Hey, Signal Corps! It's Nathan C.! Marvel as he gets interviewed about the Texas Public Radio summer movie series in San Antonio.
Well done, Mr. Cone.
Film. Comics. Sci-Fi. Superheroes. Pulp. Noir. History. Superman. 20th Century Archaeology.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
Monday, May 31, 2010
Psycho: Dinner and a Movie?
UPDATE: Meet-up is CANCELED.
Apparently, Lucy the Dog has taken ill.
One of the most influential films of all time, Psycho, will be showing at the Paramount Theatre in Austin at 7:00 on Tuesday.
Jamie and I will be joining Heather "Mad Dog" Wagner at the Hickory Street Bar and Grill at 5:45ish, prior to the show.
If you've got the time and want to meet up prior to the show or at the show, we'd love to see you.
Come join us. It'll be a scream.
Apparently, Lucy the Dog has taken ill.
One of the most influential films of all time, Psycho, will be showing at the Paramount Theatre in Austin at 7:00 on Tuesday.
Jamie and I will be joining Heather "Mad Dog" Wagner at the Hickory Street Bar and Grill at 5:45ish, prior to the show.
If you've got the time and want to meet up prior to the show or at the show, we'd love to see you.
Come join us. It'll be a scream.
One Day I will See "Sex and the City 2"
Around 2000 or 2001, Jamie and I splurged and got HBO. At the time, we were watching "Six Feet Under", and I believe "Sex and the City" came on directly after "Six Feet Under". At the time, people were nutso for the show. On the promise that there might be some nudity, what with the title, and because 3/4's of the stars had appeared in other stuff I'd liked*, I gave it a whirl a few times.
I realized immediately that the show was clearly not aimed at me or my demographic. Let's make this clear, because I really want to acknowledge that I know this show is not for me.
Because it was new, supposedly frankly discussed sex from a woman's point of view (I have no idea), and catered to a certain, mostly untapped demographic's fantasy world the way Star Trek catered to my own, the show had taken off like wildfire. At the time the show had some how galvanized critics to support what, to my 20's-self, felt like a bizarre black-comedy celebrating a mirror opposite of everything I'd just spent 5 years of RTF school learning was no longer acceptable in mass media in a post-ERA world. But I got it then and I get it now. The show was a trailblazer for an audience that felt underrepresented, that reflected attitudes and lifestyles which either didn't make it to the small screen, or were not portrayed as something upheld by protagonists.
Add a cyborg, an ape and a flying tank, and I'm still not sure I'd think this was for me.
I don't even remember which show I used to watch, but once "SATC" hit syndication, it used to come on after that program, sometime around 10:30pm. I'd be blogging or surfing the internets, and realize I had just sort of watched a whole episode of "SATC". Mostly, honestly, the show rolls off me like an episode of "Everybody Loves Raymond". I can follow the plot without really watching, the characters are sort of preprogrammed enough that nothing ever seemed too complicated, and it all played out like a very expensive show where the characters seemed to continually learn new life lessons that it would seem brighter people would have figured out at a younger age or would have been able to intuit without the adventure of the episode.
But, again, the show was never aimed at me. It featured no robots, spaceships or anything called a "Gorn".
I'll never forget that episode where Samantha had sex with William Shatner
This post is my very long way of explaining that, somehow, I've seen an inordinate amount of "SATC", don't particularly love it, but seem to know an amazing amount about the show whether I like it or not, even though I've never seen two episodes in order.
Frankly, having watched enough of the show, I don't buy that criticism of "SATC" is automatically misogynistic, or that pointing out that the characters seem a bit immature is somehow attacking women's enjoyment of sex at any age. It's that the dithering of the characters is the point of show, and at some point, when its all you see of the characters rather than them actually doing anything, it becomes annoying. How seriously are we supposed to find a protagonist whose primary preoccupation is stated to be designer shoes and who keeps coming back romantically to a guy whose primary feature seems to be his ability to pay for those shoes?
