 2014
The Argument Against the Common Core State Standards for Mathematics
If I had to summarize all of the somewhat cogent arguments against the CCSSM, they appear to sound something like, "We've done it this way and it works, so why would we try anything else?"
This is how their argument is posed, but it makes a pretty LARGE assumption, that being that mathematics education in America has worked.
It doesn't work.
I understand that it is reassuring in some twisted Lovecraftian way to think that there are some people that are good at math and the rest of the world that will never be good at math, but that's like saying, "there are some people that are good at Japanese and some people that will never be good at Japanese . . . " well yeah, if you assume as a matter of course that it's impossible to teach Japanese except to the people that are already fluent in it.
The fact of the matter is that mathematics IS a language and anybody can be good at it. That doesn't mean that we'll be as good as the absolute best of the world any more than it means that we can be as good as some guitar virtuoso, but we can at least learn power chords and probably the melody to "Ode to Joy".
Everyone can math.
Yes, that is probably going to become a standard saying in my teaching repertoire and maybe even a title of some book down the line. I understand that math is a noun and I'm using it as a verb, deal with it. (Sorry to foreigners that use "maths", it sounds much less cool in your language).
I'll say it again, everyone can math.
At least, they can if they are afforded the opportunity to math, given a reason to math, and taught math in such a way as to not have it sound like gobbledegook, gibberish and doubletalk.
So when we say that the old way of teaching math "works", we're saying that the increasing minority of people that have natural talent in mathematics or are raised in mathematics-speaking households rise to the top and are able to do math by learning it the old way while everyone else flounders, increases math anxiety on a national level, and mathematics becomes increasingly stigmatized and closed off to a majority of Americans—which only compounds the difficulty for the next round of students and the next and the next.
Eventually we have a culture of assumed failure when it comes to mathematics instead of a culture of, "Yes, we can do this!"
So why are we changing math even though you think that it made some sort of sense the old way and the new way makes less sense to you? Because the old way was stupid and it set students up to fail.
Yes, people taught the old way are not going to understand the new way as well at first, but if you learned the old way maybe you couldn't ever get pass power chords because you were taught rote memorization of chords and notes and never understood music theory. Maybe all you can say is "konnichiwa" (but you've got that down pat), but never learned the grammar and mechanics of the Japanese language; this is mathematics in America today for the vast majority of students.
But the CCSSM emphasize the understanding necessary to not just be able to do arithmetic, but to set students up for success in algebra, geometry, calculus, and beyond. We're teaching students the language of mathematics, not just the vocabulary.
Let me know if you have any questions.
(Note: I've ignored the arguments that sound something along the lines of, CCSSM is other people trying to take control of our schools! Besides the politically motivated nature of many of those arguments, the assumption is that your schools were better off before. They weren't. Is CCSSM perfect? Absolutely not, but it is immeasurably better than the system that preceded it and it deserves our support.)
This is how their argument is posed, but it makes a pretty LARGE assumption, that being that mathematics education in America has worked.
It doesn't work.
I understand that it is reassuring in some twisted Lovecraftian way to think that there are some people that are good at math and the rest of the world that will never be good at math, but that's like saying, "there are some people that are good at Japanese and some people that will never be good at Japanese . . . " well yeah, if you assume as a matter of course that it's impossible to teach Japanese except to the people that are already fluent in it.
The fact of the matter is that mathematics IS a language and anybody can be good at it. That doesn't mean that we'll be as good as the absolute best of the world any more than it means that we can be as good as some guitar virtuoso, but we can at least learn power chords and probably the melody to "Ode to Joy".
Everyone can math.
Yes, that is probably going to become a standard saying in my teaching repertoire and maybe even a title of some book down the line. I understand that math is a noun and I'm using it as a verb, deal with it. (Sorry to foreigners that use "maths", it sounds much less cool in your language).
I'll say it again, everyone can math.
At least, they can if they are afforded the opportunity to math, given a reason to math, and taught math in such a way as to not have it sound like gobbledegook, gibberish and doubletalk.
So when we say that the old way of teaching math "works", we're saying that the increasing minority of people that have natural talent in mathematics or are raised in mathematics-speaking households rise to the top and are able to do math by learning it the old way while everyone else flounders, increases math anxiety on a national level, and mathematics becomes increasingly stigmatized and closed off to a majority of Americans—which only compounds the difficulty for the next round of students and the next and the next.
