I've been doing facebook for a while now, and some things people do there are so annoying to me, that I've decided to write this. These complaints are in no particular order, but all of them should be taken seriously, because If you do this on facebook, I hate you.
1. Quit posting "I'm bored," or any variation on that, when you post something to facebook, it's supposed to make everyone's day better or worse. Telling everyone you know that you are pathetically unentertained while using a computer helps no one, least of all, you. If you do post those two demon words, make it interesting, like, "I'm bored, IN SPACE!"
2. Stop posting on statuses and photos someone added more than a week or two ago. Nothing ruins my internet binge more than clicking on a notification be be dragged to a horrible joke you posted on a status I don't even remember.
3. Stop sending me farmville/mafia wars messages. Messages are supposed to help me, not make me want to tear out your soul. Also, if you play farmville or mafia wars, it might be in your favor to keep it to yourself....... you enormous nerd.
4. Don't post purposely vague things just to make the rest of us ask what it is. Because deep down, you're only doing it to make yourself feel important for two more minutes, instead of hopelessly defeated and depressed. Facebook isn't the best way to solve that issue. Get a therapist.
5. Posting those statuses that say "Please post this to support (insert minority/deadly disease patients here) 90% of people won't do this, are you going to do the right thing?" Here's the problem with that, If I don't post it, I feel like a jerk, If I do, then I make other people feel like jerks when they don't post it. It creates a lose-lose situation for everyone. And really, how is a status on facebook going to help anyone? The only exception to this rule is if it's a joke, like instead of supporting cancer patients, it's supporting the families of people who died in the Hogwarts attack, in which case, it's the coolest thing ever.
So there you have it, my list of personal peeves for facebook, now I will warn you that I WILL come down hard on you if you do any of these on my wall. You have been warned.
Thursday, January 27, 2011
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Science and Religion
The other day, during my obscenely long midterm lunch block, I mentioned to an acquaintance of mine that I was deeply religious. But am I? I go to church every Sunday, I sing in the choir, I serve on the altar. But I still swear, I make sex jokes, I'm mean to people I don't like, and I sit less than a phonebook away from my girlfriend.
The truth is, when put in perspective, looking throughout time, I'm about as unreligious as you can get. However, by today's standards, I am off the scale of religiousness. Most people know little or nothing about God, many other Catholics I know only go to church on Christmas, and that isn't even right, if you only go once a year, you should go on Easter. In my religious Ed class, most of the kids are there against their will because the parents are still desperately holding onto the last scrap of moral fiber the kid has. Church attendance is also way down in the past twenty years, the number of priests is steadily declining, and the world is becoming more and more secular everyday. People are losing interest in religion and faith. There are still some religious people out there, but a portion of them seem to me like they are only doing it to stand out among the crowd. When people do this, they are usually real open, too open, about their religion. When I know someone who does that, I take their religion, and tack "super" onto the front. I know one super-protestant, who posts about prayer, a very private thing, on Facebook, and one super-jew, who glares at you if you mention Hitler in any way. To paraphrase the bible, "Don't pray in public, you're only doing it for attention." These people may be religious for the wrong reasons, but at least they act with the ethic, but overall, interest in faith is dying.
Why is this happening? A mere two hundred years ago, you would be a social outcast if you didn't spend literally all day in church on Sunday. Entire wars were fought over religion, and still are, but only in parts of the world where science is not as prevalent, is this a coincidence? Absolutely not. Science is the source of all these problems, and I'm not saying we go back to the Stone Age. The root of the problem is people are misinterpreting science for what it really is. Hundreds of years ago, people used religion to explain science. Lightning was a pissed-off Zeus, the world is here because God created it in seven days. Sciences like the Big Bang Theory convince some people that there is no God, But I have thought otherwise. The big bang theory states that before the universe was created, all the matter existed in a singularity, which was infinitely small, hot, and dense. This singularity then exploded and created the universe, static on your TV is leftover energy from the explosion. The only unanswered question of this theory is what trigged the explosion? Well I can only assume that you would need a giant source of power. But nothing besides the singularity existed, so how could that power be generated? My answer: God.
