Here's some of Fred's musings on the matter...
Two ways exist of looking at Wikileaks, the site that publicizes secret military documents and videos. The first is held self-interestedly by the Pentagon and by Fox News, the voice of an angry lower-middle class without too much education. These believe that Wikileakers are traitors, haters of America, who give aid and comfort to the enemy and endanger the lives of Our Boys.Plenty more at the above link. If you've never had the pleasure of reading a Fred Reed essay, I've been told that it's quite like the literary equivalent to drinking several shots of Jack Daniels. Not that I personally know what that is like, mind ya...Implicit in the Foxian view is a vague idea that the leaks give away important—well, stuff. You know, maybe frequencies of something or other, or locations of ambushes or, well, things. Important things. The Taliban will use this information to kill American soldiers. The notion is vague, as are those who hold it, but emotionally potent.
The other view, held usually by people who have some experience of Washington, is that the Pentagon is worried not about the divulging of tactical secrets, but about public relations. Wikileaks doesn’t endanger soldiers, insists this way of looking at things, but the war itself, and all the juiceful contracts and promotions and so on entailed by wars.
Which is obvious if you look at what the military (the president, remember, is commander-in-chief) actually does. Remember the military’s frantic efforts to suppress the photos of torture at Abu Ghraib, photos of prisoners lying in pools of blood while grinning girl soldiers play with them? These had zero tactical importance. They did however threaten to arouse the Pentagon’s worst enemy.
The American public.
Slashdot is spreading the news this afternoon about a massive ejection of high-energy particles from the the sun. It's headed toward Earth and should reach us sometime tomorrow. Among other things it means that we should be enjoying some lovely aurora, if you're fortunate to live at a high-enough latitude.
Awright well, here's the thing: I've noticed in the past several years that most every time we get hit by a solar flare, that there's usually a massive earthquake that happens not very long afterward.
Considering that the inside of the Earth is a molten piezoelectric dynamo that generates this planet's magnetic field and that the plates of the planet's crust are floating on top of it, it doesn't seem that coincidental a correlation. I mean, if every now and then the sun ejects some highly electromagnetic particles toward us, seems only fitting that there'd be some agitation of the works beneath us.
So... will an earthquake be occurring in the near future? More than one, perhaps?
I decided awhile back that the next time there was a report of this kind of solar weather that I'd make a note of it on this blog, just to see if anything happens. And whether or not it does well, guess this'll be my own lil' contribution to the body of observable data on geological activity :-)
Tonight I'm sitting in Reidsville... but my heart is at Fort A.P. Hill.
Here's bidding a hearty "hello" to all 45,000 or so of my friends who are celebrating the 100th anniversary of the Boy Scouts in style this week :-)
And should I play the original StarCraft first? Believe it or not, for all of the original's legendary renown, I've yet to play it.
(I'm way behind on my video games. I still need to finish Batman: Arkham Asylum sometime. Not to mention Halo 3: ODST.)
Anyway, StarCraft II looks incredibly promising. Just wondering if it's worth dropping sixty bucks for it, or if I should wait :-)
Some of us have pondered and discussed that question at great length. If you're one of my Facebook friends, you've probably noticed that I describe myself to be an "Irreligious follower of Christ" in my religious affiliation. And that's just what it means: my identity is found in Christ. He and He alone establishes and defines my spiritual nature.
Do I enjoy worshiping our Lord with other followers of Christ? Absolutely. And I enjoy that regardless of what kind of "denomination" they might happen to be. Christ is magnificently bigger than our feeble and flawed perceptions. Where we invariably fail, He does succeed.
That is how I can fellowship with many different manner of those who follow Him, be they Baptist or Methodist or Presbyterian, or non-denominational, or whatever. Does that mean I agree with or understand everything that other Christians hold to? No, it does not. But those things don't really matter anyway. We don't have to agree with each other 100% on issues that in the end have nothing to do with our faith in Christ. When He is truly our focus, He will overcome our foibles and errors. As much as I have faith in Him, I have faith in that as well.
That said, I can understand where author Anne Rice is coming from. Unfortunately, the message she is conveying is going to get lost in the rush to proclaim that she is "abandoning Christianity".
You might have heard already that Rice has announced on her Facebook page that she is giving up being a Christian. And as this sort of thing is apt to do, it has generated a whole heap of interest and controversy.
Here's Rice's post that started it all...
For those who care, and I understand if you don't: Today I quit being a Christian. I'm out. I remain committed to Christ as always but not to being "Christian" or to being part of Christianity. It's simply impossible for me to "belong" to this quarrelsome, hostile, disputatious, and deservedly infamous group. For ten ...years, I've tried. I've failed. I'm an outsider. My conscience will allow nothing else.That was on Wednesday. Yesterday afternoon, Rice made a follow-up comment on her Facebook page...
