The not-so-final frontier

I've been away from my blog for sufficiently long enough to forget what my last post was. To my horror, I returned to find the grinning face of one Bill Gates looking back at me. What's a committed Apple user doing with the face of "the enemy" on his website?

Being lazy, that's what.

Rather than post a real news item for my vast readership of four, I decided to throw up a couple of the meme quizzes I had recently indulged in. It was the blogging equivalent of junk food; quick, easy, and probably, bad for you.

The fact is, I haven't had much time to post lately, and for that I ask forgiveness. I've had no end of subjects to blog about; in fact, I almost posted a review of some of the new photos released for J.J. Abrams' new Star Trek movie about three weeks ago. And since the new trailer for that film was released today, I should probably post some impressions on this new Trek now. And while my impulse is to put it off, take some time, and give "proper preparation," I know my tendency towards procrastination makes this a bad idea. And so, without further ado...

The photo above is the new-and-improved USS Enterprise from the upcoming Star Trek movie. The image comes from the trekmovie.com website (which I highly recommend), who in turn got it from Entertainment Weekly. There's been a flurry of new information about the new movie that's come out in the past month or so, but I've treasured none more than the photo above. To me, the Enterprise herself, dinky metal-and-plastic model that she is, is one of the most important components of any new Star Trek venture. I can (and probably will) post my critique of the designs that preceded her, ranking them in order of preference. For now, let me say that while I was initially less than pleased with this latest offering, she is starting to grow on me.

What does excite me is what this new Star Trek represents. If this next generation (pun intended) succeeds at reviving the Star Trek franchise, they will have breathed life into it beyond their wildest dreams. While many of the Star Trek incarnations of the past like Next Generation have been successful in their own right, they are rather like the Star Wars prequels; fun, and part of that universe, but not quite up to the original. What is missing in any Star Trek other than the Original Series (TOS, if you want the fan lingo), is what is missing from the Prequels — characters. Specifically, Kirk, Spock, Bones, Scotty and the other members of the original Enterprise crew. More specifically, the characters as they were written and portrayed during the three seasons of the Original Series, not the six movies they were subsequently featured in. That is a debate for another time.

If Abrams & co. can sell this new crew, and make us believe they are Kirk, Spock et. al., then Star Trek will be in the same position as Dr. Who and the Bond series. The characters will be what lives on, not the actor's portrayals of them. Other actors will be able to give their own unique takes on the Kirk character, just as the various actors to fill Bond's shoes have, or the numerous good doctors. Anyone who says that there can be only one definative Kirk or Spock need look no further than Daniel Craig's Bond, or David Tennant's excellent Time Lord, to blow that theory out of the water.

As far as scripts, there are countless stories yet to be told in the Star Trek universe, as there are in Star Wars. Whether or not they will be told depends on whether the people holding the purse strings that are making those stories. Will they want to tell a good story, or will they just want to milk the cash cow until it drops dead. Personally, I'm hoping for the former — it would make me very happy indeed if, thoughout my life, there were always a new Star Trek to look forward to, just as I am enjoying the new Star Wars offerings.

As Genie said in Aladdin, "here's hoping."

Uh...thanks, I think

Your result for The Nerd? Geek? or Dork? Test...

Outcast Genius

For The Record:

A Nerd is someone who is passionate about learning/being smart/academia.
A Geek is someone who is passionate about some particular area or subject, often an obscure or difficult one.
A Dork is someone who has difficulty with common social expectations/interactions.
You scored better than half in all three, earning you the title of: Outcast Genius.

Outcast geniuses usually are bright enough to understand what society wants of them, and they just don't care! They are highly intelligent and passionate about the things they know are *truly* important in the world. Typically, this does not include sports, cars or make-up, but it can on occassion (and if it does then they know more than all of their friends combined in that subject).

Outcast geniuses can be very lonely, due to their being outcast from most normal groups and too smart for the room among many other types of dorks and geeks, but they can also be the types to eventually rule the world, ala Bill Gates, the prototypical Outcast Genius.

Congratulations!