Eventually we have a culture of assumed failure when it comes to mathematics instead of a culture of, "Yes, we can do this!"
So why are we changing math even though you think that it made some sort of sense the old way and the new way makes less sense to you? Because the old way was stupid and it set students up to fail.
Yes, people taught the old way are not going to understand the new way as well at first, but if you learned the old way maybe you couldn't ever get pass power chords because you were taught rote memorization of chords and notes and never understood music theory. Maybe all you can say is "konnichiwa" (but you've got that down pat), but never learned the grammar and mechanics of the Japanese language; this is mathematics in America today for the vast majority of students.
But the CCSSM emphasize the understanding necessary to not just be able to do arithmetic, but to set students up for success in algebra, geometry, calculus, and beyond. We're teaching students the language of mathematics, not just the vocabulary.
Let me know if you have any questions.
(Note: I've ignored the arguments that sound something along the lines of, CCSSM is other people trying to take control of our schools! Besides the politically motivated nature of many of those arguments, the assumption is that your schools were better off before. They weren't. Is CCSSM perfect? Absolutely not, but it is immeasurably better than the system that preceded it and it deserves our support.)
Status Update
Hi everyone,
It seems like I'm never meeting any sort of deadline when it comes to the creative parts of my life. It's unfortunate, but my day jobs have to take priority.
There's a chance, and I'm hesitant to believe in it because I've been burned so frequently before, that this next semester will be the first semester where I will be paid a living wage for an amount of work hours that is sustainable AND have job security. I've never had two of the three, let alone all three.
If that ends up being the case, there will be a lot of updates and changes 'round here.
If it isn't the case, then well, I'll still be working somewhere in the realm of 80 hours a week for barely over minimum wage—because that's how much we value college instructors in America—and this aspect of my life will continue to atrophy.
Here's hoping.
One thing I am planning on doing though is to have more "mini-blog updates" and treat this as an extended Twitter for those thoughts and rants that I have that I used to deem too short to share on here but are too long to share on Twitter.
That way at least, it won't be dozens of days between updates.
I will mention that in the last year I've gotten about ten times better at teaching and explaining mathematics from my curriculum developer job so whenever I have the time to continue Zero's Mathematics the quality will be significantly improved.
Thank you for reading,
~Zero
It seems like I'm never meeting any sort of deadline when it comes to the creative parts of my life. It's unfortunate, but my day jobs have to take priority.
There's a chance, and I'm hesitant to believe in it because I've been burned so frequently before, that this next semester will be the first semester where I will be paid a living wage for an amount of work hours that is sustainable AND have job security. I've never had two of the three, let alone all three.
If that ends up being the case, there will be a lot of updates and changes 'round here.
If it isn't the case, then well, I'll still be working somewhere in the realm of 80 hours a week for barely over minimum wage—because that's how much we value college instructors in America—and this aspect of my life will continue to atrophy.
Here's hoping.
One thing I am planning on doing though is to have more "mini-blog updates" and treat this as an extended Twitter for those thoughts and rants that I have that I used to deem too short to share on here but are too long to share on Twitter.
That way at least, it won't be dozens of days between updates.
I will mention that in the last year I've gotten about ten times better at teaching and explaining mathematics from my curriculum developer job so whenever I have the time to continue Zero's Mathematics the quality will be significantly improved.
Thank you for reading,
~Zero
September 22, 2014
Scorpion
The commercials dragged me in to see the "team of geniuses" with a combined IQ over 700 (which is well, nonsense, but whatever).
These characters all say the things that normal geniuses and supergeniuses train themselves not to say. Or maybe they're just too stupid? I don't know.
Like, I always used to find the Big Bang Theory offensive and ridiculous, but I was eventually able to overlook the smart-people bashing or maybe they toned it down as the series moved forward. Now I genuinely enjoy the show.
I'm OK with Sherlock because he has no interest in being socially apt. I'm not OK with Sheldon because he wants to understand AND he knows psychology AND he CONSTANTLY asks whether something is sarcasm or not, but he just can't get it. That doesn't make sense.
For Scorpion, I was really interested. But every character just seemed to be a walking stereotype.
I'm not saying that this is as offensive to me as, let's say, EVERY portrayal of women and PoC in modern media, and yes, this show appeals to me in some masturbatory ego appeal that I don't fully comprehend, but I don't see it lasting at all unless they get some depth to their characters.