"1If I speak in the tongues[a] of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. 2If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing." (1 Corinthians. St. Paul).Between that one and her initial post, Rice made a few other posts. And in them she expressed what can only be deemed dire frustration with the expectation that as a Christian, she and anyone else with that label must be "anti-gay... anti-feminist... anti-Democrat... anti-science", etc.
Is she right? Let's ask ourselves, and let's be honest in answering this: Could it be that we as Christians define ourselves more by what we are NOT than by Christ who we claim to have?
If you read this blog on a regular basis, you know about a certain cult in my area. This is a group of self-professed "Christians" who claim to be "the church that you read about in the Bible". And these people do nothing else but apparently spend every waking moment hurting others, harassing others, slandering others... all in the name of God. These "Christians" have nearly 10 hours of live television a week. What do they do with that airtime? Preach about how everyone else (especially Baptists, who according to them are without exception all damned to Hell) is wrong. These "Christians" are so overwhelmed with their hatred that they can't see that they don't have Christ at all. To them it is about "this is who we aren't", and not "this is Christ within us who has overcome us".
That is what Christianity does become, when it ceases to be about Christ. It will turn into a fixation on our own meager understanding: something that scripture warns us not to lean on or place our faith in. For without God, man inevitably places his trust in his own fallen nature.
And then, all too often, we actually excuse that away... in the name of God. In the name of Christ who came to love us and redeem us.
Reading Anne Rice's words of the past few days, I cannot BUT hear her frustration. And not with Christ, but with what is being done by some who proclaim Christ's name.
I don't see Anne Rice giving up Christ at all. And anyone who thinks otherwise should read the post that she made later yesterday afternoon...
My faith in Christ is central to my life. My conversion from a pessimistic atheist lost in a world I didn't understand, to an optimistic believer in a universe created and sustained by a loving God is crucial to me. But following Christ does not mean following His followers. Christ is infinitely more important than Christianity and always will be, no matter what Christianity is, has been, or might become.Very beautifully put. And if I dare say so, Miss Rice has better articulated what it means to follow Christ than most anyone else that I have seen of late.
Read her words again: she has been led to be "an optimistic believer in... a loving God", from previously being "a pessimistic atheist".
Hey, I've been there too. Lots of us have. It's not something we're particularly proud of. But then, God never intended any of us to be whatever we might have once been. It's by His grace that we can grow from that.
So is Anne Rice abandoning Christianity? Apparently so... but I can't blame her. And that's no reason to condemn her either (as many will no doubt rush to do). Rice is asserting that her faith is in Christ, and that her faith is not in Christianity.
Anne Rice has perhaps grown more in ten years as a follower of Christ, than very many who spend their entire lifetimes boasting His name. We should consider what she is saying.
But somehow or another I've gotten to see the following, and will share my thoughts on them accordingly.
This was the first movie I've seen in a theater since April or May, and I saw it on opening day with my filmmaking partner "Weird" Ed. And I was very pleasantly surprised at how well this turned out. The Predator franchise holds a special place in my heart: Predator 2 was the very first movie that I saw after getting my driver's license. Maybe that's coloring my perceptions but I've never understood the flak that movie seems to get. Alien vs. Predator was okay, and I haven't seen Alien vs. Predator: Requiem yet (I've a cousin who swears its better than most people say it is).
With Predators, we get a smart and fresh throwback to what started it all: the John McTiernan-directed 1987 sci-fi action thriller that was almost certainly the first film ever to feature two future state governors (when does Carl Weathers get his turn, anyway?). Instead of it being one unseen alien hunter stalking his prey in the jungles of Central America, Predators brings some of the most cold-blooded and capable soldiers and murderers on Earth to the game preserve of an extra-solar planet: pawns in the games of several Predators.
This isn't a movie focusing on the Predators as a species or a culture. Rather, Predators follows the formula that made the original film work so well: making it the story of the humans and how they cope and try to survive their predicament. What the heck the Predators are exactly, is just two scoops of ice cream and a cherry on top of the real meat of the tale. And with a strong cast including Adrien Brody, Topher Grace and Danny Trejo among many others, director Nimrod Amtal and producer Robert Rodriguez deftly play up the characters' strengths and weaknesses against each other. My one big complaint about Predators is that Laurence Fishburne's character could have been turned into something much bigger and more compelling. As it is, he's barely in the story.
But that was my only real quibble with Predators. Perhaps the sequel(s) will make up for it. The film ends on, not the most ideal note but certainly one holding more promise than any other Predator film that I've seen. I'll be looking forward to seeing where Rodriguez takes it next.
So far this is my favorite movie of the summer, because The A-Team is everything that a summer blockbuster should be: big, dumb, loud, outrageous and fun!
Now being a good child of the Eighties, I was of course leery at how the much-beloved television series would translate to the big screen. Well, The A-Team succeeds in much the same way that 1993's The Fugitive triumphed as a movie: by not trying to be the original basic material of the television show.
How should I put this? Okay... this is the A-Team. It's just not The A-Team of the series that ran on NBC... and it doesn't have to be either. This is still about four crack commandos who get sent up the river by the United States government for "a crime they didn't commit", then "promptly escape" to become soldiers of fortune. All of the classic elements from the show are here, like B.A.'s van and Hannibal's plans. It's just different. Like how Frank Miller gave us a different Batman in The Dark Knight Returns and wound up giving that character a revolutionary and direly-needed makeover.
Two examples of this stick out in my mind. First, Liam Neeson as Hannibal Smith. Neeson knows he's not George Peppard and that's fine: he's not attempting to channel Peppard's spirit into his own take on Hannibal. Instead, I saw Neeson bring his own talents and perspectives to the role: there's a kind of gravitas in 2010's Hannibal Smith that perhaps Liam Neeson is the only actor who could have done this with. I appreciated and even admired that.
And then there is Quinton "Rampage" Jackson as B.A. Baracus. The role that Mr. T played on the TV show (by not doing much more than just being himself). How the heck does anyone portray Mr. T as a character without it being Mr. T himself?! Again, as with much else in this movie, the answer is "by not trying to be Mr. T at all". Make no mistake: that is B.A. Baracus you're seeing in The A-Team movie. It's just a different interpretation of the character: one that is perhaps driven to more wild extremes of both kick-assery and penitent humility. How B.A. Baracus was handled was the biggest hurdle that this movie had to overcome in my mind in order for it to work... and with Quinton Jackson in the role it succeeds brilliantly.
But I can't let a review of The A-Team end without also saying something about Sharlto Copley as Murdock. The Howling Mad one is a scream to behold. In every scene that he's in (and thankfully there are many) Copley's Murdock brings a teetering, dizzying and completely crazy compelling performance. Sharlto Copley is fast emerging as one of my favorite people to watch on screen, between District 9 last year and now The A-Team. Not bad for a guy who not long ago was a filmmaker behind the camera, aye?
The A-Team is the first movie in awhile that I left the theater looking forward to buying the Blu-ray on the day it's released. But don't wait for that if at all possible: go check it out now while it's still playing on the big screen.
I want, nay, need to see Inception again. As with The A-Team, I'm also planning on getting the Blu-ray of this as soon as it comes out. And if my previous experience with The Matrix DVD is any indication, my Blu-ray machine will likely be spinning Inception more than any other title on my shelf in the foreseeable future.
I guess Inception qualifies as a science-fiction film. But it avoids the trap that too much of the genre falls into: namely, giving more time to the intellect than to the emotion. Inception barely gives us the nitty-gritty nuts 'n bolts of shared dreaming: we find out that it was originally developed by the military as a training method, before it wound up in the black market world of corporate espionage. And we do find out how stealing from a dream works: what the role of an architect is, what a "kick" is, etc.
But those represent what is merely the slick and fresh patina on the real core of Inception: an exploration of the human condition by way of a newfangled take on the old-fashioned heist film. This is a $160 million art-house movie: the kind of film that will be discussed and dissected at length for many years to come... and rightly so.
I don't know what else to be said about Inception that hasn't been said already by very many other people. This is certainly one of the best movies that I have been able to catch in quite a long time. And I'm looking forward to possibly seeing it again this weekend.
So that's what I've seen this summer so far. Still ain't watched Toy Story 3 (and you wouldn't catch me dead in a screening of Eclipse). And now that I'm caught up on that, I can be more timely in writing other movie reviews this summer.
If only we could finally see Tucker & Dale vs. Evil get distribution before Labor Day...
Here's a sample...
4. “I’m a leader that people can count on.”For more of the list visit The Official FALCON Blog.
Technically speaking, if elected officials obeyed the Constitution, there would be very little evil that they would be allowed to work against the people. It’s a dangerous thing to believe in men.5. “I’m not dominated by party politics.”
(Yet they’re running with a party label. ‘Nuff said.)
Anyway...
What you are about to see is not an official trailer for Gears of War 3. This is something that a group of fans collaborated on and... honestly, I think this is a much better piece than the "Ashes to Ashes" trailer.
Focusing on Augustus Cole and with Johnny Cash's cover of "Hurt" helping to set the tone, here is "What Have I Become?"
That is just plum haunting. Hey Epic Games, hire these guys now!
