2010

A healthy reminder with the start of a new year.

Inception Trailer

Snow

Snow. Snow. Snow.

... WINTER STORM WARNING REMAINS IN EFFECT UNTIL 6 AM CST SATURDAY...

Ugh.

Film: Some People Call Me Obsessed Part 2

Below is a list of directors and films I've seen by them (along with a list of films I still need to see in their filmography).

Martin Scorsese:

Who's That Knocking at My Door
Mean Streets
Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore
Taxi Driver
Raging Bull
After Hours
The Color of Money
The Last Temptation of Christ
Goodfellas
Cape Fear
Casino
Kundun
Bringing Out the Dead
Gangs of New York
The Aviator
The Departed

Films I have not seen:

Boxcar Bertha
New York, New York
The King of Comedy
The Age of Innocence

Stanley Kubrick:

Killer's Kiss
The Killing
Paths of Glory
Spartacus
Lolita
Dr. Strangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
2001: A Space Odyssey
A Clockwork Orange
Barry Lyndon
The Shining
Full Metal Jacket
Eyes Wide Shut

Films I still need to see:

Fear and Desire

David Cronenberg:

Scanners
Videodrome
The Fly
Dead Ringers
eXistenZ
A History of Violence
Eastern Promises

Films I have not seen:

Stereo
Crimes of the Future
Shivers
Rabid
Fast Company
The Brood
Naked Lunch
M. Butterfly
Crash
Spider


Coen Brothers:

Blood Simple
Raising Arizona
Miller's Crossing
Fargo
The Big Lebowski
O Brother, Where Art Thou?
The Man Who Wasn't There
The Ladykillers
No Country for Old Men
Burn After Reading
A Serious Man

Films I have not seen:

Barton Fink
The Hudsucker Proxy
Intolerable Cruelty

Sam Peckinpah:

Ride the High Country
Major Dundee
The Wild Bunch
Straw Dogs
The Getaway
Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia
Cross of Iron

Films I have not seen:

The Deadly Companions
The Ballad of Cable Hogue
Junior Bonner
Pat Garrett and Billy the Kid
The Killer Elite
Convoy
The Osterman Weekend

Film: Some People Call Me Obsessed Part 1

Below is a list of directors and films I've seen by them (along with a list of films I still need to see in their filmography).

Sergio Leone:

Once Upon a Time in America
A Fistful of Dynamite
Once Upon a Time in the West
The Good, the Bad and the Ugly
For a Few Dollars More
A Fistful of Dollars
The Colossus of Rhodes

I have seen all of his films.

Ridley Scott:

Body of Lies
American Gangster
Kingdom of Heaven
Matchstick Men
Black Hawk Down
Hannibal
Gladiator
G.I. Jane
Thelma & Louise
Black Rain
Legend
Blade Runner
Alien
The Duellists

Films I have not seen:

A Good Year
White Squall
1492: Conquest of Paradise
Someone to Watch Over Me

Akira Kurosawa:

Stray Dog
Rashomon
Ikiru
Seven Samurai
Throne of Blood
The Hidden Fortress
The Bad Sleep Well
Yojimbo
Sanjuro
Red Beard
Dodesukaden
Dersu Uzala
Kagemusha
Ran
Madadayo

Films I have not seen:

Sanshiro Sugata
The Most Beautiful
Sanshiro Sugata Part II
The Men Who Tread on the Tiger's Tail
No Regrets for Our Youth
One Wonderful Sunday
Drunken Angel
The Quiet Duel
Scandal
The Idiot
I Live in Fear
The Lower Depths
High and Low
Dreams
Rhapsody in August

Steven Spielberg:

Jaws
Close Encounters of the Third Kind
1941
Raiders of the Lost Ark
E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial
Twilight Zone: The Movie
Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom
The Color Purple
Empire of the Sun
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade
Hook
Jurassic Park
Schindler's List
Amistad
The Lost World: Jurassic Park
Saving Private Ryan
A.I. Artificial Intelligence
Catch Me If You Can
Minority Report
The Terminal
Munich
War of the Worlds
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

Films I have not seen:

Duel
The Sugarland Express
Always


Clint Eastwood:

High Plains Drifter
The Outlaw Josey Wales
The Gauntlet
Firefox
Honkytonk Man
Sudden Impact
Pale Rider
Heartbreak Ridge
Unforgiven
A Perfect World
The Bridges of Madison County
Absolute Power
Blood Work
Mystic River
Million Dollar Baby
Flags of Our Fathers
Letters from Iwo Jima
Gran Torino

Films I have not seen:

Play Misty for Me
Breezy
The Eiger Sanction
Bronco Billy
Bird
White Hunter Black Heart
The Rookie
True Crime
Space Cowboys
Changeling
Invictus

Part 2 coming soon.