Having a torrid past doesn't equal depth by the way.
But if I find the ridiculousness of these character's over-the-top, then how would anyone else be able to stand them? And the answer is they won't. I'll be interested to see the ratings for this episode and how many people turned it off before they got to the action-packed ending that everyone was expecting for the entire episode because it was spoiled in the commercials.
Wait. Is this how I come off to others? ? ?
(to clarify, IQ scores become too variable to be worthwhile above the 160s. Saying you have an IQ of 200 means that at age ten you would have scored the same as the average 20 year old, but what the hell is the average 20 year old? The standard deviation goes out of control after age 14, 16, and 18 because not everyone goes to high school, people drop out, and not everyone goes to college. Is the average 20 year old in college? In the work force? In jail? If you're a genius you're a fucking genius, you don't need to quantify it down to the last IQ point).
These characters all say the things that normal geniuses and supergeniuses train themselves not to say. Or maybe they're just too stupid? I don't know.
Like, I always used to find the Big Bang Theory offensive and ridiculous, but I was eventually able to overlook the smart-people bashing or maybe they toned it down as the series moved forward. Now I genuinely enjoy the show.
I'm OK with Sherlock because he has no interest in being socially apt. I'm not OK with Sheldon because he wants to understand AND he knows psychology AND he CONSTANTLY asks whether something is sarcasm or not, but he just can't get it. That doesn't make sense.
For Scorpion, I was really interested. But every character just seemed to be a walking stereotype.
I'm not saying that this is as offensive to me as, let's say, EVERY portrayal of women and PoC in modern media, and yes, this show appeals to me in some masturbatory ego appeal that I don't fully comprehend, but I don't see it lasting at all unless they get some depth to their characters.
Having a torrid past doesn't equal depth by the way.
But if I find the ridiculousness of these character's over-the-top, then how would anyone else be able to stand them? And the answer is they won't. I'll be interested to see the ratings for this episode and how many people turned it off before they got to the action-packed ending that everyone was expecting for the entire episode because it was spoiled in the commercials.
Wait. Is this how I come off to others? ? ?
(to clarify, IQ scores become too variable to be worthwhile above the 160s. Saying you have an IQ of 200 means that at age ten you would have scored the same as the average 20 year old, but what the hell is the average 20 year old? The standard deviation goes out of control after age 14, 16, and 18 because not everyone goes to high school, people drop out, and not everyone goes to college. Is the average 20 year old in college? In the work force? In jail? If you're a genius you're a fucking genius, you don't need to quantify it down to the last IQ point).
September 11, 2014
Samsung Galaxy Note 3
I bought a Note 3 at the end of July and I have to say that I was really completely thrilled with the device.
I'm sure I haven't unlocked its full potential yet, but I do have a bit of a troubling development.
Last month my darling fiancee went a bit overboard with our data which resulted in both of us turning off data for the last couple of weeks of the billing cycle.
My phone immediately became quite stupid.
It would take minutes for certain apps to open, things had a hard time downloading over wifi, and texting became completely unreliable—sometimes not sending at all, sometimes taking hours to send, and usually requiring a restart for text messages to come through.
I went to Verizon and they put a new SIM card in and changed my antenna defaults from Global to CDMA and this seemed to fix the problem . . . for about a day. Then it went back to being stupid.
Well, on the 7th my plan reset and ever since restarting with the data turned back on my phone's been back to 100%.
I almost never use over-the-air data; i.e. I am always on wifi, so this was pretty bothersome and troubles me for the future.
Anyway, wanted to share in case anyone else came across this.
(Delving into forum responses, there was some intelligence suggesting that this was caused by Android 4.4.2 and would be fixed in 4.4.4, but I couldn't find anyone that spoke about the data being turned off connection).
I'm sure I haven't unlocked its full potential yet, but I do have a bit of a troubling development.
Last month my darling fiancee went a bit overboard with our data which resulted in both of us turning off data for the last couple of weeks of the billing cycle.
My phone immediately became quite stupid.
It would take minutes for certain apps to open, things had a hard time downloading over wifi, and texting became completely unreliable—sometimes not sending at all, sometimes taking hours to send, and usually requiring a restart for text messages to come through.
