Thursday, October 25, 2007
I just saw Lars and The Real Girl, with Ryan Gosling. I'm a huge Ryan Gosling fan and I've been waiting to see this movie for some time now. I give it a B+. I think Gosling's character, Lars, was very well played but the actions in the movie didn't ring true. Gosling did give a very good performance, as usual, but the storyline was weak.
It's obvious from the start that Lars is a damaged person. He doesn't like to be touched and he's detached from his family--apparently this is a result of early family tragedies. He is a functional being, with the ability to hold a job with very limited social skills. I will try not to give anything away that people can't get from the trailer or written reviews, but the first deviation from reality was when Lars actually ordered a man-made doll over the internet. It just doesn't seem within the character's ability to take such a proactive step in his attempt to find a companion/mate.
Several other things occur within the small northern town once Lars' companion, Bianca, arrives that also doesn't really mesh. I think it's great when people pull together to support those going through rough times, but even in a small town, resources (mostly financial) would definitely be an area of interest--but not in the movie.
The movie also touches on character--what it means to "be a man" and "do the right thing." This was probably the sweetest part of the film, but again, it was all just a little too simplistic and convenient. Now, even though I found several flaws with the movie, I would still recommend people see it. I think it does portray the nice and purposeful side of religion--to express tolerance, acceptance and a sense of community.
I do think Gosling put on a little weight for the movie, but I don't care--he's still hot. So, go see the movie--you'll like it. Plus, you'll get to see Ryan Gosling......who can knock that? In the meantime, I'll just be fantasizing about this being me:
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
I mean, c'mon, ladies. How do you leave a bathroom (public and/or private) stall with a dirty toilet seat? Do you not think about wiping it off? If so, why not? Aren't you embarrassed when people enter the stall after you and will see the mess you've left? Why not just wipe it off with toilet paper before you leave the stall? Please help me understand.
Sunday, October 21, 2007
I'll have three cheese
I have to say, when I first noticed the sign I didn't think much of it—so many places offer free WiFi now. But then, I'd pass the sign several times a week and each time I saw it I found it more and more intriguing—then just pretty damn funny. Why is it that a fast-food chain (that sells 59 cent hamburgers) can offer free WiFi as a service to its customers, but several hotel chains, airports, coffee shops, etc…, cannot—or does not, rather. It seems a bit incongruous—dontcha think?
Yesterday, according to the New York Times, "The United Nations
That endorsement opens the way for many of the union's member countries to devote a part of the public radio spectrum to WiMax, and receivers for it could be built into laptop computers, phones, music players and other portable devices.
Unlike Wi-Fi, this mobile Internet technology can hand off a signal from antenna to antenna, thus allowing a device to hold a connection while in motion. WiMax potentially can move data at 70 megabits a second across 65 kilometers, or 40 miles. Current fixed-line broadband connections have speeds of about 2 megabits a second."
Doesn't it seem like we are behind the times, at times? I mean, the technology to offer everyone completely wireless access to the internet exists. It's there. Because we live in a bureaucratic democracy, we have to first worry about regulation and establish so many vaguely written policies, to be challenged in court, before the people are given the "power" to access the world. I think this is probably a measure to ensure the continuity of the middle class. A democracy such as ours depends on the middle class to ensure its existence and viability. The upper class doesn't have to worry about finance and policy and therefore are willing to pay a premium (literally and figuratively) to separate themselves from the rest of us. But, again, I digress.
Just imagine how much free wireless internet access for all could benefit our capitalistic economy. If internet access were free, how many purchases would be made by online shoppers waiting for their flight to board at the airport. How many online movies would be downloaded, music purchased, etc, if people had all access all the time? When people have to pay for mobile internet access, it reduces revenue because people have to either find hot-spots for their individual internet service provider (ISP), or they just don't bother. But, again, due to the lack of regulations, free internet access for all is still a long ways away. It seems as though the "Powers That Be" would be able to establish some sort of regs for ISP's that resemble the radio and TV stations. WiMax might provide an outlet for this to occur—only time will tell.
I had a lot of ideas for this blog but due to lack of time and planning, I didn't get to shape my ideas into well-developed complete arguments. I'll try to come back and do so as time permits, but in the meantime, lemme know your thoughts. And, please change that Diet Coke into a chocolate milk shake, please. If you're gonna splurge, do it right. See ya at