Human Language Circuitry and Other Stuff

The Foxp2 gene and the "Broca’s area" region of the brain might be the reason why we developed complex languages.

Now, genetic evidence may show how our language brain circuitry came about over the last half million years of human evolution. In a study published in Nature, Neuroscientists Genevieve Konopka and Daniel Geschwind at the University of California, Los Angeles have demonstrated that the human version of the FOXP2 gene –- one that mutated around the time humans developed the ability to talk –- regulates more than 100 other genes differently than the chimpanzee version of the gene. Other genes may also be involved, but there’s a good chance that this mutation helped us humans develop speech and language.
...
According to another recent study led by Chet Sherwood, a neuroscientist at George Washington University in Washington DC, a brain region critical to speech and language in humans developed substantially after humans split from chimpanzees. French physician Pierre Paul Broca identified this region of the brain studying brain-damaged patients incapable of uttering more than a few words. “Broca's area” typically occupies a much larger portion of the left half of the human brain than the right. Because right-handed humans also tend to process language in their left halves (this is reversed for lefties), some researchers think that lop-sidedness in Broca's area may help explain why humans –- and not chimpanzees –- developed language. Broca's area ballooned disproportionately during our species' evolution. Human brains are 3.6 times larger than those of chimpanzees, on average. And Broca’s area is more than 6 times larger in humans than chimpanzees according Natalie Schenker, a neuroscientist at the University of California, San Diego, who worked with Sherwood on the research

Wow.

But wait...

Marc Hauser, a professor of human evolutionary biology at Harvard University, cautions that it’s too early to draw too many conclusions regarding the genetic basis of the evolution of language circuitry in humans. "I would be extremely skeptical about drawing inferences," says Hauser.

Damn, you're no fun.

Wolfmother - Cosmic Egg

Live on iheartradio.



Mind. Blown.

The Duke Spirit

The Duke Spirit - Lassoo



When are they releasing a new album? No idea.

Debating the Right, the Far-Right, and More

I was searching my comments on BackType (It's called being bored) and found a couple interesting debates I had this year and last at Hotair. It is a conservative website, yet has the bloggers Allahpundit and Ed Morrissey, who both lean libertarian (Allahpundit more so than Ed). Charles from Little Green Footballs recently got into a little fight with Hotair and posted some of the more extreme comments that are present on the blog. While I think Charles goes a little overboard, these commentators do exist, as some of my debates will show. The following comment debates cover: Evolution, Sarah Palin, GLBT rights and Birtherism. I will post some excerpts of what I had to say, and give a link to the original blog post.

Evolution:
While not a very long debate, this one featured evolution deniers.
Excerpt from my comments:

This is what happens when you mix science and religion, the two should be separated. That doesn’t mean a scientist can’t have faith, yet s/he shouldn’t draw from his/her spiritual book to prove something.

...

Someone of faith can try to explain evolution and its coexistence with their religion, that’s fine. Yet when they omit chapters and misinterpret aspects of it (like Comfort), no, not okay.

Sarah Palin:
My feelings on Palin in a post about her starting a political group.
Excerpt from my comments:

I really wish this whole Palin phenomenon goes away. The right clings to her uncritically and the left exaggerates her faults. It’s just damn annoying now. Does anyone here really think she can handle 15 + debates in the Republican primaries for 2012? I don’t.

...

She had only a little more than two months of attacks on her in a campaign setting. Now spread that out to a year. Now spread that out to a year and a half. Her campaign would not be able to handle that amount of criticism while trying to maintain a clear message (i.e. spending more time persuading people that she is not the devil rather than persuading them why she is right to be president).

As for commitment, I see signs in her resigning as Governor as a clear indicator that she will not survive the primaries. Yet that’s just me.

...

