2000 Views! You REALLY LOVE ME!!!

Ok, it is very small potatoes, but as a baby blogger, I'm grateful someone is coming by and reading.  I started this thing before I deployed to Afghanistan in '10 and resumed it late last year.  Eventually, this will be part of a greater concern that will include a podcast, video, voice over services, etc.  So...ground floor.  Thank you to those of you who have been around since the start.

Nye/Ham Creation Evolution Debate: This was intellectual professional wrestling...

The conclusion I walked away from in what I saw of the Ham/Nye debate was this. Science is about a systematic exploration and attempt to figure out the natural processes of our universe as best we can, given present tools, knowledge and assumptions. At best, with the proper mindset, it not only helps us understand how things work, but gives us a greater appreciation of the wonder of it all. Religion/spirituality/faith, properly pursued, is about the inner self, the true self, that which transcends space and time, and seeking transcendent understanding of ourselves and greater realities. The two don't dabble in each other's realms, though I believe an open-minded embrace of each enhances appreciation and metaphysical understanding of both. What corrupts BOTH, and we see it in all kinds of ways in our modern culture, is when we let world views formed by the embrace of either one become ideology. When it ceases being the humble pursuit of understanding and enlightenment and becomes the arrogant quest for idealogical conquest, both become corrupted, base, and far from the higher as pirations they should stand for, and the inspiration they should provide.

Now, don't get me wrong.  Both men were polite and erudite, but they came in both misrepresenting the world views upon which they stand.  Mr. Ham loses credibility for himself when he presents a world view that says to be a person of faith, you must accept the most literal interpretations of Holy Scripture you can muster, never mind that such an interpretation comes apart at just the slightest bit of critical thinking.  Also, such an interpretation not only isn't the point of the faiths represented by the text, the faith gets mired in an argument that takes attention away from the main reason the faith exists in the first place.  For Nye's part, sure, he may have the science, at least as we presently understand it, correct, but again, he doesn't let that just say within the bounds of science itself.  It does inform for him an ideology that is also harmful and does not stand up to scrutiny.  Plus, for me, scientists wanting to brawl with creationists always strikes me as...unsporting.

Here's to a polite, gentlemanly debate.  Just wish it wasn't an unnecessary freak show. 

The Hobbit-Peter Jackson Opus, Extended Edition...

Just a few things to observe.  Most of those I talked to who saw this film, even those who enjoyed it (I was one) agreed that it was bloated, that Mr. Jackson, Master of Middle Earth lore he is, took a simple adventure story, in many ways an opposite tale from Lord of the Rings and just bloated the hell out of it form scraps from all over elsewhere in Tolkien's tales.  Now, between the frenetic, video game-esque action sequences and said stuffing, I felt the bloat myself, along with the wonder that I enjoyed.

However, the extended version includes several dialogue sequences that slow the pace down, relaxes the viewer, gives one time to digest the meal that is The Hobbit, Pt 1.  Personally, though it is longer, it actually feels shorter, like this is again a window into another world, rather than a promo for a computer game.

I do  recommend.

Spartacus Season 1: In between all the skin, blood and gratuitous sex, they slipped in a few Kubrick references as well as portrayed Rome as a land of little honor and much backstabbing bastardry...

Yessir, I finally got around to seeing this series.  Ancient Rome is one of my favorite eras in history.  Not only does much out of it form the foundation of much western culture, it is also fascinating in both what it did right as well as what it did tragically wrong.  It is one of the world's first attempts at a more egalitarian society, at least as much as the ancient world could muster.  It is also one of the first experiments at representative government, though that eventually went dreadfully wrong.  However, Rome, as much mistakes as the leaders made, managed to last many centuries and leave a legacy in lore, artifacts, architecture and memory that stays with us to this day.  We still honor it with books, films and TV shows.

Spartacus is one of those tales we gravitate to, as it tells the tale of a slave who found fame in the gladiator arenas and eventually led a rebellion against Roman authority.  Many aspects of that tale we are drawn to, from the gladiator spectacles themselves, to the idea of a slave accruing power in said arenas, to the idea of a mass break for freedom, succeed or fail.  We are drawn to such stories as they stir many cultural chords inside us as Americans.

Now, I'm not sure as the the historical accuracy of the series, and it differs in it's method of telling from, say, the Kubrick film.  However, the makers of the show do the film homage by slipping in a few easter eggs here and there.  For example, the line, "I am Spartacus!" does make itself present.  Watch for it.

You won't see a Kubrick remake, though.  It is it's own animal, showing the sleazy ebb and flow of Roman political power and the dehumanizing effects of the institution of slavery, how human beings can only have value in pure physical function, and one human can own another as property and not be recognized for their humanity.  This can serve as a corruptor of a society and be one of the rotting boards fading away beneath it's footing.