I went to Verizon and they put a new SIM card in and changed my antenna defaults from Global to CDMA and this seemed to fix the problem . . . for about a day. Then it went back to being stupid.
Well, on the 7th my plan reset and ever since restarting with the data turned back on my phone's been back to 100%.
I almost never use over-the-air data; i.e. I am always on wifi, so this was pretty bothersome and troubles me for the future.
Anyway, wanted to share in case anyone else came across this.
(Delving into forum responses, there was some intelligence suggesting that this was caused by Android 4.4.2 and would be fixed in 4.4.4, but I couldn't find anyone that spoke about the data being turned off connection).
September 4, 2014
RWBY Update
I recently wrote about RWBY and how it was a mixed bag.
The second season is currently streaming and is MUCH improved. So far the episode lengths have been consistent around 15 and every episode features SOME level of action at levels we have come to expect.
The action is still absurdly entertaining and the interplay between the characters remains hilarious and endearing.
Much improved Rooster Teeth.
The second season is currently streaming and is MUCH improved. So far the episode lengths have been consistent around 15 and every episode features SOME level of action at levels we have come to expect.
The action is still absurdly entertaining and the interplay between the characters remains hilarious and endearing.
Much improved Rooster Teeth.
September 3, 2014
Writing Again . . .
I know I know I know I know.
I suck, I've said it before. It's not new that I've disappointed you. Yes, I should have been writing more in the last 10 months, but I was working a LOT those 10 months. So deal.
But what is new is that I'm writing again.
I have lots of energy most days now (thanks to my spiffy new c-pap machine #thankyouObama), and as of this week am only working at my day jobs two days of week.
Now, that doesn't mean I'm not looking for more work. If this keeps up and I don't have an immediate windfall in the form of having the math series grow at the rate it should if I release a few extra books in the next month, then I am going to become rather desperate.
First up will be finally getting "Algebra and the Algorithm" out the door. So look for some updates on that in the next week or so.
I'll also be dusting off ye' olde mailing list, so please subscribe if you haven't already! CLICK ME
And yes, you can expect some general website maintenance here, at ApocalypseDesigns.com and at the WotA Wiki.
Thank you for your interest!
I suck, I've said it before. It's not new that I've disappointed you. Yes, I should have been writing more in the last 10 months, but I was working a LOT those 10 months. So deal.
But what is new is that I'm writing again.
I have lots of energy most days now (thanks to my spiffy new c-pap machine #thankyouObama), and as of this week am only working at my day jobs two days of week.
Now, that doesn't mean I'm not looking for more work. If this keeps up and I don't have an immediate windfall in the form of having the math series grow at the rate it should if I release a few extra books in the next month, then I am going to become rather desperate.
First up will be finally getting "Algebra and the Algorithm" out the door. So look for some updates on that in the next week or so.
I'll also be dusting off ye' olde mailing list, so please subscribe if you haven't already! CLICK ME
And yes, you can expect some general website maintenance here, at ApocalypseDesigns.com and at the WotA Wiki.
Thank you for your interest!
August 15, 2014
Thoughts on Guardians of the Galaxy and Updated Marvel Cinematic Universe Rankings and MORE RANKINGS
I've been ridiculously looking forward to GotG since the first trailer dropped and I think I was definitely influenced by the insane amount of hype I had for the film, but it did not disappoint.
I loved the infusions of 70s and 80s Earth pop culture since that is the last bit of Earth that Chris Pratt's character knew (in the first 5 minutes he's abducted from Earth circa 1988).
It was an origin movie with a hefty amount of exposition, and was a bit slow and clunky to start off with, but after a certain point (about when the Guardians started to come together in the first 1/3 of the movie) I started smiling and didn't stop.
I don't think it's a Star Wars level film like people are saying, but at the same time, if you compare it one-to-one with Star Wars: A New Hope and not the trilogy as a whole . . .
It does many things amazingly. In no particular order:
Space.
Space Adventure.
Comedy.
Pop culture references.
Make-up and digital effects of characters (with the exception of Thanos who looks completely stupid and cheap, I hope he improves over the course of Phase 3).
Scenery and spacecraft.
Setting.
Soundtrack.
Action.
Character Relationships & Chemistry
Some of the best one-liners in recent movie history
Once you get into the movie, backstory of the characters is revealed in bits and pieces, with never taking too terribly long or distracting from the flow of the story.
