Zero Angel Richardson's Blog, page 15
January 1, 2014
Stay away from ValuTime Coffee
Just in case anyone was at all curious, valu-time coffee is in no way an acceptable substitute for ANY type of coffee. It doesn't even taste like coffee. It doesn't even smell like coffee.
I'm not going to say it was terrible, because Satan is terrible, but it's right up there near that level, or maybe I should say down there. It's terrible-lite. Maybe not Satan terrible, but perhaps a Mephistopheles level of terrible-ness.
It's just bad, and not in a secretly awesome way. I mean tattoos are "bad" but that just means cool. Valu-time coffee is hot, but not in a sexually attracted to way, just in the temperature sense.
I suppose it probably has caffeine, so if you're in an end-of-the-world, post-apocalypse, there-are-no-more-coffee-plants-in-existence kind of situation, then I would recommend training yourself to function without caffeine because there is no reason why you should be drinking this.
December 22, 2013
O Holy Night
Another quick one today everyone and really, just a question.
In the South, do they only play the first verse of "O Holy Night"?
In the South, do they only play the first verse of "O Holy Night"?
Oh, holy night
The stars are brightly shining
It is the night of our dear Savior's birth
Long lay the world in sin and error pining
Till He appeared and the soul felt His worth
A thrill of hope the weary world rejoices
For yonder breaks a new and glorious morn
Fall on your knees
Oh, hear the Angel voices
Oh, night divine, oh, night
When Christ was born
Oh, night divine, oh, night
Oh, night divine
Chains shall He break for the slave is our brother
And in His name all oppression shall cease
Sweet hymns of joy in grateful chorus raise we
Let all within us praise His holy name
Christ is the Lord, let ever, ever praise Thee
Noel, Noel
Oh, night, oh, night divine
Noel, Noel
Oh, night, oh, night divine
Noel, Noel
Oh, night, oh, night divine
December 21, 2013
Little Drummer Boy: Now we know why Mary is the Queen of Grace
Just a small one today.
Can you imagine the grace and humility shown by Mary when confronted with the little drummer boy? Some dirty urchin with a drum comes in after she's given birth with Jesus laying in the hay and asks if he can play his drum for the BABY and she simply nods an acquiescence.
Note though, that not even for Mary, Mother of God, does it say that she SMILED and nodded. Just a nod. I guess even for her, that was too far out of reach.
It's even more absurd if you believe she gave birth to Jesus and was then immediately inundated with visitors.
Can you imagine the grace and humility shown by Mary when confronted with the little drummer boy? Some dirty urchin with a drum comes in after she's given birth with Jesus laying in the hay and asks if he can play his drum for the BABY and she simply nods an acquiescence.
Note though, that not even for Mary, Mother of God, does it say that she SMILED and nodded. Just a nod. I guess even for her, that was too far out of reach.
It's even more absurd if you believe she gave birth to Jesus and was then immediately inundated with visitors.
December 13, 2013
Review of Battle Royale — A Battle to the Death Between Children the Way It Should Be: Horrific
Battle Royale is not even in the same league as the Hunger Games. And by that, I mean Battle Royale is a million times better (and probably a million times cheaper and a million times less profitable...and no, none of those things were exaggerations).
Disclaimer: There may be bloody images of children in this blog post. If you thought that the Hunger Games was a shocking portrayal of children doing terrible things to each other, then Battle Royale may be too much for you.
Battle Royale takes an entire class of ninth graders (this is the year before high school in Japan), and pits them against one another in a battle to the death. If they disobey or try to escape, then an explosive device attached to their jugular goes off to bloody consequences.
Now, neither game exactly has a premise that makes any sense. Did they get food if they won the Hunger Games? Is that how that was supposed to work? It was never explained in the film (or maybe I was so bored I didn't notice). In Battle Royale, it's not clear if the game is supposed to be a yearly punishment or if it is supposed to be a preventative device. If the selection of the class was not random, but rather randomly selected from a pool of problem classrooms, then it would have made a lot more sense to me.
As it is, it appears to be just a very sadistic way to kill a bunch of children.
A lot of children:
Spoiler: Over 90% of these people die:
There are multiple warnings before the show begins stating that the program is not appropriate for children under 15. In Japan, I imagine that this would be similar to an R rating and if it was theatrically released in America, it may have even been an NC-17 film (and by may have, I'm pretty sure it would have. You can't really show kids dying violently and expect to keep an R).
There are a LOT of gory depictions of children-on-children violent and adult-on-children violence. There's even some children-on-adult violence thrown in there in the beginning.
There are guns, grenades, kama, explosives, swords, knives and more.
But, and this is where the film really shines, there is an incredible emotional core.
I don't know how you felt during the Hunger Games. I imagine that you probably read the book so you knew what all the characters were thinking and feeling. No matter how good Jennifer Lawrence did with her stoic representation of Katniss, the movie felt emotionally disconnected. It was devoid of any sort of intimacy and deliberately so. There was nothing between ANY of the characters.
In Battle Royale, you are hit over and over again with the fact that these kids grew up together (with a couple notable exceptions). Nearly every death has a sucker punch quality to it and each and every character of the class that we get more than a snapshot of time with is sympathetic, including the teachers.
It is also, a MUCH more realistic portrayal of how ninth graders and children might handle such a happening. There are many that cannot handle it, unlike in the Hunger Games where each individual bucks up and finds some never-say-die core inside.
Battle Royale is a stunning film that is all the more chilling for its contemporariness. I truly enjoyed the film and most of my complaints are mere nitpicks than true flaws.
The only sincere criticism I have is, as I mentioned, I wish the reasoning behind killing all the children would have been just slightly more solid. A few times it is mentioned they were selected entirely at random, but random punishment does not correct behavior, so it leaves a gap in reasoning for me. If the class had been selected out of a group of "bad" classes, then I would have no real criticism.
Also, it would have been nice to see a path for their society towards ending such a violent game (or conversely, towards complete destruction of society). As it was, the film appears to be a mere "day-in-the-life" of one particular Battle Royale.
Zero's Review: A-. Strongly recommended. A- for not being able to get past the reasoning for the games.
Here's the Amazon link:
P.S. It's in Japanese with subtitles. I believe there is a dub-track, but I did not bother with it. I heard that it is unintentionally humorous, so I'd stick with the native Japanese.