Also, you might want to check out some of my other tests if you're interested in any of the following:

Buffy the Vampire Slayer

Professional Wrestling

Love & Sexuality

America/Politics

Thanks Again! -- THE NERD? GEEK? OR DORK? TEST

Take The Nerd? Geek? or Dork? Test at HelloQuizzy

I don't know if it's art...

Your result for What Your Taste in Art Says About You Test...

Conscientious, Fulfilled, and Spiritual

19 Renaissance, 17 Islamic, 11 Ukiyo-e, -31 Cubist, -35 Abstract and 13 Impressionist!

The Renaissance was a cultural movement that profoundly affected European intellectual life.  Beginning in Italy, and spreading to the rest of Europe by the 16th century, its influence affected literature, philosopy, religion, art, politics, science, and all other aspects of intellectual enquiry. Renaissance artists looked at the human aspect of life in their art.  They did not reject religion but tended to look at it in it's purest form to create visions they thought depicted the ideals of religion.  Painters of this time had their own style and created works based on morality, religion, and human nature.  Many of the paintings depicted what they believed to be the corrupt nature of man.

People that like Renaissance paintings like things that are more challenging.  They tend to have a high emotional stability.  They also tend to be more concientious then average.  They have a basic understanding of human nature and therefore are not easily surprised by anything that people may do.  They enjoy life and enjoy living.  They are very aware of their own mortality but do not dwell on the end but what they are doing in the present.  They enjoy learning, but may tend to be a bit more closed minded to new ideas as they feel that the viewpoint they have has been well researched and considered.  These people are more old fashioned and not quite as progressive.  They enjoy the finer things in life like comfort, a good meal, and homelife.  They tend to be more spiritual or religious by nature.  They are open to new aesthetic experiences. 

Take What Your Taste in Art Says About You Test at HelloQuizzy

Good, clean fun

We (meaning my wife, daughter and I) spent some of Sunday afternoon cleaning out and refreshing the inside of my Honda wagon. I sort of accepted the "lived-in look" as the way things were, since there are a host of things I'd rather be doing on the weekend other than cleaning out my car. But it went quickly with help, and I must admit, it made the commute to work this morning much more pleasant. My noble steed is in desperate need of a good wash and wax job, and I'm looking forward to tackling that this weekend.

We had planned to see "Beverly Hills Chihuahua" this weekend, but that one somehow dropped off the radar. Instead, we managed to get two really enjoyable viewings in. For starters, the three of us watched "The Clone Wars" debut on Saturday. My daughter stayed overnight at her best friend's house Friday, when the debut was, so I brought our VCR back online. It was the first time I'd taped something in at least at year, and I'm almost surprised I remembered how.

I was definitely pleased with the first two episodes. "Ambush, " the first episode, did a nice job of highlighting Yoda, melding the playful little green frog of The Empire Strikes Back with the Jedi warlord of Attack of the Clones and Revenge of the Sith. The second, "Rising Malevolence," was especially enjoyable for the way it highlighted Plo Koon, one of my favorite "background" Jedi Council members. I think it was criminal that Plo, a fan favorite of many, including my esteemed apprentice, the Jedi Hero, was neglected throughout all three prequels, except for a short bit during the Order 66 sequence of Sith.  I'm not sure I agreed with the voice they gave him in "Clone Wars," but they got the attitude right, I think. However, I await the Hero's verdict before I give the portrayal my full endorsement.

Both episodes had a couple of "neat bits" in them, and my youngest apprentice and I both agreed that we have a new Friday night tradition — assuming she has nothing more pressing on her social calendar.

The second treat came Sunday, as I watched the movie Iron Man for the first time (minus the aforementioned padawan). What can one say about this movie other than "it rocked?" Downey was absolutely perfect as Tony Stark, and the entire affair was well done from start to finish. I look forward to Iron Man 2, and plan to acquire the 2-disc set the first film so I can immerse myself in the "making of" features I enjoy so much.

Next week, if all goes well, I should acquire the new Indiana Jones DVD, which I am embarrassed and ashamed to say I missed in its theatrical run. Naturally, you may expect a full report on that experience, as well as the new Clones episodes as they are aired. Until then, dear readers!