People are saying Dave Bautista and Karen Gillan are low-points in the acting realm of the movie, but I thought they did fantastic. Drax the Destroyer (Bautista) is an alien that takes everything literally, so his reactions and deadpan were fitting and not (necessarily) a result of bad acting. They made his character so that his acting would not detract from it and I thought it was great. Gillan did better than she ever did on Doctor Who (where she was a regular disappointment to me in terms of acting) and her make-up and the effects of her character are some of the best in the movie. She didn't take me out of the movie at all and I had absolutely no complaints about her.
I can't underscore that enough. I went into the movie expecting that she was going to be the one low-point and I thought she was fantastic.
Many people are criticizing the level of villain in this film and that they just want to get to Thanos, but I thought the villains were suitably powerful, badass, and personal enough that I had no complaints there either.
Because of the comedy I think (which always felt natural and never wink-wink nudge-nudge to the audience), the level of intensity and fear/worry/build-up you have for the climax did not seem as incredible as say, in Captain America: The Winter Soldier.
Granted, Cap 2 is one of the best superhero movies of all-time and probably in my top 20 best movies of all time (if not higher), so that's not necessarily a fair comparison, but I wasn't overly worried in any particular scene, even when characters started dying.
The end-credit scene is not worth staying for unless for some reason you're a huge fan of obscure superhero movies from the 80s made by George Lucas. Maybe if it was a minute of credits, but GotG is the type of movie that you're not going to want to get up to use the restroom, so forcing 5 minutes of credits on an audience expecting an Avengers 2 tease for a hah-that-was-mildly-amusing-if-you-get-the-reference moment is the low-point of the entire movie.
Here's where I think it ranks amongst the current Marvel films.
1. Captain America: The Winter Soldier.
2. The Avengers
3. Iron Man
4. Captain America: The First Avenger5. Guardians of the Galaxy
6. Iron Man 3
7. Iron Man 2
8. The Incredible Hulk9. Thor
10. Thor: The Dark World* (haven't seen)
Note that I've enjoyed all of those movies. Only Thor and the Incredible Hulk were in the 7-out-of-10 range and that's still a movie that I enjoyed but don't really need to see again. The top 4 on the list are movies that I never get tired of watching and the other two Iron Mans are fantastic entries in the series and ones I don't mind rewatching.
I'm not going to go see GotG again in theaters (unless there are friends that want to go see it with me! anyone? anyone?) but I will definitely be purchasing it and watching it again once it's available.
If you remember the 80s or are aware of the culture from back then, I think it adds an entire dimension to the film, but even if you don't, it's just a fantastic time. This is how space-adventure should be done. Fun, exciting, grounded.
Now, if you include all Marvel films. Then the ranking is something like this:
1. Captain America: The Winter Soldier
2. The Avengers
3. The Amazing Spider-Man
4. Iron Man
5. Captain America: The First Avenger6. Guardians of the Galaxy
7. Iron Man 3
8. Iron Man 2
9. Spider-Man 2
10. X-Men: First Class
11. X-Men 2
12. Spider-Man
13. X-Men
14. Amazing Spider-Man 2
15. X-Men Origins: Wolverine
16. The Wolverine
17. Blade
18. Incredible Hulk
19. Daredevil
20. Thor
21. X-Men: Days of Future Past*
22. Blade 2
23. Thor: The Dark World*
24. Hulk
25. X-Men 3: X-Men United
26. Spider-Man 3
27. Blade 3
28. Fantastic Four
29. Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer
Note: I haven't seen the * movies, but I assume they are better than 22-29.
My favorite Marvel comic book characters going from most favorite to least favorite (not including unfavorites):
1. Spider-Man
2. Iron Man
3. Captain America
4. Black Cat
5. Gwen Stacy
6. Mary Jane Watson
7. Jean Grey
. . . wow, I guess I don't really have many favorites. And that's including villains! I'm probably forgetting some. . .
I loved the infusions of 70s and 80s Earth pop culture since that is the last bit of Earth that Chris Pratt's character knew (in the first 5 minutes he's abducted from Earth circa 1988).
It was an origin movie with a hefty amount of exposition, and was a bit slow and clunky to start off with, but after a certain point (about when the Guardians started to come together in the first 1/3 of the movie) I started smiling and didn't stop.
I don't think it's a Star Wars level film like people are saying, but at the same time, if you compare it one-to-one with Star Wars: A New Hope and not the trilogy as a whole . . .