P.P.S. If you're curious about the Hunger Games comparison. There are a lot of people that believe the Hunger Games idea was a rip-off of Battle Royale. According to the author of HG, this isn't the case, but that's fine, because Battle Royale is better in almost every regard. Oh, I just found this: http://whatculture.com/film/10-reasons-the-hunger-games-isnt-a-rip-off-of-battle-royale.php Some of the points I've made already, but it is a point-by-point comparison of the two (spoiler: Battle Royale wins). So, that's cool.
P.P.P.S. If you like testimonials, Quentin Tarantino has said that this is his favorite movie made in the last 20 years and is the number one film that he wishes he had made since he started making movies.
Disclaimer: There may be bloody images of children in this blog post. If you thought that the Hunger Games was a shocking portrayal of children doing terrible things to each other, then Battle Royale may be too much for you.Battle Royale takes an entire class of ninth graders (this is the year before high school in Japan), and pits them against one another in a battle to the death. If they disobey or try to escape, then an explosive device attached to their jugular goes off to bloody consequences.
Now, neither game exactly has a premise that makes any sense. Did they get food if they won the Hunger Games? Is that how that was supposed to work? It was never explained in the film (or maybe I was so bored I didn't notice). In Battle Royale, it's not clear if the game is supposed to be a yearly punishment or if it is supposed to be a preventative device. If the selection of the class was not random, but rather randomly selected from a pool of problem classrooms, then it would have made a lot more sense to me.
As it is, it appears to be just a very sadistic way to kill a bunch of children.
A lot of children:
Spoiler: Over 90% of these people die:
There are multiple warnings before the show begins stating that the program is not appropriate for children under 15. In Japan, I imagine that this would be similar to an R rating and if it was theatrically released in America, it may have even been an NC-17 film (and by may have, I'm pretty sure it would have. You can't really show kids dying violently and expect to keep an R).
There are a LOT of gory depictions of children-on-children violent and adult-on-children violence. There's even some children-on-adult violence thrown in there in the beginning.
There are guns, grenades, kama, explosives, swords, knives and more.
But, and this is where the film really shines, there is an incredible emotional core.
I don't know how you felt during the Hunger Games. I imagine that you probably read the book so you knew what all the characters were thinking and feeling. No matter how good Jennifer Lawrence did with her stoic representation of Katniss, the movie felt emotionally disconnected. It was devoid of any sort of intimacy and deliberately so. There was nothing between ANY of the characters.
In Battle Royale, you are hit over and over again with the fact that these kids grew up together (with a couple notable exceptions). Nearly every death has a sucker punch quality to it and each and every character of the class that we get more than a snapshot of time with is sympathetic, including the teachers.
It is also, a MUCH more realistic portrayal of how ninth graders and children might handle such a happening. There are many that cannot handle it, unlike in the Hunger Games where each individual bucks up and finds some never-say-die core inside.
Battle Royale is a stunning film that is all the more chilling for its contemporariness. I truly enjoyed the film and most of my complaints are mere nitpicks than true flaws.
The only sincere criticism I have is, as I mentioned, I wish the reasoning behind killing all the children would have been just slightly more solid. A few times it is mentioned they were selected entirely at random, but random punishment does not correct behavior, so it leaves a gap in reasoning for me. If the class had been selected out of a group of "bad" classes, then I would have no real criticism.
Also, it would have been nice to see a path for their society towards ending such a violent game (or conversely, towards complete destruction of society). As it was, the film appears to be a mere "day-in-the-life" of one particular Battle Royale.
Zero's Review: A-. Strongly recommended. A- for not being able to get past the reasoning for the games.
Here's the Amazon link:
P.S. It's in Japanese with subtitles. I believe there is a dub-track, but I did not bother with it. I heard that it is unintentionally humorous, so I'd stick with the native Japanese.
P.P.S. If you're curious about the Hunger Games comparison. There are a lot of people that believe the Hunger Games idea was a rip-off of Battle Royale. According to the author of HG, this isn't the case, but that's fine, because Battle Royale is better in almost every regard. Oh, I just found this: http://whatculture.com/film/10-reasons-the-hunger-games-isnt-a-rip-off-of-battle-royale.php Some of the points I've made already, but it is a point-by-point comparison of the two (spoiler: Battle Royale wins). So, that's cool.
P.P.P.S. If you like testimonials, Quentin Tarantino has said that this is his favorite movie made in the last 20 years and is the number one film that he wishes he had made since he started making movies.
December 11, 2013
Chibi Vampire: The Manga Formerly Known as Karin
I'm not complaining about the choice to change the name of "Karin" to "Chibi Vampire" for its American release. If it wasn't for that, I probably would have never read the books. I find it hard to pass up a cute vampire story however, so here we are.
Chibi Vampire is a 14-volume manga series written by Yuna Kagesaki and released by TokyoPop (so that means it's out of print now). Luckily, Amazon's to the rescue. Here is the link to all the books in the series through a variety of Amazon sellers:
Chibi Vampire on Amazon.com
Sorry about the lack of a picture, it's a search page link so no pictures. Here's one of the first cover:
The eponymous Karin is a reverse vampire whose blood fills to overflowing whenever she is around someone unhappy and must bite and inject her blood instead of stealing it from the owner.
All the vampires in this story are attracted to people with blood of a certain sort and whenever that blood is drained or injected as the case may be, instead of rising as undead horrors, whatever malady attracted the vampire to them in the first place (unhappiness, liars, stress, loneliness, etc) is temporarily vanished (pretty much like someone who's been heart-broken in Ni no Kuni: Rise of the White Witch, except here it's only temporary).
I really enjoyed most things in this series, but Kenta Usui really stands out as not being a douchebag male lead, in spite of having a rather uninspired character design (which nevertheless provides some humor throughout the series as most characters make fun of his beady eyes):
I know I've said that already, but it's pretty absurd how bad male characters usually are in anime and manga like this. Either they're a jerk that the female leads fall for (because of his jerkiness of course, err...I mean his sensitive core that he doesn't share with everyone...because he's such a jerk), they're kind-hearted but hopelessly inept and clumsy, or he's a raging pervert that people say is kind-hearted in spite of his raging perviness.
Here we have an upstanding citizen of a character that may not always make the right choices, but he definitely works hard and doesn't expect good fortune to magickally come his way. It's refreshing.
Actually though, Karin is inept and clumsy and her embarrassments are off the chart. So although we have a relatively well-adjusted male lead, the female lead makes up for it. She gets embarrassed over practically everything, but apparently this is a moe? She's a cute girl in personality, actions and appearance, and it is a little frustrating some of the situations she gets thrown into because of her embarrassment, but I suppose that's one of the driving plot points.
The images above are both from the anime, which I have not gotten a chance to see (and probably won't as it's a whopping $140 on Amazon.com), but the character designs are basically unchanged.
Her relationship with her family is interesting and it's nice to see the stress placed on them to take care of the aberrant Karin and how this affects her interactions with them.
After the first story arc is completed (satisfactorily, by the way), the series starts to lose its way, but by this time you've probably become addicted to the characters and are very interested in how they are going to move forward. An apparently planned prophecy comes forward to explain the aberrant and external conflict ensues to throw a monkey wrench into everything.
I say, apparently planned because the mangaka stated at the end that she had planned the end from the beginning, but it seems sudden and not really hinted at all in the first story arc of the series. By the end, your emotional investment does pay off and you are rewarded with both happy and sad endings.
As an aside, there are side stories released as novels. I've read through the first four and have access to one more so I plan on reading that as well, but as side stories they can't ever really do anything to advance the plot, and their plots rarely show up as more than a cameo or an aside in the manga. They're all interesting once you're hooked on the characters, but I felt their formulaic add-a-character-or-two-with-their-own-issues-for-a-plot-that-the-characters-of-the-manga-can-experience-without-moving-forward-their-own-plot tiring by the end of the fourth.
In fact, by the third, I was somewhat surprised that it was still being used. Apparently, there are 8 or 9 of these novels (similarly out-of-print, but an Amazon search will turn up most).
I really enjoyed these characters, and even the secondary vampire characters making up her family. Anju shines especially (and clearly on purpose), but by the end of the series the connection between them all is as apparent as it is between any family and was very touching.
Anju
Everything from Karin's relationship with her childhood friend, Maki, the burgeoning relationship between Kenta and Karin, Karin's family relationship, Kenta's family relationship, the economical duress experienced by Kenta especially, all of it; it was very well done. Impressive even. The relationships were great.
There was a lot of room left open for a sequel, but this apparently isn't even being discussed. Not that I have faith that they could pull it off. I think most creators do very well with their first run, but the longer they try to pump a creation the less it becomes. I would love to see additions to this tale, or even the tale retold with some of my pet peeves taken care of and I may go try to explore and see if there are any good fanfictions of it, but I truly enjoyed my time with Chibi Vampire and would recommend it to anyone that enjoys manga, especially supernatural romantic comedy/drama manga.
B+
Note: Images belong to their respective owners are not in any way property of myself. If I get around to some fan-art, I'll be sure to post though!
Chibi Vampire is a 14-volume manga series written by Yuna Kagesaki and released by TokyoPop (so that means it's out of print now). Luckily, Amazon's to the rescue. Here is the link to all the books in the series through a variety of Amazon sellers:
Chibi Vampire on Amazon.com
Sorry about the lack of a picture, it's a search page link so no pictures. Here's one of the first cover:
The eponymous Karin is a reverse vampire whose blood fills to overflowing whenever she is around someone unhappy and must bite and inject her blood instead of stealing it from the owner.
All the vampires in this story are attracted to people with blood of a certain sort and whenever that blood is drained or injected as the case may be, instead of rising as undead horrors, whatever malady attracted the vampire to them in the first place (unhappiness, liars, stress, loneliness, etc) is temporarily vanished (pretty much like someone who's been heart-broken in Ni no Kuni: Rise of the White Witch, except here it's only temporary).
I really enjoyed most things in this series, but Kenta Usui really stands out as not being a douchebag male lead, in spite of having a rather uninspired character design (which nevertheless provides some humor throughout the series as most characters make fun of his beady eyes):
I know I've said that already, but it's pretty absurd how bad male characters usually are in anime and manga like this. Either they're a jerk that the female leads fall for (because of his jerkiness of course, err...I mean his sensitive core that he doesn't share with everyone...because he's such a jerk), they're kind-hearted but hopelessly inept and clumsy, or he's a raging pervert that people say is kind-hearted in spite of his raging perviness.Here we have an upstanding citizen of a character that may not always make the right choices, but he definitely works hard and doesn't expect good fortune to magickally come his way. It's refreshing.
Actually though, Karin is inept and clumsy and her embarrassments are off the chart. So although we have a relatively well-adjusted male lead, the female lead makes up for it. She gets embarrassed over practically everything, but apparently this is a moe? She's a cute girl in personality, actions and appearance, and it is a little frustrating some of the situations she gets thrown into because of her embarrassment, but I suppose that's one of the driving plot points.
The images above are both from the anime, which I have not gotten a chance to see (and probably won't as it's a whopping $140 on Amazon.com), but the character designs are basically unchanged.Her relationship with her family is interesting and it's nice to see the stress placed on them to take care of the aberrant Karin and how this affects her interactions with them.
After the first story arc is completed (satisfactorily, by the way), the series starts to lose its way, but by this time you've probably become addicted to the characters and are very interested in how they are going to move forward. An apparently planned prophecy comes forward to explain the aberrant and external conflict ensues to throw a monkey wrench into everything.
I say, apparently planned because the mangaka stated at the end that she had planned the end from the beginning, but it seems sudden and not really hinted at all in the first story arc of the series. By the end, your emotional investment does pay off and you are rewarded with both happy and sad endings.
As an aside, there are side stories released as novels. I've read through the first four and have access to one more so I plan on reading that as well, but as side stories they can't ever really do anything to advance the plot, and their plots rarely show up as more than a cameo or an aside in the manga. They're all interesting once you're hooked on the characters, but I felt their formulaic add-a-character-or-two-with-their-own-issues-for-a-plot-that-the-characters-of-the-manga-can-experience-without-moving-forward-their-own-plot tiring by the end of the fourth.
In fact, by the third, I was somewhat surprised that it was still being used. Apparently, there are 8 or 9 of these novels (similarly out-of-print, but an Amazon search will turn up most).
I really enjoyed these characters, and even the secondary vampire characters making up her family. Anju shines especially (and clearly on purpose), but by the end of the series the connection between them all is as apparent as it is between any family and was very touching.
