Tradition!
19 November 1998
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
|
Tradition!
19 November 1998
|
|
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
| |
More Needless Irony Dept.: So, after having had the Clash running through my head all day yesterday for no particular reason, what were they playing at the bar last night? Why, the Clash's Greatest Hits CD, of course. Two or three times through, as it turned out. Heh. But it was fine - I'd forgotten just how good a song "Complete Control" was, and they even played "White Man in Hammersmith Palais" to boot. Ah, yoot.
Not much to report on for Today. Saw a couple more Jet Li films this evening, Once Upon A Time In China & America and that other one that's kind of like the Schwarzenegger film, Dr. Li and the Scripture Without Words or something like that. Amusing, incredible choreography, really cheesy special effects, bad Anglo actors. The sort of thing one looks for in this type of film.
Anyway, I thought I'd turn the podium here over to myself, just for a change, to give voice to a rant initially directed at a different audience:
From: me
To: wired news
Subject: Re: So Long, Celluloid
http://www.wired.com/news/news/culture/story/16357.html
It amazes me that this story could fail to mention the fundamental difference between film projection and whatever kind of digital liquid crystal Jetsons display might be used. When you see a movie projected from a piece of film, you're seeing reflected light among shadows and darkness. When you look at a television, or a giant liquid crystal whatnot, the light is radiating at you, with darker areas radiating less light (although almost never none at all). It's a very different experience.
I'm sure it will be a very high quality image, but there's bound to be as much objection and controversy over such a switch as there is around vinyl VS CDs. It would have been interesting to hear the comments of some film*makers* on the matter - Martin Scorcese's, say....
I was a little disconcerted to see today in the referrer logs (or 'referer' as the no doubt bright but rather poor-spelling Apache developers, er, refer to it..) that somebody in the UK had done a search on my name at Yahoo. I'm used to people finding this site looking for, oh, potatoe guns, or wacko people, or ugly lips, or Jennifer Lopez's butt, even. But my name??? I just hope it's not one of my ex-wives. But, um, if it is - Hi honey! Ha ha.
Time for that long trip to far distant lands without extradition treaties, maybe...
Willfully blind self-indulgent nebbish or amusingly quirky old coot? And how bout that local sports team? Discuss among yourselves.
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| yestoday | today | tomorrowday | ||
| archive | semi-bio | |||
| listen! | random | privit | ||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
|
| ||||
| ||||
|
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
| ||||
All names are fake, most places are real, the
author is definitely
unreliable but it's all in good fun. Yep.
© 1998-1999 Lighthouse for the Deaf. All rights reserved and stuff. The motto at the top of the page is a graffito I saw on Brunswick Street in Melbourne. | ||||
| ||||