Yes, I was among the throngs of folks who have seen the movie "Avatar." We went yesterday. There were three choices-- a regular screen, 3D, or 3D with iMax. The time slot that fit in the best with our plans was the 3D showing so off we went. We sat halfway up in the bleeder section and put on our special plastic 3D glasses. As it was a Friday afternoon, the theatre held maybe 12 people in all. After returning a stale popcorn for a fresh bowl (to discover that the freshness of the popcorn did not improve the flavor much), we settled back to a long line of previews and a few which included 3D movies in the offing.
The movie Avatar was full of 3D effects-- many of which appeared to be happening in front of our noses. I enjoyed the forest on the planet Pandora. I especially liked the very realistic looking ferns, the giant-sized fiddleheads, and the white jellyfish-like seed pods floating in the air that were being released from the mother tree. Ah but here I am getting ahead of myself.
Sam Worthington plays Jake Sully, twin brother of a dead scientist named Tom. Because Jake's D.N.A. "matches" that of his dead twin, he is recruited in Tom's place to go to the alien planet Pandora and act as the human control for an avatar which looked somewhat like the cat-tailed natives of the planet. The plan was for the human controls to lay in isolation pods and have their "nerves" (nervous systems?) connect with the "nerves" of the artificial avatars who would then go off to explore Pandora and befriend the primitives. The indigenous race on Pandora lived smack dab in the middle of a site where it was determined that a mother lode of the element Unobtainium lay. The mother tree of the tribe also grew there and her roots were described as forming neural networks with the roots of many other trees on the planet in a number exceeding those connections in the human brain.
The plan hits a snag when Jake (who is paraplegic possibly acquired during his career as a Marine) revels in the avatar's ability to walk and so Jake the avatar escapes and goes native. Going native involves falling in love with one of the savages after she teaches him the local lingo. Jake the human neglects to shower and has to be cajoled into taking enough time to eat. There is a showdown at the end of course. The natives triumph over the bad humans who are sent packing off to their abused home planet Earth.
I especially enjoyed the performance given by Stephen Lang as Colonel Michael Quaritch. The Colonel is pure Marine, driven to fulfill the mission assigned to him. His acting was most convincing to me. I found myself hating his character halfway through the movie. Sigourney Weaver was less convincing as Grace Augustine, the scientist who comes to believe in the Mother. She started off with a bang as a bitch who had little to no use for Jake Sully. The script had her too quickly deteriorate into a gentler kinder human sort. I have to believe that her unconvincing transformation was a fault of the writer, rather than of her own fine acting.
The movie Avatar borrows heavily from other science fiction pieces, notably from Asimov's Foundation series with this whole business of a planet being seen as a living, breathing Gaia (yes, you folks who believe that, your belief is rooted in stories). Also present was shades of Anne McCafferty's Dragonriders of Pern and also influences by David Brin. The science in this science fiction piece was notably lacking. The one thing that I especially did not care for was how the group mourning scenes were portrayed-- the natives sat cross-legged moving their upper torso in ever-expanding circles. I was also perturbed when once again an atheistic bitch scientist yields to the throes of religiosity, a theme that I watched in some other movie portraying the world ending whose name escapes me at the moment.
The most significant thing about the movie "Avatar" was the decision that I made after seeing it. I've decided to donate my whole body to science and not just any organs needed for transplant. I figure that if there are any gods hanging out in the afterlife, they will have to deal with my lack of a corpse in a creative manner. Folks here on earth need my body more-- whether it's my retinas, heart, a kidney or two, skin. Or perhaps my earthly remains can help teach some future surgeons how to make those precise cuts. After watching the aftermath of the death scenes in Avatar, (yes those funky scenes where the natives sit cross-legged while moving their upper torsos in those ever-expanding circles...) I figure that our remains are wasted by being allowed to rot in expensive boxes in cemeteries. And cremation does not allow for full use of the shells we leave behind.
While it's nice I suppose for some people to have a spot to go to in the middle of a wide expanse of lawn in order to remember me, I would prefer to be the eyes for one who can now see or the new skin for a burn victim.
sapphoq reviews books and more
Saturday, January 09, 2010
Monday, December 28, 2009
Backyard Bird Secrets for Every Season by Sally Roth
Backyard Bird Secrets for Every Season, Sally Roth.
New York: Rodale Press, 2009. large paperback, 337 pps. inc. sources and index.
We've had a bit of a cold snap and I found my self wanting to read books that remind me that spring will return. Backyard Bird Secrets for Every Season fits the bill. Sally Roth is an avid birder from Indiana. She knows her stuff and has been widely published. The book itself uses medium thickness glossy pages which pleased my fingers and colored photographs which were a feast for my eyes. Charts and writing style are both clear and precise. I am as pleased with this book as I have been with other things that Roth has written.