It does many things amazingly. In no particular order:
Space.
Space Adventure.
Comedy.
Pop culture references.
Make-up and digital effects of characters (with the exception of Thanos who looks completely stupid and cheap, I hope he improves over the course of Phase 3).
Scenery and spacecraft.
Setting.
Soundtrack.
Action.
Character Relationships & Chemistry
Some of the best one-liners in recent movie history
Once you get into the movie, backstory of the characters is revealed in bits and pieces, with never taking too terribly long or distracting from the flow of the story.
People are saying Dave Bautista and Karen Gillan are low-points in the acting realm of the movie, but I thought they did fantastic. Drax the Destroyer (Bautista) is an alien that takes everything literally, so his reactions and deadpan were fitting and not (necessarily) a result of bad acting. They made his character so that his acting would not detract from it and I thought it was great. Gillan did better than she ever did on Doctor Who (where she was a regular disappointment to me in terms of acting) and her make-up and the effects of her character are some of the best in the movie. She didn't take me out of the movie at all and I had absolutely no complaints about her.
I can't underscore that enough. I went into the movie expecting that she was going to be the one low-point and I thought she was fantastic.
Many people are criticizing the level of villain in this film and that they just want to get to Thanos, but I thought the villains were suitably powerful, badass, and personal enough that I had no complaints there either.
Because of the comedy I think (which always felt natural and never wink-wink nudge-nudge to the audience), the level of intensity and fear/worry/build-up you have for the climax did not seem as incredible as say, in Captain America: The Winter Soldier.
Granted, Cap 2 is one of the best superhero movies of all-time and probably in my top 20 best movies of all time (if not higher), so that's not necessarily a fair comparison, but I wasn't overly worried in any particular scene, even when characters started dying.
The end-credit scene is not worth staying for unless for some reason you're a huge fan of obscure superhero movies from the 80s made by George Lucas. Maybe if it was a minute of credits, but GotG is the type of movie that you're not going to want to get up to use the restroom, so forcing 5 minutes of credits on an audience expecting an Avengers 2 tease for a hah-that-was-mildly-amusing-if-you-get-the-reference moment is the low-point of the entire movie.
Here's where I think it ranks amongst the current Marvel films.
1. Captain America: The Winter Soldier.
2. The Avengers
3. Iron Man
4. Captain America: The First Avenger5. Guardians of the Galaxy
6. Iron Man 3
7. Iron Man 2
8. The Incredible Hulk9. Thor
10. Thor: The Dark World* (haven't seen)
Note that I've enjoyed all of those movies. Only Thor and the Incredible Hulk were in the 7-out-of-10 range and that's still a movie that I enjoyed but don't really need to see again. The top 4 on the list are movies that I never get tired of watching and the other two Iron Mans are fantastic entries in the series and ones I don't mind rewatching.
I'm not going to go see GotG again in theaters (unless there are friends that want to go see it with me! anyone? anyone?) but I will definitely be purchasing it and watching it again once it's available.
If you remember the 80s or are aware of the culture from back then, I think it adds an entire dimension to the film, but even if you don't, it's just a fantastic time. This is how space-adventure should be done. Fun, exciting, grounded.
Now, if you include all Marvel films. Then the ranking is something like this:
1. Captain America: The Winter Soldier
2. The Avengers
3. The Amazing Spider-Man
4. Iron Man
5. Captain America: The First Avenger6. Guardians of the Galaxy
7. Iron Man 3
8. Iron Man 2
9. Spider-Man 2
10. X-Men: First Class
11. X-Men 2
12. Spider-Man
13. X-Men
14. Amazing Spider-Man 2
15. X-Men Origins: Wolverine
16. The Wolverine
17. Blade
18. Incredible Hulk
19. Daredevil
20. Thor
21. X-Men: Days of Future Past*
22. Blade 2
23. Thor: The Dark World*
24. Hulk
25. X-Men 3: X-Men United
26. Spider-Man 3
27. Blade 3
28. Fantastic Four
29. Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer
Note: I haven't seen the * movies, but I assume they are better than 22-29.
My favorite Marvel comic book characters going from most favorite to least favorite (not including unfavorites):
1. Spider-Man
2. Iron Man
3. Captain America
4. Black Cat
5. Gwen Stacy
6. Mary Jane Watson
7. Jean Grey
. . . wow, I guess I don't really have many favorites. And that's including villains! I'm probably forgetting some. . .