Meanwhile those brilliant eggheads at the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency - who previously brought us such wonders as the Internet and the Global Positioning System - have developed a new technology that turns humans into batteries for powering gadgets like cellphones (but for now is being considered primarily for use in the military). Thankfully, artificial intelligence has yet to arise that would no doubt enslave us to the Matrix.
Elsewhere in the world, the concept of the In Vitro Meat Habitat has recently been introduced. There's really no other way to put it: this is a house made out of meat.
And while you are lounging in your living room of liverwurst, what more fitting attire than clothing grown from bacteria?
After reading stuff like this, I can't shake the notion that somewhere, out there in this all too scary world, somebody is hard at work on making Soylent Green...
Yeah you laugh now. But just watch. It wouldn't surprise me if sometime during the lifetime of most of us that this will happen... if not at least seriously suggested by politicians, "experts", whatever.
The microbe-grown clothing is pretty cool though. If I recall my comic books correctly, that is much like how Tony Stark manufactures his current Iron Man armor: with bacteria "growing" it via nanotechnology. So that might be worth watching...
And... wait for it (like anyone wouldn't be expecting it these days)... it's going to be shot in 3-D!
Mash down here to read more about the news that will send waves of joygasm across legions of geeks throughout the world.
Lovecraft's classic tale of ancient horror in the Antarctic, brought to the screen by the director of Hellboy and Pan's Labyrinth, with the pioneer of the most groundbreaking 3-D filmmaking of the modern era on board as producer...
I am totally stoked about this. If it's going to be 3-D it might as well be done right and if it's going to be anything at all to do with H.P. Lovecraft well, I can think of nobody better to helm this than Guillermo del Toro.
And let's face it: there are some movies which should be made in 3-D.
And then there are some movies which should not be made in 3-D. And possibly even not made at all...
Truly, Yogi Bear in 3-D is this week's sign that the Apocalypse is upon us.
For the moment, I'll try to make up for things by posting this portrait of Chewbacca riding a giant squirrel while fighting Nazis.
I can only wish that I had the skillz to pull off an image that awesome! As it is, somebody forwarded it to me this morning, and it was too good not to share. Kudos to whoever it was who executed this startling depiction.
EDIT 4:20 a.m. 07-29-2010: That picture has become crazy popular in the past 24 hours across the Internets and The Official Star Wars Blog has tracked down the artist who created it! A dude named Tyler Edlin is responsible for it... and this was a piece originally commissioned as a wedding present! Stranger and stranger. And I wouldn't mind having this hanging on my own wall, to be honest :-)
Rev. Fred Phelps and his demented progeny came to San Diego on Thursday to, for whatever reason makes sense to the inner fog of their warped minds, "protest" at this year's San Diego Comic-Con. What the world's biggest comic book/pop culture convention has done to rile the "God Hates Fags" loons, I have no idea...
...but the geeks of Comic-Con certainly knew how to respond in kind!
How crazy? Looks like I'm gonna have to be notifying the local law enforcement agencies about it so that we won't be getting arrested during filming. Considering that we've a special guest star who's come all the way from western Europe, the last thing we want happening is our lil' movie creating an international diplomatic crisis.
Expect some production photos soon.
It happened folks... and not just anywhere but right here in Reidsville, North Carolina (though more than a few friends have noted that this sort of thing is already inherent to this town's nature).
Here's the story from Fox 8 WGHP...
A 55-year-old North Carolina woman was taken to the hospital after her husband loaded a gun with toilet paper and shot her in the back early Tuesday morning, according to the Rockingham County Sheriff's Office.I know this area has been hit especially hard by the economic downturn... but it's still pretty bad when a man has been reduced to loading his shootin' irons with toilet paper. I mean, if you're going to get serious with non-lethal loads, at least consider using a 12-gauge double-barreled shotgun firing a load of rock salt...Lonnie Irvin Pinnix, 38, of 951 Garrison Rd., was charged with assault with a deadly weapon for allegedly shooting his wife after she returned to their home shortly after midnight.
According to the sheriff's office, Darlene Pinnix came home and found her husband agitated. She lay down on the bed, but Lonnie Pinnix held a pistol and told her to get up. Before she could, he fired, hitting her in the back.
Darlene Pinnix suffered a powder burn from the gunshot. She was taken to the hospital for treatment.
Lonnie Pinnix told police he loaded the pistol with toilet paper instead of bullets and shot his wife because she would not leave.
His bond was set at $1,000. He's scheduled to appear in court August 11.
Let's see Charmin or Scott do that!
I just wish I could have been at Comic-Con this year, 'cuz this afternoon that's where Disney unloaded this intense trailer for Tron Legacy!
If you can't watch the YouTube embed, don't fret 'cuz this thing is pretty much everywhere tonight.
Ummm... just, wow.