I believe, along with others, that Palin resigned because of the onslaught of criticism against her (which came in the form of ethics complaints). Because of this criticism, she was not able to maintain her commitment as being Governor. She resigned if not wholly, partially because of this criticism. When looking at a candidate and whether or not they’ll be able to “handle” a campaign and stay committed, I look at past experiences. Resigning as Governor over criticism TO ME is a clear indicator she will not survive the primaries, and will ultimately drop out.

GLBT Rights:
Original post dealt with Rick Warren, Obama, and gay marriage.
Excerpt of my comments:

Marriage between homosexuals (and those who are transgender, etc.) would be between two consenting adults. I will say that again, two consenting…adults. To even compare or argue this slippery slope non-sense is absurd.

Onto the subject of equal rights. Some state that gays are actually allowed to marry…just someone of the opposite sex. I see that and raise you, “why are they not allowed in the military?” What is your legitimate argument on this? That they are allowed to serve…yet based on their mental thoughts…they have an inability to fight for our country, so no service for them? They cannot fight? They have an inability to translate Arabic (look it up)? Because of their thoughts?

That is a discriminatory practice of the State, an overbearing one at that. Some say “Hate Crimes” should not be in place because it considers the “thought” of the criminal. Yet the State in all its might should in this case (i.e. homosexuals serving in the military) consider the thought of an individual in relation to their sexual preferences to serve in the military? Please explain that one to me. I am listening.

...

Yet someone shouldn’t be restricted on the basis of their culture or beliefs from being married to another consenting adult. Someone who is into S&M can still marry, as long as it is to someone of the opposite sex. Someone who is very promiscuous can marry, as long as it is someone of the opposite sex. Whether or not homosexuals ascribe to certain practices or whether they are liberal or conservative in their sexuality, should not be in consideration on whether or not they should marry.

Let’s stop kidding ourselves here. The only reason why people are against gay marriage is either their religious beliefs or some type of neo-Darwinian argument. Simple as that.

...

On the same token [name omitted] ,what about those who are medically incapable of procreating? Should they also be, on the basis of natural infertility, be prevented from marrying (because they can’t procreate and help the species out). As far as I know they, heterosexual infertile people, are still allowed to marry.

Birtherism:
As for me debating (and mocking) Birtherism, click here.
Excerpt of a commentator and my response:

Who is this “DanStark,” Andrew Sullivan?

...

Funny how Sullivan is a Trig-Birther. It would be really funny to see Trig-birthers and Obama-Birthers fight it out. Or really tragic, whatever.

...

http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/born_in_the_usa.html
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/birthcertificate.asp

If you believe all of this is a forgery, then you sir are in fact a conspiracy theorist.

Hell, take pride in it, the JFK theorists didn’t stop after documents were released in the early 90’s.

The end.

Click here and it all makes sense.

Avatar: Boxoffice Bomb or Mega Hit?

Next week, one of the most expensive films in recent memory will be released. From the mind of James Cameron comes a Sci-fi action adventure tale of planetary conquest. The budget? Depending on your source, from $237 million to $500 million. It is hard nowadays to not see a trailer or spot for the film when you turn on the television or go to the theatre. Yet will the massive amounts of advertisement draw people in? Remember, word of mouth is killer nowadays for films, and an instant hit can become a dud in a matter of weeks. The best model I can think of, with a large worldwide release similar to Avatar is the Pirates of the Caribbean franchise. The second of the franchise, Dead Man's Chest, only grossed $423,315,812 in the United States (okay, maybe I shouldn't use the word "only"). The international gross for the film? $642,344,000. Which leads me to believe that Avatar's success will be dependent on its success worldwide (I'm also assuming the $500 million budget figure is correct). When looking at Google Trends in comparison to the Pirates of the Caribbean films, Avatar seems to have received a good amount of buzz. Yet with graphics equivalent to video game cutscenes, I have a feeling it's going to bomb. Avatar is no Titantic. Avatar is no Terminator 2. Will I be proven wrong? Probably. Its competition for the rest of the month is pretty weak. The only film I could see possibly knocking Avatar off from the number one spot is Sherlock Holmes . There is also the escapism factor, which will certainly help the film. Yet with no big names to carry the film, like Johnny Depp or Christian Bale, I doubt it will be a success.

It's a wait and see game from here on out, will James Cameron prove me wrong?

Update: Be sure to check my post "Eating Crow..."

