FA+
Shop
Today's Fun Fact: The General Lee is a stolen car.
Posted 9 years agoYes, it's true. In the first episode of the final season of The Dukes Of Hazzard, "Happy Birthday General Lee" they tell the story of how the Dukes acquired the car.
They got it from a junkyard, where it had just been delivered...
...by a tow truck which had pulled it out of a ditch...
...where it had been wrecked by two bank robbers during a police chase...
...after the robbers stole it from somebody and used it to commit a robbery.
What this means is, somewhere out there in Dukes Of Hazzard Land, is the car's original and legal owner, who most likely filed a police report after it was stolen.
Boss Hogg could have saved himself a whole lot of scheming if, during one of those many times that he had the car in impound, he'd just taken a minute to get the VIN number off it, and run a check on it with the state police.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/01/17/n.....-the-road.html
http://fox8.com/2015/10/21/man-gets.....ely-beautiful/
Can you imagine finding out that your vintage muscle car had been welded shut, painted orange and was routinely being jumped over ravines, and crashed through various billboards, fences and barns?
Whoever that original owner is, he sure got a raw deal.
All My Yes
Posted 9 years agoScrew you, "The Killing Joke" - this is the Batman cartoon I'm looking forward to.
Headline: Amazon Tick might suck
Posted 9 years agoIt's been well over a decade now since the live action The Tick series had it's brief but wonderful life on television. And it's been a couple years since Amazon started making noises about making more of it.
The original announcements, that Amazon were going to bring the live action Tick back were met with speculation and adulation about and over the idea of Patrick Warburton returning to the role - a role that he wasn't so much born to play, as much as (at least to my mind) a role that the universe coughed up specifically so he could play it.
But time dragged on, and eventually it was announced that Patrick Warburton wouldn't be back.
None of the original cast would be.
So, this new series would not be the Live Action Tick that we all knew and loved, bought on DVD and wanted more of (at least those of us with any sense or taste) - it would be a whole new take on the character.
Yes, essentially it's a reboot.
Not a word that inspires much confidence, reboot.
Still, it's The Tick. How wrong could it go?
Soon came the first pictures of our new Tick, and.... well, at least to my mind it was "Ugh. Really? That's the best they could do?"
Apart from the badly overdesigned costume with it's needlessly buglike surface texturing, the actor they hired to wear it just didn't look the part.
The man has no jawline.
But hey... you haven't seen him in action. Give him the benefit of the doubt. Maybe he's really locked the character down. Maybe he's really good, and this balances out the fact that he looks almost completely wrong.
Well, I've just seen two clips of him in action. I won't bother to link them because it's not worth the effort. You can probably go check any of the usual places where video is posted on the internet if you really want to see them.
Let me sum them up:
The first clip lost me.
The second clip didn't win me back.
In the first clip, this new Tick punches his way through an alleyway full of gun-toting criminals. This is basically just a generic superhero punch-em'up action sequence demonstrating little of the self-aware wit or humor of the Warburton version.
The second is the new version of the "Tick visits Arthur's apartment for the first time and tries to find the hidden switch that makes all the superhero gear pop out of the walls" scene. And this one rather misses the mark because this version of Arthur isn't a superhero. He doesn't have a costume, or (seemingly) any interest in wearing one (Tick basically dumps the costume on him at the end of he scene and tells him he's going to be a superhero and that's final, so there) instead he appears to just be a generic conspiracy theorist with the now standard wall-full-of-photos-connected-by-bits-of-string.
It doesn't look offensively GHOSTBUSTERS bad, more bland and uninspired. A cover-band version without the guitar riff that made the song work. The feeling I get from it is similar to the feeling I got from that Hitch-Hiker's Guide To The Galaxy movie that came out a few years ago. The one with all the jokes edited out of it, but just enough framework left so that you could go "That's where a laugh used to be. Right there."
Still, There's this little voice at the back of my brain screaming "It's The Tick! Give it a chance!"
I think I'm going to give it exactly one episode to demonstrate that it's worth expending effort to see a second one.
I don't anticipate that being the case, though.
Not if what they've shown so far is an accurate representation of the rest of it.
I've been wrong before though.
The original announcements, that Amazon were going to bring the live action Tick back were met with speculation and adulation about and over the idea of Patrick Warburton returning to the role - a role that he wasn't so much born to play, as much as (at least to my mind) a role that the universe coughed up specifically so he could play it.
But time dragged on, and eventually it was announced that Patrick Warburton wouldn't be back.
None of the original cast would be.
So, this new series would not be the Live Action Tick that we all knew and loved, bought on DVD and wanted more of (at least those of us with any sense or taste) - it would be a whole new take on the character.
Yes, essentially it's a reboot.
Not a word that inspires much confidence, reboot.
Still, it's The Tick. How wrong could it go?
Soon came the first pictures of our new Tick, and.... well, at least to my mind it was "Ugh. Really? That's the best they could do?"
Apart from the badly overdesigned costume with it's needlessly buglike surface texturing, the actor they hired to wear it just didn't look the part.
The man has no jawline.
But hey... you haven't seen him in action. Give him the benefit of the doubt. Maybe he's really locked the character down. Maybe he's really good, and this balances out the fact that he looks almost completely wrong.
Well, I've just seen two clips of him in action. I won't bother to link them because it's not worth the effort. You can probably go check any of the usual places where video is posted on the internet if you really want to see them.
Let me sum them up:
The first clip lost me.
The second clip didn't win me back.
In the first clip, this new Tick punches his way through an alleyway full of gun-toting criminals. This is basically just a generic superhero punch-em'up action sequence demonstrating little of the self-aware wit or humor of the Warburton version.
The second is the new version of the "Tick visits Arthur's apartment for the first time and tries to find the hidden switch that makes all the superhero gear pop out of the walls" scene. And this one rather misses the mark because this version of Arthur isn't a superhero. He doesn't have a costume, or (seemingly) any interest in wearing one (Tick basically dumps the costume on him at the end of he scene and tells him he's going to be a superhero and that's final, so there) instead he appears to just be a generic conspiracy theorist with the now standard wall-full-of-photos-connected-by-bits-of-string.
It doesn't look offensively GHOSTBUSTERS bad, more bland and uninspired. A cover-band version without the guitar riff that made the song work. The feeling I get from it is similar to the feeling I got from that Hitch-Hiker's Guide To The Galaxy movie that came out a few years ago. The one with all the jokes edited out of it, but just enough framework left so that you could go "That's where a laugh used to be. Right there."
Still, There's this little voice at the back of my brain screaming "It's The Tick! Give it a chance!"
I think I'm going to give it exactly one episode to demonstrate that it's worth expending effort to see a second one.
I don't anticipate that being the case, though.
Not if what they've shown so far is an accurate representation of the rest of it.
I've been wrong before though.
Our Long National Nightmare Is Over
Posted 9 years ago‘Ghostbusters’ Director Says He Won’t Reboot Another Classic Movie
http://tinyurl.com/gn9prjs
The war is over.
We won.
http://tinyurl.com/gn9prjs
The war is over.
We won.
A pet theory of mine...
Posted 9 years agoThis is for fans of 80's television.
I theorize that there is an untelevised adventure wherein The A-Team cross paths with The Greatest American Hero.
Ok. hear me out. Here's the evidence:
For a start, apart from the fact that both series were produced by Stephen J Cannell, they share the same incidental music - the same music cues.
Furthermore, in one episode of The A-Team, the team get burgers (and a special baseball cap for Murdock) from the Captain Bellybuster hamburger restaurant.
Captain Bellybuster, the hamburger chain's mascot, is the subject of an episode of The Greatest American Hero.
To my mind, this sets both shows firmly in the same universe.
Now here's the clincher: One of the tricks that Ralph can do with his supersuit is turn invisible by thinking of "white paper" - he will repeat this as he fades out. "White paper... White paper..."
A-Team, season four episode four. In this episode, Murdock is convinced that he can turn invisible. Several times throughout the episode he performs the act of "fading out" by repeating the phrase "white paper... white paper..."
I'm convinced that this is proof that Murdock met Ralph, and Murdock saw him doing the invisibility trick.
I theorize that there is an untelevised adventure wherein The A-Team cross paths with The Greatest American Hero.
Ok. hear me out. Here's the evidence:
For a start, apart from the fact that both series were produced by Stephen J Cannell, they share the same incidental music - the same music cues.
Furthermore, in one episode of The A-Team, the team get burgers (and a special baseball cap for Murdock) from the Captain Bellybuster hamburger restaurant.
Captain Bellybuster, the hamburger chain's mascot, is the subject of an episode of The Greatest American Hero.
To my mind, this sets both shows firmly in the same universe.
Now here's the clincher: One of the tricks that Ralph can do with his supersuit is turn invisible by thinking of "white paper" - he will repeat this as he fades out. "White paper... White paper..."
A-Team, season four episode four. In this episode, Murdock is convinced that he can turn invisible. Several times throughout the episode he performs the act of "fading out" by repeating the phrase "white paper... white paper..."
I'm convinced that this is proof that Murdock met Ralph, and Murdock saw him doing the invisibility trick.
I Side With...
Posted 9 years agoLook out! Hide the children! Shut the windows! Throw a tarp over the Buick and lock up the garage!
It's another political post!
AIEEEEEEEEEE
Anyway...
It's an election year, and as such it seems that once again we're being treated to all manner of propaganda, designed to make one vote the way the rich and powerful want you to vote: for Lesser Evil or Greater Evil, (and which is which will depend on personal opinions, so they tend to be interchangable)
Me, I think both choices stink.
Today's subject: a website called http://www.isidewith.com
I took their test, and although it showed my score as being 96% aligned with Green Party candidate Jill Stein, it also somehow showed me %94 aligned with Hillary Clinton.
So, I took a look at the questions and answers that made them think this was even remotely possible. The ones where I was calculated to be agreeing with her.
The following are just some of those questions:
Q: Do you support Obamacare?
Hillary: Yes
Me: A single payer system would be better.
Q: Do you support the legalization of Marijuana?
Me: Yes
Hillary: Only for medical use
Q: Should the US expand offshore drilling?
Hillary: Provide more incentives for alternative energy
Me: Nationalize the energy sector
Q: Do you support the use of fracking?
Me: No
Hillary: more research is needed to measure the long term effects of fracking
Q: Should the government make cuts to public spending in order to reduce the national debt?
Hillary: cuts to public spending will negatively affect the economy
Me: increase taxes on large multinational corporations
Wow.. We're so in tune with each other - it's like we're besties. *gag*
In the meantime I shall be smug about the fact that even with the propaganda machine putting their finger on the scales to tilt things in Hillary's favor, Jill Stein still won.
In closing:
#JillNotHill
It's another political post!
AIEEEEEEEEEE
Anyway...
It's an election year, and as such it seems that once again we're being treated to all manner of propaganda, designed to make one vote the way the rich and powerful want you to vote: for Lesser Evil or Greater Evil, (and which is which will depend on personal opinions, so they tend to be interchangable)
Me, I think both choices stink.
Today's subject: a website called http://www.isidewith.com
I took their test, and although it showed my score as being 96% aligned with Green Party candidate Jill Stein, it also somehow showed me %94 aligned with Hillary Clinton.
So, I took a look at the questions and answers that made them think this was even remotely possible. The ones where I was calculated to be agreeing with her.
The following are just some of those questions:
Q: Do you support Obamacare?
Hillary: Yes
Me: A single payer system would be better.
Q: Do you support the legalization of Marijuana?
Me: Yes
Hillary: Only for medical use
Q: Should the US expand offshore drilling?
Hillary: Provide more incentives for alternative energy
Me: Nationalize the energy sector
Q: Do you support the use of fracking?
Me: No
Hillary: more research is needed to measure the long term effects of fracking
Q: Should the government make cuts to public spending in order to reduce the national debt?
Hillary: cuts to public spending will negatively affect the economy
Me: increase taxes on large multinational corporations
Wow.. We're so in tune with each other - it's like we're besties. *gag*
In the meantime I shall be smug about the fact that even with the propaganda machine putting their finger on the scales to tilt things in Hillary's favor, Jill Stein still won.
In closing:
#JillNotHill
Let's talk about BURNOUT
Posted 9 years agoSeveral days ago, another artist whose work I follow wrote a journal which contained a request for suggestions on how to deal with feeling burned out from drawing. They felt that they had lost their creative spark, becoming little more than a human photocopier pumping out other people's ideas with little to no actual input of their own. The work was becoming tedious and boring, and wearing him down.
Burnout is actually a pretty serious problem, especially for an artist who relies upon their art for most, if not all of their income.
When the magic stops working, that naturally leads to stress, and stress is the backbone of burnout.
It becomes very easy to sink into a downward spiral. Stress because the art isn't working. And the art isn't working because you're too damned stressed. Repeat until the ceiling caves in.
I made a suggestion in their journal which, after some thought, I decided I should post about on my own. It's something I've been making myself do, because at one point I too was tottering on the brink of being completely burned out. This ONE SIMPLE TRICK pulled me back. (to use the popular vernacular of clickbait)
Some of you long-time followers may have a dusty memory of my once posting a video wherein John Cleese talks about creativity.
For those of you who missed it, I'll post it below.
It's slightly over thirty minutes long, but you should watch all of it before continuing to read any further.
Go on. I'll wait.
Right, all done?
In the video, Cleese talks about how hard it is to be creative when you have a boss constantly breathing down your neck demanding to know if you're done yet. About how creativity is a form of play, and how nothing can destroy the ability to freely play with ideas more thoroughly than turning creativity into a chore that must be done RIGHT NOW WHAT'S HOLDING UP THE WORK GET ON WITH IT WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU?
As an artist who is self-employed - one who isn't punching a time-clock and is therefore free to set my own work hours - I came to realize that while this situation may seem free and ideal when viewed from one angle, from another it was actually anything but.
I never leave the office.
I never clock out.
I am always at work.
No vacation days. No sick days. Not even a coffee break.
Because I am my own boss, everywhere I go, my boss is always there with me, following me around, frowning, tapping it's watch with a finger and saying "Get Back To Work You lazy Bum! Time is money!"
So, the trick to dealing with this and getting my Mojo back?
Simply this: I have made myself start taking a weekend again.
That's it. That's all.
Friday night to Monday morning is all about me. Sleep in, read a book, watch TV. Do nothing. And if I do work on something it will be something for me. My weekend hobby project. Nothing serious. Nothing that needs to be done. I might not even do it at all. I might put it off.
It sounds counter-intuitive. "I can't take time off! I have too much to do!"
Yes, you have too much to do.
It's piled on top of you like suitcases, and the more you pile on, the heavier that load is going to get.
You are never going to be able to continue hauling it around unless you put it down for awhile and get your strength back.
So take a rest. Take a weekend. Put that load down and just walk away from it. You can get back to it later.
And once Monday rolls back around, as it currently has, you can take heart in knowing that you have a weekend coming up that you can look forward to.
It's coming.
It's right there at the end of the week.
Get ready for it.
And when it gets here, relax, unwind and do nothing but enjoy it.
Tell the little boss voice in your head to get stuffed.
It's your day off.
Burnout is actually a pretty serious problem, especially for an artist who relies upon their art for most, if not all of their income.
When the magic stops working, that naturally leads to stress, and stress is the backbone of burnout.
It becomes very easy to sink into a downward spiral. Stress because the art isn't working. And the art isn't working because you're too damned stressed. Repeat until the ceiling caves in.
I made a suggestion in their journal which, after some thought, I decided I should post about on my own. It's something I've been making myself do, because at one point I too was tottering on the brink of being completely burned out. This ONE SIMPLE TRICK pulled me back. (to use the popular vernacular of clickbait)
Some of you long-time followers may have a dusty memory of my once posting a video wherein John Cleese talks about creativity.
For those of you who missed it, I'll post it below.
It's slightly over thirty minutes long, but you should watch all of it before continuing to read any further.
Go on. I'll wait.
Right, all done?
In the video, Cleese talks about how hard it is to be creative when you have a boss constantly breathing down your neck demanding to know if you're done yet. About how creativity is a form of play, and how nothing can destroy the ability to freely play with ideas more thoroughly than turning creativity into a chore that must be done RIGHT NOW WHAT'S HOLDING UP THE WORK GET ON WITH IT WHAT'S WRONG WITH YOU?
As an artist who is self-employed - one who isn't punching a time-clock and is therefore free to set my own work hours - I came to realize that while this situation may seem free and ideal when viewed from one angle, from another it was actually anything but.
I never leave the office.
I never clock out.
I am always at work.
No vacation days. No sick days. Not even a coffee break.
Because I am my own boss, everywhere I go, my boss is always there with me, following me around, frowning, tapping it's watch with a finger and saying "Get Back To Work You lazy Bum! Time is money!"
So, the trick to dealing with this and getting my Mojo back?
Simply this: I have made myself start taking a weekend again.
That's it. That's all.
Friday night to Monday morning is all about me. Sleep in, read a book, watch TV. Do nothing. And if I do work on something it will be something for me. My weekend hobby project. Nothing serious. Nothing that needs to be done. I might not even do it at all. I might put it off.
It sounds counter-intuitive. "I can't take time off! I have too much to do!"
Yes, you have too much to do.
It's piled on top of you like suitcases, and the more you pile on, the heavier that load is going to get.
You are never going to be able to continue hauling it around unless you put it down for awhile and get your strength back.
So take a rest. Take a weekend. Put that load down and just walk away from it. You can get back to it later.
And once Monday rolls back around, as it currently has, you can take heart in knowing that you have a weekend coming up that you can look forward to.
It's coming.
It's right there at the end of the week.
Get ready for it.
And when it gets here, relax, unwind and do nothing but enjoy it.
Tell the little boss voice in your head to get stuffed.
It's your day off.
Back In The Saddle Again
Posted 9 years agoMy new ASUS flatpanel monitor is here, installed, powered up, color tuned, and ready to go.... and the old, dead, defunct unit is now sitting across the room on the floor, waiting for something to be done with it.
I'm back!
I'm back!
It's always sad when a monitor dies
Posted 9 years agoHiya folks.. just a quick heads-up.
I'm going to be operating in low power mode for the next few days.
My aging I-INC iP221 flatscreen monitor has finally died. It's slowly been getting dimmer and dimmer over the past few weeks, and about twenty minutes ago, the backlight started blinking on and off, and then the blinking got faster and faster, and now it sort of looks like a disco lamp.
Fortunately, once again thanks to my wonderful patrons at
patreon I was able to order a replacement for it.
The bad news is, since the monitor hadn't yet gone into stroboscopic freakout mode when I ordered the new one, I opted for amazon's free shipping, which means it's going to be a few days before it gets here.
In the meantime, I am using my iPad, and that good 'ol VNC remote desktop program (you may recall my mentioning it when I used it to connect to my home computer cross-country and post some art, when I was out west on my California trip) to view my computer desktop. So I'm not completely cut off, I'm just... somewhat hindered in my work for now.
Hopefully the new one shows up before tuesday.
I'm going to be operating in low power mode for the next few days.
My aging I-INC iP221 flatscreen monitor has finally died. It's slowly been getting dimmer and dimmer over the past few weeks, and about twenty minutes ago, the backlight started blinking on and off, and then the blinking got faster and faster, and now it sort of looks like a disco lamp.
Fortunately, once again thanks to my wonderful patrons at
patreon I was able to order a replacement for it.The bad news is, since the monitor hadn't yet gone into stroboscopic freakout mode when I ordered the new one, I opted for amazon's free shipping, which means it's going to be a few days before it gets here.
In the meantime, I am using my iPad, and that good 'ol VNC remote desktop program (you may recall my mentioning it when I used it to connect to my home computer cross-country and post some art, when I was out west on my California trip) to view my computer desktop. So I'm not completely cut off, I'm just... somewhat hindered in my work for now.
Hopefully the new one shows up before tuesday.
DOT: a card game
Posted 9 years agoDOT: a card game
While similar to poker, DOT is far less complex. There are no face cards, no suits, and no collected combinations such as a "straight" or a "full house."
THE CARDS
There are 96 cards in a deck.
Cards are circular, with the reverse side decorated with a colored spiral design.
The face of each card is marked with a number of dots in a circular pattern around a centrally located numeric figure, depicting the numbers 1-8.
In a pinch, three identical standard poker card decks may be used, with all cards removed from play except those depicting suits Ace-2-3-4-5-6-7-8, with ACE being equal to one. and any suit markings disregarded during play as irrelevant.
It is inadvisable to play with more than ten players. Eleven is possible but pushing it. Twelve is the mathematical limit, and is considered bad form.
PRE-GAME SETUP
At the start of the game, (and this is usually done by the owner of the pack of cards) a number of cards equal to the number of players in the game is laid out facedown on the table. All the players then select a card, with the person who laid the cards out selecting a card last.
Out of this draw, whoever has the highest number on their card shall be the dealer for the first round.
In case of the highest card being a tie, a second similar draw is held, with the number of cards is laid facedown on the table (by another player) equal to the number of players needing their tie broken.
Once any tie has been broken, and a dealer has been selected, play may begin.
A HAND OF PLAY
The point of the game is to have the hand with the highest number of dots in total.
At the start of a hand of play, the dealer shuffles the deck completely, then places it on the table and draws the top card, turning it over on the table, face up. However many dots are depicted on this card will dictate how many cards will be in the hand. The dealer then deals that number of cards to each player. (yes, this means it is possible for players to play a hand with only one card in it.)
Once all cards are dealt, with each player receiving the indicated number of cards, and the players have viewed them and counted up the number of dots, the betting begins.
Ante in is one chip.
During a hand of play, including the initial chip ante, a player may bet 1-8 chips, and add them to the pot to remain in the game, call to end the hand, or drop out of the hand.
A total of eight chips is the maximum total bet allowed during a hand.
Example: a player may bet one chip at a time over eight rounds, or four chips at a time over two rounds, but may not exceed eight chips total over all rounds of betting.
A player who is sure they have the winning hand may bet all eight at once, but this will bring the hand to an immediate end.
Because of this, play is limited to a maximum of eight total rounds during a hand.
Once the hand has ended, either because a player has chosen to call, or because the eight round / eight chip bet total has been reached by a player, players reveal their cards to the entire table, with whoever has the highest score winning the hand, and the chips in the pot.
If there is a tie, with two players having the top score, the pile of chips in the pot is divided evenly between them.
If the chips cannot be divided evenly, then the chips in the pot are divided such that each winning players receives the same number, with whatever is left over remaining in the pot for the next hand.
example:
nine chips in the pot divided between two winning players:
each player receives four chips, with one chip remaining in the pot.
At the end of the round, the player who won that round becomes the dealer of the next round.
In case of a tie, where a hand has had two (or more) winners, a tiebreaker draw with cards facedown on the table, in a fashion similar to the draw at the start of the game, will allow the new dealer to be chosen.
STRIPDOT:
A Strip version of the game, STRIPDOT, may also be played, with players who want to drop out of a hand required to remove a piece of clothing in order to be allowed to do so, or players who lose a hand being required to remove an item of clothing after the hand has ended, and after the winning player has been determined.
A player who has run out of clothing but not chips, and who wishes to remain in the game, may "bet" sexual favors, to be awarded to whoever ends up winning the hand. These sexual awards may be collected during the next hand of play, with the player who is performing them "sitting out" that hand, while the player who is being performed upon continues to play.
END NOTES:
Not sure where this all came from. I took a nap this afternoon, and when I woke up, this game was in my head, fully formed.
So here it is.
Enjoy.
While similar to poker, DOT is far less complex. There are no face cards, no suits, and no collected combinations such as a "straight" or a "full house."
THE CARDS
There are 96 cards in a deck.
Cards are circular, with the reverse side decorated with a colored spiral design.
The face of each card is marked with a number of dots in a circular pattern around a centrally located numeric figure, depicting the numbers 1-8.
In a pinch, three identical standard poker card decks may be used, with all cards removed from play except those depicting suits Ace-2-3-4-5-6-7-8, with ACE being equal to one. and any suit markings disregarded during play as irrelevant.
It is inadvisable to play with more than ten players. Eleven is possible but pushing it. Twelve is the mathematical limit, and is considered bad form.
PRE-GAME SETUP
At the start of the game, (and this is usually done by the owner of the pack of cards) a number of cards equal to the number of players in the game is laid out facedown on the table. All the players then select a card, with the person who laid the cards out selecting a card last.
Out of this draw, whoever has the highest number on their card shall be the dealer for the first round.
In case of the highest card being a tie, a second similar draw is held, with the number of cards is laid facedown on the table (by another player) equal to the number of players needing their tie broken.
Once any tie has been broken, and a dealer has been selected, play may begin.
A HAND OF PLAY
The point of the game is to have the hand with the highest number of dots in total.
At the start of a hand of play, the dealer shuffles the deck completely, then places it on the table and draws the top card, turning it over on the table, face up. However many dots are depicted on this card will dictate how many cards will be in the hand. The dealer then deals that number of cards to each player. (yes, this means it is possible for players to play a hand with only one card in it.)
Once all cards are dealt, with each player receiving the indicated number of cards, and the players have viewed them and counted up the number of dots, the betting begins.
Ante in is one chip.
During a hand of play, including the initial chip ante, a player may bet 1-8 chips, and add them to the pot to remain in the game, call to end the hand, or drop out of the hand.
A total of eight chips is the maximum total bet allowed during a hand.
Example: a player may bet one chip at a time over eight rounds, or four chips at a time over two rounds, but may not exceed eight chips total over all rounds of betting.
A player who is sure they have the winning hand may bet all eight at once, but this will bring the hand to an immediate end.
Because of this, play is limited to a maximum of eight total rounds during a hand.
Once the hand has ended, either because a player has chosen to call, or because the eight round / eight chip bet total has been reached by a player, players reveal their cards to the entire table, with whoever has the highest score winning the hand, and the chips in the pot.
If there is a tie, with two players having the top score, the pile of chips in the pot is divided evenly between them.
If the chips cannot be divided evenly, then the chips in the pot are divided such that each winning players receives the same number, with whatever is left over remaining in the pot for the next hand.
example:
nine chips in the pot divided between two winning players:
each player receives four chips, with one chip remaining in the pot.
At the end of the round, the player who won that round becomes the dealer of the next round.
In case of a tie, where a hand has had two (or more) winners, a tiebreaker draw with cards facedown on the table, in a fashion similar to the draw at the start of the game, will allow the new dealer to be chosen.
STRIPDOT:
A Strip version of the game, STRIPDOT, may also be played, with players who want to drop out of a hand required to remove a piece of clothing in order to be allowed to do so, or players who lose a hand being required to remove an item of clothing after the hand has ended, and after the winning player has been determined.
A player who has run out of clothing but not chips, and who wishes to remain in the game, may "bet" sexual favors, to be awarded to whoever ends up winning the hand. These sexual awards may be collected during the next hand of play, with the player who is performing them "sitting out" that hand, while the player who is being performed upon continues to play.
END NOTES:
Not sure where this all came from. I took a nap this afternoon, and when I woke up, this game was in my head, fully formed.
So here it is.
Enjoy.
Gods Of Egypt - Epic Facepalm
Posted 9 years agoPicture if you will, a street in the middle of Anywhereville USA.
The roads are all clean and in good repair, without a speck of litter to be seen. The children are well dressed and play quietly and politely on sidewalks, or on lawns manicured to a trim picture-book length by dads who, because this is Saturday, are not at "the office" but instead relax either in the armchair in the den with the newspaper and a pipe, or in a hammock in the backyard with a nice refreshing glass of lemonade. The various mothers and wives of this community are all off in a kitchen somewhere, baking something.
This is a picture in black and white - a scene from a reality that never existed. Suburbia by way of the television set.
A land populated entirely by white people.
To this image, we now add the following caption:
HARLEM, 1972.
There is something wrong with this picture.
...and that is the feeling that permeates the whole of the film Gods Of Egypt.
For, this is a story that takes place in the heart of Egypt: an Egypt which, apart from the rare token black dotting the population like raisins in a danish loaf, is as white as mayonnaise. And not just white, but white with Posh British Accents, and an air of aristocracy - and that includes the poor, streetwise everyman who is supposed to be the protagonist of the film.
There is something wrong with this picture.
...and it doesn't end there, because when you boil it all down, the plot of this film is basically "A bunch of spoiled rich kids back-stab each other in a squabble over who gets control of the family fortune."
This is a movie with a status quo of 1% elitists lording it over the huddled masses as godlike figures, and this state of affairs is considered not just acceptable but desirable - the proper state of things - and the bad guy is the one decrying "You spoiled brats are a bunch of lazy, useless, self-entitled wastes of space. The status quo sucks, and I'm tearing it all down!"
Yes, the bad guy is basically Bernie Sanders, but with Abs To Die For.
There is something wrong with this picture.
...and there's no getting away from it. For all it's action-adventure trappings, this film is basically a tone-deaf Ayn Rand fantasy where the audience is expected to buy into the sob story that It's Such A Burden To Be Rich, And In Charge, with the weight of the world resting on your toned-and-perfectly-tanned-shoulders. And while the god who acts as this story's "hero" comes to the realization that Maybe Poor People Aren't All Bad by the time the credits roll, we are finally returned once again to a status quo where the privileged elite are so much better than the ignorant and average rabble, and they deserve to be in charge, so worship them.
...and then the Stargate dials open with a huge watery kawoosh, and SG-1 steps through it, and they free the human slaves from their alien oppressors in an epic climactic gun battle.
Ok, I made up that last bit. But, it would have made one hell of a better ending for this farce.
The roads are all clean and in good repair, without a speck of litter to be seen. The children are well dressed and play quietly and politely on sidewalks, or on lawns manicured to a trim picture-book length by dads who, because this is Saturday, are not at "the office" but instead relax either in the armchair in the den with the newspaper and a pipe, or in a hammock in the backyard with a nice refreshing glass of lemonade. The various mothers and wives of this community are all off in a kitchen somewhere, baking something.
This is a picture in black and white - a scene from a reality that never existed. Suburbia by way of the television set.
A land populated entirely by white people.
To this image, we now add the following caption:
HARLEM, 1972.
There is something wrong with this picture.
...and that is the feeling that permeates the whole of the film Gods Of Egypt.
For, this is a story that takes place in the heart of Egypt: an Egypt which, apart from the rare token black dotting the population like raisins in a danish loaf, is as white as mayonnaise. And not just white, but white with Posh British Accents, and an air of aristocracy - and that includes the poor, streetwise everyman who is supposed to be the protagonist of the film.
There is something wrong with this picture.
...and it doesn't end there, because when you boil it all down, the plot of this film is basically "A bunch of spoiled rich kids back-stab each other in a squabble over who gets control of the family fortune."
This is a movie with a status quo of 1% elitists lording it over the huddled masses as godlike figures, and this state of affairs is considered not just acceptable but desirable - the proper state of things - and the bad guy is the one decrying "You spoiled brats are a bunch of lazy, useless, self-entitled wastes of space. The status quo sucks, and I'm tearing it all down!"
Yes, the bad guy is basically Bernie Sanders, but with Abs To Die For.
There is something wrong with this picture.
...and there's no getting away from it. For all it's action-adventure trappings, this film is basically a tone-deaf Ayn Rand fantasy where the audience is expected to buy into the sob story that It's Such A Burden To Be Rich, And In Charge, with the weight of the world resting on your toned-and-perfectly-tanned-shoulders. And while the god who acts as this story's "hero" comes to the realization that Maybe Poor People Aren't All Bad by the time the credits roll, we are finally returned once again to a status quo where the privileged elite are so much better than the ignorant and average rabble, and they deserve to be in charge, so worship them.
...and then the Stargate dials open with a huge watery kawoosh, and SG-1 steps through it, and they free the human slaves from their alien oppressors in an epic climactic gun battle.
Ok, I made up that last bit. But, it would have made one hell of a better ending for this farce.
Where else not to find me
Posted 9 years agoWith the recent slew of "Here's where to find me in case FA explodes all over itself again" journals, I figure it's probably a good idea to tell you folks where NOT to find me. Because I'll be here, waiting for the smoke to clear and the pieces to get swept up.
There are accounts on both Weasyl:
https://www.weasyl.com/~cobalt
...and Furry Network:
https://beta.furrynetwork.com/cobalt
...neither of which is me.
Funnily enough, the Cobalt account here on FA also originally belonged to somebody else, who signed up under the name and then pretty much never used it. In that case, I had to sign up under the name cobalt1:
http://www.furaffinity.net/user/cobalt1/
...just to ask them if they'd consider letting me have the account instead. Which they did, much to the betterment of the universe as a whole (or so I prefer to believe.)
I have to say, it's a bit disheartening that after approximately 25 years of being Cobalt (has it really been that long? my, how time flies), and doing my darnndest to make the name synonymous with the phrase "ewok porn" it still hasn't penetrated enough into furry mainstream that people just know "Hey, there's already a guy called that! Don't use that name! People will think you're that weirdo!"
One Cher.
One Prince.
One Ringo.
One Cobalt.
The real one, me.
Accept no substitutes.
I would be tempted to ask those two folks if they'd consider letting me have the name on those two sites, but the chances are that barring absolute disaster, I probably wouldn't use those accounts any more than the people there already do.
I mean, I'm on Inkbunny:
https://inkbunny.net/Cobalt
...but, I haven't posted anything there for over a year.
..and also on SoFurry:
https://cobalt.sofurry.com/
...but I've never posted anything there, ever.
I guess if anything does happen, one of those two locations would be my backup plan.
But for now, I'm here, and I'm staying here.
The power of inertia compels me.
There are accounts on both Weasyl:
https://www.weasyl.com/~cobalt
...and Furry Network:
https://beta.furrynetwork.com/cobalt
...neither of which is me.
Funnily enough, the Cobalt account here on FA also originally belonged to somebody else, who signed up under the name and then pretty much never used it. In that case, I had to sign up under the name cobalt1:
http://www.furaffinity.net/user/cobalt1/
...just to ask them if they'd consider letting me have the account instead. Which they did, much to the betterment of the universe as a whole (or so I prefer to believe.)
I have to say, it's a bit disheartening that after approximately 25 years of being Cobalt (has it really been that long? my, how time flies), and doing my darnndest to make the name synonymous with the phrase "ewok porn" it still hasn't penetrated enough into furry mainstream that people just know "Hey, there's already a guy called that! Don't use that name! People will think you're that weirdo!"
One Cher.
One Prince.
One Ringo.
One Cobalt.
The real one, me.
Accept no substitutes.
I would be tempted to ask those two folks if they'd consider letting me have the name on those two sites, but the chances are that barring absolute disaster, I probably wouldn't use those accounts any more than the people there already do.
I mean, I'm on Inkbunny:
https://inkbunny.net/Cobalt
...but, I haven't posted anything there for over a year.
..and also on SoFurry:
https://cobalt.sofurry.com/
...but I've never posted anything there, ever.
I guess if anything does happen, one of those two locations would be my backup plan.
But for now, I'm here, and I'm staying here.
The power of inertia compels me.
On the subject of the re-use of things in popular media
Posted 9 years agoSo, now that we're finally back...again... I can mention something that I noticed recently.
And this ties in directly to all that stuff I posted earlier about noticing the same props being re-used over and over in various TV series.
I've noticed a location that seems to be very popular with action-oriented tv heroes.
The same abandoned shopping mall has appeared now in episodes of Rush Hour, Agents Of SHIELD, and The Flash. And not just the same shopping mall... the same part of the same shopping mall - a big, open space with a central staircase.
A little goolging turned up this:
http://blogs.dailybreeze.com/histor.....nsideempty.jpg
And this, which is more like how it looks now, with most of the walls torn out:
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.co.....132bed8570.jpg
It seems that this is Hawthorn Plaza, a half-abandoned shopping mall, which now serves a new life as a filming location.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawth.....hopping_Center
I guess everybody's rushing to film there this season, because the mall is soon to be "revitalized" according to it's wikipedia page.
But hey, if you live in the area, and you don't mind ducking security guards, you can probably bop on over and visit a real live film set.
...while it lasts.
And this ties in directly to all that stuff I posted earlier about noticing the same props being re-used over and over in various TV series.
I've noticed a location that seems to be very popular with action-oriented tv heroes.
The same abandoned shopping mall has appeared now in episodes of Rush Hour, Agents Of SHIELD, and The Flash. And not just the same shopping mall... the same part of the same shopping mall - a big, open space with a central staircase.
A little goolging turned up this:
http://blogs.dailybreeze.com/histor.....nsideempty.jpg
And this, which is more like how it looks now, with most of the walls torn out:
https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.co.....132bed8570.jpg
It seems that this is Hawthorn Plaza, a half-abandoned shopping mall, which now serves a new life as a filming location.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawth.....hopping_Center
I guess everybody's rushing to film there this season, because the mall is soon to be "revitalized" according to it's wikipedia page.
But hey, if you live in the area, and you don't mind ducking security guards, you can probably bop on over and visit a real live film set.
...while it lasts.
The Most Important Device In The Universe
Posted 9 years agoI recently posted this image:
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/20020038/
Which was a collection of stock science fiction props which had appeared in a number of tv shows and movies. I also mentioned that I had several more in various stages of completion.
One of those props is the infamous "Dual Neon Generators" prop, without which no science fiction program is truly complete:
Over the course of working on it, and studying all the various appearances of it that I can find, I came up with a few notes about it which I thought I would share.
The grey "generator" sections which give the unit its name most likely started life as a set of in-ground hot tub filter baskets.
This is mostly a guess, based on the structure of the unit: They are almost identical to a set of in-ground filter baskets for a swimming pool manufactured by the Hayward company (Hayward Skim Master), but are far deeper, and appear large enough to fit the variety of tall, cylindrical filters user in a hot tub. This would also match the presence of the three exit pipes, as these would correspond to being the drain (where the neon tube attaches), the pump connection (top cap), and the vacuum safety port (underside cap. The large square "base" of the unit would be where it attaches to the tub, so having the vacuum safety on the same side would make sense.)
When facing the unit from the shelf side, gold caps ate fitted to the left side of the unit, while the right side (which is the side which seems to be shown the most) features polished chrome end caps of a different design, with interior U-shaped fluorescent tube lighting behind them. (Not sure what these end caps are made from.)
The gold caps would appear to be the filter basket lids flipped upside down to show the inner reinforcing ribs, and with a clear, lighted plug fitted to the hole in the middle which would have originally allowed the cover to be lifted.
Amazing what some plumbing supplies and spray paint can do.
The prop has also been modified several times over the course of its life:
1981 - earliest appearance of it I could find, from a season two episode of Buck Rogers. The shelf at the side has a blue neon tube, covered with a cylindrical cover.
1982 - Airplane II: Identical to as seen previously, minus the cylindrical cover.
Prop also appears this year in Star Trek: The Wrath Of Khan as a background object, and is always framed so that the little shelf isn't visible.
1983 - 1987 (unsure of date) - Appears as background object in an episode of "V" - The shelf and the blue lamp it held have been replaced with a new, angular shelf and a black control panel which will remain with the prop through the current day.
1988 - Appears as prop in "The Incredible Hulk Returns." During this TV Movie, the prop careens down a ramp and crashes into a wall, after being attacked by the actor playing Thor, indicating that the table is on wheels. (Considering how fussy Modern props rental agreement is, in regards to the safety of the items they rent during their transport, I'm betting that someone got a rather loud talking to about this.)
1987 - 1994 - Multiple appearances on Star Trek The Next Generation. Initial appearance is identical to that as it appeared in V, and HULK movie (including one episode where it is possible to see slight damage to the side of the table, in the same location where a label had been affixed to the table during HULK movie, suggesting that the label was not easily removed.)
Later appearances in the series include new detailing: a cross-member and reinforcement bars on the table that attach to the control panel. Also, supports for the little shelf are added, and the base is repainted from gray to black.
1999 - "Pathfinder" episode of Star Trek Voyager. Unit appears in laboratory of Reg Barclay. Black caps on pipe ends have been replaced with brushed metal versions. Clear neon tube sections are either replaced with red tubes, or fitted with colored gels.
Today: Brushed metal end caps on pipes are now fitted with connecting tube assemblies. Lighted neon tubes also have had an additional brushed metal surround with fins added to them. Neon tubes are clear again.
So, there you have it. A peek behind the scenes of my weekend hobby project, showing how obsessive one fan can be about onscreen minutiae.
But after all... we are talking about The Most Important Device In The Universe.
Nobody knows what it does, but everybody has to have one.
Eventually, I will have one, too. Or maybe several, depending on if I feel like duplicating all the various versions of it which have been seen.
http://www.furaffinity.net/view/20020038/
Which was a collection of stock science fiction props which had appeared in a number of tv shows and movies. I also mentioned that I had several more in various stages of completion.
One of those props is the infamous "Dual Neon Generators" prop, without which no science fiction program is truly complete:
Over the course of working on it, and studying all the various appearances of it that I can find, I came up with a few notes about it which I thought I would share.
The grey "generator" sections which give the unit its name most likely started life as a set of in-ground hot tub filter baskets.
This is mostly a guess, based on the structure of the unit: They are almost identical to a set of in-ground filter baskets for a swimming pool manufactured by the Hayward company (Hayward Skim Master), but are far deeper, and appear large enough to fit the variety of tall, cylindrical filters user in a hot tub. This would also match the presence of the three exit pipes, as these would correspond to being the drain (where the neon tube attaches), the pump connection (top cap), and the vacuum safety port (underside cap. The large square "base" of the unit would be where it attaches to the tub, so having the vacuum safety on the same side would make sense.)
When facing the unit from the shelf side, gold caps ate fitted to the left side of the unit, while the right side (which is the side which seems to be shown the most) features polished chrome end caps of a different design, with interior U-shaped fluorescent tube lighting behind them. (Not sure what these end caps are made from.)
The gold caps would appear to be the filter basket lids flipped upside down to show the inner reinforcing ribs, and with a clear, lighted plug fitted to the hole in the middle which would have originally allowed the cover to be lifted.
Amazing what some plumbing supplies and spray paint can do.
The prop has also been modified several times over the course of its life:
1981 - earliest appearance of it I could find, from a season two episode of Buck Rogers. The shelf at the side has a blue neon tube, covered with a cylindrical cover.
1982 - Airplane II: Identical to as seen previously, minus the cylindrical cover.
Prop also appears this year in Star Trek: The Wrath Of Khan as a background object, and is always framed so that the little shelf isn't visible.
1983 - 1987 (unsure of date) - Appears as background object in an episode of "V" - The shelf and the blue lamp it held have been replaced with a new, angular shelf and a black control panel which will remain with the prop through the current day.
1988 - Appears as prop in "The Incredible Hulk Returns." During this TV Movie, the prop careens down a ramp and crashes into a wall, after being attacked by the actor playing Thor, indicating that the table is on wheels. (Considering how fussy Modern props rental agreement is, in regards to the safety of the items they rent during their transport, I'm betting that someone got a rather loud talking to about this.)
1987 - 1994 - Multiple appearances on Star Trek The Next Generation. Initial appearance is identical to that as it appeared in V, and HULK movie (including one episode where it is possible to see slight damage to the side of the table, in the same location where a label had been affixed to the table during HULK movie, suggesting that the label was not easily removed.)
Later appearances in the series include new detailing: a cross-member and reinforcement bars on the table that attach to the control panel. Also, supports for the little shelf are added, and the base is repainted from gray to black.
1999 - "Pathfinder" episode of Star Trek Voyager. Unit appears in laboratory of Reg Barclay. Black caps on pipe ends have been replaced with brushed metal versions. Clear neon tube sections are either replaced with red tubes, or fitted with colored gels.
Today: Brushed metal end caps on pipes are now fitted with connecting tube assemblies. Lighted neon tubes also have had an additional brushed metal surround with fins added to them. Neon tubes are clear again.
So, there you have it. A peek behind the scenes of my weekend hobby project, showing how obsessive one fan can be about onscreen minutiae.
But after all... we are talking about The Most Important Device In The Universe.
Nobody knows what it does, but everybody has to have one.
Eventually, I will have one, too. Or maybe several, depending on if I feel like duplicating all the various versions of it which have been seen.
Yes, It's Another Political Rant
Posted 9 years agoI made a promise to myself that I wasn't going to do too many more of these, as I never really saw this place as s soapbox for my political views...but this one hits a little too close to home for me to let it slide by without commenting.
I know that my home state, Delaware, is primarily a tax haven for big businesses. I also know that it's not exactly free of political corruption. After all, this is a state where for a good few decades, if you wanted to build something, no matter how pointless it was, all you had to do was grease the right palms - which is how we ended up with a brand new four lane highway bridge sitting in the middle of Newark with no highway connected to it for twenty years. Also, if you wanted to build something and didn't pay the bribe..er.. I mean make the "charitable contribution"... your building site would mysteriously fill up with dead fish, just before the health inspectors arrived for a spot check for code violations.
But you know, despite all that, the one thing I really honestly believed, was that we could at least do an honest election.
So, what's happened to shake my worldview, you ask?
http://www.inquisitr.com/3039553/vo.....gged-election/
Officially, Hillary Clinton won Delaware.
However, In at least one Delaware county, that was with %153.4 of the vote being reported from 89 of 53 precincts.
But it gets better. Somehow, Bernie Sanders had thousands of votes simply vanish as the night wore on. So, despite starting the night with a massive several thousand vote lead over Clinton, instead of votes being added to his total as primary voting continued, votes were instead subtracted. And thus he lost.
It appears that we've joined the likes of Arizona and New York, with a blatantly rigged Democratic primary.
I know that my home state, Delaware, is primarily a tax haven for big businesses. I also know that it's not exactly free of political corruption. After all, this is a state where for a good few decades, if you wanted to build something, no matter how pointless it was, all you had to do was grease the right palms - which is how we ended up with a brand new four lane highway bridge sitting in the middle of Newark with no highway connected to it for twenty years. Also, if you wanted to build something and didn't pay the bribe..er.. I mean make the "charitable contribution"... your building site would mysteriously fill up with dead fish, just before the health inspectors arrived for a spot check for code violations.
But you know, despite all that, the one thing I really honestly believed, was that we could at least do an honest election.
So, what's happened to shake my worldview, you ask?
http://www.inquisitr.com/3039553/vo.....gged-election/
Officially, Hillary Clinton won Delaware.
However, In at least one Delaware county, that was with %153.4 of the vote being reported from 89 of 53 precincts.
But it gets better. Somehow, Bernie Sanders had thousands of votes simply vanish as the night wore on. So, despite starting the night with a massive several thousand vote lead over Clinton, instead of votes being added to his total as primary voting continued, votes were instead subtracted. And thus he lost.
It appears that we've joined the likes of Arizona and New York, with a blatantly rigged Democratic primary.
Ghostbusters Reboot: Who Brought The Dog?
Posted 9 years agoWell, it seems that my dire predictions about the upcoming Ghostbusters reboot may be coming to pass.
Those Journals for those of you who missed them:
Part 1: Paul Feig's GHOSTBUSTERS - a tragedy
http://www.furaffinity.net/journal/6880301/
part 2: GHOSTBUSTERS (not) III
http://www.furaffinity.net/journal/7419033/
And now the current news...
"A redditor who claims to have seen the new ‘Ghostbusters’ film brings bad news: it’s something strange and it don’t look good."
"Ghostbusters test screened to absolutely abysmal reviews in Van Nuys this weekend."
"the good news is minimal and Sony is absolutely panicked right now."
http://tinyurl.com/gqmt8ow
Interestingly, I was also pointed to the following videos today, which suggest that the problems with this film ran even deeper than I thought:
I'm really not sure what else to say, except that this seems to be just the natural result of letting your creative decisions be driven by corporate boardrooms and marketing agencies whose only interest is in pushing product. Lock down the product placement, ask the CGI guys to give us a couple big visual set pieces. Slap on a famous name and call it a day. Story? what story... It will write itself, trust me.
Hooray for Hollywood.
Those Journals for those of you who missed them:
Part 1: Paul Feig's GHOSTBUSTERS - a tragedy
http://www.furaffinity.net/journal/6880301/
part 2: GHOSTBUSTERS (not) III
http://www.furaffinity.net/journal/7419033/
And now the current news...
"A redditor who claims to have seen the new ‘Ghostbusters’ film brings bad news: it’s something strange and it don’t look good."
"Ghostbusters test screened to absolutely abysmal reviews in Van Nuys this weekend."
"the good news is minimal and Sony is absolutely panicked right now."
http://tinyurl.com/gqmt8ow
Interestingly, I was also pointed to the following videos today, which suggest that the problems with this film ran even deeper than I thought:
I'm really not sure what else to say, except that this seems to be just the natural result of letting your creative decisions be driven by corporate boardrooms and marketing agencies whose only interest is in pushing product. Lock down the product placement, ask the CGI guys to give us a couple big visual set pieces. Slap on a famous name and call it a day. Story? what story... It will write itself, trust me.
Hooray for Hollywood.
Friday's Angels
Posted 9 years agoOnce upon a time, Punk Rock was actually good.
Happy Friday everyone.
Have some Billy Idol, from before he went solo.
Happy Friday everyone.
Have some Billy Idol, from before he went solo.
Happy Birthday To Me
Posted 9 years agoIt's been April 16 for about an hour here, now.
I'm 46.
Let the festivities commence.
I'm 46.
Let the festivities commence.
Rush Hour
Posted 9 years agoUsually, when I write a review of something I've watched on teevee recently - for example, my many diatribes about how every copy of this week's Doctor Who (whatever it may have been on that day) should be set fire to and then extinguished within the confines of a used chamber pot - I tend to complain with such ferocity, that some of you probably start worrying about my blood pressure, and the potential consequences of my head popping clean off my neck and spiraling off into the stratosphere, like one of those toy water rockets that come with the little air pump.
So... For a change, let's talk about something I do like.
Rush Hour.
Based on the film series of the same name, and with largely the same concept, the show is one of those buddy cop shows where opposites collide and then bounce off of each other after being assigned as partners in (location) police force. In this case, a hip black streetwise fast-talking police detective with shady neighborhood connections, buddied up with a quiet, by-the-book, and ruthlessly efficient Chinese cop, in the LAPD.
But it really does go beyond the formula described above. I'm not quite sure how to explain it except to say that it's fun. It's buckets of fun. And it seems to know this and is having fun, being fun.
Yes, in a world where grim and gritty heroes who stand and glare majestically are the rule of the day, Rush Hour delights in being that rarest of things - funny.
And not dumb funny, smart funny.
Quick funny.
Dare I say it, Clever Funny.
It's been way too long since there has been a program this unapologetic about just being fun to watch.
In the vernacular of now, ZERO FUCKS GIVEN.
Not trying to be stylish. Not trying to be so intense and serious that you must be impressed by the pure power of it all. It is not art, it is entertainment. Pure, unabashed entertainment.
It's having fun. And that makes it fun.
I really hope it doesn't get cancelled.
So... For a change, let's talk about something I do like.
Rush Hour.
Based on the film series of the same name, and with largely the same concept, the show is one of those buddy cop shows where opposites collide and then bounce off of each other after being assigned as partners in (location) police force. In this case, a hip black streetwise fast-talking police detective with shady neighborhood connections, buddied up with a quiet, by-the-book, and ruthlessly efficient Chinese cop, in the LAPD.
But it really does go beyond the formula described above. I'm not quite sure how to explain it except to say that it's fun. It's buckets of fun. And it seems to know this and is having fun, being fun.
Yes, in a world where grim and gritty heroes who stand and glare majestically are the rule of the day, Rush Hour delights in being that rarest of things - funny.
And not dumb funny, smart funny.
Quick funny.
Dare I say it, Clever Funny.
It's been way too long since there has been a program this unapologetic about just being fun to watch.
In the vernacular of now, ZERO FUCKS GIVEN.
Not trying to be stylish. Not trying to be so intense and serious that you must be impressed by the pure power of it all. It is not art, it is entertainment. Pure, unabashed entertainment.
It's having fun. And that makes it fun.
I really hope it doesn't get cancelled.
The Revolution Will Not Be Televised
Posted 9 years agoOne more quick political post:
Right now, Bernie Sanders is in Washington Square Park, under the arch, with the Empire State Building in the background, making a speech before an audience of 40,000 cheering, sign-waving people.
Right now, Hillary Clinton is also making a speech, in a school gym, to 200 people.
Guess which one of these two events is considered telelvision-coverage worthy by CNN and MSNBC?
Go on.. GUESS.
Right now, Bernie Sanders is in Washington Square Park, under the arch, with the Empire State Building in the background, making a speech before an audience of 40,000 cheering, sign-waving people.
Right now, Hillary Clinton is also making a speech, in a school gym, to 200 people.
Guess which one of these two events is considered telelvision-coverage worthy by CNN and MSNBC?
Go on.. GUESS.
I blame The Harlem Globetrotters
Posted 9 years agoYes, it's another political post.
I hate to admit it, but until recently, I hadn't really been invested in the current Presidential race. I cringed at the idea of Trump, but that was about it.
Those of you who have been following my journals will remember that I wrote a brief piece about watching the debates a while back, and how this somewhat reframed the whole thing for me. I've become a bit of a Bernie supporter, and the more I look into the race, and the various goings-on that surround it, the more I'm convinced that part of my growing interest can be laid at the feet of The Harlem Globetrotters.
It's their fault. Really.
Ok, explanation coming.
In pretty much every one of their appearances in pop culture, from scooby-doo episodes, to their own saturday morning cartoons, to that Gilligan's Island tv movie where they played against evil robots (yes, this was an actual thing, look it up) the story always took the same basic track...
The snobbish evil baddie had all the support, and had rigged the game. By halftime, the evil baddie had driven the score way up. The game was all but over, and the Globetrotters had lost. Woe! Woe, I say!
But then... the scrappy underdogs came back in the second half, and beat back the snobbish baddie, even with all the cheating that had gone on. Victory from the jaws of defeat!
And that looks to be the same story playing out in this year's election.
Bernie Sanders, the scrappy underdog. The all-american guy from New York City. Humble. Rides coach. Wears rumpled suits. Preaches a message of equality and inclusion. Even little birds appear when he speaks, like some Disney hero.
And then there's Hillary. Rich, connected, influential. It's not hard to see her as the snobbish elite, especially when she's wagging her finger in the face of anyone who dares ask a question she doesn't want to answer, like that Greenpeace activist earlier in the week.
And, of course, the establishment has been rigging the game in her favor, so that at halftime, her score had been driven way up. The election was all but over, said the pundits, and Bernie had lost. Woe!
But, just like a Globetrotter playing basketball against evil robots.... now that halftime is over... Bernie seems to have started winning, and winning big. In the past handful of states, he's landed 70% to 80% wins. And yesterday, he even took back a state (Nevada) which had been a loss for him, originally. And, if the controversy surrounding that win is true, it was against some pretty hefty election rigging by the Clinton campaign:
http://usuncut.com/politics/bernie-.....cratic-caucus/
So, the evil snob is starting to lose, and the scrappy underdog is making their big comeback, at least according to The Harlem Globetrotters plotline.
So, I've gone from disinterested third party, to hoping the bad guy doesn't win.
Because Globetrotters.
It looks like it's all going to come down to New York... If Bernie can win big there, he may just have this game in the bag.
Somebody cue the theme music.
I hate to admit it, but until recently, I hadn't really been invested in the current Presidential race. I cringed at the idea of Trump, but that was about it.
Those of you who have been following my journals will remember that I wrote a brief piece about watching the debates a while back, and how this somewhat reframed the whole thing for me. I've become a bit of a Bernie supporter, and the more I look into the race, and the various goings-on that surround it, the more I'm convinced that part of my growing interest can be laid at the feet of The Harlem Globetrotters.
It's their fault. Really.
Ok, explanation coming.
In pretty much every one of their appearances in pop culture, from scooby-doo episodes, to their own saturday morning cartoons, to that Gilligan's Island tv movie where they played against evil robots (yes, this was an actual thing, look it up) the story always took the same basic track...
The snobbish evil baddie had all the support, and had rigged the game. By halftime, the evil baddie had driven the score way up. The game was all but over, and the Globetrotters had lost. Woe! Woe, I say!
But then... the scrappy underdogs came back in the second half, and beat back the snobbish baddie, even with all the cheating that had gone on. Victory from the jaws of defeat!
And that looks to be the same story playing out in this year's election.
Bernie Sanders, the scrappy underdog. The all-american guy from New York City. Humble. Rides coach. Wears rumpled suits. Preaches a message of equality and inclusion. Even little birds appear when he speaks, like some Disney hero.
And then there's Hillary. Rich, connected, influential. It's not hard to see her as the snobbish elite, especially when she's wagging her finger in the face of anyone who dares ask a question she doesn't want to answer, like that Greenpeace activist earlier in the week.
And, of course, the establishment has been rigging the game in her favor, so that at halftime, her score had been driven way up. The election was all but over, said the pundits, and Bernie had lost. Woe!
But, just like a Globetrotter playing basketball against evil robots.... now that halftime is over... Bernie seems to have started winning, and winning big. In the past handful of states, he's landed 70% to 80% wins. And yesterday, he even took back a state (Nevada) which had been a loss for him, originally. And, if the controversy surrounding that win is true, it was against some pretty hefty election rigging by the Clinton campaign:
http://usuncut.com/politics/bernie-.....cratic-caucus/
So, the evil snob is starting to lose, and the scrappy underdog is making their big comeback, at least according to The Harlem Globetrotters plotline.
So, I've gone from disinterested third party, to hoping the bad guy doesn't win.
Because Globetrotters.
It looks like it's all going to come down to New York... If Bernie can win big there, he may just have this game in the bag.
Somebody cue the theme music.
Movie I hate: Xmas Edition
Posted 9 years agoWhy the hell is Cobalt making a Christmas post in the middle of March?
Well folks, tomorrow night... or rather, very early Saturday morning, I'm going to be finally taking the Christmas trip west to visit the family. As you may recall, the trip got cancelled after God threw a brick at my mother.
Read more about it here:
http://www.furaffinity.net/journal/7267797/
...and so, as I sit here taking a breather from finishing up the last few projects that I need to get done before the big trip, my mind has naturally turned to things of a holiday nature.
And one movie in particular, which I hopefully won't have to sit through while I'm out there, because it's March now. Not December.
That movie is The Polar Express.
My folks always insist upon making it part of the yearly holiday celebration, when we're at my brother's place, because he was a full amaz-o-wow dolbywatt humongophonic theatrical sound system and you can really hear that hubcap rattle like it was right in the room with you. (Those of you who have seen the movie will know of what I speak)
So, let's get this out of the way - I don't mind the CGI. The movie is an exciting roller-coaster (literally in some scenes)...
No, what makes me hate this film is the message, with which it takes great joy in repeatedly whacking you over the head: YOU GOTTA BELIEVE!!
Stop thinking. Stop being rational. Only fools think for themselves. Just believe, because what are you, some kind of jerk?
Yes, the movie is about believing in Santa Claus against all proof otherwise. But it's not hard to see this as a ham-handed religious metaphor. Jesus Claus requires your belief!
The problem is, that while they hammer both the audience and the kid who is the protagonist of them film with BELIEVE messages throughout the film, finally pushing him until he collapses, screaming "Yes, I Believe! I BELIEVE!!" ... there's basically no gooddamn belief required. Not from the audience. Not from the kid.
You're on a goddamn train which somehow showed up in the middle of the street in front of your parents' house despite there being no train tracks there. It takes you to the north pole. You meet elves. You visit a massive society of these elves complete with buildings and streets, and a factory, a pneumatic tube travel system, a communications network spying on kids to see if they've been naughty or nice, and a complex Christmas present packaging and delivery system... you fall in Santa's bag of toys... you see flying reindeer, then then... through the crowds of cheering elves, surrounding the biggest Christmas tree in the world.. you see the man himself.
At this point, how in the hell is belief even an issue? They have basically eradicated any requirement for it. This is no longer faith, this is evidence. There it is. You're surrounded by it. FUCK BELIEF.
But no, the kid has to yell "I Believe!" because otherwise the magic doesn't work and you can't hear the sleigh bells. Because it's not enough to know you were wrong, you have to confess your sins and beg for forgiveness, because you didn't believe you godless heretic!
It is, at this point, that I want to punch this entire movie in the nose.
Fuck you movie.
Fuck you very much.
It is my least favorite holiday tradition, right up there with the "Tell everybody what you're thankful for!" speech I have to give in front of the entire family, before I get to eat any Turkey at thanksgiving. And I really extra hate that.
I really hope I won't have to sit through it again.
Maybe we can watch Star Wars instead.
Well folks, tomorrow night... or rather, very early Saturday morning, I'm going to be finally taking the Christmas trip west to visit the family. As you may recall, the trip got cancelled after God threw a brick at my mother.
Read more about it here:
http://www.furaffinity.net/journal/7267797/
...and so, as I sit here taking a breather from finishing up the last few projects that I need to get done before the big trip, my mind has naturally turned to things of a holiday nature.
And one movie in particular, which I hopefully won't have to sit through while I'm out there, because it's March now. Not December.
That movie is The Polar Express.
My folks always insist upon making it part of the yearly holiday celebration, when we're at my brother's place, because he was a full amaz-o-wow dolbywatt humongophonic theatrical sound system and you can really hear that hubcap rattle like it was right in the room with you. (Those of you who have seen the movie will know of what I speak)
So, let's get this out of the way - I don't mind the CGI. The movie is an exciting roller-coaster (literally in some scenes)...
No, what makes me hate this film is the message, with which it takes great joy in repeatedly whacking you over the head: YOU GOTTA BELIEVE!!
Stop thinking. Stop being rational. Only fools think for themselves. Just believe, because what are you, some kind of jerk?
Yes, the movie is about believing in Santa Claus against all proof otherwise. But it's not hard to see this as a ham-handed religious metaphor. Jesus Claus requires your belief!
The problem is, that while they hammer both the audience and the kid who is the protagonist of them film with BELIEVE messages throughout the film, finally pushing him until he collapses, screaming "Yes, I Believe! I BELIEVE!!" ... there's basically no gooddamn belief required. Not from the audience. Not from the kid.
You're on a goddamn train which somehow showed up in the middle of the street in front of your parents' house despite there being no train tracks there. It takes you to the north pole. You meet elves. You visit a massive society of these elves complete with buildings and streets, and a factory, a pneumatic tube travel system, a communications network spying on kids to see if they've been naughty or nice, and a complex Christmas present packaging and delivery system... you fall in Santa's bag of toys... you see flying reindeer, then then... through the crowds of cheering elves, surrounding the biggest Christmas tree in the world.. you see the man himself.
At this point, how in the hell is belief even an issue? They have basically eradicated any requirement for it. This is no longer faith, this is evidence. There it is. You're surrounded by it. FUCK BELIEF.
But no, the kid has to yell "I Believe!" because otherwise the magic doesn't work and you can't hear the sleigh bells. Because it's not enough to know you were wrong, you have to confess your sins and beg for forgiveness, because you didn't believe you godless heretic!
It is, at this point, that I want to punch this entire movie in the nose.
Fuck you movie.
Fuck you very much.
It is my least favorite holiday tradition, right up there with the "Tell everybody what you're thankful for!" speech I have to give in front of the entire family, before I get to eat any Turkey at thanksgiving. And I really extra hate that.
I really hope I won't have to sit through it again.
Maybe we can watch Star Wars instead.
Cobalt Stupidly Talks About Politics
Posted 9 years agoYes, it's true.
While I don't normally talk about anything political here on these pages, since I see this primarily as a stage upon which I may entertain you folks.... Last night I bore witness to something, that if I don't comment on it, will likely continue to throb painfully in the back of my head.
So, I'm letting it out.
Here goes.
Last night, on CNN, there was a debate between the two Democratic candidates running for the coveted slot of "Person who will defeat Donald Trump and become President."
Why did I watch this? Because it's been a bad week for TV, and I was bored. No Flash. No Arrow. No Star Wars Rebels. Not even a new Supergirl. So, figuring I could at least call it "doing my civic duty to stay informed" I put the debate on.
Now, going into this I was evenly divided on the two candidates. I liked Bernie. But I also had a lot of respect for Mrs. Clinton. I figured whichever one won, it would be okay with me. I was expecting to see two titans of democracy standing proud and answering the call of the public in an open forum.
What I got was a total shitshow.
Here's the point of all this: Clinton lost me last night. Just lost me. I don't know if this was typical of her debate performances in the past, but she came off as hateful and spiteful and childish. I've seen clips of Trump making an idiot out of himself in the various Republican debates (usually being shown in a "look at this clown" context) and what I saw coming from Clinton last night was positively Trumpian. Trumpesque. Whatever.
It was a total let-down. She is clearly not the person I thought she was.
The sneering. The scowling. The fact that she continually tried to not answer the questions put to her, to the point that the moderators had to re-ask the question and demand that she specifically answer that question, the one that had been asked, until they finally backed her into a "No, I'm not answering that, MOVE ON!" response.
The constant lying.
The laughing at inappropriate moments.
The car-salesman style "Heyyyy... trust me!"
The constant "Oh yeah? Well Bernie Sanders MURDERS ORPHANS!" non-sequitur responses, as she threw anything and everything at the wall she could to see what would stick.
The audience wasn't having it, the moderators weren't having it, and Bernie Sanders....
He shut her down each and every time. I had no idea that he had that in him.
He's just been this sort of goofy uncle type, or at least that's the general impression I had. But last night he weathered one of the most vicious, under-handed and pathetic slime attacks I've witnessed in a long time, and he managed to remain standing. I clearly haven't been giving him enough credit.
Last night totally re-framed things for me. I was evenly divided. I could have gone with either.
Now, I think I've become a Bernie fan.
And I'm more than a bit scared of that crazy woman he was debating.
Don't let her get me.
While I don't normally talk about anything political here on these pages, since I see this primarily as a stage upon which I may entertain you folks.... Last night I bore witness to something, that if I don't comment on it, will likely continue to throb painfully in the back of my head.
So, I'm letting it out.
Here goes.
Last night, on CNN, there was a debate between the two Democratic candidates running for the coveted slot of "Person who will defeat Donald Trump and become President."
Why did I watch this? Because it's been a bad week for TV, and I was bored. No Flash. No Arrow. No Star Wars Rebels. Not even a new Supergirl. So, figuring I could at least call it "doing my civic duty to stay informed" I put the debate on.
Now, going into this I was evenly divided on the two candidates. I liked Bernie. But I also had a lot of respect for Mrs. Clinton. I figured whichever one won, it would be okay with me. I was expecting to see two titans of democracy standing proud and answering the call of the public in an open forum.
What I got was a total shitshow.
Here's the point of all this: Clinton lost me last night. Just lost me. I don't know if this was typical of her debate performances in the past, but she came off as hateful and spiteful and childish. I've seen clips of Trump making an idiot out of himself in the various Republican debates (usually being shown in a "look at this clown" context) and what I saw coming from Clinton last night was positively Trumpian. Trumpesque. Whatever.
It was a total let-down. She is clearly not the person I thought she was.
The sneering. The scowling. The fact that she continually tried to not answer the questions put to her, to the point that the moderators had to re-ask the question and demand that she specifically answer that question, the one that had been asked, until they finally backed her into a "No, I'm not answering that, MOVE ON!" response.
The constant lying.
The laughing at inappropriate moments.
The car-salesman style "Heyyyy... trust me!"
The constant "Oh yeah? Well Bernie Sanders MURDERS ORPHANS!" non-sequitur responses, as she threw anything and everything at the wall she could to see what would stick.
The audience wasn't having it, the moderators weren't having it, and Bernie Sanders....
He shut her down each and every time. I had no idea that he had that in him.
He's just been this sort of goofy uncle type, or at least that's the general impression I had. But last night he weathered one of the most vicious, under-handed and pathetic slime attacks I've witnessed in a long time, and he managed to remain standing. I clearly haven't been giving him enough credit.
Last night totally re-framed things for me. I was evenly divided. I could have gone with either.
Now, I think I've become a Bernie fan.
And I'm more than a bit scared of that crazy woman he was debating.
Don't let her get me.
GHOSTBUSTERS (not) III
Posted 9 years agoAs some of you may recall, some time back I wrote a journal about the upcoming Ghostbusters film, and how the guy responsible for making it had been handed a copy of the Ghostbusters 3 script, and how he then decided he didn't want to make that. He wasn't interested in the idea. He couldn't get excited about the idea. He wanted to do a hard reboot, that would be all his own idea.
And how this was going to happen....
Well, now the trailer for it is now out:
OH GOD DOES THAT SUCK.
I don't know why I let my hopes get up, even the tiniest bit. Everything they showed us previously looked like a bad copy created without talent or care, from the costumes, to the junk-store equipment and car, to the generic "grim and gritty action movie" posters. It looked like a Bollywood rip-off but without the spicy exotic flavor or snazzy dance routines.
It says volumes that they start the trailer with a little bait-and-switch. Look! The original firehouse! 30 years later! Oooh....
But no, the message this trailer makes is "Hey, remember that movie you used to really like? You're not getting that."
Vomit jokes. Vagina jokes. Cheap retreads of scenes from the original. This is the movie with all that and less!
Featuring the talents of:
"Gender Swapped Cartoon Egon"
"Fat Chick"
"Loud Black Female Caricature"
and "Also appearing in this film"
And you know what would really sell this to audiences? The worst cover of the classic Ray Parker theme tune, since RUN DMC. MAKE IT HAPPEN!
It's like they took everything bad about Ghostbusters II and distilled it down to the purest concentrate of pure awful that physics would allow.
Jay Sherman warned us: "After roman numeral II give it a rest! If it's a remake of a classic, rent the classic!"
The movie's gonna blow.
Do-se-do.
Oh wait.. Sorry..
*ahem*
JUST DON'T GO!
And how this was going to happen....
Well, now the trailer for it is now out:
OH GOD DOES THAT SUCK.
I don't know why I let my hopes get up, even the tiniest bit. Everything they showed us previously looked like a bad copy created without talent or care, from the costumes, to the junk-store equipment and car, to the generic "grim and gritty action movie" posters. It looked like a Bollywood rip-off but without the spicy exotic flavor or snazzy dance routines.
It says volumes that they start the trailer with a little bait-and-switch. Look! The original firehouse! 30 years later! Oooh....
But no, the message this trailer makes is "Hey, remember that movie you used to really like? You're not getting that."
Vomit jokes. Vagina jokes. Cheap retreads of scenes from the original. This is the movie with all that and less!
Featuring the talents of:
"Gender Swapped Cartoon Egon"
"Fat Chick"
"Loud Black Female Caricature"
and "Also appearing in this film"
And you know what would really sell this to audiences? The worst cover of the classic Ray Parker theme tune, since RUN DMC. MAKE IT HAPPEN!
It's like they took everything bad about Ghostbusters II and distilled it down to the purest concentrate of pure awful that physics would allow.
Jay Sherman warned us: "After roman numeral II give it a rest! If it's a remake of a classic, rent the classic!"
The movie's gonna blow.
Do-se-do.
Oh wait.. Sorry..
*ahem*
JUST DON'T GO!
bouncy bouncy
Posted 9 years agoHappy leap day, everybody.
You got an extra day this year. Do something with it.
You got an extra day this year. Do something with it.
