Watch free unaired pilot for Sarah Silverman comedy

A "failed pilot" doesnot denote quality necessarily but demographic- and business- decisions.

I am not always a fano he style, but I often am, and just wish her style was a little less ntentionally offensive. Some folks like that, but I do not especially.

But, I have not seen this show, so I cannot say.

On Comedy Central's channel's 'Sarah Silverman Program' her character was abnoxious and self-centered to the point she was a very effective anti-hero, I thought.

http://www.cinemablend.com/television/Watch-Sarah-Silverman-Failed-NBC-Pilot-Susan-313-60050.html

I stopped watching 'The Simpsons' about 2003

http://splitsider.com/2013/10/18-things-youd-be-surprised-happened-on-the-simpsons-if-you-stopped-watching-in-2003/

Nothing really seems that wildly unexpected really, although sometimes I had to shake my head at the sheer absurdity. Like the whole town moving to the "new" Springfeild. I was actually a bit disappointed nothing really wild happened. For instance, Marge and Homer being divorced for a bunch of seasons, but reading further it was only divorced as a matter of legal paperwork.

I wonder where the movie fits in with all this.

Goodies for today

This is fun to read, if you are familiar with the Wold Newton universe. Also, it may be of general interest for those curious about fan-fiction and copyright issues, etc.

http://www.sfsignal.com/archives/2013/10/excerpt-read-the-introduction-from-tales-of-the-wold-newton-universe-edited-by-win-scott-eckert-and-christopher-paul-carey/

Here is an interview with Charisma Carpenter, and she talks about the Expendables movie and the recent Wonder Woman costume changes.

http://www.liveforfilms.com/2010/07/14/exclusive-interview-charisma-carpenter-talks-psychosis-the-expendables-wonder-woman-and-more/

Charisma Carpenter is a latina? And Vanna White? Cool.
Click on the slide show.
http://www.latina.com/entertainment/tv/5-joss-whedon-actors-you-never-knew-were-latino?slide=2#axzz2iJWF5ZC4
http://www.latina.com/entertainment/105-stars-you-never-knew-were-latino#axzz2iJWF5ZC4
Charisma Carpenter, 42
"She's best known for playing Cordelia Chase—a conceited and popular teenager who reluctantly joins “The Scooby Gang” in Whedon’s hit TV series, Buffy the Vampire Slayer. But we’re betting you didn’t know that this talented beauty—who also starred on Whedon's Buffy spinoff, Angel—is Latina! Charisma’s dad might be French and German, but her mom is a mix of Cherokee and Spanish. The actress lived in Rosarito City, Mexico during her teen years."

About Vanna White, 54:

"You know her as the legendary hostess of Wheel of Fortune, but White – whose very last name hints that she’s Caucasian— is actually part-Latina! You see, “White” is not Vanna’s real apellido—it’s the name she took from her stepfather Herbert Stackley White Jr., a former real estate agent in North Myrtle Beach. Not much is known about Vanna’s real father whose name is Miguel Angel Rosich, except that he was born in Ponce, Puerto Rico and abandoned the family when she was a child. Fun fact: Rumor has it that one of White's ancestors, whose last name was Barnes, was one of the first mayors of the city of Ponce, Puerto Rico."

Also, I just learned that in Nashville, Tennessee (of all places) there is a concrete recreation of the Greek Parthenon in Athens as it was when in ancient times. That's worth a trip to see.
http://www.nashville.gov/Parks-and-Recreation/Parthenon.aspx

Just learned about Expendables 3 (in filming, apparently)

The new cast for the third film really caught my eye! Also, the conspicuious abscence of Charisma Carpenter, which I will research when time allows.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2333784/?ref_=fn_al_tt_4

The Expendables and The Expendables 2 were action-packed, ultra-violent, bloody films especially notable for their amazing cast, which stated out with Sylvester Stallone, Jet Li, and a dazzling host of others, and the precious Charisma Carpenter. Brief cameos were contributed by Arnold Schwarzenegger and Bruce Willis.

