So in thinking about the Playlists feature, and in talking to Chip about it, I'm sort of seeing that I was setting it up for failure on a few different levels.
First, on a very basic level, "walking music" isn't really something that people can grasp, because most people don't walk just for exercise. They have people walking with them, or they are walking a dog, or pushing a stroller, so they've got other things to be concerned with while walking. And while it's true that I'd like to incorporate more jogging into my walks, the majority of my walks are spent, well, walking.
I was able to find some solid walking music, but that's more from my own conceptions about walking, not from some base standard of "good walking music." That one Primitive Radio Gods song is an example, in case you were wondering what I'm talking about. But I'm not asking for any more assistance on walking music.
I'm also not going to just offer a wide open "give me some songs" anymore. While I'm obviously interested in hearing all sorts of musical suggestions, leaving it so wide open I think makes it a little tough for people to feel comfortable responding. And that's all I really care about, making you folks feel comfortable tossing in a response or five.
I haven't completely resolved how I'm going to change the format of Playlists, and it might not even be called Playlists anymore. But at some point, we'll get it going. Stay tuned.
Please stay tuned.
Monday, May 30, 2011
Sunday, May 29, 2011
Zombie Games
If you've hung out with me, or if you've read some of my previous posts, you know I've got a special place in my heart for a good zombie video game. I'm also a big fan of the sandbox-style games like Grand Theft Auto and Morrowind that give you some flexibility and independence when it comes to game progression. So naturally, Dead Rising is among my favorite classic Xbox 360 games, and I've quickly embraced its sequels.
Well, there's another sequel coming, and I think I might be more excited about this one than any of the other stuff. It's called Dead Rising 2: Off The Record, and it's referred to as a "re-imagination" of Dead Rising 2 if the original game's Frank West were the protagonist, rather than Chuck Greene. This means that a lot of the same characters will be brought back from the original Dead Rising 2, but indications are that there'll be plenty of new characters as well, and new challenges to face.
At least as important is that Capcom has specifically indicated that they've been working on reducing the load times in the game, which was really the only complaint I had about it. The fact that they've mentioned it specifically means that they're willing to be held accountable for fixing it, and that's encouraging.
But that's not the only exciting game coming soon on the zombie front. I think everybody on the planet has seen this trailer for a game in development called Dead Island, and rightfully so. It's pretty creative, and the basis for the game is interesting enough on its own to generate a lot of hits. But now we've got an actual gameplay video out, and we can begin to see how this game is taking shape. And it definitely looks good.
It's a good time to want to smash zombies.
Well, there's another sequel coming, and I think I might be more excited about this one than any of the other stuff. It's called Dead Rising 2: Off The Record, and it's referred to as a "re-imagination" of Dead Rising 2 if the original game's Frank West were the protagonist, rather than Chuck Greene. This means that a lot of the same characters will be brought back from the original Dead Rising 2, but indications are that there'll be plenty of new characters as well, and new challenges to face.
At least as important is that Capcom has specifically indicated that they've been working on reducing the load times in the game, which was really the only complaint I had about it. The fact that they've mentioned it specifically means that they're willing to be held accountable for fixing it, and that's encouraging.
But that's not the only exciting game coming soon on the zombie front. I think everybody on the planet has seen this trailer for a game in development called Dead Island, and rightfully so. It's pretty creative, and the basis for the game is interesting enough on its own to generate a lot of hits. But now we've got an actual gameplay video out, and we can begin to see how this game is taking shape. And it definitely looks good.
It's a good time to want to smash zombies.
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
Playlists - Walking
Another new "feature" I want to start running here is what I'm going to simply call Playlists. I've always been a big fan of making CDs and playlists, but I'm starting to realize that there's a lot of music I just don't know. But maybe you folks can help me out.
Part of this process will involve me generating the playlist on Grooveshark and posting it for you guys to check out and critique. INTERACTIVITY!
Our first playlist is actually going to be pretty challenging, because there isn't really a conventional feel for "walking music." What I'm thinking is zone-out kind of music, but songs that still have a strong beat. Maybe some jam bands like Allman Brothers Band or Dave Matthews Band? Right now I've got a couple Arcade Fire albums and an album by a band called Bonobo on my mp3 player; both seem to work pretty well.
I appeal to you, Internet. Offer your wisdom.
Part of this process will involve me generating the playlist on Grooveshark and posting it for you guys to check out and critique. INTERACTIVITY!
Our first playlist is actually going to be pretty challenging, because there isn't really a conventional feel for "walking music." What I'm thinking is zone-out kind of music, but songs that still have a strong beat. Maybe some jam bands like Allman Brothers Band or Dave Matthews Band? Right now I've got a couple Arcade Fire albums and an album by a band called Bonobo on my mp3 player; both seem to work pretty well.
I appeal to you, Internet. Offer your wisdom.
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
TV Reviewed - Dead Like Me
So I was over at Eddie and Rachel's house a few weeks ago, and Rachel and I were looking for a show to watch from Netflix's instant options. She had seen an episode of Dead Like Me and said it was decent, so we flipped on the first episode. Turns out the first episode was a double episode, so it took way longer than we thought it would, but it was interesting enough for me to give the show a shot.
After having watched both seasons, all 29 episodes, I'm still not entirely sure how I feel about the show.
The basic premise of the show is this: when people die, grim reapers help them "move on." Grim reapers are people who have died, but whose time on earth was extended to serve this role. The show follows a small team of reapers, with the main focus on a brand new (so recently deceased) reaper, Georgia, and how she handles the transition from living to dead, along with her new job.
The idea is interesting enough, and both the writers and actors do a fair job of executing it. The main character is a little whiny, but she's 18; that's a pretty whiny age. In season one, the show does a good job of balancing the day-to-day reaps with Georgia's growth as a reaper and her surviving family's hardships at dealing with the loss. As someone who's dealt with loss, I found a lot of relate-able scenarios, and the characters seem very real and very natural in this regard.
But for all of the positives of season one, season two seems to just be lost. The story is all over the place, and for 90% of the show, the episodes don't seem to need to be in any particular order. There are occasionally spots where the story endures for an episode or two, and the surviving family has a progression of events, but mostly the stories just don't seem very intertwined. By the end of season two, I was really just watching the show because I knew I was almost finished. And that's not good.
While I liked the first season enough, I can't put my name on a recommendation. It was just too fragmented in season two, and the individual stories weren't compelling enough to compensate.
The Last Word - You might like the first half of it, but if you watch it, prepare for some disappointment later on.
After having watched both seasons, all 29 episodes, I'm still not entirely sure how I feel about the show.
The basic premise of the show is this: when people die, grim reapers help them "move on." Grim reapers are people who have died, but whose time on earth was extended to serve this role. The show follows a small team of reapers, with the main focus on a brand new (so recently deceased) reaper, Georgia, and how she handles the transition from living to dead, along with her new job.
The idea is interesting enough, and both the writers and actors do a fair job of executing it. The main character is a little whiny, but she's 18; that's a pretty whiny age. In season one, the show does a good job of balancing the day-to-day reaps with Georgia's growth as a reaper and her surviving family's hardships at dealing with the loss. As someone who's dealt with loss, I found a lot of relate-able scenarios, and the characters seem very real and very natural in this regard.
But for all of the positives of season one, season two seems to just be lost. The story is all over the place, and for 90% of the show, the episodes don't seem to need to be in any particular order. There are occasionally spots where the story endures for an episode or two, and the surviving family has a progression of events, but mostly the stories just don't seem very intertwined. By the end of season two, I was really just watching the show because I knew I was almost finished. And that's not good.
While I liked the first season enough, I can't put my name on a recommendation. It was just too fragmented in season two, and the individual stories weren't compelling enough to compensate.
The Last Word - You might like the first half of it, but if you watch it, prepare for some disappointment later on.
Monday, May 23, 2011
Movie Reviewed - 28 Weeks Later
I'm a fan of a good zombie movie. However, 28 Weeks Later (and its predecessor 28 Days Later) are not zombie movies, because the "monsters" in the movie are not zombies. They're "infected," people with normal human capabilities but whose minds are overthrown, utterly consumed with rage towards everyone and everything.
In the original (a very well put together film), we saw London ravaged by the disease, and learned that all of Great Britain was virtually leveled by the infected. The sequel moves us forward several months, after it's believed that the disease has been eradicated. The United States military is sent in to reclaim the country, and eventually civilians are permitted to re-settle. Of course, something goes wrong, and the disease breaks out again.
The main difference for me between Days and Weeks is that Days was fresh, creative, and had some interesting characters, while Weeks was simply a re-hash of the original story. Perhaps the most distinct representation of this was the CONSTANT use of the main theme song from the original film. The song has a haunting tone and was one of the things that really made the original movie, but it just feels trite in the sequel.
One of the mechanisms that these movies (and many other modern horrors/thrillers) rely on is the idea that while monsters are scary, humans can be just as scary. The first few times, it was compelling. But after a hundred different scenarios where good guys turn bad, it becomes too predictable. And I think the writing gets a little lazy; you don't get the buildup of frustration, anxiety, and hopelessness that might actually prompt the panic that would precipitate a "turn." And to be honest, the concept that the military are so easily prone to villainy is getting a little old.
People love putting numbers on opinions, so let's move on to a rating. I've talked previously about how I don't love a 5 star scale, because in that scale, 3 stars equates to "I have no opinion on this movie." Three stars is dead center, and doesn't offer a recommendation, which is fine for your own ratings, but useless when you're trying to offer advice to others.
So, I'm going to go with a 10-point scale, ten points being reserved for elite films (High Fidelity, The Shawshank Redemption, etc), and one point being reserved for the most utterly awful films (Meet the Spartans). It gives us plenty of room to differentiate between good films, very good films, and great films, and it's an even number, so there's no dead-center number that means nothing. Anything six or above, I recommend, anything five or below, I don't.
So, back to this movie. It took a little while to get going, but the story was entertaining enough in the context of being a basic thriller. I didn't think much of the script, and the characters are mostly bland, but the actors do well enough to keep your attention. As long as you're willing to accept a few obviously inaccurate situations (like why wasn't the wife under constant military supervision? the husband can just wander in?), it's a tense, aggressive, and enjoyable movie. But if you didn't like the first one, there's no way this one is going to do it for you.
The Last Word - I endorse it, but barely.
In the original (a very well put together film), we saw London ravaged by the disease, and learned that all of Great Britain was virtually leveled by the infected. The sequel moves us forward several months, after it's believed that the disease has been eradicated. The United States military is sent in to reclaim the country, and eventually civilians are permitted to re-settle. Of course, something goes wrong, and the disease breaks out again.
The main difference for me between Days and Weeks is that Days was fresh, creative, and had some interesting characters, while Weeks was simply a re-hash of the original story. Perhaps the most distinct representation of this was the CONSTANT use of the main theme song from the original film. The song has a haunting tone and was one of the things that really made the original movie, but it just feels trite in the sequel.
One of the mechanisms that these movies (and many other modern horrors/thrillers) rely on is the idea that while monsters are scary, humans can be just as scary. The first few times, it was compelling. But after a hundred different scenarios where good guys turn bad, it becomes too predictable. And I think the writing gets a little lazy; you don't get the buildup of frustration, anxiety, and hopelessness that might actually prompt the panic that would precipitate a "turn." And to be honest, the concept that the military are so easily prone to villainy is getting a little old.
People love putting numbers on opinions, so let's move on to a rating. I've talked previously about how I don't love a 5 star scale, because in that scale, 3 stars equates to "I have no opinion on this movie." Three stars is dead center, and doesn't offer a recommendation, which is fine for your own ratings, but useless when you're trying to offer advice to others.
So, I'm going to go with a 10-point scale, ten points being reserved for elite films (High Fidelity, The Shawshank Redemption, etc), and one point being reserved for the most utterly awful films (Meet the Spartans). It gives us plenty of room to differentiate between good films, very good films, and great films, and it's an even number, so there's no dead-center number that means nothing. Anything six or above, I recommend, anything five or below, I don't.
So, back to this movie. It took a little while to get going, but the story was entertaining enough in the context of being a basic thriller. I didn't think much of the script, and the characters are mostly bland, but the actors do well enough to keep your attention. As long as you're willing to accept a few obviously inaccurate situations (like why wasn't the wife under constant military supervision? the husband can just wander in?), it's a tense, aggressive, and enjoyable movie. But if you didn't like the first one, there's no way this one is going to do it for you.
The Last Word - I endorse it, but barely.
Sunday, May 22, 2011
What are you doing?
Remember those old Budweiser commercials, the "Wazzup" ones? And then remember the follow up they did with white guys and an Indian guy saying "What are you doing?" That was pretty funny.
Anyways, you might have noticed that I've reworked the layout a little bit, and added a new section on the right entitled "Currently..." It's basically a collection of the things I do when I get home from work. Not entirely, obviously. I still eat and sleep and walk and watch sports. And in fact, I watch a lot more TV than is notated there, but it's mostly new TV (Parks and Recreation, House, Kitchen Nightmares, etc). The TV shows in this section are the shows that have either already run their course and I'm watching after the fact, or are still on, but I'm catching up on.
What's in it for you, you ask? Well, on the off chance you're someone I ever actually see in person, you'll have some insight into potential topics of conversation. For example, "Hey Joe, I read you're playing some game called Magicka. Are you like 100% nerd, or are there a few strands of manliness somewhere in there?" See? Fun!
But seriously, we can talk about books or movies or games.
Additionally, I'll be posting a review of every movie and show I watch from here forward. Well, okay, not every movie and show. I'm not going to review Jurassic Park or Zombieland or The Office every time I watch them on Netflix (we're at I think 9 times for Zombieland...and many more than that for Jurassic Park). But every movie and show I watch for the first time, you can count on a review. And I just watched 28 Weeks Later for the first time today, so you can look forward to my thoughts on that film.
Sneak preview: not as good as the first one.
Anyways, you might have noticed that I've reworked the layout a little bit, and added a new section on the right entitled "Currently..." It's basically a collection of the things I do when I get home from work. Not entirely, obviously. I still eat and sleep and walk and watch sports. And in fact, I watch a lot more TV than is notated there, but it's mostly new TV (Parks and Recreation, House, Kitchen Nightmares, etc). The TV shows in this section are the shows that have either already run their course and I'm watching after the fact, or are still on, but I'm catching up on.
What's in it for you, you ask? Well, on the off chance you're someone I ever actually see in person, you'll have some insight into potential topics of conversation. For example, "Hey Joe, I read you're playing some game called Magicka. Are you like 100% nerd, or are there a few strands of manliness somewhere in there?" See? Fun!
But seriously, we can talk about books or movies or games.
Additionally, I'll be posting a review of every movie and show I watch from here forward. Well, okay, not every movie and show. I'm not going to review Jurassic Park or Zombieland or The Office every time I watch them on Netflix (we're at I think 9 times for Zombieland...and many more than that for Jurassic Park). But every movie and show I watch for the first time, you can count on a review. And I just watched 28 Weeks Later for the first time today, so you can look forward to my thoughts on that film.
Sneak preview: not as good as the first one.
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Pizza
Listen. I like pizza. If you've spent any time with me at mealtime over the past few years, you know that I have a slight tendency to default to pizza. It's a decent enough meal with plenty of potential variety, it's pretty clean most of the time, and most people like it.
The problem is, pizza isn't very diet-friendly. Well, that's not fair to pizza. Pizza, like almost any food, can be diet-friendly when enjoyed in moderation. But most of the time that you eat pizza, you get a whole pie, and eat several slices, and boom, 1400 calories. Since I'm on a diet, that's a "bad" idea.
Enter Boboli. I bought a couple crusts the other day, and the calorie numbers look manageable. I made a "white" pizza the other day, the whole pizza was 1080 calories. It had shredded Parmesan cheese, butter, garlic salt, oregano, sliced onions, and sliced red pepper. I know I can actually save a few calories by switching to a lower calorie version of cheese, maybe get the whole thing down to a thousand. And this is for the bigger crust, I think 10 or 12 inches. They've also got personal size ones, which obviously make for an even more calorie-friendly meal.
So I'm reaching out to you folks. Let's figure out some pizzas I can make. Give them names, if you like. But we're looking to make them fairly healthy, so I can keep on my weight-loss train. Lean meats are good, we can work with most cheeses, and I'm open to vegetables and fruits...except mushrooms and olives. Those are a no go fo sho.
Here, I'll start it off (please note that I have not tried these pizzas; they're just ideas. And yours can be as well):
The Jerry's Cheesesteak Pizza
The problem is, pizza isn't very diet-friendly. Well, that's not fair to pizza. Pizza, like almost any food, can be diet-friendly when enjoyed in moderation. But most of the time that you eat pizza, you get a whole pie, and eat several slices, and boom, 1400 calories. Since I'm on a diet, that's a "bad" idea.
Enter Boboli. I bought a couple crusts the other day, and the calorie numbers look manageable. I made a "white" pizza the other day, the whole pizza was 1080 calories. It had shredded Parmesan cheese, butter, garlic salt, oregano, sliced onions, and sliced red pepper. I know I can actually save a few calories by switching to a lower calorie version of cheese, maybe get the whole thing down to a thousand. And this is for the bigger crust, I think 10 or 12 inches. They've also got personal size ones, which obviously make for an even more calorie-friendly meal.
So I'm reaching out to you folks. Let's figure out some pizzas I can make. Give them names, if you like. But we're looking to make them fairly healthy, so I can keep on my weight-loss train. Lean meats are good, we can work with most cheeses, and I'm open to vegetables and fruits...except mushrooms and olives. Those are a no go fo sho.
Here, I'll start it off (please note that I have not tried these pizzas; they're just ideas. And yours can be as well):
The Jerry's Cheesesteak Pizza
- Roast beef or sliced steak
- Provolone cheese
- Onions
- Green peppers
- Onions
- Light ranch dressing
- Taco seasoning
- Mozzarella cheese
Interactivity / Twitter?
Let me be the first to say that I have trouble getting what the big draw is for Twitter. It's like if you took Facebook and stripped away everything interesting and just had the status updates. No pictures, no videos, not even any long statuses that actually give you information. Just quick-hitters, like "Going to the mall to get my nails done" or "Let's go Cavs! Two of the top four picks!"
Are these invalid ideas? No, of course not. But it's like an entire website devoted to smalltalk. Are we so starved for human interaction that we'll settle for an occasional impersonal text from celebrities, or cousins, or strangers?
Well, yes, probably. As some of you may know, I run a little sports blog called Joe and Joe Sports, and I've set up a Twitter account for it. I don't post regularly (on either), so the synergy between the two is negligible, but with the recent explosion of smart phones, I know that social media is becoming a quick way to "check up" on people, both friends and strangers. And if you want to grow your web presence, it's definitely useful to employ multiple vehicles.
Anyways, where was I going with this? Right, interactivity. I'd like to have a little more of it on here. Now, it'd be easier for you all to chime in if I posted more often, I'll grant you that. So here's the deal. I'm going to post more often (promise), and you're going to respond more often.
Not gonna wait for you to agree. That's how we do it in sales; we presume agreement and move right on to the details.
I've got a few ideas for how to generate some back and forth. Look for the first one later today.
LOOK FOR IT.
Are these invalid ideas? No, of course not. But it's like an entire website devoted to smalltalk. Are we so starved for human interaction that we'll settle for an occasional impersonal text from celebrities, or cousins, or strangers?
Well, yes, probably. As some of you may know, I run a little sports blog called Joe and Joe Sports, and I've set up a Twitter account for it. I don't post regularly (on either), so the synergy between the two is negligible, but with the recent explosion of smart phones, I know that social media is becoming a quick way to "check up" on people, both friends and strangers. And if you want to grow your web presence, it's definitely useful to employ multiple vehicles.
Anyways, where was I going with this? Right, interactivity. I'd like to have a little more of it on here. Now, it'd be easier for you all to chime in if I posted more often, I'll grant you that. So here's the deal. I'm going to post more often (promise), and you're going to respond more often.
Not gonna wait for you to agree. That's how we do it in sales; we presume agreement and move right on to the details.
I've got a few ideas for how to generate some back and forth. Look for the first one later today.
LOOK FOR IT.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
