Repelled

Asher, Amy and I were soundly beaten back from Stanley hot springs yesterday by waist deep snow about a mile from the prize. After today's additional foot, I can't imagine getting in there until March, even with snowshoes. I sank to my chest with them on at one point, then decided to throw in the towel. Sigh.

Record snows I hear, the most in Moscow since 1996. I love a real winter.

From All Over

I've scanned some more film. These are from the Austin wedding, College Station, home in Wisconsin over break, a few leftovers from Eagle Cap and Moscow, and two from our road trip between Texas and Idaho. The black and white wedding photos were shot with Kodak TMax 400, and the others in Fuji NeoPan 1600. The bus and Eagle Cap were Fuji 100.

Hardy Har

I heard one of the best expressions of disgust with Christ Church today:

"They're just so...inclusive."

We Dare to Disagree

After much thought and discussion with Amy, I can safely say that The Golden Compass was the worst movie I saw in 2007. My interest in and opinion of this movie enjoyed quite the roller coaster ride, which ended up being far more enjoyable than sitting through the movie itself. I began with a low opinion when I first saw the gigantic banner at the Village Centre Cinemas this fall, and thought “Lame. More child-oriented fantasy schlock that somehow looks even cheaper and more derivative than the Harry Potters. And somehow Daniel Craig got roped in.”

A few weeks later I read an article on the books and coming movie in the Atlantic which stressed the anti-Christian vibe of the books, and the Hollywood diluting of said vibe. While the article was somewhat interesting, I still haven’t finished it and Pullman’s whiny complaints that his books haven’t caused as much controversy as Harry Potter stirred up, did little to entice me into the theater.

And then I read Joshua’s thoughts. While I don’t usually notice the same things he does in films, the overwhelmingly positive (and interesting) review was too much to resist. Amy and I saw it in Texas over the break, and we have yet to think of one good thing about it, with the possible exception of Kate Bush’s hilarious song over the credits (Lyraaaa, Lyraaaaaaaaa…..and her face….full of grace).

First off, Lyra’s character was embarrassingly unsympathetic for me. I just can’t handle the “sassy and defiant child hero/ine,” who always knows what’s best beyond her years, and is constantly flying in the face of authority to “teach them a lesson.” I don’t know if it’s the sheer annoyance of kids who are actually like that, but think that their rebellion against doing chores is a worthy cause, or the fact that bratty know-it-all kids being heroes is tired news in movies. Meh.

Josh’s review noted a number of ways that the movie inadvertently glorified Christian principles, which sounded like an interesting nugget lodged in an attempt to humiliate Christianity. I went into it knowing that I probably wouldn’t feel as strongly about these moments, but was prepared to look for them. When the credits rolled however I found myself not only lacking the conviction of themes seen, but flat out disagreeing with a few, specifically the line that, “all human beings are composed of dust and when humans die, they become dust again.” It was during the witch attack scene (?) that I realized that the human bodies were dying and lying cold, while the animal-soul vaporized into dust. To me, that spoke more of a direct connection between a man’s body dying and his soul vanishing into nothingness.

While we’re on the subject of witch attacks, it was moments like that that really ruined the movie for me. I really wouldn’t have minded if Jesus wasn’t jumping out of every character and situation if they had at least put together a show that didn’t feel like Eragon, that is, written by a 13-year old. Why did witches have to appear? Well, to defeat the crazy-ass Icelandic army that similarly came out of nowhere. And even if these leaps in the story remained, aesthetically the movie was one of the hardest for me to sit through. I thought the CGI was absolutely wretched compared to the Lord of the Rings trilogy. As with Narnia, I felt that the CGI just looked awful in lots of light. Peter Jackson’s films came off almost spotless because of the gloom and, of course, the forgotten arts of costume, makeup, and camera angles instead of CGI.

CDs Acquired in the Last Few Months

The Lonely H - Hair
Apollo Sunshine - s/t
Fruitbats - Spelled in Bones
Beulah - The Coast is Never Clear
Muse - Absolution
Albert Hammond Jr. - Yours to Keep
The Apples in Stereo - Discovery of a World Inside the Moone
Beirut - The Flying Club Cup
Smashing Pumpkins - Zeitgeist
The Stills - Without Feathers

Goodness

Wha?

Well Will, I suppose after so many years of being the Fresh Prince something like this was to be expected. And I'll probably watch it.

Rad Pictures of the Packer Game

This looked like the game to be at.

Beeeeeyoouuuu

While I maintain that I Am Legend was great, I have been thinking a bit on one of it's flaws/shortcomings/whathaveyous:

Computer Generated Imagery - CGI use nowadays in film might be likened to the use of synth in 80's music. "Why use a guitar/drum kit/human voice? We can just hit this key!" It seems that the excitement at the possibilities of electronic elements proved too great a temptation for most. There have been countless times I've heard a great 80's song covered by some guy and his guitar that sounds way better than the soulless, bleeping original. I'm all about electronic beeps and hums thrown in to augment a great rock song, or electronically based music (sometimes) but the problem seemed to be the forcing of a perfectly good rock song through a Casio mold.

Likewise with CGI in movies, there's definitely a way to use it that doesn't feel like an obnoxious keyboard solo, which is sometimes what the special effects in Legend felt like. Could they really not find someone to lie on a table with makeup on and breath quickly? Or someone else, again with makeup, to run out of a dark doorway and frown at Will Smith? Why did it ALL have to be CGI? I'm actually surprised that Sam the dog was real. Sure, there were a few times that the Darkseekers were pulling some crazy shiz that necessitated some computer help, but it should have been by far the exception. This is one of the areas that The Lord of the Rings excelled in. Wherever possible characters were living, breathing, often slime-excreting characters. CGI was used to create vast numbers of them, or to render a creature that probably couldn't be physically created realistically enough to blend with the film. Legend, with a youthful Tom Cruise, is another example of what costuming can pull off, and that movie was made in 1985.

I think that much like we look back on 80's music and laugh (or I do anyway) at the excessive use of electronics, we'll look back at movies of this time and chuckle at the excess of CGI. And not because the effects will look out of date or "old," just like we don't listen to an 80's hit and think "Man that fake trumpet sounds sooo fake, we could totally make a fake trumpet sound way better now." Thankfully we came out of the era of replacing instruments with synths and returned to using a snare drum where a snare drum would sound good.

So, like Mr. Gibbs, I'm kinda looking forward to more guys in rubber suits in the cinematic future.