Expendables 2 brought basically everyone back, plus brought in two big names, Walker, Texas Ranger (Chuck Norris) and martial arts hero Jean-Claude Van Damme. An expanded role was given to Schwarzenegger.

You'll notice that all these "big names" are action stars with a impressive reputation. That is the point. These movies are not anything artful or meaningful. They are impressive, and designed as well oiled cash-engines. They are serving that purpose rather well.

At the time, I complained that they had missed some of the perfect cast members, and Mel Gibson was on that list. Now, he is in this third incarnation, so I have some hope for the others perhaps. They have added Wesley Snipes, which will excite many people. I never thought of Antonio Banderas or Harrison Ford specifically, but they are rather appropriate for the style of the movie and in fact add to the eccentric mix. Kelsey Grammer, on the other hand, I had never imagined in such a movie, except I would imagine he could play an unsympathetic by-the-book aloof lawyer quite well, and perhaps that is his role. Personally, I hope he has a role which stretches the range of his acting skill (I doubt that will happen with the money-fiends sapping the actors' reputations for all they are worth). That would be the only reason (I can see right now)to make this movie worth seeing this in the theater, aside from social reasons.

Two action stars that are shamefully omitted are Samuel L. Jackson and Malcolm McDowell. If either one is brought in for a fourth, or the return of Charisma Carpenter, I will have a new reason to visit the franchise in the theater and pay good money.

Note: I just found this on Kelsey Grammer
http://www.deadline.com/2013/09/kelsey-grammer-joins-beefcake-brigade-in-the-expendables-3/
I may have to look up the YouTube trailer for Transformers: Age of Extinction
And on Banderas:
http://www.latina.com/entertainment/movies/antonio-banderas-joins-expendables-3#axzz2iJWF5ZC4
And one of the best-all-over finds:
http://www.liveforfilms.com/2013/08/30/first-look-at-arnie-harrison-ford-on-the-set-of-the-expendables-3/

Doing my research on Charisma: still unclear: but I get the feeling she is not in the film.
http://www.parade.com/28266/erinhill/0818-charisma-carpenter-the-expendables/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charisma_Carpenter
http://expendables.wikia.com/wiki/The_Expendables_3
http://www.starpulse.com/Actors/Statham,_Jason/Videos/?vxChannel=&vxClipId=&clip_id=cSffPT9OEtH5k1taOiyjTQ&video_title=The+Expendables+-+Exclusive+Interview+With+Charisma+Carpenter
?!? http://www.latina.com/entertainment/movies/exclusive-charisma-carpenter-says-shell-reprise-her-role-expendables-2#axzz2iJWF5ZC4

Star Trek: Into Darkness movie review

Actually, if I was blogging chronologically, I really ought to blog my review of Pacific Rim or Monster University first, but I wanted to get this one out-of-the-way ASAP so I can watch and/or read other reviews with my own unadulterated thoughts put down already. Once seen, such things cannot be unseen. That's your deep thought for moment. I really can't wait to see what Mr. Plinkett says about Star Trek 2. His movie reviews are outstanding, although I do not know if Plinkett is one man, many, a fictional person, a pseudonym(s), or what.

Anyway, NON SPOILER SECTION

I enjoyed all three movies, although my order of the three I mention would be: Pacific Rim, Monster University, Star Trek

I haven't been to many movies this year, or any year lately. All by itself, the fact I made the effort to see it in the theater was a compliment. I did not go to see the previous Star Trek, and it took me awhile (and a change in my thinking) to finally watch it.

The newest Star Trek movies basically got the Lost in Space movie treatment. Or Starsky and Hutch. Or the Beverly Hillbillies. They are not sequels to the original, or even remakes strictly speaking, but nostolgia-driven pop-culture-appealing gimmick-prone inspired-by entertainment-experiences.