Obviously as of this writing, I have not yet seen "Sex and the City 2". The movie has taken some lumps from critics (I'll eat my hat if that effects box office). Mostly, the movie is being attacked for what sounds like its insistence that the characters haven't matured beyond the characters the audience watched for several years of the show. Or from the last movie (a movie whose denouement was found when our lead's romantic misgivings were resolved when she received an email from her wealthy admirer that said "I know I screwed up" and nothing else). Anyhow, I'm just wondering if whatever doors SATC opened have been ajar long enough that the rest of trappings of the show, and the characters themselves, haven't begun to grate a bit.
If we can retroactively condemn the western genre for its sexism, racism, etc... then I think we get a second look at "SATC" through several years of better roles and different mores. But I still doubt we'll agree that is behavior A = misogyny, then behavior A = misandry, or that cosmos + expensive shoes + locker room talk ≠ third wave feminism.**
I'd be remiss if I did not mention I watched the first movie in a hotel room in Minneapolis. While flipping channels I came upon the start of the wedding scene, which, in most narratives, happens at the end of the film, and so I left the TV on that channel to witness the nuptials for "SATC" and perhaps watch the narrative of the show draw to a close. However, that turned out to be the beginning of the movie, which I watched while writing the now infamous Chuck E. Cheese post.
No, no, no... its only empowering if you do this in your living room in a rumpled t-shirt and lip-synching or singing into a hairbrush. Preferably to Gloria Gaynor.
As long as I'm blogging, it seems that I will wind up watching "Sex and the City".
So, this weekend that Jamie and Steanso were a bit surprised to hear me state, factually, that sooner or later I would watch this movie. I won't try to see it, but eventually I'll end up goofing around on a computer, maybe in a hotel room, and on will come those fabulous four women and their plotlines and concerns that are more alien to me than Pon Farr.
*Samantha was played by Kim Cattrall of "Police Academy", "Mannequin" and "Big Trouble in Little China" fame. Cynthia Nixon had played the love interest in "The Manhattan Project". Sarah Jessica Parker had been in "Mars Attacks", "Ed Wood", "Honeymoon in Vegas" and several other projects.
**Did you know that after the age of, say, 19, most guys are actually a little put off by their friends who try to talk about their sex lives? Let alone over lunch? (and we usually ask them to stop)
Add a cyborg, an ape and a flying tank, and I'm still not sure I'd think this was for me.
I don't even remember which show I used to watch, but once "SATC" hit syndication, it used to come on after that program, sometime around 10:30pm. I'd be blogging or surfing the internets, and realize I had just sort of watched a whole episode of "SATC". Mostly, honestly, the show rolls off me like an episode of "Everybody Loves Raymond". I can follow the plot without really watching, the characters are sort of preprogrammed enough that nothing ever seemed too complicated, and it all played out like a very expensive show where the characters seemed to continually learn new life lessons that it would seem brighter people would have figured out at a younger age or would have been able to intuit without the adventure of the episode.
But, again, the show was never aimed at me. It featured no robots, spaceships or anything called a "Gorn".
I'll never forget that episode where Samantha had sex with William Shatner
This post is my very long way of explaining that, somehow, I've seen an inordinate amount of "SATC", don't particularly love it, but seem to know an amazing amount about the show whether I like it or not, even though I've never seen two episodes in order.
Frankly, having watched enough of the show, I don't buy that criticism of "SATC" is automatically misogynistic, or that pointing out that the characters seem a bit immature is somehow attacking women's enjoyment of sex at any age. It's that the dithering of the characters is the point of show, and at some point, when its all you see of the characters rather than them actually doing anything, it becomes annoying. How seriously are we supposed to find a protagonist whose primary preoccupation is stated to be designer shoes and who keeps coming back romantically to a guy whose primary feature seems to be his ability to pay for those shoes?