People who say that science disproves the existence of God have it all wrong. A long time ago, people used God to explain science, now, we must use science to explain God.
The truth is, when put in perspective, looking throughout time, I'm about as unreligious as you can get. However, by today's standards, I am off the scale of religiousness. Most people know little or nothing about God, many other Catholics I know only go to church on Christmas, and that isn't even right, if you only go once a year, you should go on Easter. In my religious Ed class, most of the kids are there against their will because the parents are still desperately holding onto the last scrap of moral fiber the kid has. Church attendance is also way down in the past twenty years, the number of priests is steadily declining, and the world is becoming more and more secular everyday. People are losing interest in religion and faith. There are still some religious people out there, but a portion of them seem to me like they are only doing it to stand out among the crowd. When people do this, they are usually real open, too open, about their religion. When I know someone who does that, I take their religion, and tack "super" onto the front. I know one super-protestant, who posts about prayer, a very private thing, on Facebook, and one super-jew, who glares at you if you mention Hitler in any way. To paraphrase the bible, "Don't pray in public, you're only doing it for attention." These people may be religious for the wrong reasons, but at least they act with the ethic, but overall, interest in faith is dying.
Why is this happening? A mere two hundred years ago, you would be a social outcast if you didn't spend literally all day in church on Sunday. Entire wars were fought over religion, and still are, but only in parts of the world where science is not as prevalent, is this a coincidence? Absolutely not. Science is the source of all these problems, and I'm not saying we go back to the Stone Age. The root of the problem is people are misinterpreting science for what it really is. Hundreds of years ago, people used religion to explain science. Lightning was a pissed-off Zeus, the world is here because God created it in seven days. Sciences like the Big Bang Theory convince some people that there is no God, But I have thought otherwise. The big bang theory states that before the universe was created, all the matter existed in a singularity, which was infinitely small, hot, and dense. This singularity then exploded and created the universe, static on your TV is leftover energy from the explosion. The only unanswered question of this theory is what trigged the explosion? Well I can only assume that you would need a giant source of power. But nothing besides the singularity existed, so how could that power be generated? My answer: God.
People who say that science disproves the existence of God have it all wrong. A long time ago, people used God to explain science, now, we must use science to explain God.
Monday, January 17, 2011
the Fretless Bass reviews: The Green Hornet.
Movies are made to make you pumped up after you see them, so you tell all your friends, "IT WAS AWESOME!!!!" So when you are a reviewer, you need to wait a little bit and think hard about the movie before you make conclusions. This was especially the case with The Green Hornet (flawless transition), which is as action-filled, and adrenalin-charged as any movie. I came out of that movie loving it, but after some thought I came to the conclusion that The Green Hornet is a "meh" movie disguised as a really good one.
First off I will continue my vendetta against 3D, in which The Green Hornet was filmed. I don't think it was even made for 3D, the lack of 3D moments tells me that they just made it into 3D in the editing room. Truth be told, 3D didn't ruin The Green Hornet, it would have been just as mediocre without the influence of Avatar. What really grinds my gears is how the production team obviously thought it would help the movie. 3D isn't for every movie. Avatar and 3D worked well together because Avatar had really good visuals, but 3D isn't what made that movie (Let me clarify right now, I thought Avatar looked fantastic, and I saw it without 3D, it did stand up on its own without it. What I hated about Avatar was its predictability and the plot). So the production team thought 3D would help The Green Hornet, but the truth is, 3D didn't affect the experience for me at all.
Detail time. The Green Hornet was entertaining, but will I remember it in a year, no. Why? My biggest issue was that there was this whole deal where both main characters liked their secretary, and were jealous of each other over her, and they resolved it, but I didn't get any closure on the issue. The movie didn't even give the resolution its own scene, just at some point it said, "Ok, that's over, now back to the gun violence." Which is another thing, for heroes, the protagonists seemed to have no problem pumping their enemies full of lead. This would be ok if the movie were a morality play. "Is fighting crime worth hurting so many people?" or, "Can violence to stop violence be justified?" But no, the movie shows these men brutally killing people, and portraying them as totally moral heroes.