To say that a movie with Kirk-Spock-McCoy and phasers and Klingons is good ol' Star Trek again is like saying my original Nintendo Star Trek 30th Anniversary game was right on par with the series in entertainment-genetics. Hey, the game was fun, with Harry Mudd, Saurian brandy, and Romulan birds-of-prey shooting at you (or threatening to). True to the classic series, I even learned to take along a few redshirts whenever bad guys were around.

SPOILER ALERT - SPOILER-FILLED SECTION - DO NOT ENTER WITHOUT CONSENT

I enjoyed the movie, but on terms of a fun sci-fi movie. It certainly was not bad. And I have seen some bad sci-fi movies, recently and in the past, so I am grateful for that.

So, in no partcular order, my gripes.
Khan crying, Spock crying, Kirk crying
Khan's defeat was not because of his 20th Century 2-Dimensional thinking, but rather a rather silly mistake (owing to a underestimation of Spock).
Khan was not Indian (tan-skinned), but this is understandable in light of tan-skinned terrorists in movies being a delicate proposition
Scotty not being replaced with an experienced Starfleet engineer (while docked at Earth for goodness sake! This was the most stupid part of the whole movie, except maybe the crying)

My compliments:
Carol Marcus showing up for perhaps more than one movie.
The idea that Khan and Carol Marcus are in this universe suggest boundless gimmick possibilities (wouldn't it be fun if Dax, Harry Mudd, and Gary Seven show up?).
The cameo of Leonard Nimoy's Spock
The unexpectedness of the Kirk-radiation plot twist
The reappearance of the peerless Captain Pike

I expect I will think of more, but let me get this posted.

Hey, this guy wasn't in Jurassic Park: Carnotaurus

http://images4.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20120903195505/primalcarnagethegame/images/thumb/8/84/Carnotaurus.png/640px-Carnotaurus.png

http://www.wikidino.com/wp-content/uploads/Carnotaurus-M.Shiraishi-2.jpg

From my reading, I am given to understand that Carnotaurus (Meat-eating bull-lizard) was roughly contemporary with Tyrannosaurus Rex and Allosaurus, and of similar contour, but was off doing his own thing on the then-island of South America, which much like the Australia of then and now, was an isolated continent giving rise to unique forms.

Actually, also from my own reading, I recall many other examples of the peculiarity of South American fauna, represented even today by the sloths and their xenarthan brethren. You see, South America didn't connect up to North America directly until about the last Ice Age.

Apparently, I am just now learning something many 4-year-olds probably know. There is apparently a year 2000 Disney animated movie that features Carnotaurs fairly heavily. Gonna have to see that sometime.

http://disney.wikia.com/wiki/Dinosaur
http://disney.wikia.com/wiki/Carnotaurus

I am wondering if that's the dinosaur on the Turok animated movie cover.
There is so much genetic and evolutionary hanky-panky in Turok's Lost Land that I don't think it matters much.
http://donglutsdinosaurs.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Turok-DVD-697x10001.jpg

Star Trek: The Star Trek (2009) movie review

It's not exactly my review, but I do have a few additional comments.
Besides the fact these reviews are wonderfully smart AND entertaining.

Warning: Adult language and themes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FRNHpX5_Ek8 (short and metaphorical)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7dCJWr40raQ (full and lengthy)

Plinkett says wisely: "Now this is the most thing to remember when watching this movie. Star Trek is esentially a remake of the 1960s T.V. series. It's a film that specifically exploits the iconic images and phrases of the old T.V. show for mass audience appeal. It's really no different [in concept] than the 1998 remake of Lost in Space.... strictly for nostalgia exploitation. ... When you accept this fact, you can learn to enjoy the film more for what it is: a fun, action-packed nod to the old T.V. show...nothing more."

