Category: movies

  • Why Snakes on a Plane makes me sad

    I grew up with snakes.  A Burmese Python named, appropriately enough, “Julius Squeezer.”  Lots of harmless king snakes and gopher snakes and more.

    You see, my dad (a biology teacher) was friends with a herpetologist, and the two of them would often conduct hands-on educational seminars around the area to help people understand that snakes are our friends, not something to be feared nor chopped up with a garden shovel.  My dad and his friend also helped out the local sheriff by being part of what I called “The Snake Patrol”—comprised of environmentalist folks who’d go out to a house where some person—who had moments ago called 911 or whatever screaming incoherenantly about a deadly snake—was about ready to take drastic, lethal action against a harmless baby king snake or whatnot.  My dad would go out there, put the snake in a pillowcase, and release it into the wild. 

    One time, alas, it was too late.  The frantic woman, who had spotted what she KNEW was a deadly snake outside by her trash cans, could hold off no longer.  About ten minutes before my dad arrived, she had repeatedly bisected the critter.  The purely rubber critter I might add.  Methinks that snake wasn’t posing all that much of a threat, eh?

    As part of all these efforts, my dad would sometimes temporarily bring snakes to our home, where I got to hold them and learn that they weren’t slimy or (generally) deadly or even venemous.

    Plus snakes eat things like wild rats, which are generally NOT our friends when they’re carrying diseases into our homes.

    Anyway, this brings us to why movies like Snakes on a Plane and those films about deadly spiders or any other fearful-animal-de-jour make me sad.  They undoubtedly result in not only a rise of fear but also an increased level of senseless animal killings.  In a broader sense, they contribute to a dystopian view of nature as something to be feared, coralled, and conquered.

    You might think I’m overreacting, or you might argue that people are smart enough to know the difference between Hollywood and real life.  I, regrettably, beg to differ.  As a human race, we haven’t shown a very good ability to either assess comparative risks (say, the likelihood of a plane incident vs. the chances of dying in an auto accident) or live in harmony with nature.

    True, at the core, it’s pretty much just one of a zillion stupid movies that people flock to see.  And I suppose there’s something to be said for lame escapist entertainment.  I just wish it didn’t use nature as a scapegoat.

  • Trying out online database services (see my movie list!)

    Microsoft Access is for masochists.  It’s expensive, a pain to learn, and—frankly—quite overkill for nearly any home application.

    So, for too long, folks like myself have kept lists in Excel.  This works… sort of.  But it’s a pain to share, and it lacks a lot of the usefully-database’y features that make working with data multidimensionally both useful and fun.

    For instance, I’m trying to keep track of where I’ve traveled around the world, what sets of pictures I’ve taken, where those pictures reside (online, in photo albums, etc.), who I have yet to share them with, and so on.  I *could* do lots of messy filtering and sorting on Excel as I try to handle related action items, but a database (featuring multiple persistent views) would be so much easier!

    Well… dabbledb and Zoho Creator to the rescue!  Below I’ll talk about my initial experiences using both services, some advantages I perceive in each, and I’ll also demo my first “app”—a filterable/sortable list of movies I’ve seen and want to see (all 217 of them so far!)

    Clearly, there are lots of professional uses for databases.  But here are a few hobbyist uses I’ve thought of off the top of my head:
    – Managing and showing off stamp / comic book / music / other collections
    – Dealing with rosters (Little League, Church members, volunteer list, etc.)
    – Working with a personal or team todo list.

    *  *  *

    Zoho Creator (“ZC”) is, at least for now, free.  Dabbledb (“ddb”) offers a 30 day free trial, and various plans after that starting at $10/month.

    Getting started on either service is a snap.  You can easily import your existing data just by copying the cells from Excel and pasting one big block into a text box in either service.  Both of them handled this data quite smartly!