July 31, 2014
Continuing the Unpublishing.
In the process of unpublishing THE THRONE OF AO.
It's down on Smashwords and they say that it will take 2-3 weeks to remove completely from itunes, et al.
In the meantime, I went ahead and dropped the price to $2.99 on Amazon (probably won't take effect for 12 hours or so). In about a month, I'll remove it completely from Amazon's sites.
Why? When a new book is posted, I'll have some sort of special where previous purchasers can get the new book for free. Plus, lots and lots of people tell me that they'd buy the book if it wasn't so expensive, this is their last chance and so that it's not wasted, they can get a free new book out of it as well.
Here's the plan for those of you wondering:
Unpublish THE THRONE OF AO (rebranded as the abridged version) in future releases. (processing)
Publish Part 1 in the new expanded THRONE OF AO (optimistically early 2015, likely late 2015).
Publish Part 2 in the new expanded THRONE OF AO (optimistically late 2015, likely 2016).
Publish Part 3 in the new expanded THRONE OF AO (optimistically 2016, possibly as late as 2017).
Publish THE THRONE OF AO ULTIMATE EDITION containing the expanded trilogy, the original abridged version, character art, bestiary, notes on magick and more.
Since the ultimate edition isn't going to be out until the third part is out, I'll probably give previous purchasers the option of either getting the new Part 1 for free, a different title of mine for free, or waiting for the ultimate edition to get that for free.
I haven't been idle for the last two years Throne has been published, and there's more content than ever in War of the Ages, so there will be side stories, back stories and more released throughout this process (which I estimate will take 2-3 years before completely finished).
Part 1 will definitely not be out by Christmas 2014 however, so please don't get your hopes up for that (unless I hit the lottery and can afford to sit around every day writing).
Thank you for your patience with me as I develop as an author and your continued patronage.
It's down on Smashwords and they say that it will take 2-3 weeks to remove completely from itunes, et al.
In the meantime, I went ahead and dropped the price to $2.99 on Amazon (probably won't take effect for 12 hours or so). In about a month, I'll remove it completely from Amazon's sites.
Why? When a new book is posted, I'll have some sort of special where previous purchasers can get the new book for free. Plus, lots and lots of people tell me that they'd buy the book if it wasn't so expensive, this is their last chance and so that it's not wasted, they can get a free new book out of it as well.
Here's the plan for those of you wondering:
Unpublish THE THRONE OF AO (rebranded as the abridged version) in future releases. (processing)
Publish Part 1 in the new expanded THRONE OF AO (optimistically early 2015, likely late 2015).
Publish Part 2 in the new expanded THRONE OF AO (optimistically late 2015, likely 2016).
Publish Part 3 in the new expanded THRONE OF AO (optimistically 2016, possibly as late as 2017).
Publish THE THRONE OF AO ULTIMATE EDITION containing the expanded trilogy, the original abridged version, character art, bestiary, notes on magick and more.
Since the ultimate edition isn't going to be out until the third part is out, I'll probably give previous purchasers the option of either getting the new Part 1 for free, a different title of mine for free, or waiting for the ultimate edition to get that for free.
I haven't been idle for the last two years Throne has been published, and there's more content than ever in War of the Ages, so there will be side stories, back stories and more released throughout this process (which I estimate will take 2-3 years before completely finished).
Part 1 will definitely not be out by Christmas 2014 however, so please don't get your hopes up for that (unless I hit the lottery and can afford to sit around every day writing).
Thank you for your patience with me as I develop as an author and your continued patronage.
Quick Thoughts on Wonder Woman
So Wonder Woman is in the new Batman v. Superman movie (follow-up to Man of Steel).
I'm not particularly fond of DC in general, although I've always loved the non-comics versions of their properties I've consumed starting with Adam West and George Reeves reruns in the 80s and 90s and progressing to the present.
In my opinion, DC in general feels like it is less real than Marvel. I've always heard that "DC has the best storylines and Marvel has the best characters", but I've never seen any evidence of these best storylines.