I was violently unhappy with Star Trek: The Star Trek until I realized I could pretend it said "inspired by Star Trek created by Gene Roddenberry"

Having Fun: watching great YouTube movie reviews

RedLetterMedia has put some excellent scifi movie reviews on YouTube. Last week, I went through most of their Star Trek movie reviews (spot on, even if I didn't always agree) and today watched one on Avatar and another of Star Wars 3: Revenge of the Sith.

I myself liked the Avatar movie, but even those loyal fans could see (and laugh at) the obvious story "borrows" from other films, like the animated Fern Gully or as RedLetter says, Dances with Wolves in Space.

His critisms are fair and many. The emotional components of the movie didn't bother me like they did him, but I loved his "disection" of the movie components. I just wish he had compared Jar Jar Binks's people with the Na'vi.

Generally, the worst things he could say is that the movie was light on story and character depth and heavy on digital effects and spoon-feeding (which I might call effective marketing, sadly enough).

It was really brilliant to compare the Avatar movie experience to a theme park ride.

The Sith criticisms were far less flattering, although just as fair. And many of them are unavoidably clear to all but the diehard fans. I personally mostly just had my own thoughts confirmed, although he did make quite a few points I had not considered. Like how a boy Han Solo was not in the movie, when every other Star Wars icon seems to have been sodomized for all it was worth. And RedLetter made comparions to the action in the Star Trek (new actors) movie which were very favorable...to Trek. I had not thought about what I took for granted in that movie.

His one omission that comes to mind: he failed to note that Jar Jar Binks (in the Senate) was instrument of the downfall of the whole Jedi society. Everyone seems to miss that fact, which I thought delicious irony.


Now, Star Wars is a "safe" subject for me, because it's not dear to my heart. His Star Trek: First Contact review was more challanging, personall, but not by much. In truth, his criticisms only pointed out things worth mentioning. It was fun to watch. So even when potentially insulting, RedLetter seems to deliver.

It reminds me of watching the Daily Show.

Varan idol figurine

It is hard to explain why I find this so amazingly cool. It's an obscure reference to an obscure monster in an obscure monster movie, beautifully rendered. It's listed as Price: 12,500 Yen, whatever that comes out to in dollars. I am doubtful that it is still available, however.

It's exceedingly ironic that an idol is the source of my fascination. Smacks of idolatry?

The website it's from, www.kaijukits.com, is interesting in and of itself.

Also, check out Varan Unleashed

Listen to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7p-b0rE2_7w
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=223JFA8zsaY&feature=share&list=PL5871002D4E8A850C
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pholQl7L8A0

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rHrEZ0bYzes (images)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ws_dP1PwuQs (theme music from Godzilla: Unleashed video game)

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ckaiCaG4UlI (maybe film reviews)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXH3QJrx98U (German military music? WHy?)
http://www.historyvortex.org/TohoInAmerica5.html

http://www.ebay.com/itm/X-Plus-12-internet-variant-Varan-monster-Godzilla-Marmit-Bandai-M1-Paradise-/121031803070
http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=160949760756&fromMakeTrack=true

【Description】

X-Plus 12" internet variant Varan monster Godzilla Marmit Bandai M1 Paradise

Here is a spikey 12" vinyl X-Plus prepainted figure of Varan, the orphan kaiju of Toho who was given a decidedly unspectacular production for his first and essentially final film appearance (unless you count his ragged costume being shown for a few seconds in Destroy All Monsters). But don't think that Toho's one-shot wonder is not pursued by collectors, partially due to his elusive nature and partially because he is one classic-looking reptilian monster, with a tough scaly hide and those distinguishing (and distinguished) spikes. X-Plus adds the requisite touch of making the spikes out of translucent vinyl, and this internet exclusive includes a 4" plus stone-textured version of the idol from Varan's island, making this the definitive Varan piece for that hole in your kaiju collection (unless you have the Paradise Varan, then you're in pretty good shape). Comes in the box unused as pictured.

“If you have any question, please ask me.

I’m looking forward to your contact!!