Repost: My Political Identity

The following is a repost from February 26, 2009 with some revisions:

In the meantime, I'm going to give two lists describing my political views. It is hard to characterize myself, so I'm going to give positive descriptions, and negative descriptions to help those people who want to either identify with me or insult me. There might be some contradictions on both lists, yet this is to be expected (for in the positive column, I take elements from each description and/or viewpoints). Some in the negative column might include off base descriptions, though that doesn't mean I view them negatively (i.e. I have nothing against someone being conservative, which I am not, though those who would identify me as one do).

Positive:
-moderate
-secular (yet not restrictive of religion)
-tolerant
-liberal internationalist
-for universal human rights
-idealist
-capitalist
-free trader (from a moderate stance)
-not a hawk or a dove
-individualist
-if not limited government, efficient government
-promotion of liberal democracy (and belief of)
-for gun rights (to a point)
-social equality
-belief in federalism (to a point)
-marriage for all (i.e. marriage for GLBT people)
-military service for all (i.e. acceptance of GLBT people in the military)
-against ethnic profiling
-fair response to illegal immigration (legalization, fines and closed border)
-drug decriminalization (users go to treatment not jail/prison, fines)
-for helping Iraq and Afghanistan transition from developing democracies to liberal democracies
-support for unions (to a point)
-support for business owners (to a point)
-for fiscal responsibility and decreasing the deficit
-optimist (i.e. I'm against alarmism)



Negative:
-imperialist
-cultural imperialist
-right-winger
-conservative
-liberal
-bleeding heart
-RINO
-Democrat
-heathen
-capitalist
-democracy promoter (against the will of [insert group])
-hawk
-militarist
-fascist
-backward
-emotionless
-colonizer
-bigot
-neocon (neoconservative)
-in denial

Political parties I have voted for (this does not mean I endorse them now):
Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party of Minnesota
Republican Party
Independence Party of Minnesota
Green Party of Minnesota

Obama's Speech on Afghanistan

In September, I asked why Obama was addressing the nation on health-care yet not Afghanistan. Well I guess the wait is over, last night Obama revealed his plan for the troubled nation, stating he will deploy 30,000 additional troops to Afghanistan.



Click here for the full transcript.
Below is an excerpt:

Our overarching goal remains the same: to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and to prevent its capacity to threaten America and our allies in the future.

To meet that goal, we will pursue the following objectives within Afghanistan. We must deny al Qaeda a safe haven. We must reverse the Taliban's momentum and deny it the ability to overthrow the government. And we must strengthen the capacity of Afghanistan's security forces and government so that they can take lead responsibility for Afghanistan's future.

We will meet these objectives in three ways. First, we will pursue a military strategy that will break the Taliban's momentum and increase Afghanistan's capacity over the next 18 months.

The 30,000 additional troops that I'm announcing tonight will deploy in the first part of 2010 -- the fastest possible pace -- so that they can target the insurgency and secure key population centers. They'll increase our ability to train competent Afghan security forces, and to partner with them so that more Afghans can get into the fight. And they will help create the conditions for the United States to transfer responsibility to the Afghans.
...
Second, we will work with our partners, the United Nations, and the Afghan people to pursue a more effective civilian strategy, so that the government can take advantage of improved security.

This effort must be based on performance. The days of providing a blank check are over. President Karzai's inauguration speech sent the right message about moving in a new direction. And going forward, we will be clear about what we expect from those who receive our assistance. We'll support Afghan ministries, governors, and local leaders that combat corruption and deliver for the people. We expect those who are ineffective or corrupt to be held accountable. And we will also focus our assistance in areas -- such as agriculture -- that can make an immediate impact in the lives of the Afghan people.
...
Third, we will act with the full recognition that our success in Afghanistan is inextricably linked to our partnership with Pakistan.

We're in Afghanistan to prevent a cancer from once again spreading through that country. But this same cancer has also taken root in the border region of Pakistan. That's why we need a strategy that works on both sides of the border.

Even though I have some problems with Obama's new plan for Afghanistan (i.e. after 18 months, what happens exactly? If conditions are worse than they are now, are we still leaving? Or is the exit condition based?), I agree with most of it. In the coming days we'll see if the rest of the nation is on board.

Update: Be sure to check Grading Obama's Afghanistan Speech by The New Centrist.