September 13, 2005

Sometimes I post something and I think that it will generate some comments, and I get nothing (yesterday would be an example of that) and sometimes I post something which I think won't get any comments (there was a short entry a few weeks ago that was an example of that) and it gets quite a few. I guess the point is that, much like Mark Twain (or so I hear), I'm stylisticly tone-deaf. I can't tell which of my stuff is good and which is bad, but rather like the monkey at the zoo, I hurl crap at passersby and hope that I occasionally hit someone.

I took the family to see Charlie and the Chocolate Factory last night. I liked it quite a bit, especially the Oompa Loompa songs. I've heard lots of unfavorable comparisons between this version and the older version with Gene Wilder. I've only seen the older version once, and I can't really remember that much of it, but the impression I got was that it was a mediocore movie. As my wife and I discussed it, she concurred and mentioned that for her it stemmed from reading the book first. That was the case with me and I wonder if people who like the Gene Wilder version better than this version are people who've never read the book?

As a finale, I was going to link to an article on Slashdot about some students who had managed to recover 96% of the keystrokes in a 10 minutes typing session using only a recording. (Rhere is a link to their research paper available.) This method of cracking passwords does require a certain level of access, but it goes to show how so much of our security is weakened because of the human element.

Chief cook and bottle-washer
Ross

Posted by direkobold at September 13, 2005 11:59 AM
Comments

Are you saying Mark Twain is a crap-hurling monkey?

Posted by: yourwife at September 13, 2005 01:55 PM

I thought about commenting on yesterday's blog, but since I have important things to do I only read this every so often. O:)

I am curious though how obedience and bystander effect go together. My first thought was the Rawhide Syndrome, but my first question is who gave that monkey the @!#$??

Posted by: ttocS O:) at September 13, 2005 04:16 PM

I really, really liked the new Charlie and the Chocolate Factory movie....until I re-read the book with my kids. Then I only really liked it. The whole schtick with his father and his disturbing childhood is not only not in the book, it is antithetical to the character of Willie Wonka that Dahl puts in the book.

Just another pathetic example of our postmodern society trashing great modern or late-modern literature in movies.

One of the most offensive examples of this is Faramir from Lord of the Rings. Tolkien wrote him as immune from the temptation of the Ring; noble and perfect in his moral fiber. Jackson's hacks claimed such a character ruins the construct of the Ring as the ultimate temptation; thus claiming that the idea of morally stallwart individuals is impossible. Again, postmodern "monkey projectiles".

I must admit, the allusion to past bands (especially Queen) in the oompa-loompa songs was great. The overall effect was wonderful. The postmodernism just frosts my cookies.

Posted by: Brad at September 13, 2005 09:35 PM
Post a comment









Remember personal info?






Powered by Movable Type 2.64

Dire Kobold?SubscribeView from the BushesMembers |
LinksLegalContact Us |

Except where noted copyright © 2002 Sodality, LLC