AnjuEverything from Karin's relationship with her childhood friend, Maki, the burgeoning relationship between Kenta and Karin, Karin's family relationship, Kenta's family relationship, the economical duress experienced by Kenta especially, all of it; it was very well done. Impressive even. The relationships were great.
There was a lot of room left open for a sequel, but this apparently isn't even being discussed. Not that I have faith that they could pull it off. I think most creators do very well with their first run, but the longer they try to pump a creation the less it becomes. I would love to see additions to this tale, or even the tale retold with some of my pet peeves taken care of and I may go try to explore and see if there are any good fanfictions of it, but I truly enjoyed my time with Chibi Vampire and would recommend it to anyone that enjoys manga, especially supernatural romantic comedy/drama manga.
B+
Note: Images belong to their respective owners are not in any way property of myself. If I get around to some fan-art, I'll be sure to post though!
December 7, 2013
Why Math Teachers Need Real Analysis and Abstract Algebra
A common complaint heard by anyone that hangs out with future math teachers is, "When are we ever going to use this?"
Only it's not their students that are saying this, it's the teachers themselves complaining about the classes of Real Analysis and Abstract Algebra.
And yes, I believe the irony is lost on them.
Depending on the institution, there may be a transitional course between calculus 3 and real & abstract. This course may have a title such as "transitional math" or "foundations of math" or "discrete math", but it's basically just a getting-your-feet-wet course and not the intense introduction to actual mathematics that real and abstract are.
And yet these future enthusiasts of mathematics, these people supposed to guide our children to be the next generation of mathematicians and scientists, are repelled by these courses like Dracula is by a crucifix.
To describe these courses a little more without delving too deep into jargon or a technical discussion, real analysis is basically the course that explains how everything in calculus 1 and 2 work, while abstract algebra is basically the course that explains how algebra works.
Like, ACTUALLY explains it, not just handing it down from on high or saying, "the proof of this is beyond the scope of this course." Those are the courses whose scope includes the proofs that were once-upon-a-time beyond the scope of the courses you took as underclassmen.
And yet future teachers of algebra and calculus balk at the mere thought of these courses worse than the rookiest of rookie pitchers.
There are many reasons why math teachers NEED Real Analysis and Abstract Algebra, and in no particular order, here are 10:
A math teacher needs to understand actual mathematics.Teachers should know at least one level beyond what they teach their students (if you're teaching high school, you should know college mathematics: i.e. Real Analysis and Abstract Algebra). Math teachers serve as advisors to students and need to be able to advise those that might actually enjoy mathematics. Real Analysis explains how calculus works. Abstract Algebra explains how algebra works. Mathematics before Real & Abstract (from now on, I'll just say R&A) can be thought of as "cookbook" mathematics that requires no actual thinking. Follow the recipe and get the answer without ever understanding what you're doing. Curriculum writers without understanding of R&A struggle and fail at writing and re-writing the curriculum of high school level classes. Number Theory requires R&A, which is the course that explains arithmetic (so you should take that too).Teachers should not be a cliche: "Those that can, do; those that can't, teach."A math teacher should love mathematics, and saying you love math without loving R&A is like saying you're in love with a girl you saw at a bus stop once. Don't be so superficial.What are your thoughts? I plan to update this list with more reasons why as I work through future sections of Zero Angel's Mathematics (since yes, I do use and incorporate Real Analysis, Abstract Algebra and Number Theory into those books).
Only it's not their students that are saying this, it's the teachers themselves complaining about the classes of Real Analysis and Abstract Algebra.
And yes, I believe the irony is lost on them.
Depending on the institution, there may be a transitional course between calculus 3 and real & abstract. This course may have a title such as "transitional math" or "foundations of math" or "discrete math", but it's basically just a getting-your-feet-wet course and not the intense introduction to actual mathematics that real and abstract are.
And yet these future enthusiasts of mathematics, these people supposed to guide our children to be the next generation of mathematicians and scientists, are repelled by these courses like Dracula is by a crucifix.
To describe these courses a little more without delving too deep into jargon or a technical discussion, real analysis is basically the course that explains how everything in calculus 1 and 2 work, while abstract algebra is basically the course that explains how algebra works.
Like, ACTUALLY explains it, not just handing it down from on high or saying, "the proof of this is beyond the scope of this course." Those are the courses whose scope includes the proofs that were once-upon-a-time beyond the scope of the courses you took as underclassmen.
And yet future teachers of algebra and calculus balk at the mere thought of these courses worse than the rookiest of rookie pitchers.
There are many reasons why math teachers NEED Real Analysis and Abstract Algebra, and in no particular order, here are 10:
A math teacher needs to understand actual mathematics.Teachers should know at least one level beyond what they teach their students (if you're teaching high school, you should know college mathematics: i.e. Real Analysis and Abstract Algebra). Math teachers serve as advisors to students and need to be able to advise those that might actually enjoy mathematics. Real Analysis explains how calculus works. Abstract Algebra explains how algebra works. Mathematics before Real & Abstract (from now on, I'll just say R&A) can be thought of as "cookbook" mathematics that requires no actual thinking. Follow the recipe and get the answer without ever understanding what you're doing. Curriculum writers without understanding of R&A struggle and fail at writing and re-writing the curriculum of high school level classes. Number Theory requires R&A, which is the course that explains arithmetic (so you should take that too).Teachers should not be a cliche: "Those that can, do; those that can't, teach."A math teacher should love mathematics, and saying you love math without loving R&A is like saying you're in love with a girl you saw at a bus stop once. Don't be so superficial.What are your thoughts? I plan to update this list with more reasons why as I work through future sections of Zero Angel's Mathematics (since yes, I do use and incorporate Real Analysis, Abstract Algebra and Number Theory into those books).
I Saw Mommy Kissing Santa Claus: the Horror
Or should that be whore?
Is the reason this kid gets such good presents from Santa because his mother is dealing on the side?
This is one of my least favorite Christmas carols and the way I see it there are really only two ways to take it:
The mother is kissing the kid's father, who is dressed up as Santa Claus. The mother is kissing actual Santa Claus.Either way, this is one messed-up song.
Why is this guy dressed up as Santa? Is it to give the kid a chance to have a Christmas experience he may never forget? If so, then why is he kissing his wife as Santa?? Is it a test for the kid? Is he testing to see if the kid loves his mom, presents and Santa more than he loves his father? What kind of twisted individual tests their children like this?
