Ehh to both Hollywood and weather
Jun. 21st, 2009 04:52 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
So the promise of a dry week to follow Friday's deluge and wind has already been broken. It's been raining on and off this afternoon, and the next few days are once again filled with "chance of thunderstorms." Water in the pastures is again deeper than the top of my rubber boots, and I think deeper than it was at its peak earlier this spring. I can't get to the vegetable garden without a boat, even though I can see the snow peas hanging there begging to be harvested. In the first nine years that we lived here, we saw flooding like this only once. On that occasion, we received four inches of rain in a 24 hour period, so anything was certainly possible.
Since the stupid developers busted up the tiling in the 250 acres of land uphill of us, we are seeing this every time there is an inch or more of rain in 24 hours. That's about six times in the last two years. Our ability to use our land has been damaged by this, significantly so. Our chance of getting anything done about it is, of course, non-existent. I take great pleasure in the fact that no one has actually chosen to build anything in that "development." I hope the developers go bankrupt.
We went to see the Star Trek film this afternoon because Gary wanted to. Even setting aside the fact that I now have a headache imposed by the earthquake inducing level of the sound in the theatre (which always irritates the hell out of me...I guess everyone else is already deaf from listening to stuff at those decibel levels, so they keep escalating) my reactions are mostly negative. There were some cute moments and an occasional clever concept, but c'mon, folks. Star Trek has used the time paradox thing far too much. It's no longer credible to me. I never liked Kirk and I like him even less after this film. Giving Spock a romantic interest, even at a young age, doesn't wash with me either, no matter how cleverly they could play it off against Kirk. The young Scotty, McCoy, Sulu, and Chekhov were interestingly portrayed, but they can't carry off a weak plot all by themselves. I won't even dignify it with any apples at all.
On the way home we stopped and used the "coupon" (plus $16) to get a digital conversion box. I don't anticipate it doing any good here, but we can always give it to someone else if it's completely useless.
Since the stupid developers busted up the tiling in the 250 acres of land uphill of us, we are seeing this every time there is an inch or more of rain in 24 hours. That's about six times in the last two years. Our ability to use our land has been damaged by this, significantly so. Our chance of getting anything done about it is, of course, non-existent. I take great pleasure in the fact that no one has actually chosen to build anything in that "development." I hope the developers go bankrupt.
We went to see the Star Trek film this afternoon because Gary wanted to. Even setting aside the fact that I now have a headache imposed by the earthquake inducing level of the sound in the theatre (which always irritates the hell out of me...I guess everyone else is already deaf from listening to stuff at those decibel levels, so they keep escalating) my reactions are mostly negative. There were some cute moments and an occasional clever concept, but c'mon, folks. Star Trek has used the time paradox thing far too much. It's no longer credible to me. I never liked Kirk and I like him even less after this film. Giving Spock a romantic interest, even at a young age, doesn't wash with me either, no matter how cleverly they could play it off against Kirk. The young Scotty, McCoy, Sulu, and Chekhov were interestingly portrayed, but they can't carry off a weak plot all by themselves. I won't even dignify it with any apples at all.
On the way home we stopped and used the "coupon" (plus $16) to get a digital conversion box. I don't anticipate it doing any good here, but we can always give it to someone else if it's completely useless.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-23 04:49 pm (UTC)of sliced melon and altarian eggs and a tricorder to
diagnose that headache*
SO! So...shhh...you...don't...like...Kirk?
And you don't like LOUD MUSIC!?
*headtilts*
Okay.
*leaves the tray but tosses a copy of Gravity's Rainbow
on the bed and rubs his hands together cunningly*
"That'll keep him busy for awhile!"
*goes off with the local foxes*
no subject
Date: 2009-06-23 05:09 pm (UTC)Nope, never liked Kirk. To me he was an impulsive troublemaker, an irritating womanizer, and used too much muscle and not enough brains. Without Spock and McCoy to counterbalance him, he'd have been an utter disaster. His cocksure attitudes always rubbed me the wrong way. Tim Allen's spoof of him in the 1999 film Galaxy Quest summed it up perfectly. ;p
Definitely no loud music, and even moreso no loud explosions and gunfire, which seems to be the entire point of so many films these days. I can hear a mouse from two rooms away, which is remarkable at my age, and I want to keep it that way.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-24 03:56 pm (UTC)I'm pleased you don't like Pynchon. I never understood
how he got such a fine reputation. If I want obscure
but heavy I go for Hesse. Just me. The Glass Bead
Game was a story that drew you in with characters
and a setting, though I have to say Neil Stephenson's
"Anathem" does the idea a whole lot better, and is
about as long.
Okay, no cocksure Kirks and no loud music.
But you secretly want Kirk...you want him on that
galactic rim...you NEED him on that galactic rim!
XD
no subject
Date: 2009-06-24 04:21 pm (UTC)I liked Piccard much better.
no subject
Date: 2009-06-27 07:30 pm (UTC)it would be probable that Picard would get to
Admiral and then eventually to head the Federation
while Kirk was being busted every few years back
to Ships Captain. XD