The book is divided into sections according to the four seasons with winter being the last. I turned first to Part 4 subtitled Winter: Getting down to Basics. In Part 4, Roth addresses the need for proteinous foods, water, and shelter. The colorful pictures compliment her information rather well. A picture of a hollowed out tree caught my eye. I was pleased to see Part 4 mention the roosting together of birds in nesting boxes and small cavities that we observe here. If I get up early enough in the morning that was preceded by a cold night, I can be rewarded by the sight of a bunch of little birds pouring out of a roosting box, having all shared the box and body heat for the night. Roth suggests putting up birdhouses early, cleaning the feeders once a month in the winter time (with steps included), and providing water via a heated water source or at least special plastic with a dark interior that will delay freezing. I am now actively looking for either a solar water unit or a water heater for my birdbath. Roth also mentions the reliance that buffleheads have on woodpeckers in finding shelter. Buffleheads are considered incidental here along the Mohawk, although I did have the pleasure of watching a female bufflehead one fall down by the locks. Upon spying me and my dog, she dove underwater and came up again 50 feet later. Charts included in Part 4 illustrate which plants and trees attract which birds in the winter landscape.
Sally Roth has once again succeeded in presenting information about birds in an easy-to-read style bound to appeal to people who find pleasure in feeding birds. Although this book is not a scholarly tome, it is worth the look-see for anyone wishing to hone their knowledge about backyard birds.
sapphoq reviews says: break out those suet cakes! A definite plus for the casual birding library.
New York: Rodale Press, 2009. large paperback, 337 pps. inc. sources and index.
We've had a bit of a cold snap and I found my self wanting to read books that remind me that spring will return. Backyard Bird Secrets for Every Season fits the bill. Sally Roth is an avid birder from Indiana. She knows her stuff and has been widely published. The book itself uses medium thickness glossy pages which pleased my fingers and colored photographs which were a feast for my eyes. Charts and writing style are both clear and precise. I am as pleased with this book as I have been with other things that Roth has written.
The book is divided into sections according to the four seasons with winter being the last. I turned first to Part 4 subtitled Winter: Getting down to Basics. In Part 4, Roth addresses the need for proteinous foods, water, and shelter. The colorful pictures compliment her information rather well. A picture of a hollowed out tree caught my eye. I was pleased to see Part 4 mention the roosting together of birds in nesting boxes and small cavities that we observe here. If I get up early enough in the morning that was preceded by a cold night, I can be rewarded by the sight of a bunch of little birds pouring out of a roosting box, having all shared the box and body heat for the night. Roth suggests putting up birdhouses early, cleaning the feeders once a month in the winter time (with steps included), and providing water via a heated water source or at least special plastic with a dark interior that will delay freezing. I am now actively looking for either a solar water unit or a water heater for my birdbath. Roth also mentions the reliance that buffleheads have on woodpeckers in finding shelter. Buffleheads are considered incidental here along the Mohawk, although I did have the pleasure of watching a female bufflehead one fall down by the locks. Upon spying me and my dog, she dove underwater and came up again 50 feet later. Charts included in Part 4 illustrate which plants and trees attract which birds in the winter landscape.
Sally Roth has once again succeeded in presenting information about birds in an easy-to-read style bound to appeal to people who find pleasure in feeding birds. Although this book is not a scholarly tome, it is worth the look-see for anyone wishing to hone their knowledge about backyard birds.
sapphoq reviews says: break out those suet cakes! A definite plus for the casual birding library.
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Nothing by Nica Lalli
Nothing, Nica Lalli. New York: Prometheus Books, 2007. paperback, 271 pps.
Nica Lalli grew up in a (secular) Jewish Italian family. In second grade, she envied a classmate who was going for First Holy Communion. She wanted a white dress too and a veil. But when she asked her parents about what the family was, she was told that the family was "nothing." The family did not practice any religion and her parents did not believe in God. This resulted in a round of tears as now Nica would not be a miniature bride of Christ for one day after all.
The book transitioned smoothly from remembrance of times past to philosophical musings of time present. There is a proselytizing high school ski trip and Girl Scouts and a dead bird. There is a marriage, a couple of kids, and a very Christian sister-in-law. There is also 9/11. Meg and Jacob (husband's very Christian sister and spouse) have several protracted fights with Nica and her spouse Greg and the end result is estrangement shortly after 9/11. "Nothing" was very powerful up until the last two chapters.
Nica went through her struggles and was able to choose atheism for herself in the end. In the last couple of chapters, she belatedly discusses her own two children. Amanda and Victor are more fortunate in growing up. And the answer to "What are we?" is a somewhat sappy "Let's find out together."
In sixth grade, I had a classmate who was an atheist from an atheist family. She was open about her non-belief but not obnoxious. We were the obnoxious ones, demanding to know of her how she thought the world began. Even at that young age, we used the First Cause argument in our own primitive manner. But classmate was a strong kid and would not yield to our reason and logic. After a few minutes, we let her be.
Our great nephews are being raised also in an atheist home. The two kids are comfortable within themselves and confident in their views of the world. Their parents are upfront about their atheism and when asked will tell the kids directly, "We don't believe in any gods. We are atheists.
That family is fortunate to live in an area where their scientific nature is understoon and celebrated.
sapphoq reviews says: "Nothing" is an interesting book. Through its snapshops, we get an impression of life in the fifties up through today in the eyes of an unbeliever. Although Lalli's style
will not appeal to everyone. Nica's story may appeal to those who are going their own"crisis of faith."
Nica Lalli grew up in a (secular) Jewish Italian family. In second grade, she envied a classmate who was going for First Holy Communion. She wanted a white dress too and a veil. But when she asked her parents about what the family was, she was told that the family was "nothing." The family did not practice any religion and her parents did not believe in God. This resulted in a round of tears as now Nica would not be a miniature bride of Christ for one day after all.
The book transitioned smoothly from remembrance of times past to philosophical musings of time present. There is a proselytizing high school ski trip and Girl Scouts and a dead bird. There is a marriage, a couple of kids, and a very Christian sister-in-law. There is also 9/11. Meg and Jacob (husband's very Christian sister and spouse) have several protracted fights with Nica and her spouse Greg and the end result is estrangement shortly after 9/11. "Nothing" was very powerful up until the last two chapters.
Nica went through her struggles and was able to choose atheism for herself in the end. In the last couple of chapters, she belatedly discusses her own two children. Amanda and Victor are more fortunate in growing up. And the answer to "What are we?" is a somewhat sappy "Let's find out together."
In sixth grade, I had a classmate who was an atheist from an atheist family. She was open about her non-belief but not obnoxious. We were the obnoxious ones, demanding to know of her how she thought the world began. Even at that young age, we used the First Cause argument in our own primitive manner. But classmate was a strong kid and would not yield to our reason and logic. After a few minutes, we let her be.
Our great nephews are being raised also in an atheist home. The two kids are comfortable within themselves and confident in their views of the world. Their parents are upfront about their atheism and when asked will tell the kids directly, "We don't believe in any gods. We are atheists.
That family is fortunate to live in an area where their scientific nature is understoon and celebrated.
sapphoq reviews says: "Nothing" is an interesting book. Through its snapshops, we get an impression of life in the fifties up through today in the eyes of an unbeliever. Although Lalli's style
will not appeal to everyone. Nica's story may appeal to those who are going their own"crisis of faith."
Saturday, November 14, 2009
DumbHeart, a Get Fuzzy collection, by Darby Conley
Dumb Heart, a Get Fuzzy collection, by Darby Conley.
Kansas City: Andrews McNeal Publishing L.L.C., 2009.
large paperback, 127 pps.
I love Get Fuzzy. The antics of Bucky the snarky cat, Satchel the lovable pooch, and their friends vs. Rob Wilco the human never fail to please me. This collection does not disappoint. Of special delight to me was the introduction of Satchel's new hosta and Bucky's new clothing line. The presence of weasels was unexpected and livened things up. The brief political banter between Satchel and Bucky left me lmao.
As an aside, I have problems reading other books with comic strips because of the layout and print use. I had no problems reading this one. (And never do).
sapphoq reviews says: Highly recommended.
Kansas City: Andrews McNeal Publishing L.L.C., 2009.
large paperback, 127 pps.
I love Get Fuzzy. The antics of Bucky the snarky cat, Satchel the lovable pooch, and their friends vs. Rob Wilco the human never fail to please me. This collection does not disappoint. Of special delight to me was the introduction of Satchel's new hosta and Bucky's new clothing line. The presence of weasels was unexpected and livened things up. The brief political banter between Satchel and Bucky left me lmao.
As an aside, I have problems reading other books with comic strips because of the layout and print use. I had no problems reading this one. (And never do).
sapphoq reviews says: Highly recommended.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
A.B.C. Wife Swap
Today I sat through an entire episode of A.B.C.'s Wife Swap show. The episode I watched turned out to be a rerun. The actual episode was episode 6 of season 4-- Kim and Randall Beckman-Heskett vs. Lee-Ann and Christopher Childs. The guide describing the two families can be found at:
http://abc.go.com/shows/wife-swap/episode-guide/beckmanheskettchilds/79727?page=1#
Basically, the show goes for drama (as much of unreal "reality" teevee does). The paired up families are frequently polar-opposites in parenting styles as well as in values. Randall is a stay-at-home dad with a strong background in theology who likes to sing fundamentalist religious rounds in an off-beat way. Wife Kim is a C.E.O., kids Allison and Hannah are "regular kids," the family is liberal. I believe that "Lutheran" was specifically mentioned but I am not entirely sure of that.