I'll tell you, the kind of twisted individual that dresses up in Santa suits to steal kisses from mothers.
But wait, there's another side here, and one the lyrics even supports. The kid says that they DIDN'T KNOW HE WAS THERE.
So here we have the kid's mom having some sort of Santa fetish and satisfying it, all the while the peeping tom of a child is gawking and laughing away.
And the kid is a cruel jerk as well. Let's look at option (2).
The mom is kissing Santa Claus, the real Santa Claus. Both parties here are married and have other obligations, and from the kid's own lyrics, it is not necessarily an innocent kiss. He even laughs at the thought of his father being cuckolded by his tramp of a mother.
We can't put all the blame on the mom however. Santa is supposed to be incorruptible, but now there is a darkness about him. Is this the real reason he delivers presents on Christmas Eve? Are only the households with cheating moms the households that get presents from the real Santa? Is it all some sort of dastardly scheme?
And look at his image that he's cultivated before all. He comes off as being some perfect person. He probably let's the mothers think they are seducing him and that they are the one that are corrupting him, when all along it's part of his evil plan to steal the stockings off of the mothers of the world by parting some cheap wooden toy horse.
And now we come to the test of loyalty for the child, but he fails this miserably. Regardless of whether it's (1) or (2), whether it is Santa or the child's father, the kid THINKS it is Santa, and his reaction? To laugh at the thought of his cuckold father.
No, it's worse. To wish his father was THERE TO SEE THE CUCKOLDING.
What a perverse, horrible tune about a sick, twisted family.
Is the reason this kid gets such good presents from Santa because his mother is dealing on the side?
This is one of my least favorite Christmas carols and the way I see it there are really only two ways to take it:
The mother is kissing the kid's father, who is dressed up as Santa Claus. The mother is kissing actual Santa Claus.Either way, this is one messed-up song.
Why is this guy dressed up as Santa? Is it to give the kid a chance to have a Christmas experience he may never forget? If so, then why is he kissing his wife as Santa?? Is it a test for the kid? Is he testing to see if the kid loves his mom, presents and Santa more than he loves his father? What kind of twisted individual tests their children like this?
I'll tell you, the kind of twisted individual that dresses up in Santa suits to steal kisses from mothers.
But wait, there's another side here, and one the lyrics even supports. The kid says that they DIDN'T KNOW HE WAS THERE.
So here we have the kid's mom having some sort of Santa fetish and satisfying it, all the while the peeping tom of a child is gawking and laughing away.
And the kid is a cruel jerk as well. Let's look at option (2).
The mom is kissing Santa Claus, the real Santa Claus. Both parties here are married and have other obligations, and from the kid's own lyrics, it is not necessarily an innocent kiss. He even laughs at the thought of his father being cuckolded by his tramp of a mother.
We can't put all the blame on the mom however. Santa is supposed to be incorruptible, but now there is a darkness about him. Is this the real reason he delivers presents on Christmas Eve? Are only the households with cheating moms the households that get presents from the real Santa? Is it all some sort of dastardly scheme?
And look at his image that he's cultivated before all. He comes off as being some perfect person. He probably let's the mothers think they are seducing him and that they are the one that are corrupting him, when all along it's part of his evil plan to steal the stockings off of the mothers of the world by parting some cheap wooden toy horse.
And now we come to the test of loyalty for the child, but he fails this miserably. Regardless of whether it's (1) or (2), whether it is Santa or the child's father, the kid THINKS it is Santa, and his reaction? To laugh at the thought of his cuckold father.
No, it's worse. To wish his father was THERE TO SEE THE CUCKOLDING.
What a perverse, horrible tune about a sick, twisted family.
December 6, 2013
I Hate Tolkien's Lord of the Rings
This fact has been a defining characteristic of my own writing since I first read LotR in middle school.
I mean, he just can't shut up.
Reading LotR is like sitting down with an old grandfather and listening to him try to tell the greatest story in his sizable repertoire, but getting distracted with all the sidelong bits and speaking at length about each and every place the story comes to.
And when I say, "at length", I mean, AT LENGTH. Presently, LotR is a little over 1000 pages in length, but if it were written in the style of today, it would probably clock in around 400 pages. (If I wrote an abridged version, I could probably get it to 300 without undue difficulty and without leaving off ANY of the plot or character development).
I honestly do not believe LotR would be published today, even ignoring all the conventions that were established in LotR that have become cliche by now.
It's too unwieldy. It's a sledgehammer of a book.
Yet, when it's all said and done, that old grandfather telling the story is the greatest storyteller to have ever lived, and it's the greatest story in all his sizable repertoire.
For the impatient and the ADHD, the books are incomprehensible drivel. Incomprehensible drivel that should go down (if it has not already) as one of the greatest achievements in writing of all time.
The Lord of the Rings is myth made real.
More than any fantasy I've ever read (and I've read hundreds), the LotR shares an incredible story from a world more tangible than our own.
Any world-builder to attempt creation on the scope and mastery of Tolkien are a pale shadow of his genius.
How I loth LotR.
Can he ever stay on point?
Can we get SOME level of character development from anyone besides Frodo, Sam and Gandalf in the first 300 pages?
When reading the LotR I find myself skipping entire passages that do nothing to advance the plot or develop the characters. It reads as a travel-book to Middle-Earth would.
I find myself skipping those passages to my detriment however, for although skipping them improves the story, it steals from the experience that is the Lord of the Rings.
Reading the LotR with a patient, focused mind is one of the most amazing experiences a lover of the fantastic can experience.
It is a journey to another world more than any work ever could be.
It is the definitive world-building and, more so, the definitive world-exploring experience.
Awe and wonder over this world fill every page.
10/10. A+. Must-read.
I mean, he just can't shut up.
Reading LotR is like sitting down with an old grandfather and listening to him try to tell the greatest story in his sizable repertoire, but getting distracted with all the sidelong bits and speaking at length about each and every place the story comes to.
And when I say, "at length", I mean, AT LENGTH. Presently, LotR is a little over 1000 pages in length, but if it were written in the style of today, it would probably clock in around 400 pages. (If I wrote an abridged version, I could probably get it to 300 without undue difficulty and without leaving off ANY of the plot or character development).
I honestly do not believe LotR would be published today, even ignoring all the conventions that were established in LotR that have become cliche by now.
It's too unwieldy. It's a sledgehammer of a book.