Happy Bidding”


http://tomkrohne.blogspot.com/2012/02/godzilla-all-monsters-attack-cartoon.html You gotta see this!

sci-fi backstage

RedLetterMedia has made some EXCELLENT reviews of Star Trek movies (and Star Wars, and Avatar, and many others). These have been uploaded onto YouTube fairly recently (2012) Star Trek Generations Star Trek: First Contact As much as I liked First Contact generally, I found his wit and critism to be severe but fair. And sometimes painfully spot-on. Star Trek: Insurrection I was impressed by factors I had not considered before, especially the comparison with the DMZ native Americans. Star Trek: Nemesis I liked the Nemeis review best, perhaps because I respected Nemesis the least of all the films. Yes, worse than I and V. His criticisms were spot-on. I was impressed.

I have been reading a bit about the history of the sci-fi genre and it's corresponding media ghetto.
I suggest some (in)famous essays: http://www.verysilly.org/lethem/lethems_vision.html (the link seems to have wandered around) The Squandered Promise of Science Fiction (Why Can't We All Just Live TOgether?), by Jonathan Lethem Things Are Tough All Over, by Ray Davis.
A concurrent e-mail exchange between Davis and Lethem is also a worthwhile read.

TV series Heroes

I said I was going to post more on natural history and ecology, and I had entirely intended to, but life intervenes. (Although on an ecology note, I heard on NPR this morning that the guest was estimating a 80%-90% chance Obama will succumb to the Keystone pipeline bill during his second term, despite his political base. Say it isn't so!) Well, my pre-wife bought me the box-set DVD collection of Heroes Season One. I finished it last night, and it was quite the thrill ride, but I am glad it is over. It was fun, but I am glad. Why? It was not a series that was convenient. It was not kind to it's audience (or at least the part represented by me). Here's why: there were very few story frameworks. It was not appropriately episodic. There were very few reliable endings. Now, cliffhangers during a two-parter are acceptable. Unresolved endings are acceptable. Hints that "the villian lived and will come back for revenge later" or somesuch are acceptable. Heroes was a continuous flow of story lines that felt like a 26-parter (I forget how many episodes the season had.) It was not until the season ended that I felt a little relief in the form of something resembling an ending. A TV series needs to be episodic, I think. It felt more like a made-for-tv movie. I guess that is a matter of taste, but I think I have precedent on my side. A talented creative team can form a wonderfully rich story taken as a whole, but with each installment being readable or watchable in and of itself. This may be been a matter of taste, and certainly makes good business sense for the TV series, but I wa unhappy with it. Storywise, I was especially disappointed that the whole series did not diverge much from the X-Men archetype. Wrapped up with that, I was also disappointed the eclipse (despite the series logo and pilot) wasn't much of a factor in the plot. Perpahs the solar eclipse was explained and incorporated later, but it was such promise as an alternative to the tired old mutation concept. Like the X-Men movies, heroes even featured a mutant conspiracy and government-sponsered genocide. And the concept of a villian-stealing-super-powers was one of their biggest innovations, but even that was taken from LXG (League of Extraordinary Gentlemen). Can you please point me to any example of innovation? I generally applaud the series, but I am very glad I caught it on DVD rather than immersed in the broadcast episodes. One of my largest applauds most go to the casting of Malcolm McDowell as a great, multi-faceted villian. I have caught his performances on other occasions, and this was one of the best roles. A role befitting him. I am still annoyed that Star Trek Generations so wasted his potential. Although the same happened with F. Murray Abraham in Star Trek: Insurrection, so I guess it's a sad habit of the franchise. Speaking of Trek, seeing the reboot Spock (Quinto) as Sylar was interesting, and very good casting also. George Takei had a good "peice of the action." Oh, and do you recognize this guy? I knew he looked familiar! Erick Avari was Daniel's Abados father-in-law on Stargate, plus a million other things, including bit roles in Star Trek: Enterprise, Babylon 5, Independace Day, and Lois and Clark, among others. And he was in The 13th Warrior, too! Speaking on Insurrection earlier, I did a quick search on YouTube, and although it says little to nothing about Abraham, it's well done: http://www.youtube.com/watch?NR=1&v=qlV3bsafkq0&feature=endscreen