Regardless, let's talk about the current Wonder Woman. There was some hubbub when Gal Gadot was cast as Wonder Woman, something about a lingerie model that can't act being cast as the most iconic female superhero warrior. There were additional comments about her being too slight to portray the Amazonian warrior. Personally, I was not particularly thrilled with the casting but I was willing to give her a chance. The entire property has me leery and I have next to no faith or confidence in anything from DC.
With the recent poster release, many have apparently abandoned their criticisms of Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman and even more are saying, "She looks ready to kick ass!"
I went another way. I took this poster as evidence of everything that people were worried about. First, here's the image:
A couple things.
(1) People are talking about her mobility like that is something that only a skirt can provide.
(2) She's wearing hooker boots.
(3) Completely sleeveless chest piece.
I understand DC has no grounds in reality, but we just came off the Dark Knight Trilogy which FELT like it was real. We're going toe-to-toe with Marvel which FEELS real. Then there's someone that looks like this.
I'm not going to overanalyze her attributes and complain about her being too sexy or whatever, I'm going to analyze her pose.
Has anyone tried mimicking this pose? If you haven't, try it right now.
Stand up, push your shoulders back, lock your knees and elbows completely straight. Now lift yourself on your toes all the way to mimic wearing the heels too. Do you feel badass?
Well you shouldn't. I understand this is a visual image and it's designed to be a visual image, but everyone's talking about how ready to kick ass this Wonder Woman is when in reality if you tried to take this stance in a dojo your teachers would immediately berate you and modify the stance.
This worries me, because it tells me that we're more concerned that Wonder Woman looks the part than she can play the part.
I don't want to overstate this. It's not like this is a scene taken from the movie. It could just be a "glamour shot" of Wonder Woman in which case, sure it makes some sort of sense to have her do a model pose and not a fighter's stance. But I'd still question having Wonder Woman appear so oversexed.
This poster seems to me to be evidence of everything the people that were worried about Wonder Woman being in the movie at all and Gal Gadot playing her feared. But at least it's just a poster. It could still be fine in the movie itself.
. . .
But I don't have faith in it.
I'm not particularly fond of DC in general, although I've always loved the non-comics versions of their properties I've consumed starting with Adam West and George Reeves reruns in the 80s and 90s and progressing to the present.
In my opinion, DC in general feels like it is less real than Marvel. I've always heard that "DC has the best storylines and Marvel has the best characters", but I've never seen any evidence of these best storylines.
Regardless, let's talk about the current Wonder Woman. There was some hubbub when Gal Gadot was cast as Wonder Woman, something about a lingerie model that can't act being cast as the most iconic female superhero warrior. There were additional comments about her being too slight to portray the Amazonian warrior. Personally, I was not particularly thrilled with the casting but I was willing to give her a chance. The entire property has me leery and I have next to no faith or confidence in anything from DC.
With the recent poster release, many have apparently abandoned their criticisms of Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman and even more are saying, "She looks ready to kick ass!"
I went another way. I took this poster as evidence of everything that people were worried about. First, here's the image:
A couple things.(1) People are talking about her mobility like that is something that only a skirt can provide.
(2) She's wearing hooker boots.
(3) Completely sleeveless chest piece.
I understand DC has no grounds in reality, but we just came off the Dark Knight Trilogy which FELT like it was real. We're going toe-to-toe with Marvel which FEELS real. Then there's someone that looks like this.
I'm not going to overanalyze her attributes and complain about her being too sexy or whatever, I'm going to analyze her pose.
Has anyone tried mimicking this pose? If you haven't, try it right now.
Stand up, push your shoulders back, lock your knees and elbows completely straight. Now lift yourself on your toes all the way to mimic wearing the heels too. Do you feel badass?
Well you shouldn't. I understand this is a visual image and it's designed to be a visual image, but everyone's talking about how ready to kick ass this Wonder Woman is when in reality if you tried to take this stance in a dojo your teachers would immediately berate you and modify the stance.
This worries me, because it tells me that we're more concerned that Wonder Woman looks the part than she can play the part.
I don't want to overstate this. It's not like this is a scene taken from the movie. It could just be a "glamour shot" of Wonder Woman in which case, sure it makes some sort of sense to have her do a model pose and not a fighter's stance. But I'd still question having Wonder Woman appear so oversexed.
This poster seems to me to be evidence of everything the people that were worried about Wonder Woman being in the movie at all and Gal Gadot playing her feared. But at least it's just a poster. It could still be fine in the movie itself.
. . .
But I don't have faith in it.