Obviously as of this writing, I have not yet seen "Sex and the City 2". The movie has taken some lumps from critics (I'll eat my hat if that effects box office). Mostly, the movie is being attacked for what sounds like its insistence that the characters haven't matured beyond the characters the audience watched for several years of the show. Or from the last movie (a movie whose denouement was found when our lead's romantic misgivings were resolved when she received an email from her wealthy admirer that said "I know I screwed up" and nothing else). Anyhow, I'm just wondering if whatever doors SATC opened have been ajar long enough that the rest of trappings of the show, and the characters themselves, haven't begun to grate a bit.
If we can retroactively condemn the western genre for its sexism, racism, etc... then I think we get a second look at "SATC" through several years of better roles and different mores. But I still doubt we'll agree that is behavior A = misogyny, then behavior A = misandry, or that cosmos + expensive shoes + locker room talk ≠ third wave feminism.**
I'd be remiss if I did not mention I watched the first movie in a hotel room in Minneapolis. While flipping channels I came upon the start of the wedding scene, which, in most narratives, happens at the end of the film, and so I left the TV on that channel to witness the nuptials for "SATC" and perhaps watch the narrative of the show draw to a close. However, that turned out to be the beginning of the movie, which I watched while writing the now infamous Chuck E. Cheese post.
No, no, no... its only empowering if you do this in your living room in a rumpled t-shirt and lip-synching or singing into a hairbrush. Preferably to Gloria Gaynor.
As long as I'm blogging, it seems that I will wind up watching "Sex and the City".
So, this weekend that Jamie and Steanso were a bit surprised to hear me state, factually, that sooner or later I would watch this movie. I won't try to see it, but eventually I'll end up goofing around on a computer, maybe in a hotel room, and on will come those fabulous four women and their plotlines and concerns that are more alien to me than Pon Farr.
*Samantha was played by Kim Cattrall of "Police Academy", "Mannequin" and "Big Trouble in Little China" fame. Cynthia Nixon had played the love interest in "The Manhattan Project". Sarah Jessica Parker had been in "Mars Attacks", "Ed Wood", "Honeymoon in Vegas" and several other projects.
**Did you know that after the age of, say, 19, most guys are actually a little put off by their friends who try to talk about their sex lives? Let alone over lunch? (and we usually ask them to stop)
Sunday, May 30, 2010
Zee... Zee... Zee...
So... I am unsure if The Signal Corps care at all about the Weekly Watch Wind thing I've been doing on Fridays (frankly, the hits to The Watch Wind are low, but I can't tell if that's because it goes up on Friday or if its because nobody gives a rip). In addition to the Weekly Watch Wind, I've also decided to begin linking items as they pop up on my radar on a separate blog, and then posting the RSS feed in the content column on the left. You'll also find Randy's RSS feed.
Anyhow, if you're interested, you can subscribe to the RSS feed from zee... zee... zee..., click from this site, go to the actual blogger location, or ignore it altogether.
While I'll certainly write posts about certain links, don't expect actual content at zee... zee... zee... Just think of it as amusing junk I've decided to share.
Saturday, May 29, 2010
Dennis Hopper Merges with The Infinite
On my way home the other day I was listening to a story about how a modern art museum in LA was retrofitting itself under new leadership, and that their first new exhibit would be the work of Dennis Hopper. Actor, director, writer and visual artist.
And then I saw this afternoon that Hopper had passed.
My first memory of Hopper is from seeing "Hoosiers", the Gene Hackman Indiana high school basketball flick. But I also very much recall that during the post-Platoon surge of Vietnam movies, The Admiral decided we should really see "Apocalypse Now".
Apparently I'd seen him previously in "My Science Project", a movie now forgotten and collecting dust or in landfills on VHS. I'd also see him circa 1989 when I rented "River's Edge". But, of course, Hopper was just sort of omnipresent, and you didn't know when he'd pop up, from "Rebel Without A Cause" as a rental, to "Space Truckers" when you were watching TV on a Saturday morning. "Cool Hand Luke", of course.
Of course I watched "Easy Rider", too.
Anyway, I was shocked to see that Hopper had passed. 74 seems young these days. 202 acting credits on IMDB seems almost impossible.
Vaya con dios, sir.
And then I saw this afternoon that Hopper had passed.
My first memory of Hopper is from seeing "Hoosiers", the Gene Hackman Indiana high school basketball flick. But I also very much recall that during the post-Platoon surge of Vietnam movies, The Admiral decided we should really see "Apocalypse Now".
Apparently I'd seen him previously in "My Science Project", a movie now forgotten and collecting dust or in landfills on VHS. I'd also see him circa 1989 when I rented "River's Edge". But, of course, Hopper was just sort of omnipresent, and you didn't know when he'd pop up, from "Rebel Without A Cause" as a rental, to "Space Truckers" when you were watching TV on a Saturday morning. "Cool Hand Luke", of course.
Of course I watched "Easy Rider", too.
Anyway, I was shocked to see that Hopper had passed. 74 seems young these days. 202 acting credits on IMDB seems almost impossible.
Vaya con dios, sir.
Friday, May 28, 2010
Four Dollars for a Comic?
I don't know how much comics cost when I started buying them, but I remember that when I first started collecting, comics were $0.75. A few months back, Marvel comics moved the price point of several of their titles from $2.99 to $3.99 for a 32 page comic. And now DC Comics is following suit. Not on all titles, but the shift to $3.99 has started (I have to partially blame the fact that titles like "Blackest Night", which were priced higher, sold just fine).
In recent years, as DC and Marvel have pushed their mega-narratives to company-wide cross-over events (see DC's "Blackest Night" and Marvel's "Siege"), I had to make a conscious choice to quit following Marvel comics.
This wasn't based upon any Marvel vs. DC complaint, as I had followed Captain America, Spider-Man, Fantastic Four, Black Panther and many other titles since the mid-80's (I have a continuous run of Uncanny X-men from issue 168-320, for chrissake). Even prior to Marvel raising its prices, the sheer volume of comics a buyer had to pick up to follow a storyline went through the roof, and not for a short summer event. These events lasted the better part of a year.
So around issue #3 of Marvel's "Secret Invasion", I realized I was both (a) not terribly interested in the story and (b) did not want to spend the money to follow the storyline.
So Monday night I began sorting through several months of comics and discovered that of a stack of comics that was quite literally 2 - 2.5 feet high, I had purchased 2 "floppies" from Marvel during that time. Yes, I had purchased Captain America collections, but the bottom line appears to be that rising costs and the "event" driven nature of the Big 2 of the past few years meant I gave up on one of the companies.
I'm wondering if I'm not the only one.
But now, looking at an increase of 33% in the cost of a single, 32 page comic (most of which have 22 pages of content and 10 of ads, etc...)? It's hard enough to justify the number of comics I read at this point, and I do buy comics from other publishers (it's always been easier to swallow higher prices from smaller publishers as its clear how quickly they can go under). At any rate, as of this month, I'll be dropping another handful of DC titles that have only partially captured my interest. And its that much less likely I'll pick up any new titles from either DC or Marvel.
I have to wonder, exactly, what DC and Marvel think they're doing. I can buy a novel for under $15. Buy a DVD for $8. Download an album for $10 or cheaper. Play a video game for hours and hours for $20 - $50. And I can certainly go look online for illegal scans of comics for no direct cost (although I have serious issues with the practice and don't do it myself). But buying 3 comics shouldn't cost me $12. Or, more accurately, buying material supported by advertising for, really, roughly 22 pages of comics per... its $12 for about 60 pages of material, depending on how many splash pages they toss in.
The price point says nothing healthy about the industry, and demonstrates that DC is unable to think of better cost-cutting measures before passing their costs along to consumers. But with something you read so quickly, and often only once, how to rationalize the cost? And, it seems, the cost of comics is rising faster than almost any known product out there.
The announcement that DC would move to a $4 price point is, for me, problematic...
I'll be reviewing my titles this month. This, alone, could mean I go to trades with Batman books, drop Booster Gold, Doom Patrol and others. And not because I wasn't enjoying them, but they were on my "B" list. I'll not pick up the new "Emerald Warriors" series from DC at all, at least I'll never own it in a floppy format.
I'm absolutely not married to the higher quality paper and technical techniques that both companies switched to in the 90's, and what I suspect are probably overvalued by most in the business. I'd gladly begin looking at digital comics from DC at a lowered price point, and if the entry into an iPad weren't so damn steep.
Yes, I'll continue to pick up Superman comics. That's my thing. But I'd prefer that it not be my only thing. I have a pretty darn considerable collection of Batman and Detective comics, too, and the thought of ending that due to price point is more than a little depressing.
At the end of the day, $3 was high, and $3.50 had been pushing it. At $4... I found my threshold and I'll need to re-evaluate.
In recent years, as DC and Marvel have pushed their mega-narratives to company-wide cross-over events (see DC's "Blackest Night" and Marvel's "Siege"), I had to make a conscious choice to quit following Marvel comics.
This wasn't based upon any Marvel vs. DC complaint, as I had followed Captain America, Spider-Man, Fantastic Four, Black Panther and many other titles since the mid-80's (I have a continuous run of Uncanny X-men from issue 168-320, for chrissake). Even prior to Marvel raising its prices, the sheer volume of comics a buyer had to pick up to follow a storyline went through the roof, and not for a short summer event. These events lasted the better part of a year.
So around issue #3 of Marvel's "Secret Invasion", I realized I was both (a) not terribly interested in the story and (b) did not want to spend the money to follow the storyline.
So Monday night I began sorting through several months of comics and discovered that of a stack of comics that was quite literally 2 - 2.5 feet high, I had purchased 2 "floppies" from Marvel during that time. Yes, I had purchased Captain America collections, but the bottom line appears to be that rising costs and the "event" driven nature of the Big 2 of the past few years meant I gave up on one of the companies.
I'm wondering if I'm not the only one.
But now, looking at an increase of 33% in the cost of a single, 32 page comic (most of which have 22 pages of content and 10 of ads, etc...)? It's hard enough to justify the number of comics I read at this point, and I do buy comics from other publishers (it's always been easier to swallow higher prices from smaller publishers as its clear how quickly they can go under). At any rate, as of this month, I'll be dropping another handful of DC titles that have only partially captured my interest. And its that much less likely I'll pick up any new titles from either DC or Marvel.
I have to wonder, exactly, what DC and Marvel think they're doing. I can buy a novel for under $15. Buy a DVD for $8. Download an album for $10 or cheaper. Play a video game for hours and hours for $20 - $50. And I can certainly go look online for illegal scans of comics for no direct cost (although I have serious issues with the practice and don't do it myself). But buying 3 comics shouldn't cost me $12. Or, more accurately, buying material supported by advertising for, really, roughly 22 pages of comics per... its $12 for about 60 pages of material, depending on how many splash pages they toss in.
The price point says nothing healthy about the industry, and demonstrates that DC is unable to think of better cost-cutting measures before passing their costs along to consumers. But with something you read so quickly, and often only once, how to rationalize the cost? And, it seems, the cost of comics is rising faster than almost any known product out there.
The announcement that DC would move to a $4 price point is, for me, problematic...
I'll be reviewing my titles this month. This, alone, could mean I go to trades with Batman books, drop Booster Gold, Doom Patrol and others. And not because I wasn't enjoying them, but they were on my "B" list. I'll not pick up the new "Emerald Warriors" series from DC at all, at least I'll never own it in a floppy format.
I'm absolutely not married to the higher quality paper and technical techniques that both companies switched to in the 90's, and what I suspect are probably overvalued by most in the business. I'd gladly begin looking at digital comics from DC at a lowered price point, and if the entry into an iPad weren't so damn steep.
Yes, I'll continue to pick up Superman comics. That's my thing. But I'd prefer that it not be my only thing. I have a pretty darn considerable collection of Batman and Detective comics, too, and the thought of ending that due to price point is more than a little depressing.
At the end of the day, $3 was high, and $3.50 had been pushing it. At $4... I found my threshold and I'll need to re-evaluate.
Weekly Watch Wind 05/28/2010
Movies/ DC Comics: I got so excited reading that Superman will be coming to theaters for the Holidays in 2012 and that WB execs are talking about movies featuring The Flash and Wonder Woman, I kind of threw up a little.
Superman on the big screen. I am kind of freaking out.
and, seriously... A Flash movie could be crazy fun.
Also, there's an amazing song and dance number after the second jump. Its performed by action figures of superheroes and discusses the status of movies from Marvel and DC.
Randy/ Links: Randy has promoted himself to Chief Link-Meister of the Signal Corps and ChronSnob. We are terribly excited about following Randy's input, and have made a home for his work over in the "Legion" links on the left. I also suggest adding his site to your RSS reader.
Television/ DC Comics: I don't watch Fox TV's "Fringe" (Steanso does, and says nice things about it), but I guess the season finale featured several alternate universe covers from classic DC Comics. You will either get these or you won't.
Music: Willie Nelson cut his hair. I'll be dipped.
Music: Just yesterday I was wondering when the hell Arcade Fire's next album would arrive. August 2.
Weird/ Why?: Teen Wolves! Apparently teenagers are now telling folks that they're werewolves. In San Antonio (where I think being a were-coyote or were-scrappy-neighborhood-dog makes infinitely more sense). Anyway, I am very glad I am not a high-schooler.
Superman/ Television: You may recall the "Smallville" related item about the commercial celebrating Chloe/ Allison Mack. The final product is just kind of weird and awkard (and the choice of music, which sounded like a classic NES score, wasn't helping).
Classic/ Comics: Flash Gordon returns to comics at Dynamite! Entertainment. Also, Mandrake.
Superheroes/ Events: Great event or GREATEST event? The good people of Melbourne, Australia will try to set a world record for most people assembled dressed as superheroes. I would so attend this event, cape flapping in the wind.
Superman/ Wrong: Dean Haspiel discusses Lois Lane #106, the eye-brow raising issue where Lois Lane uses Super Science to become black for a day or so. Its one of those well-meaning, but ill-executed attempts to discuss social issues in a superhero/ romance comic.
Yes, I own a copy of this comic.
WTF?/ Autoracing: Formula One racing? Why, that's more of a Shelbyville idea...!
Way, way out of scope for this blog, but it came over the wire on Tuesday night that Austin will supposedly host Formula One racing starting in 2012. The deal was apparently made without a single public announcement or bit of consideration. Which is fairly typical of what happens when someone from the big city comes to town (I live in Austin) and starts waving around money.
While I am curious about the spectacle of Formula One, this is not a motor sports kind of town, and the infrastructure isn't going to handle this kind of event without causing some serious problems. Not to mention, part of the deal is building an all-new track, which likely means somebody is getting a Formula One track in their backyard. Not to mention the likelihood that tax dollars will be redirected to the track that nobody asked for.
City of Austin, prepare to see an infuriated populace. And certainly raises questions about the common concept that any money coming to town is what the citizens want. Not to mention, F1 seems to have flamed out in several cities when it was no longer financially viable.
Sadly, I hope this effort fails.
Superman on the big screen. I am kind of freaking out.
and, seriously... A Flash movie could be crazy fun.
Also, there's an amazing song and dance number after the second jump. Its performed by action figures of superheroes and discusses the status of movies from Marvel and DC.
Randy/ Links: Randy has promoted himself to Chief Link-Meister of the Signal Corps and ChronSnob. We are terribly excited about following Randy's input, and have made a home for his work over in the "Legion" links on the left. I also suggest adding his site to your RSS reader.
Television/ DC Comics: I don't watch Fox TV's "Fringe" (Steanso does, and says nice things about it), but I guess the season finale featured several alternate universe covers from classic DC Comics. You will either get these or you won't.
Music: Willie Nelson cut his hair. I'll be dipped.
Music: Just yesterday I was wondering when the hell Arcade Fire's next album would arrive. August 2.
Weird/ Why?: Teen Wolves! Apparently teenagers are now telling folks that they're werewolves. In San Antonio (where I think being a were-coyote or were-scrappy-neighborhood-dog makes infinitely more sense). Anyway, I am very glad I am not a high-schooler.
Superman/ Television: You may recall the "Smallville" related item about the commercial celebrating Chloe/ Allison Mack. The final product is just kind of weird and awkard (and the choice of music, which sounded like a classic NES score, wasn't helping).
Classic/ Comics: Flash Gordon returns to comics at Dynamite! Entertainment. Also, Mandrake.
Superheroes/ Events: Great event or GREATEST event? The good people of Melbourne, Australia will try to set a world record for most people assembled dressed as superheroes. I would so attend this event, cape flapping in the wind.
Superman/ Wrong: Dean Haspiel discusses Lois Lane #106, the eye-brow raising issue where Lois Lane uses Super Science to become black for a day or so. Its one of those well-meaning, but ill-executed attempts to discuss social issues in a superhero/ romance comic.
Yes, I own a copy of this comic.
WTF?/ Autoracing: Formula One racing? Why, that's more of a Shelbyville idea...!
Way, way out of scope for this blog, but it came over the wire on Tuesday night that Austin will supposedly host Formula One racing starting in 2012. The deal was apparently made without a single public announcement or bit of consideration. Which is fairly typical of what happens when someone from the big city comes to town (I live in Austin) and starts waving around money.
While I am curious about the spectacle of Formula One, this is not a motor sports kind of town, and the infrastructure isn't going to handle this kind of event without causing some serious problems. Not to mention, part of the deal is building an all-new track, which likely means somebody is getting a Formula One track in their backyard. Not to mention the likelihood that tax dollars will be redirected to the track that nobody asked for.
City of Austin, prepare to see an infuriated populace. And certainly raises questions about the common concept that any money coming to town is what the citizens want. Not to mention, F1 seems to have flamed out in several cities when it was no longer financially viable.
Sadly, I hope this effort fails.
Wednesday, May 26, 2010
Super Bored
I've been in a lousy mood for days. Between coming off of vacation, some cognitive dissonance, North Korea acting crazy, the BP oil spill, and my inability to basically have enough hours in a day... I'm a little down, which makes it tough to find FUN things to talk about. And, dammit, I'm here for fun.
So, I apologize if this week has seemed a tad off.
This evening I decide to shake off the blues.
Anyway, I had nothing in particular to write about, so I thought I'd share an evening at home at The Watch Tower.
Ah. An evening to myself in the Justice Lounge. SuperTed and I decide to kick back with some fine reading.
Just settled in, Scout surprised me with a request.
Puppies like comics. These two were intent on having comics read aloud to them while they looked at pictures.
Afterward, they insisted on playing "Legion of Super Pets". Lucy wanted to be "Proty II". Scout wanted to be SuperScout. Jeff the Cat was cast as "Stupid Cat", and was chased.
Ryan S. sez: Comics are good for the physical and mental development of all puppies. Read comics to your puppies every day.
So, I apologize if this week has seemed a tad off.
This evening I decide to shake off the blues.
Anyway, I had nothing in particular to write about, so I thought I'd share an evening at home at The Watch Tower.
Ah. An evening to myself in the Justice Lounge. SuperTed and I decide to kick back with some fine reading.
Just settled in, Scout surprised me with a request.
Puppies like comics. These two were intent on having comics read aloud to them while they looked at pictures.
Afterward, they insisted on playing "Legion of Super Pets". Lucy wanted to be "Proty II". Scout wanted to be SuperScout. Jeff the Cat was cast as "Stupid Cat", and was chased.
Ryan S. sez: Comics are good for the physical and mental development of all puppies. Read comics to your puppies every day.
Tuesday, May 25, 2010
This is so you...
For going on 7 years, Randy has shared links with Ransom and myself, often with the subject line "This is so (insert either Ryan or Ransom)".
He's now turned that link service into a blog!
This Is So You aka: Links for Ransom and Ryan S..
He's now turned that link service into a blog!
This Is So You aka: Links for Ransom and Ryan S..
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)