Still,  Spartacus is a thoughtful examination of power and human nature, though dark and brutal.  It allows sentiment, honor and even a bit of spirituality, but does not let you forget this realm you are in, where life is cheap, though if fate smiles, life becomes briefly glorious.

Spartacus' name is indeed one remembered, for it is one of the few from this period that I recall from my unremarkable high school history classes.

But yeah, not for the squeamish, with lots of sex, violence and blood.  But if you like the period and/or your swords and sandals spectacles, Spartacus will do ya fine.

Person of Interest, stealth science fiction on TV...

Person of Interest...I sit and think about this show.  Generally, I'm a fan of what comes out of JJ Abrams and his Bad Robot production house.  The man is clearly a first order geek and seeks to make his own impact on imaginative storytelling.  The man has nothing to prove, what with Alias, and even more to the point, LOST. But he has gone on to Fringe and other shows...like Person of Interest.  Now, I had to take a couple passes at this show before it truly gripped me.  Yes, it deals with lots of pertinent issues of our times, like lots of good science fiction does, such as the War on Terror, the Surveillance State, artificially intelligence and the like.  At first, though, it appears to be a procedural police show with some spy stuff.  And if you didn't hang around long enough or pay close enough attention, that is all you would see, at least in the first two seasons.

Hearing enough voices say, "PoI, possibly the best science fiction on TV right now!", I felt obligated to try to stick it out, especially being an Abrams fan as well as trusting the pedigree of others on the show.  It is subtle.  You get a few hints in the first season, some more in the second, but apparently the science fiction element, the evolution of a true artificial consciousness, comes to full bloom in season three.

Robots are all over the place in science fiction, but the exploration of an AI, a self aware machine, has it's highest marks in literature.  There are movies that deal with it, too, like 2001 and the Terminator films (notably 2).  But on TV, the key examples seem to be Data on Star Trek The Next Generation and Ronald D. Moore's handling of the Cylons in his remake of Battlestar Galactica.  Person of Interest, out of all the other ideas wants to explore, this is the big one.

I'm down.

More Treks, More Treats

I also watched/rewatched some other Star Trek recently, I just wanted to write a few thoughts....

Star Trek First Contact: This Next Gen film, scripted by Deep Space Nine/Battlestar Galactica mastermind Ronald D. Moore, uses the same unfortunate formula that a chunk of the Trek films, including ALL of the Next Gen films do, that being action movies in scifi skin, with a big villain and an over the top explosion filled finale.  However, due to the skill of Mr. Moore, and maybe a bid to redeem himself after the missteps of Generations, and also given the skillful, knowledgable direction of Jonathan Frakes (William Ryker), this is widely regarded as the best of the Next Generation movies, featuring the crew at their best, giving excellent performances all around and getting great moments, all of them.  You had an important figure in Trek history, Zephram Cochrane, played amazingly by James Cromwell.  You had a dark period in human history shown, along with a pivotal moment in Trek history, first contact with an extraterrestrial civilization, the Vulcans, wrote about in non-canon stories for years, but this was the first time the event was shown on the screen.  Jerry Goldsmith teamed up with his son Joel to compose the soundtrack.  Industrial Light and Magic did an amazing job with the special effects.  HR Giger, designer of the Alien, gave the Borg a wonderful makeover.

Is the film flawless? Of course not.  But the kind of nitpicks a disgruntled few throw up to try to dismiss the film fall flat, as do said critics.  Sure, it used the "action formula".  But this time, it seemed to work.  As did all the rest of the pieces.  It is a grand Trek time at the cinema and on disc many years later.

Star Trek Enterprise Season 3: I've been going through the seasons of Enterprise on disc, having missed most of them in their original running, and briefly getting on the "down on Ent" bandwagon.  As I've gone through the seasons, imo, the derision is mostly undeserved.  Was Enterprise not the best call as to where to go next in the franchise?  Yeah, I'd say.  But is it the abomination some Trek fans say it is?  I most heartily disagree.  There's some great stories in all the seasons.  Season two, especially episodes like First Flight, Future Tense, Stigma, Cease Fire and Judgement go into the lore of the Trek univers and our characters.  Regeneration, possibly one of the most controversial of the season two episodes, shows the aftermath of Star Trek First Contact, and is one of the scariest Borg episodes on any episode of any Star Trek.  But that's all seasons two, which I like much more than average.  Season three, on the other hand, is the season where they, in response to declining ratings, tried to kick it in the pants, so to speak.  They started with an attack on Earth, where some alien superweapon strikes from out of nowhere, cutting off the state of Florida from the rest of the continental US, killing millions of humans.  The Enterprise is sent in to the Delphic Expanse, the origin space of this weapon, to find where it come from and stop it.