I also didn't like the predictability of the movie. I'm not going to tell you about the plot points I predicted because I don't want to spoil it for you. I predicted how the movie would go from the third or fourth scene.
Lastly, Seth Rogen was a perfect choice for the main character; the movie may have fallen short, but Seth was fantastic. Sadly, Mr. Rogen's performance did nothing to make the sting of this hornet enter my soul. Perhaps if the movie had more of a message, or if I believed the heroes were doing good for the right reasons, I may not have just crucified it the way I did, but nay, this hornet has no sting.
First off I will continue my vendetta against 3D, in which The Green Hornet was filmed. I don't think it was even made for 3D, the lack of 3D moments tells me that they just made it into 3D in the editing room. Truth be told, 3D didn't ruin The Green Hornet, it would have been just as mediocre without the influence of Avatar. What really grinds my gears is how the production team obviously thought it would help the movie. 3D isn't for every movie. Avatar and 3D worked well together because Avatar had really good visuals, but 3D isn't what made that movie (Let me clarify right now, I thought Avatar looked fantastic, and I saw it without 3D, it did stand up on its own without it. What I hated about Avatar was its predictability and the plot). So the production team thought 3D would help The Green Hornet, but the truth is, 3D didn't affect the experience for me at all.
Detail time. The Green Hornet was entertaining, but will I remember it in a year, no. Why? My biggest issue was that there was this whole deal where both main characters liked their secretary, and were jealous of each other over her, and they resolved it, but I didn't get any closure on the issue. The movie didn't even give the resolution its own scene, just at some point it said, "Ok, that's over, now back to the gun violence." Which is another thing, for heroes, the protagonists seemed to have no problem pumping their enemies full of lead. This would be ok if the movie were a morality play. "Is fighting crime worth hurting so many people?" or, "Can violence to stop violence be justified?" But no, the movie shows these men brutally killing people, and portraying them as totally moral heroes.
I also didn't like the predictability of the movie. I'm not going to tell you about the plot points I predicted because I don't want to spoil it for you. I predicted how the movie would go from the third or fourth scene.
Lastly, Seth Rogen was a perfect choice for the main character; the movie may have fallen short, but Seth was fantastic. Sadly, Mr. Rogen's performance did nothing to make the sting of this hornet enter my soul. Perhaps if the movie had more of a message, or if I believed the heroes were doing good for the right reasons, I may not have just crucified it the way I did, but nay, this hornet has no sting.
Wednesday, January 12, 2011
the Fretless Bass reviews: The Cape pilot on NBC
Today, I'm snowed in, so I'm writing about something I saw yesterday. It was The Cape, a show about a man who was unjustly framed for a horrible crime and must don a new identity to protect his family and get his life back. So it's pretty much every super hero movie or show ever made.
I kid The Cape, I actually liked it a lot, but I'm a fanboy, and as a reviewer, it is my duty to look at this in perspective, objectively, without bias.
The show was entertaining, but was it really good? Luckily, I'm here to answer that question for you, so you don't need to think as much. (Orwellian?) The pilot's job is to draw the audience in with high action, focus, and conflict, so its job is to be the best episode in the entire run of the series. If every episode of The Cape is as good as the pilot, then this show is the next 24 for me until The Walking Dead staggers back onto my TV next fall. But TV shows rarely replicate the quality found in the pilot. The Cape makes the mistake of giving the protagonist one ultimate goal, in this case; it's to prove his innocence by taking down a private military contract army that runs the city. This is going to get old fast. Luke Cage made that mistake as well in his first issue, but the geniuses at Marvel were smart enough to leave Luke's problems open ended enough to keep the series interesting after the death of this antagonist. This is not the case with The Cape, should the main villain fall, there's no more juice left in the tank, and The Cape dies. Like I said, the same bad guy in every episode is going to get old. They also introduced one villain that has scales on his face, and a whole organization of super-killers, but they all work for the ultimate villain as well, so it's kind of a fail on that scale.