Exciting movie! Pacific Rim, great sounding mainstream monster movie

This is a movie about giant manmade robots battling with giant biological monsters in defense of Mankind (expected Summer 2013 (July?). And it's no "B movie" but as big a blockbuster adventure movie as the Spider-man or X-Men movies. The official website with the latest news: http://www.pacificrim-movie.net/ I have not been keeping up-to-date, and the newest Star Trek movie is also being something to note, apparantly titled Trek: Into Darkness (expected release also summer 2013). This link talks about both: http://www.tgdaily.com/entertainment/67862-star-trek-and-pacific-rim-trailers-about-to-drop And do you know who Ron Perlman is? I wasn't so sure until I saw him present on the discussion panel for Pacific Rim. WATCH PANEL http://www.aintitcool.com/node/57081 It's a bit embarrassing I hadn't realized he was the Reman Viceroy in Star Trek Nemesis. I really enjoyed his performance in Enemy at the Gates, but he is best known as the Hellboy. Well, now that I know who was under the Reman make-up, I am even more disappointed in Nemesis than ever before. It's almost as bad as the unforgivable misuse of the talents of Malcolm McDowell in Generations. Both of the actors had the potential to be the most memorable, badass villians imaginable. But they came off...uninspired. But I digress... http://www.comicbookresources.com/?page=article&id=30450 Pacific Rim and Guy Davis http://robot6.comicbookresources.com/2012/04/two-things-you-didnt-know-about-guy-davis-and-pacific-rim/ http://guydavisartworks.blogspot.com/2012/04/home-from-pacific-rim.html http://guydavisartworks.wordpress.com/ I know of people who have been very excited about The Hobbit. And I can't quite blame them, and that movie is a cool thing, but not quite worth the money to see it in a fancy theatre premiere. I am happy with the $2 theater, thank you. I've waited this long... However, I might be tempted to splurge on Pacific Rim and see it right when it comes out.

movies seen recently

Let's see...Cowboys Versus Aliens Kung Fu Panda 2 (?) Expendables 2 Watch (Ben Stiller) The Good Girl http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confucianism

The Internet Has Failed Me...

I've been searching for an image from James Careron's Avatar for parts of yesterday and today, and to be honest far too much time wasted.

I really enjoyed the movie, but my interests are on top of that. There is one shot in particular with one of the best...features I've seen in a movie, animated or otherwise. Bravo to movie's digital artists for creating such a life-like animation! It was of a female's perfectly contoured athletic Na'vi buttocks, to put it politely. It was when Jakesully was sent to capture a banshee-dragon. She was stalking the creatures, lying on her stomach, watching them before the dragons saw the party. She was an unnamed character, as far as I know. The image I attached will give you some idea, perhaps. I seem to have found all sorts of moments just before and right after.

The shot I am looking for should have been easy to find online, because of its sexy nature. But all my Google searches, safesearch on or off, came up suprisingly empty. And here I thought I had all the sexually-deprived Internet on my side.

John Carter of Mars update - trailer

The movie trailer for Disney's John Carter is out just recently: (looking good)


http://www.movieline.com/2011/12/watch-avatar-meets-attack-of-the-clones-in-the-new-john-carter-trailer.php

and here's an excited article from someone I don't think even read the books:
http://thefoxisblack.com/2011/12/01/3-reasons-why-im-excited-to-see-john-carter/

'Avatar' movie Na'vi reproduction

I didn't see Avatar for a long time, but I really enjoyed it when I did.

