The popular morning round table talk show the View will be broadcasting from Disney studios this week. From the schedule:
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 11th: Patrick Dempsey from Grey's Anatomy; President and Chief Executive Officer Robert Iger of The Walt Disney Company; Whoopi Goldberg takes you on a guided tour inside the Walt Disney warehouse; the Academy Award®-winning animator and Chief Creative Officer at Pixar and Walt Disney Animation Studios, John Lasseter, previews Up; and the Barbara Walters "Disney Legend" dedication ceremony with Robert Iger
The preview of Up alone is worth the price of admittance the interview with Lasseter is the icing on the cake.
I finally jumped on the T4 bandwagon after seeing the most recent trailer and now I'm ready to talk plot lines. But wait, this is all we get from Warner Brothers:
Set in post-apocalyptic 2018, John Connor is the man fated to lead the human resistance against Skynet and its army of Terminators. But the future Connor was raised to believe in is altered in part by the appearance of Marcus Wright, a stranger whose last memory is of being on death row. Connor must decide whether Marcus has been sent from the future, or rescued from the past. As Skynet prepares its final onslaught, Connor and Marcus both embark on an odyssey that takes them into the heart of Skynet’s operations, where they uncover the terrible secret behind the possible annihilation of mankind.
It's pretty vague, but if we read between the lines we may be able to infer some things.
Who is Marcus Wright?
Marcus thinks he is from the past, but the big reveal in the trailer obviously shows that Wright is indeed part machine. My theory is that Marcus is actually from the future of the future. Clearly Marcus is doesn't know what time he is in, in fact I believe that during the trailer he actually asks the question,"what year is this?" And even though he may believe he's from the past. There's no way that Skynet's tech was ever that advanced. So it stands to reason that Wright was possibly sent from the future of 2019. Perhaps he is the next evolution in Skynet's onslaught. They may have even sent him to compromise Conner's efforts. It's also possible he was reprogrammed sent by the resistance to help Conner, or as a sign of things to come. I don't think that this is unreasonable, because, after all, that's what John Conner did in the second movie. Either way good times ahead.
Cyborgs,Cyborgs,Cyborgs.
If Wright is truly as "human" as we see him be in the trailer, then this means that Skynet, at some point has developed an extreme amount of sophistication and finesse. But the question I have is about the other Terminators. For sure the T-800 will be in the movie, but what about the T-1000 and dare I say it, the Terminatrix? Were they developed after 2019? It makes sense if they were because Kyle Reese which places the movie somewhere before the inception of the the liquid metal Terminator. But why wouldn't the future Skynet just send the T-1000? I'm a bit confused about this one.
And what's up with Kate?
I thought that Terminator salvation was wiping the slate clean after T4. But why is Kate the physician/veterinarian in Salvation? She was a character introduced in T3 and payed by Claire Daines. This time around she's played by Bryce Dallas Howard. She was also said to have sent the model 101 back in time after it assassinated her husband, John Conner, in the future. She doesn't seem to have aged any since T3. I'm interested to see what role her character plays in Salvation. She's also carrying John's child. But I guess we'll have to wait on this one.
That's pretty much all I got for now, but I'm cooking up some other theories for another post. Until then...
If you like creeps, tunes and games, listen up. Because this podcast is for you.
In this podcast we discuss aliens, watchmen nudity, and the Jonas Bros.
Media Fix Podcast: Episode 4 - Addicted to Media
It's been a very long time since I've been truly excited to see a midnight showing of a movie. It takes a certain type of enthusiasm to brave the sweaty, stinky, elbow-to-elbow crowds that often brave the late night and the risk of sleep deprivation to see a movie that they intend to cheer, sneer and laugh raucously through. It's all good though. Anyway, I'm sure Watchmen will wipe that smile off Madea's face and kick those Jonas brats in the nuts and claim the top spot. But will it be "successful" in the box office sense of the word? I guess we'll see. To add some fuel to the fire, here's nine minutes of footage. Enjoy.
Engadget has the blog-o-sphere buzzing with all kinds of gossip about a new PSP. According to "a source close to Sony" the new PSP will dump the UMD (good riddance) and add a large movable (sliding up and down) screen that will cover the buttons and D-pad when retracted. Sony has a knack for building in unneeded "elegance" into to their systems which usually cause them to be at an extremely elegant price point. Does anyone remember their $32,000 70in LCD television? Do we really need a sliding screen? Hopefully the system will end up being a little more practical than what's being rumored. Because I would love to play Little Big Planet on the small screen.
Faith restored? Maybe. The terminators think that they are a human...I like. I even like the Nine Inch Nails song.
I am not an expert writer, or even a good one for that matter, in fact most would probably correctly label me as the very definition of a novice writer. I am also not a critic, though sometimes I try on the cap just to see how it fits. So why do I pedant then? I do it often. Maybe not in text, but verbally, and usually among friends. There is a sense of power in sharp cynicism. I feel intelligent when I'm the first to point out a flaw in something. But is that why so many of us do it so often? Is that why we snark? Because it makes us feel intelligent? Maybe it's because that's the only way many of us know how to speak.
Roger Ebert writes:
A snarker is one who snarks. The word is said to be a combination of snide and remark. There are slithering undertones of shark, bark, and stark. There is also, for me, an association with snipe. The practice involves holding someone up to ridicule not so much for anything they actually did, as for having the presumption to be who they are.In his article Hunt not the Snark but the Snarker he correctly labels the phenomenon at work here as cultural vandalism. And that's exactly what it is. There seems to be a rush among fans of things like movies, video games, art, etc to take a shit on the first thing/person that, as Ebert puts it, steps out of line. It's like a game to see who can be the first to capitalize of off a moment of vulnerability.
Ebert:
[Snarking] has operated almost as a reflex to smack down behavior that upsets our expectations. It essentially says: Get back in line, Phoenix! Think now of Howard Dean's scream, Janet Jackson's wardrobe malfunction, Sarah Palin's inability to name her reading material. Did we really think, even at the height of political passion, that the governor didn't read any newspapers? That would be George Bush, who said he didn't.
It's true, at the first sign of weakness we go in for the kill, or to be more accurate, the buzz kill. I know, I know I'm just as much of a purveyor snapshot criticism as anyone. But I wish not to be. Criticism is good, but sniping is not so good. There's a problem when we point out the flaws in others to massage our own intellect. It's also problematic when the only way we know how to celebrate the things we love is to vandalize them. It's ironic, I feel that often those who profess to be fans really have derisive and subversive intentions.
The line is not so subtle. Think about what you are really criticizing the next time you have the urge to say something scornfully witty. I'm not calling criticism itself problematic, it's not, I'm saying that criticism overwhelmingly driven by personal politics can indeed be harmful and unjustified.
Anyway, I'm sorry for digressing. This probably wont make sense to most. Moving on...
...A new XBOX 360
This'll do nicely. Unless the rumblings of a possible 149.00 SKU turn out to be true.
Via[Engadget]
Addicted to Media 2008,2009,2010