 Ok, the time shenanigans where the series originates are interesting, the problem is that it is not strongly conceptualized from the get-go and the showrunners don't seem to be confident as to how to develop it.  Further, it seems to give the impression that merely being a prequel isn't enough.  That the early pre-Kirk Trek U can't stand on it's own, so we have to zazz it up.  Christopher L. Bennet, one of my favorite Trek fiction writers, shows that in the hands of real talent, this could pay off, but it seems to me that those who came up with this just didn't know where to go and what to do.  The Delphic Expanse stuff and the Xindi come across as more of the same.  Retcons, I'm not against as a matter of course.  But interweaving them into established history must be done with care, or else the viewer gets a bit of narrative whiplash.  Xindi?  Surely a power this potent we would have heard of before.  Such an attack on Earth, we also should have known of before.  If we haven't, we need a reason as to why not.  None was really forthcoming.

Not to say there aren't some good eps in the season.  There are.  Always when Shran (Jeffrey Combs) shows up, he's a welcome sight.  The female Andorian weapons officer will also play an important part in Season 4, my favorite of Enterprise.  The episode "Twilight", directed by Robert Duncan MacNeil (Tom Paris on Voyager), was a great "what if" ep, showing humans trying to survive after the demise of Earth and still dealing with a Xindi threat.  "Stratagem" showed a more subtle approach to the Xindi and began to finally differentiate them from just being moustache twirling baddies (took way too long to get to that, but when they did, they did it well).  And there were others.

There were great episodes in Season 3.  However, the season is hobbled by a concept that seems more thrown up there, see if it works.  Which is kind of the problem with Enterprise.  When it succeeds, it does it despite itself, not because.


Star Trek The Next Generation Season 5: Next Gen at this point was a confident, powerful, charismatic show that knew exactly what it was about and how it wanted to go about things.  Cast, crew and audience were all enthusiastically along for the ride.  This season had powerful episodes like "Redemption Part 2", showing the conclusion of the Klingon civil war, reintroducing Sela and setting up both Klingon and Romulan politics for some time to come.  We also got Sarek again, along with Spock, who had been referenced in the 24th century a couple times, but not shown, or his fate known, until that point.  His activities would also set him up for the first  JJ Abrams Trek film.  Michelle Forbes got thrown into the mix with "Ensign Ro", showing the limits of power politics in policy, even as those played by the benevolent United Federation of Planets.  Many other wonderful episodes abounded, but still powerful are "Darmok" which was a mediation on both the importance of storytelling as well as the difficulty of communication.  And then, there was "Inner Light", playing with the idea that what if you could get a good look at the road less traveled.  And then, the Ronald D. Moore penned "The First Duty", with Wesley Crusher dealing with scandal at Starfleet Academy (first appearance of Robert Duncan MacNeil in Trek, btw).

A wonderful season of tv, Trek or no.

Star Trek V The Final Frontier-A Lesson In Having Something To Say, But Hobbled In The Way You Say It...

Star Trek V The Final Frontier,W oh, you poor dear.  The main reason why William Shatner never got a shot at the director's chair again.  The reason Trek fans breathed such a huge sigh of relief when Star Trek VI The Undiscovered Country rocked the house as suicide stats probably would have creeped up amongst Trekkies had you been the swansong of the original crew.  And you know what?  I was right there along with them, piling derision and scorn upon your sad, sad head.  It has been a long time.  The only thing that has kept me coming back to you time and again is twofold.  First, you are Trek, and apparent blemishes aside, those of us who love this universe and these characters as much as we do, we often can find something worthy in the most dire of outings to the Final Frontier.  Also, we want to figure out why you are such a mixed bag of goods.  You should be better.

What if...you actually are and most of us have not noticed?

I recently watched this film again after purchasing it on Blu Ray.  The Star Trek film blu rays are available here at the PX for cheaps and all my DVDs are locked up in storage at Ft Benning, they have been since I deployed to Afghanistan.  So, I've been picking them up, including the "unwanted step children".

Well, looking over you again...I saw you in a way that I never have before.  You introduced us to Nimbus III, the Planet of Galactic Peace, a combined galactic government in social engineering conducted by the United Federation of Planets, the Romulan Star Empire and the Klingon Empire that has seemingly utterly failed.  Your population is composed of rejects and dregs that no one wants.  Your "settlements" are dirt farmers out digging holes in sterile soil and your one town is crime filled shanty.  But it apparently is prime recruiting ground for a Vulcan who laughs.

The ambassadors of the three governments, also rejects of one sort or another (the Fed and Klingon ambassadors are burnouts staggering drunkenly to retirement, the Romulan is a wide eyed naïve noob) send out messages to their governments.  The Enterprise gets there first, but the Klingon captain, Klaugh, and his first officer, a brawny female named Vixis (played by the lovely Spice Williams) are spoiling to take Kirk on.  So, when Kirk and company are taken prisoner in a hostage rescue that goes bad, the Klingons come gunning.  And they are ready to follow the Enterprise wherever it goes to get their shot at Kirk, including through the Great Barrier.  Why are they going there?  Sybok, the Vulcan leading this cult, is a spiritual leader with a vision.  God is waiting on the other side of the Barrier.  For them.  For him.  And he wants to share in the revelation.

So the story goes.  I hated this film.  Why?  Oh, count the reasons.  Since Star Trek IV The Voyage Home was a hit, the script writers though, hey, they like jokes, let's give them jokes.  But "jokes" they though did it were slapsticky pratfalls.  No, guys, that's not it.  CHEAP looking SFX, no ILM in the credits at all in this one.   Improbable things like the 1701-A Enterprise being such a lemon THEN being sent into action.  There is more, but that's the stuff that STILL stands out as bad.  But the good that also still stands...

First, Kirk, Spock and McCoy, taking shore leave together.  The buddy chemistry and the adopted family/brotherhood still stands out.  Those scenes hit from the first and still bring it home for those of us who know and love these characters.  The other characters also have moments that work, as they usually do in these films.  In fact, this team, this family coming together is what brings you back to perhaps reconsider other elements.  Now, what seemingly didn't work before, reconsidered...

First, Sybok.  Yes, Spock having this half brother is quite out of the blue.  But...consider that Vulcans are very close mouthed about deep emotional matters, especially that which is scandalous or embarrassing.   We have to remember that Vulcans, for all their emphasis on IDIC, are a very closed and conservative society.  They aren't mean or hostile about it, but the social pressure they can bring to conform is crushing.  Sybok was rebelling against all that, the control of emotion, the rule of logic and yes, the pursuit of spirituality and mysticism and meaning beyond rigid logic.  He even had the hypocrisy  and contraditions of his own people to look back on.  For Vulcans, even though they have rejected their gods of old, still cling to ceremony, ritual, and even mystic traditions that have real world effects, such as the phenomenon of katra and the like.  Sybok wanted to pursue spirituality far more boldly, far more fully. He ended up way off the reservation.  But this is certainly not without real world precedence.

Second, the MacGuffin, "God".  Many thought that was a silly trope.  I disagree.  Spirituality has a confused place in the Star Trek universe.  For example, humanity is said to have established a certain utopia in the Star Trek universe, with material want mostly gone, crime well under control and politics extremely stable.  The culture among 23rd century humanity is very humanistic and materialistic and it is assumed that that is the inevitable future trend among some in real life.  However, religious and spiritual references abound and it is made clear that not all humans, never mind extraterrestrial civilizations see things this way.  That spiritual yearning is about transcendence, reaching for something that deep down, we know is there, and we are meant to seek for it.  That the meeting of material needs does not even begin to quench this most profound of desires.  Sybok manifests this need.  But, this quest of his went off the rails and opened him up to one of the most common temptations amongst those who seek spiritual connection.  If one is not careful, the ego can slip in the way of the spirit, and what one seeks can take on the cast of...yourself, without you even knowing it.  It becomes a quest to obtain, to control, to make some part of the world more like what you think it should be, to put your face on it.  "God" at the end drives this point home.

Finally, the scene where Spock surrenders the ship to Sybok.  This bothered me greatly.  Spock is defined by duty and loyalty.  He will most willingly sacrifice to see that his friends, comrades and ship are safe.  But...would he sacrifice family?  If it is one fault the movie had, and as you can see in one of the cut scenes they tried to establish, they didn't show just how deep Spock's tie to Sybok went.  Spock has always been the perennial outsider, the guy out on his own, and you can point to many instances with him identifying with other outsiders.  He sympathizes with underdogs.  Further, he'll be the first one to tell you that conformity to the dominant culture isn't necessarily a virtue.  He sympathizes with Sybok and his quest.  And part of him even believes that he may have indeed discovered something.  And he knows that Sybok is no killer or bloodthirsty bastard.  He is just an extremely deterrmined Seeker willing to go to great lengths short of bloodshed to achieve his quest.  He won't kill for it, intentionally.  He will die for it, though.  Could Spock have shot to wound in that scene where Kirk orders him to shoot?  Even with those crappy guns, probably.  But...Spock knew that surrendering to Sybok would not get anyone killed, that to fight at that point might necessitate his killing Sybok, and...deep down, he wanted to help see Sybok's quest through.  And Nimoy did portray this conflict in Spock wonderfully. I also loved Shatner's portrayal of Kirk feeling fundamentally betrayed.  Also, DeForest Kelley's portrayal of McCoy and that part of him wanted to understand what Spock did.  Well done  on all their parts.

Star Trek V The Final Frontier is a very flawed movie.  But it is flawed movie with a huge heart and wonderful intent.  And if one allows, it is intent that actually payed off.

Just took me a couple decades to see it.

I think I owe William Shatner an apology.