At the end of the day, or this review, or whatever you and your cult may call it, the pilot of The Cape was good, but the show has nothing to really set it apart from any other super drama on TV or the big screen. If guys wearing capes and cool hoods excites you as much as it excites me, then you'll probably like the pilot of The Cape, as for the rest of the series, I predict it will fall into the problem Power Rangers had where you could recite what was going to happen in every episode before it even happened. So don't get your hopes up. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go put a towel over my head and pretend I'm Batman.
I kid The Cape, I actually liked it a lot, but I'm a fanboy, and as a reviewer, it is my duty to look at this in perspective, objectively, without bias.
The show was entertaining, but was it really good? Luckily, I'm here to answer that question for you, so you don't need to think as much. (Orwellian?) The pilot's job is to draw the audience in with high action, focus, and conflict, so its job is to be the best episode in the entire run of the series. If every episode of The Cape is as good as the pilot, then this show is the next 24 for me until The Walking Dead staggers back onto my TV next fall. But TV shows rarely replicate the quality found in the pilot. The Cape makes the mistake of giving the protagonist one ultimate goal, in this case; it's to prove his innocence by taking down a private military contract army that runs the city. This is going to get old fast. Luke Cage made that mistake as well in his first issue, but the geniuses at Marvel were smart enough to leave Luke's problems open ended enough to keep the series interesting after the death of this antagonist. This is not the case with The Cape, should the main villain fall, there's no more juice left in the tank, and The Cape dies. Like I said, the same bad guy in every episode is going to get old. They also introduced one villain that has scales on his face, and a whole organization of super-killers, but they all work for the ultimate villain as well, so it's kind of a fail on that scale.
At the end of the day, or this review, or whatever you and your cult may call it, the pilot of The Cape was good, but the show has nothing to really set it apart from any other super drama on TV or the big screen. If guys wearing capes and cool hoods excites you as much as it excites me, then you'll probably like the pilot of The Cape, as for the rest of the series, I predict it will fall into the problem Power Rangers had where you could recite what was going to happen in every episode before it even happened. So don't get your hopes up. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to go put a towel over my head and pretend I'm Batman.
Monday, December 20, 2010
The Fretless Bass informs you of his new position.
I would tell you how long I have been writing on this blog reflectively, but I didn't check before I went to the writing page, and I don't want to have to save this as a draft.
Any way, I've been blogging for a few months now, and I'm finally crawling out of the gutter of the writing world, from internet blog with very few followers, to reviewer for a high school newspaper!
If there are any of you reading this that may fear the end of this blog, FEAR NOT! My position on The Voice staff may bring in more viewers, I will keep posting on this blog. Here's how it's going to work, I split my posting between here and The Voice, and on The Fretless Bass, you will get the more edgy/inappropriate version of the same review I might post on my school newspaper's website. You might enjoy reading this blog more, but the review with The Voice will probably be more accurate.
This has been not a review, but an informational message to anyone who reads The Fretless Bass, you will now find many of my reviews at http://cchsvoice.org/
Any way, I've been blogging for a few months now, and I'm finally crawling out of the gutter of the writing world, from internet blog with very few followers, to reviewer for a high school newspaper!
If there are any of you reading this that may fear the end of this blog, FEAR NOT! My position on The Voice staff may bring in more viewers, I will keep posting on this blog. Here's how it's going to work, I split my posting between here and The Voice, and on The Fretless Bass, you will get the more edgy/inappropriate version of the same review I might post on my school newspaper's website. You might enjoy reading this blog more, but the review with The Voice will probably be more accurate.
This has been not a review, but an informational message to anyone who reads The Fretless Bass, you will now find many of my reviews at http://cchsvoice.org/
Monday, December 6, 2010
the Fretless Bass reviews: The Walking Dead on AMC, season one.