I saw something online recently that got me thinking:

http://blogs.suntimes.com/scanners/2010/01/navi_sex_scene_found_how_they.html

Under the comments (and I hope this isn't offensive plagarism) one user writes:

"I could have sworn it was already clear in the film that they used the ponytail tendrils for sex - I'm sure I remember them showing the two make the connection, and there's certainly the "you'll go blind" joke if there was any doubt. In fact, just after watching the film I commented to someone that it make the Na'vi connections with the various animals decidedly disturbing - especially since the efforts to make these connections with the animals are forced on creatures that are trying to fight them off."

I don't recall any "going blind" joke in the version of the film I saw. Do you?

A commenter says:
"Uh, then what is Sigourney Weaver talking about when she says early in the movie to the folk trying out their Avatars: Don't play with that, you'll go blind."

Oo, this Colbert link is very cool.

And on that page I link to, among other comments, people have criticised the screenwriting and dialogue, especially the "It's cool, I'm there" line. I was shocked these people didn't seem to realize that this was good writing, in the sense of being true to their established characters. Jakesully is a self-described simpleton, and the woman has only a rudimentary understanding of English (although very good). And then, a screenplay -- even an award-winning one -- can't be judged by the standards of traditional literature. At its most effective, it is meant to convey storytelling to all the various creative minds involved during production.

And this article is informative, weather or not the link works (which I doubt)

Ooo, again. Lots of making-of details
And this one about some language building.

And a negative viewpoint

War rhinos and bio-terrorism speculation

While reading this blog article to distant xenomorphalogical interest (http://scienceblogs.com/tetrapodzoology/2007/03/war_rhinos.php) I got to thinking about kaiju used in war.

(I could explain what I am talking about, but I think it's kind of funny if I don't)

When I saw Jurassic Park III, I was really hoping that I was hearing hints of bio-warfare using dinosaurs. I was sad there hasn't been a JP 4, although eventually they did make Rush Hour 3 after all, so there is still hope.

Anyway, besides mad scientists (Mechani-Kong and Ebirah) and aliens (Monster Zero, etc) and lost civilizations (Megalon and Manda) are there many examples of kaiju-warfare? And I noticed all my examples are Japanese. What about American movies?

All I can think of that's American is Cyber-GINO. That's sad.
http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/reviews/81/1091734396.jpg

Ooh, ever hear of stegodon or sivatherium?

Mee-Shee movie zeuglodon

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Basilosaurus

http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51WT3PJAM6L._SL500_AA300_.jpg

Basically, a zeuglodon is an ancestor of the whale, a pre-whale, and can be thought of in the same sense as a mammoth or sabre-toothed tiger.

Unlike Water Horse and other similar movies, this one made a strong effort to present the "lake monster" as a mammal. I would *love* to read about the thought processes of the movie-makers in the design of the Mee-Shee creature effect, but I have yet to find that information.

I would have said "zeuglodonoid" but I thought adding yet another uncommon word to this mix would only confuse the issue horribly. Case in point, the fossil creature is formally named basilosaurus, a reptile/saurian name, and although the term zeuglodon is more appropriatly mammalian, it failed to be accepted into official taxonomic use. I, however, prefer the mammalian name, and so did Herman Melville.

The Mee-Shee movie creature is most certainly NOT an accurate rendering of the fossil record, and thus my interest in the "-oid" form of the word zeuglodon. From my cursory research thus far, and according to this website, the moviemakers patterned the Mee-Shee story on the Ogopogo, a "lake monster" said to live in Okanagan Lake in British Columbia, Canada. Due to the protestation of some American Indian leaders to whom the Ogopogo represents a spiritual and cultural icon, the creature's name was changed from the original title. Nowhere in the movie is either zeuglodon or basilosaurus mentioned, or even hinted at, but I found it difficult not to draw some fun "romantic zoology" conclusions.

