About Thoughts of a TechnoGeek: This is where I'll post my thoughts, interesting articles, or anything else I want to. If you don't like it, don't read it. David L Brenner my email Subscribe Links
|
|
Sat, 19 Jun 2004
The third installment in the Harry Potter series is probably the weakest of the movies to date. It picks up during summer break, just like the other movies and books. The events in the movie were reflective of the book, but in this instance the things that were left out detracted significantly from the quality of the movie. If I had not read the book I think that I would have been left scratching my head wondering what happened. In my opinion, this was also the weakest of the books, so it's not a surprise that the movie lacked a quality that the other movies had. It also didn't help that the actors had aged significantly and were much older looking than the characters that they were portraiting. This being said, I eagerly await the next movie and the next book. The next movie should be very exciting because it sets things up for the fifth book, which in my opinion is the best so far.
It wouldn't be summer without a sci-fi movie with little plot and a lot of action. So far this summer, this is "The Chronicles of Riddick", the new Vin Diesle movie. This is a follow-on to the movie "Pitch Black". Riddick is a murderer on a transport ship. The ship crash lands on a planet where it is almost always day due to multiple suns. Subterrainian creatures, that by the way are only nocturnal, hunt the people on the transport and Riddick needs to save the day. Chronicles is a sequel set several years later. The acting isn't great. The fight scenes are cool and the CGI is pretty good. It was a great action movie. If you are looking for a wonderful, Academy Award nominee, this isn't your movie. If you want a fun time, it is.
In a controversial decision, parliament approves Japan's largest foreign deployment since World War II. [BBC News | Front Page | UK Edition] This is a really good thing. As G put it, when they get on the ground in Iraq, all they need to say to gain credibility is, "Dude, I know how you feel." The only thing I see wrong with this is they are violating their constitution. I know that we encouraged them to keep to their island after we kicked the shit out of them at the end of the War. This was a good thing. But I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that they learned their lesson. The fact that they are sending 1k troops and we have over 100k means this is largely a gesture. Still, this is a good thing.
You know, there are some things that just piss me off. No really. Sir Paul McCartney is a wonderful musician. I love his music. Since I have been listening to it my entire life, literally, it would suck if I hated it. That doesn't mean that I want to hear his opinion on why we should all be vegetarians. It is summarized briefly at CNN. Of course there is a double standard between the way we treat chickens and the way that we treat cats & dogs. One of them is food, and one of them is a pet. I see absolutely no problem with this. If I was hungry enough I'd gladly eat the dog or cat. Paul is allowed his opinion on this one. He can be a vegetarian for whatever reason he wants. If it's because of ethical reasons, that's fine for him. I personally think its misguided to skip food groups for this particular reason. I wonder if he wears leather or uses any other animal by-products. We, as humans, are intended to eat meat. Our physiology is setup for it. Out brains are setup for it. We are predators, plain and simple. We augment the vegetable matter with meat. What else would the term "Hunter-Gather" mean? I can guarantee we weren't hunting carrots. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of reasons to cut back on meat intake, not the least of which is the resources necessary to provide meat to a large population. We have industrial chicken plants simply because it is the most efficient method for handling the quantity of chickens necessary to meet demand. As a society, we probably eat too much meat. This level of growth isn't sustainable. That doesn't mean that we should eliminate it from our diet all together. Let's address the ethical concerns for a minute, just to be fair. Do I think we should be torturing animals? No. Do I think there should be reasonable procedures put in place to ensure the well-being of these animals? Yes. But let's be honest, us killing, filleting, and eating these animals is contrary to their well-being. Plain and simple. Is it any more ethical to have free-range chickens where they need to compete for food, possibly suffering, and then kill them? I think we are splitting hairs, or maybe feathers, at this point. Personally, I think free-range chicken tastes better, probably because it gets more exercise. But in order for me to make that determination, I need to eat it. And I'm going to continue eating them. Millions of years of evolution tells me that's what I'm optimized for. I can't change what I am. I'm a predator and proud of it.
|