There hasn't been a good drama on TV, since we lost 24 and Lost. (I'm still crying myself to sleep.) At least there wasn't until last Halloween! That was the night The Walking Dead, Based on a popular graphic novel, premiered on AMC. I watched the show from the beginning, and I can tell you, no TV in my life has been so capturing, entertaining, and horrifying.
The story follows Rick Grimes, an idealistic sheriff's deputy in Georgia, who, after being sent into a comma by a gunshot wound, wakes up to a deserted hospital, with the undead clawing at him from behind a locked door. Rick escapes from the hospital and embarks on a quest to find his family. Throughout the season, Rick must do battle with insanity, loneliness, racism, and above all, the dead.
The thing that absolutely hooks me on The Walking Dead is how many episodes could go the entire length without seeing a zombie once, because the show isn't really about zombies, it's about people. The conflicts in the show are largely not about zombies. You think your husband is dead, do you hook up with his best friend? And when he comes back? What do you do then? You need to go back into the zombie infested city to save a member of your group, but he's a vile racist. You fight a street gang for a bag full of guns, but the street gang is protecting a nursing home. The conflicts in the show are all about morals, and How they break down or get stronger after the dead rise.
There is one thing that really caught my attention on the show. Throughout the season, you see some characters slowly fall to insanity, and you love it, every episode, you are wondering if someone is finally going to crack, or if they go so far over they edge, they make everyone else zombie fodder. It's conflicts like these that set The Walking Dead apart from other zombie movies and shows.
The next thing I want to talk about it the three kinds of horror. There's type one, where things jump out at you really fast, type two, which I call gore-horror, where some idiot assumed that more guts=scarier, and type three, which is psychological horror, it's also the only good kind. Three guesses which type of horror the walking dead is? Well for all you gore-horror enthusiasts out there who can't connect my last two sentences with this one, I have two things to say to you, get therapy, and it's type three. There is only one instance of type two horror in the entire season, and even that is used very creatively to make a type three. The survivors need to chop up a dead zombie and smear it's guts on them so they can't be smelled, the scene is disturbing to watch, not because of the gore, but because of the fact that they are chopping up another human. Type three horror is good for this show because you know that the zombies are coming, you just don't know when, and you pray it isn't when the kids are getting home-schooled, or Rick is having a tender moment with his wife, and it eats away at you, by the end of every episode you feel as crazy as some of the characters are.
My only complaint with the show is that at the end of the season finale, Rick gets a secret whispered in his ear, and we need to wait for next fall the find out what it is. I'm guessing it's something terrible, like the bite doesn't cause the disease, only speeds it up, because it's actually air-born!
To end, I want to say that if you haven't yet seen The Walking Dead, see it right now. Because if you don't, you're missing out on some fabulous TV. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to eat, I'm starving, I wonder if we have any leftover brains in the fridge......
The story follows Rick Grimes, an idealistic sheriff's deputy in Georgia, who, after being sent into a comma by a gunshot wound, wakes up to a deserted hospital, with the undead clawing at him from behind a locked door. Rick escapes from the hospital and embarks on a quest to find his family. Throughout the season, Rick must do battle with insanity, loneliness, racism, and above all, the dead.
The thing that absolutely hooks me on The Walking Dead is how many episodes could go the entire length without seeing a zombie once, because the show isn't really about zombies, it's about people. The conflicts in the show are largely not about zombies. You think your husband is dead, do you hook up with his best friend? And when he comes back? What do you do then? You need to go back into the zombie infested city to save a member of your group, but he's a vile racist. You fight a street gang for a bag full of guns, but the street gang is protecting a nursing home. The conflicts in the show are all about morals, and How they break down or get stronger after the dead rise.
There is one thing that really caught my attention on the show. Throughout the season, you see some characters slowly fall to insanity, and you love it, every episode, you are wondering if someone is finally going to crack, or if they go so far over they edge, they make everyone else zombie fodder. It's conflicts like these that set The Walking Dead apart from other zombie movies and shows.