Well, anyway, I saw a movie in the cheapo bin rack at a Rose's, and it caught my eye hugely. Mostly because of the startling zeuglodonoid on the cover, but also Jim Henson muppetry (rather than computer graphics) and Bruce Greenwood, an actor I am familiar with from Thirteen Days. It was a straight to DVD release in the U.S, and thus a surprise to me.

As far as the movie goes, I didn't think it was very well-done, personnally. It comes off remarkably overwrought and slow, the villians are killed vindictively, and the Mee-Shee creature effect is pretty un-loveable at its best. As a kids' movie, it falls flat, and as an adult movie it is too kiddish. Perhaps if Whoopi Goldbreg had been involved, as once planned, things might've been different, haha.



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9ehrL1Imdc
http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/films/reviews/meeshee-the-water-giant-pg-461839.html
http://www.newanimal.org/zeuglodons.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magic_in_the_Water
http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2007/aug/19/horror.actionandadventure
http://community.seattletimes.nwsource.com/archive/?date=20000501&slug=4018461
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/movies/2004090362_water25.html
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MFeAIBlNexs
http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/preview/story.html?id=8a1fa2ab-ce3f-44c5-a4ce-654b48c2d15d

Enable your bliss.

My blog title is a take on the phrase: "Follow your bliss"
Well, I love love love the new television show 'River Monsters' on Animal Planet. It tickles me for a various reasons. It's intense, unlike many 'nature' shows, even so far as described as "Action/Adventure." Further, it plainly shows the anthropolical and cultural distinctness in the areas he goes. I realize it is entertainment, and take it all with a grain of salt, but regardless is it very cool.

http://animal.discovery.com/videos/river-monsters-discovering-a-legend.html

But that isn't what this blog is about. I want to let others know what I have discovered, and to further encourage others to find ways to enjoy what they enjoy. There are entertainment forms I want nothing to do with, and even consider with revulsion, and yet I like to see people happy.

Well, I do not find cable affordable, and even if I did I might not get Animal Planet. My uncle has the same problem. I told him what I am telling you.

I went and found a pizza restaurant that, for the price of a burger dinner, can enjoy my one of my favorite past-times. I used to use a laundramat for similar purposes, although it was far less...comfortable, but also cheaper. So, think about it.

I have a friend how loves UFC (Ultimate Fighting Championships) but only sees them when he makes it out to a sports bar. This really isn't hardly any different.

http://affiliate.zap2it.com/tv/river-monsters-unhooked/EP01260437

(ah, and don't ask me why: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HU2ftCitvyQ)

Paul: quasi-scifi movie

It has taken me a while to get around to posting this, but I saw Paul the other weekend and I was both pleased and disappointed. More pleased than disappointed. And I applaud the genre it falls into: scifi about scifi fans, following in the footsteps of Galaxy Quest and quite a few others.

Other than the fact that Big Bang Theory isn't scifi, it represents part of the trend and its popularity.

Speaking of which, there were no references to Big Bang Theory in the movie. I mean, I grant that it was impossible to include references to all popular sci-fi icons, but at the same time, I thought there was too much empahasis on certain aspects and little outside of those 3: classic Trek, classic Star Wars, and E.T. Not even modern Trek or modern Wars. I have to say, that while I very much applaud the movie generally, I noticed many areas that I wanted to see. I accept that copywrite issues might have carried a lot of concern, but ways were possible. No Stargate references. I mean, just one measly Egyptian headress would've covered it. And Egyptian headress certainly aren't copywrited. And although the Gorn references were spectakularly funny to me, whatever happened to "Amok Time" and associated fight music and gladiator blugeons? I'm not terribly familiar with Dr. Who, but I didn't see that, either. Planet of the Apes? Spaceballs? Godzilla? War of the Worlds? What gives?

Oh, but tossing in the actress from Alien was a nice touch. But why weren't there more?

I really want to see the DVD extras to catch all the obscure references that I missed.

The ultimate and saddest irony is that this preview I found on YouTube has the only reference to 2001: A Space Oddysey I recall: