clothofdreams: (raspberries)
There was only one episode of House yesterday! So disappointing. To ease our pain, Matt and I rented Bring It On. That movie cracks me up. I think Matt watched 80% of it slacked-jawed, heheh.

Annoying thing: Where I work, the grounds crew has been running the sprinklers every day. This is completely understandable and commendable, as it has been rather dry here lately. However, they set up the sprinklers in such a way that all of the sidewalks are in the sprinklers' paths. This means walking anywhere on campus means running through a wet obstacle course. Fun times. I do love the way the water smells in the heat of the day, though. That lovely baked hose smell, so reminiscent of childhood and river banks.

I have felt more productive this week than last. If truth be told, last week I was a bit of a slob. I'm making up for it this week.

Random poll:

[Poll #784566]

Last but not least, go here to encourage and be encouraged. There are not nearly enough comments yet!
clothofdreams: (raspberries)
There was only one episode of House yesterday! So disappointing. To ease our pain, Matt and I rented Bring It On. That movie cracks me up. I think Matt watched 80% of it slacked-jawed, heheh.

Annoying thing: Where I work, the grounds crew has been running the sprinklers every day. This is completely understandable and commendable, as it has been rather dry here lately. However, they set up the sprinklers in such a way that all of the sidewalks are in the sprinklers' paths. This means walking anywhere on campus means running through a wet obstacle course. Fun times. I do love the way the water smells in the heat of the day, though. That lovely baked hose smell, so reminiscent of childhood and river banks.

I have felt more productive this week than last. If truth be told, last week I was a bit of a slob. I'm making up for it this week.

Random poll:

[Poll #784566]

Last but not least, go here to encourage and be encouraged. There are not nearly enough comments yet!
clothofdreams: (Default)
I watched a pointless movie tonight-- The Game, with Michael Douglas. The company was delightful, so overall the viewing experience was worthwhile, but I must say that I would be perfectly happy never to see that film again.

My roommate is gone for the weekend. I miss her presence in the room greatly-- it is a miserable thing to have to sleep by oneself. I did it all last semester, but then I was simply glad to be freed from an awkward rooming situation. This semester... Nicole is very much missed. I can't wait for her to come back.

Goodness, how sad it is that I am awake at this hour.

Off to bed...
clothofdreams: (Default)
I watched a pointless movie tonight-- The Game, with Michael Douglas. The company was delightful, so overall the viewing experience was worthwhile, but I must say that I would be perfectly happy never to see that film again.

My roommate is gone for the weekend. I miss her presence in the room greatly-- it is a miserable thing to have to sleep by oneself. I did it all last semester, but then I was simply glad to be freed from an awkward rooming situation. This semester... Nicole is very much missed. I can't wait for her to come back.

Goodness, how sad it is that I am awake at this hour.

Off to bed...
clothofdreams: (Default)
Go see Gods and Generals.

Please note, though, that you must bring a foundational, historical understanding of the War Between the States with you to the theater, or you will miss much of the film's subtlety. I really appreciate the filmmakers' assumption that their audience would be literate enough to understand unvoiced story threads in the film. The first step toward the creation of a literate public is to treat them, always, as if they are.

So, yes: if you don't think you're well-versed enough in your US History to fully appreciate this film, go read up on the subject. Then see the film.
clothofdreams: (Default)
Go see Gods and Generals.

Please note, though, that you must bring a foundational, historical understanding of the War Between the States with you to the theater, or you will miss much of the film's subtlety. I really appreciate the filmmakers' assumption that their audience would be literate enough to understand unvoiced story threads in the film. The first step toward the creation of a literate public is to treat them, always, as if they are.

So, yes: if you don't think you're well-versed enough in your US History to fully appreciate this film, go read up on the subject. Then see the film.

A.I.

May. 17th, 2002 10:59 pm
clothofdreams: (Default)
I just finished watching it.

This is the type of movie that defies an opinion. It causes reaction, touches us deeply, but we cannot tell exactly how. I cannot, at any rate. Did I like it? How can I answer that question? This is not a movie to like or dislike; it is a movie to experience.

Does that sound postmodern? Sorry. :-) Do let me try to explain.

A.I. is a very quiet film; not so much that its pace is slow than that it is well-timed. There is so much visual material to process that one must be allowed time to really explore each scene fully. Each shot is meticulously thought-out and executed. Every frame brings something illuminating to the film as a whole. Images and symbols dance before the eye without becoming pedestrian and cliched. Indeed, this film could almost be watched muted; the visual is the most important aspect. Thank goodness Steven Spielberg laid aside his thrill-a-minute approach for once and allowed us to soak in everything without being distracted by hi-tech special effects. Not that the fx aren't extraordinary: they are, beyond doubt, but they don't get in the way of the film.

One thing that struck me about this movie is that by casting real people to play robots that seem like real people, it is dramatically pointed out how futile is the belief that human creativity can ever be passed on to machines. Artificial intelligence will never replace humanity: machines are not even creative enough to play themselves on film. The underlying messages in the film itself do not make a clear statement on this subject, but I believe that what we see in the construction of the film more than makes up for this.

Who are we? This question, although never articulated by a character in the movie, is nevertheless voiced loud and clear. The eye of the camera shows us reflections, clones, replicas... uniqueness is not qualified by looks, personality, or even by DNA. Who am I? We are given a name, but even that name is not unique.

The answer seems to be that our relations with others in this world make us who we are. David has no identity unless he is linked with Monica. There is no mention of soul--after all, David, being a robot, has no soul. And yet the movie insists that he is unique.

So close. It's so close. We are who we are not because of our relations with those on earth, but because of our relationship to Him. We are unique because He is unique, and He created us in His image. Professor Hobby thought he could mimic this in his creations, but he did not realize that he could never satisfy them. His robots would be unique but lost.

David never truly finds his way. He finds his answer, but must resort to dreams for his happiness. How fortunate are we that when we are shown the Answer, He is not a dream.

A.I.

May. 17th, 2002 10:59 pm
clothofdreams: (Default)
I just finished watching it.

This is the type of movie that defies an opinion. It causes reaction, touches us deeply, but we cannot tell exactly how. I cannot, at any rate. Did I like it? How can I answer that question? This is not a movie to like or dislike; it is a movie to experience.

Does that sound postmodern? Sorry. :-) Do let me try to explain.

A.I. is a very quiet film; not so much that its pace is slow than that it is well-timed. There is so much visual material to process that one must be allowed time to really explore each scene fully. Each shot is meticulously thought-out and executed. Every frame brings something illuminating to the film as a whole. Images and symbols dance before the eye without becoming pedestrian and cliched. Indeed, this film could almost be watched muted; the visual is the most important aspect. Thank goodness Steven Spielberg laid aside his thrill-a-minute approach for once and allowed us to soak in everything without being distracted by hi-tech special effects. Not that the fx aren't extraordinary: they are, beyond doubt, but they don't get in the way of the film.

One thing that struck me about this movie is that by casting real people to play robots that seem like real people, it is dramatically pointed out how futile is the belief that human creativity can ever be passed on to machines. Artificial intelligence will never replace humanity: machines are not even creative enough to play themselves on film. The underlying messages in the film itself do not make a clear statement on this subject, but I believe that what we see in the construction of the film more than makes up for this.

Who are we? This question, although never articulated by a character in the movie, is nevertheless voiced loud and clear. The eye of the camera shows us reflections, clones, replicas... uniqueness is not qualified by looks, personality, or even by DNA. Who am I? We are given a name, but even that name is not unique.

The answer seems to be that our relations with others in this world make us who we are. David has no identity unless he is linked with Monica. There is no mention of soul--after all, David, being a robot, has no soul. And yet the movie insists that he is unique.

So close. It's so close. We are who we are not because of our relations with those on earth, but because of our relationship to Him. We are unique because He is unique, and He created us in His image. Professor Hobby thought he could mimic this in his creations, but he did not realize that he could never satisfy them. His robots would be unique but lost.

David never truly finds his way. He finds his answer, but must resort to dreams for his happiness. How fortunate are we that when we are shown the Answer, He is not a dream.
clothofdreams: (Default)
Just watched the Lawrence of Arabia special edition DVD. What an awesome movie--one of the best ever made, methinks. The screenplay, the acting, the cinematography, the music, even the editing is top-notch. Take for instance the famous direct-cut between a close-up of Lawrence blowing out a match and a brilliant sunrise in the desert. The audio track of Peter O'Toole's breath overlaps the the two scenes, so we hear the end of the sound of him blowing out the match while seeing the sunrise. Brilliantly done. And the best part is, the whole movie is full of instances like this! To say it's a masterpiece is really saying too little.

If you have not seen it yet, rent it today.
clothofdreams: (Default)
Just watched the Lawrence of Arabia special edition DVD. What an awesome movie--one of the best ever made, methinks. The screenplay, the acting, the cinematography, the music, even the editing is top-notch. Take for instance the famous direct-cut between a close-up of Lawrence blowing out a match and a brilliant sunrise in the desert. The audio track of Peter O'Toole's breath overlaps the the two scenes, so we hear the end of the sound of him blowing out the match while seeing the sunrise. Brilliantly done. And the best part is, the whole movie is full of instances like this! To say it's a masterpiece is really saying too little.

If you have not seen it yet, rent it today.

Profile

clothofdreams: (Default)
clothofdreams

January 2015

S M T W T F S
     123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031

Syndicate

RSS Atom

Most Popular Tags

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags