Review for UP in Disney Digital 3D

14 10 2009

Warning, this review may contain spoilers.

Just went to see UP in 3D with my girlfriend. First thoughts are that the glasses while providing some comedic moments of themselves are rather annoying, although I thought that I did look Ronnie Barker-ish with them on. Slick.

Well, enough with the glasses and onto the movie.

The movie begun with a short clip with some clouds delivering babies to storks to take to the lucky parents. Hmmm, i thought to myself, this may cause some sort of anatomical confusion for kids in the future.. Or perhaps not if people keep dressing their 5 year old like a slapper.

Ha, I diverge.

Anyway the movie soon started. I would warn you right now, perhaps most kids don’t have the same emotional development as me (although my girlfriend would disagree), but the start (while setting up the rest of the movie) is very very sad.

Firstly the main character, a young kid at the start, meets a young girl who he shares an interest in adventure for. Montage to the future where they fall in love, get married and grow old together. He swears to her (cross your heart) that he will take her to paradise falls. Paradise falls is a place in South America where their favourite adventurer brought back monster bones from.

The movie then sets off on a whirlwind adventure across the rain forests of south america with our main character, now an old man, constantly fighting his feelings of needing to do the right thing in favour of trying to fulfill his promise to his dead wife, awwwww.

The movie comes full circle when he finds a message left from his wife that says he should move on, he then stops fighting his will and forgets about paradise falls. He goes on to finish the movie with a fairytale ending.

Overall, I would give this movie a 8. Really really good, just not quite there, i think a 7 for the 2D version.

Not any particular bad points, although I did feel there was something wrong.

If you have any ideas on what that could be then add a comment





Mythological creatures are funny when you reverse the parts

5 10 2009

So I was sitting in college today, very bored as usual and my thoughts turned to mythological creatures (don’t ask why). I was wondering how useless would these creatures be if you switched the bits around. What happens when you swap the fishes tail with the womans body and so on with the mermaid. I’ll show you what, these abominations:

The Centaur

Becomes =

Confused Horseman

The Griffin

Becomes =

Non flying eagle with head too heavy to be supported by its back legs


 

And last but definitely not least …

 

The Mermaid


 

Becomes =

I don’t even know what the shitting hell this is called


 

Comment, rate, link…





What’s wrong with Twitter

4 10 2009
Twitter is rather useless to be honest, though it is somewhat addictive

Well, I have officially ‘twitted’ (or twittered, I’m not sure on the accepted conventions yet) twice in my 5 hour twittering career.

I honestly find twitter to be a rather useless, though unexpectedly addictive experience. I will continue to post anything I find entertaining in the hope that someone else will enjoy it.

Anyway, if your reading this then please vote in the poll below and we’ll see what everyone else thinks.

If you answered yes to the above then fill in this poll also.

If yes to this, or even if u just feel like it, then please leave a comment on why.

Comment, rate, link…





I’m now on Twitter, gasp

4 10 2009

view-source:https://s3.amazonaws.com/twitter_production/a/1254440757/images/twitter_logo_header.png

Im now on twitter, the links in the blogroll on the right of the page. For more general sarcasm and ranting, bias nonsense.





RPG, MMORPG – which game is your favourite?

4 10 2009

So for any of the older members of the audience who may not be familiar with the acronyms RPG and MMORPG, Wikipedia as always is a good source of a coherent description;

Massively multiplayer online role-playing game (MMORPG) is a genre of computer role-playing games in which a very large number of players interact with one another within a virtual game world.

As in all RPGs, players assume the role of a fictional character (often in a fantasy world),[1] and take control over many of that character’s actions.[2] MMORPGs are distinguished from single-player or small multi-player RPGs by the number of players, and by the game’s persistent world, usually hosted by the game’s publisher, which continues to exist and evolve while the player is away from the game. This is often reffered to being offline, or AFK (away from keyboard).

And a RPG is essentially this but the world is populated with AI (artificially intelligent characters) and is not persistent, i.e. the world does not continue while you are not playing.

So now we know what these acronyms mean we can begin to look at the different ones available. This list is not in any particular order, some of the more popular games:

 

Runescape, World of Warcraft, Eve online, The Old Republic (In Development), Spell Force, Knights of the Old Republic etc

 

My current favourite is knights of the old republic though I think that The Old Republic which is the online multiplayer star wars effort looks like its going to be a WoW killer, though even if it does live up to current expectations it won’t be easy considering the 11.5 million monthly subscriptions made to the game.

Screens for the new Star Wars: The Old Republic are available here.

So, what’s your opinion?

 

Comment, rate, link…

 

 


 





Is that bird trying to mate… or kill you

4 10 2009

I was perusing the bbc news site today and came across this video, quite amazing really. Apparently it’s a mating ritual though to me it looks like the bird is trying to kill him.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/8281382.stm





I’m Back also Broadband is not fit for the future

3 10 2009

Hello and welcome back, I’m sorry to anybody who would have regularly checked this blog in the past for the long break in articles I have written.

Today I was reading through the bbc news website and I found this;

A study of the global state of broadband has put the UK 25th out of 66 countries in terms of the quality and reach of its networks. … The UK was listed among countries whose broadband is “meeting needs for today”.

As someone who uses the internet to a largely ludicrous degree in comparison to the “average” person, i realise the obvious paradox here, I find this article largely useless and without basis. The article as illustrated above claims the current British internet infrastructure to be fit for today, without meeting the needs for the future. In my strung out and hugely bias opinion I find this to be absurd.

The articles integrity is failed by the simple fact that it does not explain exactly what and how the current infrastructure is meeting the needs of today. Does this mean the internet in Britain is quick enough and can handle the bandwidth for everyone to check their emails and the bbc news website a couple of times a day, does it mean we can download movies within minutes at higher than HD quality. The problem with defining this yard stick of internet usability is that what is acceptable and usable to one person is not necessarily the same for another, and why would it be?

So for the people who conducted this study to tell me that my internet is acceptable is laughable considering the broad range of uses and users the internet currently has. I also find that they can predict how much bandwidth and speed we will require in the future to be absurd also as website designers and developers largely use the mean current internet speed as the yardstick for how rich the content on their websites will be, thus making it available to the 50%tile of users.

My conclusion to this is that the internet is a dynamic and ever changing entity, how can we predict how much bandwidth we will require in the future? Even to predict what is acceptable in the present day is difficult and unrealistic. In my opinion there could never be enough bandwidth and infrastructure.