    Some other things both services have in common:
    – Very passionate developers who regularly participate in discussions online about their services.
    – The ability for users to put views and even forms on other Web sites.
    – Active user forums.
    – Helpful getting-started / overview videos

    Some advantages specific to ZC:
    – A unique and seemingly powerful scripting language
    – Custom error messages and validation
    – Multi-select-list fields.
    – The ability to put an “active” view into another Web page

    Some advantages specific to ddb:
    – It’s fast!
    – Handy grouping function
    – Superior ease of data entry
    – More choices of field types
    – Multidimensionality (a bit hard to explain… but you can define relationships between tables)

    I’ve included my movie database (in ZC) as a sample below.  Have fun searching, filtering, sorting… and don’t worry, it’s read-only, so you can’t hurt anything! 😀

  • Brief Da Vinci code review

    I got a free ticket to go see the movie Da Vinci Code and while it won’t say it was worth what I paid for it… well, it wasn’t worth a lot more than that, either.

    The movie in a word:  Joyless.

    I can count the number of times the characters smiled on one hand.
    I can count the number of times I smiled on probably one or two fingers.

    I haven’t read the book, but judging from my reactions to this movie and the 7th-grade-level writing abilities I slogged through in one of Dan Brown’s other books, I can’t say I’ll be clamoring to read the Da Vinci Code anytime soon.

    Things I *did* like about the movie:

    – Some of the beautiful scenery and cinematography.
    – Ian McKellen.  Not all the movies he’s in are good, but HE is always a pleasure to watch, IMHO.
    – Learning some interesting historical facts.

    Things I definitely *did not* like about the movie:
    – The ending.  What a fizzle!
    – The graphic depictions of the monk’s self-flaggelation.  Seeing the scars and (on the side) the whip would have conveyed the point just fine.
    – The overbearing seriousness of the entire film.  No, it didn’t need an Eddie Murphy sidekick donkey, but… hmm… on the other hand, that might have improved things.
    – The movie length.  Rarely does including every detail from the book make sense.

    Have you seen the movie yet?  What did you think?

  • Well-reviewed movie "Waterborne" now available free on Google Video

    I haven’t had a chance to watch more than the first few minutes of this film, but Waterborne has been generally well-reviewed… and you can watch it for free either below or directly on Google’s site through January 15, 2006.

    Rather than spoil even part of the plot, I’ll instead invite you to begin watching it now without preconceptions, with a note that it’s a serious film focusing on characters rather than explosive action.

    Beyond this particular film, what fascinates and excites me about Google’s video offering—despite generally wide critical raspberries—is that it can serve as a fabulous equalizer.  The key problems with getting great independent and foreign films seen by larger audiences aren’t just associated with marketing and word of mouth, but rather distribution.  Just as Google AdWords (and, before it, GoTo.com) presented a revolutionary way for Mom’n’Pop outfits to reasonably compete with BigCos, Google Video will provide market access to low(er) budget films… in this case, literally FREE distribution.  And then when some random Joe in Manhattan gets genuinely excited about a particular quality (or just frickin’ hilarious :D) production, he can indirectly cause that film to gain enormous market awareness by simply posting about it on his LiveJournal and linking to the Google Video, causing a chain reaction (remember the numa numa video?:-) And hey, can anyone even find the original anymore?!  But I digress!)

    *  *  *

    But how will this actually make money for the film producers?

    Pay-per-download
    For instance, while Waterborne is free to stream and watch online for a week, it’s then $4 to download.  With this film, thanks to the openness of its producers, purchasers will actually OWN their copy and have the practical and legal options of burning it to DVD, watching it on their iPod, etc.  This can be a win-win situation; whereas early adopters and those with more time than money can make sure to watch it for free, others will help fund the film by purchasing unfettered downloads.  Alas, not all content producers are so wise and thoughtful towards consumers; the bulk of groups charging for video on Google Video now are placing some DRM (Digital Rights Management) restrictions on their files, so they’ll self-destruct after 24 hours or be uncopyable to a portable video player, etc.  Hopefully they’ll eventually see the light, however.

    Related sales
    T-shirts.  Actual DVDs in jewelboxes.  Sequels.  Toys or other similar merchandise.  Soundtracks via Napster or Magnatune or Amazon.com.

    Long-term career growth
    Unknown artists can perhaps become bigger household names, garnering big studio money later on.

    Other ideas?  Your thoughts…?

    *  *  *

    Hat tip to Inside Google for reporting this and other interesting Google video tidbits.