The next thing I want to talk about it the three kinds of horror. There's type one, where things jump out at you really fast, type two, which I call gore-horror, where some idiot assumed that more guts=scarier, and type three, which is psychological horror, it's also the only good kind. Three guesses which type of horror the walking dead is? Well for all you gore-horror enthusiasts out there who can't connect my last two sentences with this one, I have two things to say to you, get therapy, and it's type three. There is only one instance of type two horror in the entire season, and even that is used very creatively to make a type three. The survivors need to chop up a dead zombie and smear it's guts on them so they can't be smelled, the scene is disturbing to watch, not because of the gore, but because of the fact that they are chopping up another human. Type three horror is good for this show because you know that the zombies are coming, you just don't know when, and you pray it isn't when the kids are getting home-schooled, or Rick is having a tender moment with his wife, and it eats away at you, by the end of every episode you feel as crazy as some of the characters are.
My only complaint with the show is that at the end of the season finale, Rick gets a secret whispered in his ear, and we need to wait for next fall the find out what it is. I'm guessing it's something terrible, like the bite doesn't cause the disease, only speeds it up, because it's actually air-born!
To end, I want to say that if you haven't yet seen The Walking Dead, see it right now. Because if you don't, you're missing out on some fabulous TV. Now if you'll excuse me, I need to eat, I'm starving, I wonder if we have any leftover brains in the fridge......
Saturday, December 4, 2010
the Fretless Bass reviews: CCHS's Noises Off.
This Friday, I went to my high school's fall play. This play was fantastic, I had many friends in it, and that only added to the experience for me, as a thespian myself. I would have auditioned, but this play is only for sophomores and up.
Anyway, Noises Off is one one of those plays with a play within a play. That is, it's about a bunch of actors putting on a show, and of course they fail. The show is in three acts, the first act is a dress rehearsal. In the second act, they all hate each other; the set is turned around and they go through the show again, only they are all trying to kill each other for various love reasons. In the third act, the set is forward again, and nothing goes right.
Every character was hilarious, especially the characters played by Evan Sibley, and Maddie Mahoney, who's characters, and the characters "played" (within the play) by those characters, never stopped delivering laughs. However, what really stole the show was the set. It was fantastic! It turned around in the second set, and showed us the backstage. Also, the number of doors in the set required tons of quick entrances and exits. Props to the actors and actresses for all the quick thinking, especially with all the fake attempted murder going on in-between entrances. The absolute height of the play was when Evan's character fell down the stairs.
The only grievance I have with the show is sort of a compliment in a way. It was that sometimes, there was too much going on, and you missed something, because you were already trying to watch three other events.
In summary, Noises Off is brilliant, and even though it closes tomorrow, you should make every attempt to see it, either with CCHS, or another company. Now if you'll excuse me I have to clear out forty thousand hours of the Simpsons from my Tivo.
Anyway, Noises Off is one one of those plays with a play within a play. That is, it's about a bunch of actors putting on a show, and of course they fail. The show is in three acts, the first act is a dress rehearsal. In the second act, they all hate each other; the set is turned around and they go through the show again, only they are all trying to kill each other for various love reasons. In the third act, the set is forward again, and nothing goes right.
Every character was hilarious, especially the characters played by Evan Sibley, and Maddie Mahoney, who's characters, and the characters "played" (within the play) by those characters, never stopped delivering laughs. However, what really stole the show was the set. It was fantastic! It turned around in the second set, and showed us the backstage. Also, the number of doors in the set required tons of quick entrances and exits. Props to the actors and actresses for all the quick thinking, especially with all the fake attempted murder going on in-between entrances. The absolute height of the play was when Evan's character fell down the stairs.
The only grievance I have with the show is sort of a compliment in a way. It was that sometimes, there was too much going on, and you missed something, because you were already trying to watch three other events.
In summary, Noises Off is brilliant, and even though it closes tomorrow, you should make every attempt to see it, either with CCHS, or another company. Now if you'll excuse me I have to clear out forty thousand hours of the Simpsons from my Tivo.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)