Yet, when it's all said and done, that old grandfather telling the story is the greatest storyteller to have ever lived, and it's the greatest story in all his sizable repertoire.
For the impatient and the ADHD, the books are incomprehensible drivel. Incomprehensible drivel that should go down (if it has not already) as one of the greatest achievements in writing of all time.
The Lord of the Rings is myth made real.
More than any fantasy I've ever read (and I've read hundreds), the LotR shares an incredible story from a world more tangible than our own.
Any world-builder to attempt creation on the scope and mastery of Tolkien are a pale shadow of his genius.
How I loth LotR.
Can he ever stay on point?
Can we get SOME level of character development from anyone besides Frodo, Sam and Gandalf in the first 300 pages?
When reading the LotR I find myself skipping entire passages that do nothing to advance the plot or develop the characters. It reads as a travel-book to Middle-Earth would.
I find myself skipping those passages to my detriment however, for although skipping them improves the story, it steals from the experience that is the Lord of the Rings.
Reading the LotR with a patient, focused mind is one of the most amazing experiences a lover of the fantastic can experience.
It is a journey to another world more than any work ever could be.
It is the definitive world-building and, more so, the definitive world-exploring experience.
Awe and wonder over this world fill every page.
10/10. A+. Must-read.
December 3, 2013
Do You Hear What I Hear? ...A snitch
Here's part 2 of my Christmas Carol Rants series of blog posts! This time around, dedicated to "Do You Hear What I Hear?"
You can read part 1 here: "Baby It's Cold Outside".
Disclaimer: This is a rant about a popular Christmas carol. You may not be able to enjoy this Christmas carol again after some of the things you'll read.
Note: I still enjoy most of these Christmas carols even though I find parts of them absurd.
At first, DYHWIH sounds like nothing more than the worst game of Telephone ever.
Seriously, they go from the story being that there's a star, then it's a song, then it's a child, then the child is the savior of the world. Lost in translation much?
So we have this shepherd boy that can speak and understand animals, but somehow is able to get an audience with the king. I imagine he is able to do so strictly because of his animal whispering talents.
So Dr. Doolittle takes his story straight to the king to tell him all about the child shivering in the cold, and he is arrogant beyond belief. Or at least, that's how he comes off to me. Here's this peasant that does nothing more than herd sheep, with this AMAZING talent, but what does he do with this talent? Herd sheep! Some people have no ambition in life...but in spite of having no ambition, he sure puts the warm, mighty king in place. Letting the king know that he doesn't know as much as some pissant peasant.
It's OK though, because the shepherd boy is apparently a dullard. His solution to the child being cold is to bring him silver and gold. Because THAT will make him warm. WAIT! MAYBE HE'S YUKON CORNELIUS!
Image Taken from http://christmas-specials.wikia.com/wiki/Yukon_Cornelius
But wait, there's more. Search your mind for what KING this peasant child could possibly have gained an audience with.
WAS IT HEROD THAT YOU'RE TELLING ABOUT THE CHILD SHIVERING IN THE COLD?
HASN'T ANYONE EVER TOLD YOU THAT SNITCHES GET STITCHES LITTLE SHEPHERD BOY?!
So the Massacre of the Holy Innocents wasn't the Magi's fault, it was this moron's!
At least we got the Coventry Carol out of it I suppose:
Although that doesn't have quite the same feel as DYHWIH as sung by Carrie Underwood:
So that's enough ranting for now about this particular carol. Did I miss anything that drives you mad about this tune?
Next time I may tackle "I Saw Mommy Kissing Santa Claus", but there are so many things I can't stand about that song that it will be a long one.
Here's the lyrics as posted by A to Z lyrics for Carrie Underwood's version:
Said the night wind to the little lamb
Do you see what I see
Way up in the sky little lamb
Do you see what I see
A star, a star
Dancing in the night
With a tail as big as a kite
With a tail as big as a kite
Said the little lamb to the shepherd boy
Do you hear what I hear
(do you hear what I hear)
Ringing through the sky shepherd boy
Do you hear what I hear
(do hear what I hear)
A song, a song
High above the trees
With a voice as big as the sea
With a voice as big as the sea
Said the shepherd boy to the mighty king
Do you know what I know
(do you know what I know)
In your palace warm mighty king
Do you know what I know
(do you know what I know)
A child, a child
Shivers in the cold
Let us bring him silver and gold
Let us bring him silver and gold
Said the king to the people everywhere
Listen to what I say
( Listen to what I say)
Pray for peace people everywhere
Listen to what I say
(listen to what I say)
The child, the child
Sleeping in the night
He will bring us goodness and light
He will bring us goodness and light
He will bring us goodness and light
You can read part 1 here: "Baby It's Cold Outside".
Disclaimer: This is a rant about a popular Christmas carol. You may not be able to enjoy this Christmas carol again after some of the things you'll read.
Note: I still enjoy most of these Christmas carols even though I find parts of them absurd.
At first, DYHWIH sounds like nothing more than the worst game of Telephone ever.
Seriously, they go from the story being that there's a star, then it's a song, then it's a child, then the child is the savior of the world. Lost in translation much?
So we have this shepherd boy that can speak and understand animals, but somehow is able to get an audience with the king. I imagine he is able to do so strictly because of his animal whispering talents.
So Dr. Doolittle takes his story straight to the king to tell him all about the child shivering in the cold, and he is arrogant beyond belief. Or at least, that's how he comes off to me. Here's this peasant that does nothing more than herd sheep, with this AMAZING talent, but what does he do with this talent? Herd sheep! Some people have no ambition in life...but in spite of having no ambition, he sure puts the warm, mighty king in place. Letting the king know that he doesn't know as much as some pissant peasant.
It's OK though, because the shepherd boy is apparently a dullard. His solution to the child being cold is to bring him silver and gold. Because THAT will make him warm. WAIT! MAYBE HE'S YUKON CORNELIUS!
Image Taken from http://christmas-specials.wikia.com/wiki/Yukon_Cornelius But wait, there's more. Search your mind for what KING this peasant child could possibly have gained an audience with.
WAS IT HEROD THAT YOU'RE TELLING ABOUT THE CHILD SHIVERING IN THE COLD?
HASN'T ANYONE EVER TOLD YOU THAT SNITCHES GET STITCHES LITTLE SHEPHERD BOY?!
So the Massacre of the Holy Innocents wasn't the Magi's fault, it was this moron's!
At least we got the Coventry Carol out of it I suppose:
Although that doesn't have quite the same feel as DYHWIH as sung by Carrie Underwood:
So that's enough ranting for now about this particular carol. Did I miss anything that drives you mad about this tune?
Next time I may tackle "I Saw Mommy Kissing Santa Claus", but there are so many things I can't stand about that song that it will be a long one.
Here's the lyrics as posted by A to Z lyrics for Carrie Underwood's version:
Said the night wind to the little lamb
Do you see what I see
Way up in the sky little lamb
Do you see what I see
A star, a star
Dancing in the night
With a tail as big as a kite
With a tail as big as a kite
Said the little lamb to the shepherd boy
Do you hear what I hear
(do you hear what I hear)
Ringing through the sky shepherd boy
Do you hear what I hear
(do hear what I hear)
A song, a song
High above the trees
With a voice as big as the sea
With a voice as big as the sea
Said the shepherd boy to the mighty king
Do you know what I know
(do you know what I know)
In your palace warm mighty king
Do you know what I know
(do you know what I know)
A child, a child
Shivers in the cold
Let us bring him silver and gold
Let us bring him silver and gold
Said the king to the people everywhere
Listen to what I say
( Listen to what I say)
Pray for peace people everywhere
Listen to what I say
(listen to what I say)
The child, the child
Sleeping in the night
He will bring us goodness and light
He will bring us goodness and light
He will bring us goodness and light
November 24, 2013
The Day of the Doctor Review and Analysis (Spoiler-ful): Including comments on BBCA ruining it
I thoroughly enjoyed The Day of the Doctor, but I have some complaints, mostly about how BBC America really went out of their way to ruin the viewing experience.
Here's the Amazon link:
Hey, you can watch it in 3D if you have a 3D TV
Warning: This post will contain content that can lead to spoilers and outright spoilers of the show, so please do not continue reading if you want to have a spoiler-free experience. Please read my spoiler-free review if you want to get a gauge of the show before you watch.
I'll go back and re-watch the pre-show tomorrow so I can pinpoint the exact jag-off that ruined the show for me, but saying something along the lines of "now we know there is no canon" or "everything can change" before watching a show ostensibly about the worst day of the Doctor's life...
Well, with those words it was impossible for the ending to be any different. To be fair, it didn't spoil it until I watched more than 5 minutes of the episode. But I still count that as a spoiler. I knew I should have turned off the TV when I saw the countdown to the show.
Maybe if it wasn't for those words, I could have had the emotional response that the creators were going for with the three Doctors about to destroy Gallifrey together with the big-red button.
As it was, that scene ALMOST got me there, so I think if I didn't know from the EFFING JERKOFFs before the show, that it could have been great.
Another thing I have to say: the commercials were insane.
I realize that it was broadcast earlier in the day and that it was only 1 hour and 20 minutes long. Well, when I watched it, it was during a 2 hour block, so that means there were 40 minutes of commercials. That means that for every 2 minutes of show, there was 1 minute of commercial. It was stupid.
It just disgusts me that BBCA did this in what should have been one of the greatest Doctor Who experiences of all-time.
The show itself was fantastic, although apparently there is some controversy over whether the War Doctor regenerated into the 10th Doctor or if he regenerated into some other pre-10th or even went backwards to the 8th Doctor again. (by the way, David Tennant's Doctor is now the 11th Doctor and Matt Smith's is the 12th. I get annoyed by people continuing to refer to them as 10 and 11. We're coming up on lucky 13).
I'm pretty sure that we saw the 8th Doctor's final days in the fantastic short "Night of the Doctor", included here:
He's gone now. I would enjoy seeing more of this Doctor, but he won't be coming back (at least not in a strict, natural progression of time manner), although it is notable that the actor did a good job, and that it appears that he regenerated into a young John Hurt, so the War Doctor had been fighting the Time War for quite a while since Matt Smith has lived 400 years and only aged a few years.
Although Time Lord ages are timey-wimey anyway.
The back-and-forth between the different Doctors was fantastic. The War Doctor in particular, whenever he would do something that we've seen the Doctor do a thousand times before, it was almost as though it was novel to him. It was like watching him remember what it was to be the Doctor again after countless years of fighting the most horrible war in the universe.
It was fantastic. Eccleston's non-appearance was notable, but he only ever wanted to do it for a year and I am pretty sure everyone that has ever watched interviews with him knows that he has no further interest in Doctor Who.
Rose was great as usual in her Bad Wolf incarnation, and the zygons were suitable, although clearly not the focus of the episode. It was interesting seeing UNIT in action and all of the nostalgic references were fantastic.
Seeing the 13th Doctor's brief cameo was a nice touch as well as all the rest of the Doctors helping out. The final cut was similarly awesome:
The presence of the Curator was interesting. I assumed they were going to have #13 make a more full appearance, but I suppose they are waiting for his big reveal. I'm not sure if Tom Baker playing the Curator was just fan-service or if it hints at something bigger, although Christmas is set-up nicely for Matt Smith's big exit.
I am surprised that the movie is so short. It could have been 2 hours easily and I don't think we would have lost anything.
There is a lack though, and I mention this in my spoiler-free review, so forgive me for repeating myself here:
If you got the feels watching "Day of the Doctor", then I can assure you that you're doing it to yourself.
You know so much about Doctor Who and are so in the head of the character, that you are substituting what needs to be shown in order to get the emotional reaction that you are getting out of it.
This isn't a bad thing...for you. It is a bad thing for the series as a whole however.
If you watched the first half of series 7 and thought it was amazing, then there is something wrong with you. I assume it's bandwagon syndrome, because those episodes by-and-large sucked, but it could also be that you love Doctor Who so much that it can't do wrong for you. You've got it up on a pillar. I unconditionally love Doctor Who, but that doesn't mean I can't see the flaws, and they especially bother me when they're unnecessary.
If you watched the show last night, it absolutely was AMAZING, but there is a lack. The emotion is spotty. Sometimes it shows and sometimes it doesn't.
Last night's episode and its content should have completely wrecked everyone that watched it, Whovian or not (so long as they were caught up from 2005). Completely wrecked everyone. Having to experience the possibility of the death of billions and billions and being responsible for that, it should have messed up everybody. But they pulled their punches.