Christopher refers to himself as the gatekeeper of his family (odd how that particular term is also used in a very witchy context, although the meaning of course is a bit different). He works. Lee-Ann is a stay-at-home mother who homeschools her six kids-- five girls and one boy. The boy does manly chores involving garbage and lawn-mowing. The girls are being trained up to be good fundamentalist christian housewifes. There is an emphasis on cheerful service as well as a firm belief that their god will bypass the whole dating scene and just sort of reveal the girls' future intended husbands to them. The middle girl wants to be a medical doctor and cannot understand why she cannot combine her dream with marriage and raising a family.
Kim talks to the middle child about her dream and assures her that it is possible to have a career and a family too. Kim stares in obvious disbelief as the the two older girls and the one boy explain that their god will just drop their mates upon them. They don't want to date and they like the feeling of "being sheltered." Middle child is whisked away to safety by the god-fearing dad as the girls scuttle around doing chores cheerfully.
Lee-Ann and Randall get into theological tiffs. She does not have the background, knowledge, or proficiency with languages that Randall has. In the show, he soundly trumps her several times and she appears "silly" in her sincerely held beliefs. By far the most disturbing thing to me was when Lee-Ann had the two Beckman-Heskett girls write out vows concerning dating (or rather not dating). These "vows" were forced upon the two girls. When mother Kim returns home, she spends an evening with the two girls undoing the "vows" which they had been pressured to write out.
I found this particular show to be offensive on several levels. In the United States, since children do not have the right to choose their own religion (especially without parental consent), parents get to raise their kids in the fashion that they choose to. Forcing two 12 year olds to record fake assurances that they will remain chaste (virginal) until marriage etc was upsetting to me. On the other hand, it was more than likely wrong for Kim to impose her views of happy slavery and life options on middle fundy daughter. That did not upset me nearly as much. I suppose that exposes my own bias. If there is any truth to this episode, I suspect the battle for middle daughter's future lifestyle to line up in accordance with literalist biblical ideology has already been lost long before the television crews showed up.
sapphoq reviews says: One complete episode of the show "Wife Swap" was more than enough for me. A big YUCK.
http://abc.go.com/shows/wife-swap/episode-guide/beckmanheskettchilds/79727?page=1#
Basically, the show goes for drama (as much of unreal "reality" teevee does). The paired up families are frequently polar-opposites in parenting styles as well as in values. Randall is a stay-at-home dad with a strong background in theology who likes to sing fundamentalist religious rounds in an off-beat way. Wife Kim is a C.E.O., kids Allison and Hannah are "regular kids," the family is liberal. I believe that "Lutheran" was specifically mentioned but I am not entirely sure of that.
Christopher refers to himself as the gatekeeper of his family (odd how that particular term is also used in a very witchy context, although the meaning of course is a bit different). He works. Lee-Ann is a stay-at-home mother who homeschools her six kids-- five girls and one boy. The boy does manly chores involving garbage and lawn-mowing. The girls are being trained up to be good fundamentalist christian housewifes. There is an emphasis on cheerful service as well as a firm belief that their god will bypass the whole dating scene and just sort of reveal the girls' future intended husbands to them. The middle girl wants to be a medical doctor and cannot understand why she cannot combine her dream with marriage and raising a family.
Kim talks to the middle child about her dream and assures her that it is possible to have a career and a family too. Kim stares in obvious disbelief as the the two older girls and the one boy explain that their god will just drop their mates upon them. They don't want to date and they like the feeling of "being sheltered." Middle child is whisked away to safety by the god-fearing dad as the girls scuttle around doing chores cheerfully.
Lee-Ann and Randall get into theological tiffs. She does not have the background, knowledge, or proficiency with languages that Randall has. In the show, he soundly trumps her several times and she appears "silly" in her sincerely held beliefs. By far the most disturbing thing to me was when Lee-Ann had the two Beckman-Heskett girls write out vows concerning dating (or rather not dating). These "vows" were forced upon the two girls. When mother Kim returns home, she spends an evening with the two girls undoing the "vows" which they had been pressured to write out.
I found this particular show to be offensive on several levels. In the United States, since children do not have the right to choose their own religion (especially without parental consent), parents get to raise their kids in the fashion that they choose to. Forcing two 12 year olds to record fake assurances that they will remain chaste (virginal) until marriage etc was upsetting to me. On the other hand, it was more than likely wrong for Kim to impose her views of happy slavery and life options on middle fundy daughter. That did not upset me nearly as much. I suppose that exposes my own bias. If there is any truth to this episode, I suspect the battle for middle daughter's future lifestyle to line up in accordance with literalist biblical ideology has already been lost long before the television crews showed up.
sapphoq reviews says: One complete episode of the show "Wife Swap" was more than enough for me. A big YUCK.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