I think the creators are so in the mindset of Doctor Who that they feel they don't need to show it anymore. Maybe they've been reading too much Hemingway and they have Iceberg Syndrome. It's great that stuff is happening beneath the surface of your characters, but you need to give more to the viewer. When the viewer has to assume they know what the characters are thinking in order to get the feels, you're not doing it right. If the viewer needs people like me analyzing it for them or at the least reading memes about what's going on in the character's head or how x history ties to y present, etc, you're not doing it right.
Those are nice as nuggets. Easter eggs are always welcome, but when the major thrust of an entire episode is beneath the surface, you lose something.
This could have been, this should have been, the greatest Doctor Who experience ever. As it was, it was a great episode.
Day of the Doctor should have been the quintessential Doctor Who episode of all-time. It should have been the episode that Whovians hold up to the rest of the world as proof of what is so amazing about this show.
It was great.
What a let-down.
Here's the Amazon link:
Hey, you can watch it in 3D if you have a 3D TVWarning: This post will contain content that can lead to spoilers and outright spoilers of the show, so please do not continue reading if you want to have a spoiler-free experience. Please read my spoiler-free review if you want to get a gauge of the show before you watch.
I'll go back and re-watch the pre-show tomorrow so I can pinpoint the exact jag-off that ruined the show for me, but saying something along the lines of "now we know there is no canon" or "everything can change" before watching a show ostensibly about the worst day of the Doctor's life...
Well, with those words it was impossible for the ending to be any different. To be fair, it didn't spoil it until I watched more than 5 minutes of the episode. But I still count that as a spoiler. I knew I should have turned off the TV when I saw the countdown to the show.
Maybe if it wasn't for those words, I could have had the emotional response that the creators were going for with the three Doctors about to destroy Gallifrey together with the big-red button.
As it was, that scene ALMOST got me there, so I think if I didn't know from the EFFING JERKOFFs before the show, that it could have been great.
Another thing I have to say: the commercials were insane.
I realize that it was broadcast earlier in the day and that it was only 1 hour and 20 minutes long. Well, when I watched it, it was during a 2 hour block, so that means there were 40 minutes of commercials. That means that for every 2 minutes of show, there was 1 minute of commercial. It was stupid.
It just disgusts me that BBCA did this in what should have been one of the greatest Doctor Who experiences of all-time.
The show itself was fantastic, although apparently there is some controversy over whether the War Doctor regenerated into the 10th Doctor or if he regenerated into some other pre-10th or even went backwards to the 8th Doctor again. (by the way, David Tennant's Doctor is now the 11th Doctor and Matt Smith's is the 12th. I get annoyed by people continuing to refer to them as 10 and 11. We're coming up on lucky 13).
I'm pretty sure that we saw the 8th Doctor's final days in the fantastic short "Night of the Doctor", included here:
He's gone now. I would enjoy seeing more of this Doctor, but he won't be coming back (at least not in a strict, natural progression of time manner), although it is notable that the actor did a good job, and that it appears that he regenerated into a young John Hurt, so the War Doctor had been fighting the Time War for quite a while since Matt Smith has lived 400 years and only aged a few years.
Although Time Lord ages are timey-wimey anyway.
The back-and-forth between the different Doctors was fantastic. The War Doctor in particular, whenever he would do something that we've seen the Doctor do a thousand times before, it was almost as though it was novel to him. It was like watching him remember what it was to be the Doctor again after countless years of fighting the most horrible war in the universe.
It was fantastic. Eccleston's non-appearance was notable, but he only ever wanted to do it for a year and I am pretty sure everyone that has ever watched interviews with him knows that he has no further interest in Doctor Who.
Rose was great as usual in her Bad Wolf incarnation, and the zygons were suitable, although clearly not the focus of the episode. It was interesting seeing UNIT in action and all of the nostalgic references were fantastic.
Seeing the 13th Doctor's brief cameo was a nice touch as well as all the rest of the Doctors helping out. The final cut was similarly awesome:
The presence of the Curator was interesting. I assumed they were going to have #13 make a more full appearance, but I suppose they are waiting for his big reveal. I'm not sure if Tom Baker playing the Curator was just fan-service or if it hints at something bigger, although Christmas is set-up nicely for Matt Smith's big exit.
I am surprised that the movie is so short. It could have been 2 hours easily and I don't think we would have lost anything.
There is a lack though, and I mention this in my spoiler-free review, so forgive me for repeating myself here:
If you got the feels watching "Day of the Doctor", then I can assure you that you're doing it to yourself.
You know so much about Doctor Who and are so in the head of the character, that you are substituting what needs to be shown in order to get the emotional reaction that you are getting out of it.
This isn't a bad thing...for you. It is a bad thing for the series as a whole however.
If you watched the first half of series 7 and thought it was amazing, then there is something wrong with you. I assume it's bandwagon syndrome, because those episodes by-and-large sucked, but it could also be that you love Doctor Who so much that it can't do wrong for you. You've got it up on a pillar. I unconditionally love Doctor Who, but that doesn't mean I can't see the flaws, and they especially bother me when they're unnecessary.
If you watched the show last night, it absolutely was AMAZING, but there is a lack. The emotion is spotty. Sometimes it shows and sometimes it doesn't.
Last night's episode and its content should have completely wrecked everyone that watched it, Whovian or not (so long as they were caught up from 2005). Completely wrecked everyone. Having to experience the possibility of the death of billions and billions and being responsible for that, it should have messed up everybody. But they pulled their punches.
I think the creators are so in the mindset of Doctor Who that they feel they don't need to show it anymore. Maybe they've been reading too much Hemingway and they have Iceberg Syndrome. It's great that stuff is happening beneath the surface of your characters, but you need to give more to the viewer. When the viewer has to assume they know what the characters are thinking in order to get the feels, you're not doing it right. If the viewer needs people like me analyzing it for them or at the least reading memes about what's going on in the character's head or how x history ties to y present, etc, you're not doing it right.
Those are nice as nuggets. Easter eggs are always welcome, but when the major thrust of an entire episode is beneath the surface, you lose something.
This could have been, this should have been, the greatest Doctor Who experience ever. As it was, it was a great episode.
Day of the Doctor should have been the quintessential Doctor Who episode of all-time. It should have been the episode that Whovians hold up to the rest of the world as proof of what is so amazing about this show.
It was great.
What a let-down.
