Source Code was a Breath of Fresh Air

Hey all,

Often times, movies are boring, and shallow with no real thematic elements.  However, every once in awhile, something different comes about to change how we view life and humanity.  Source Code is this rare occasion.

Before going into the specific elements which make this movie astounding, we should probably cover the not-so-goods.  The movie lacks a literal plot.  It is clear what the story is about but it is rather unclear how everything works.  This actually makes the entertainment value of the movie fairly disappointing.  The ending doesn't really make sense.  Watch the movie, and you'll know what I mean.  Nevertheless, plot points aside, the themes suggested in this film more than make up for its loss in plot.

1. We should first go over Sean.  Sean is, in every sense of the word, a foil for the Captain.  It's unclear who the real Sean was, seeing as Christina never went into detail.  However, it is certain that Sean is a different person than the Captain.  The Captain is rational, and curious; Sean is spontaneous and reckless, living in the moment.
2. One of the major themes is living life to the fullest.  That is, living every moment as if it's the last.  The ironic twist in the movie is that, Sean literally has 8 minutes to live every time he relives the train crash.  However, this movie presents a greater sense of the beauty of life.  At the end of the movie, Sean encourages everyone to laugh and have fun; enjoy life.
3. Another theme is that of fate.  The movie seems to suggest that fate is in our own hands if we try hard enough to succeed.  The Captain relived and died the same scene multiple times, but was finally successful in changing his fate.
4. The phone call to his father was one of the most touching moments in cinematic history...in my opinion. The actual storyline was 'meh' but the theme behind it was pretty moving.  In the literal sense of the movie, the Captain can no longer be who he was in the real life.  He must be Sean, now.  However, thematically, when the Captain calls his father, it shows a change in the hero's quest, but also shows failure.  He is finally able to contact his father, only to do it in second person, saying he (the Captain) is sorry, rather than he himself is sorry.  This shows that Sean has distanced himself with his past, a bittersweet moment.
5. One of the final things I noticed was the end scene with 'The Bean' in Chicago really framed the movie nicely.  In the beginning of the movie, Sean looked into a flat mirror and saw someone else's reflection - the real Sean's.  However, in 'The Bean' Sean sees himself, in a distorted manner.   It suggests how life will be different now, a false, distorted reality from the one the Captain was used to.  Mirrors are associated with reality, and the Captain constantly struggled with his own identity, a major side plot in the movie.  As the frames pan and zoom, the view does flatten, showing stability.

Overall, this movie was beautifully directed, and it's lack of closure is made up for by it's strong artistry.  If you want a movie worth thinking about for hours afterwards, give Source Code a go.

Final Rating: A

Thanks for reading,

cyoubx

YouTube, Stop Changing the Aesthetics!

Hey all,

I was trying to watch a video today, when I got distracted by this monstrosity:

Normally, I wouldn't be too bothered with something like this, since it generally looks nice.  The grudge I have is that it just isn't YouTube!  I'm not saying change is bad, but there are certain things that make YouTube what it is.  The decked out black video player just isn't the same.  It actually reminds me of Google's change in thematic colors as well.  In fact...they're very similar.

Anyway, I just had to point that out.  YouTube should leave the player as it is.  There are certain functions that could be improved upon, but the color scheme should remain.

Thanks for reading,
cyoubx

The World of Cubing is Like that of Pokémon

Hey all,

So recently, I have been watching a lot of Pokémon episodes for nostalgia.  It has been my background noise for cubing for the past few months.  All of a sudden, it seems like I now see a connection between cubing and Pokémon.  Hear me out.

1. Cubers are like trainers and coordinators.  Anyone who speedsolves for the sake of getting better times is like a Pokémon trainer.  Those who are collectors or modders are like Pokémon coordinators. - they attempt to show off their cubes as much as possible.
2. Cubes are like Pokémon.  Each cube has a different feel just like how Pokémon all have different personalities.  It is the job of the trainer to find that feel and get in sync with the cube.  More on this later.
3. Pokémon evolve, so do cubes.  Have you ever sanded a cube?  Created a hybrid?  Any sort of light modding is the same thing as evolving the cube.  When I added screws to my GuHong, the weight increased significantly, sort of like how Turtwig evolved into Grotle.  When a cube changes, the trainer needs to change as well.
4. The connection between cube and cuber is the same as Pokémon and trainer.  Ash Ketcham likes to battle a certain way, but not all Pokémon like his style.  Buisel enjoys a different style, and Ash needs to adapt.  Cubes can morph a tad (AKA breaking in), but the plastic can only be changed so much.  The rest of the bond needs to come from the cuber.  Cubers should be able to learn how the cube responds.
5. Trainers are strongest when they are in sync with their Pokémon.  Frankly, it's the same with cubing.  Ever had a bad day?  It's not because of cold or clammy hands.  It's actually because you're out of sync with your cube.  I sometimes find myself seeing one thing and turning another.  This causes lock-ups and pops and generally increases your times.  On good days, I am in perfect sync with my cube and can get good times.

The list goes on, but for now, this is enough to think about.  In Pokémon, it is never only the Pokémon's fault for a bad battle, more than half of it is the trainer's fault.  To be able to do well, a bond between cube and cuber needs to be formed.

Thanks for reading,

cyoubx

Super 8 Does Not Deserve the Hype

Note: If you're looking for an interpretation, you won't find one here.  This movie is really pretty straightforward and you shouldn't have any trouble following the storyline if you watch it.  The below contains a review and small analysis of the movie.

Review:
Yesterday, I caught myself watching the highly acclaimed "Super 8" directed by J.J. Abrams and co-produced by Steven Spielberg.  It hit number one at the box office over the weekend, so I was excited for a thrilling movie.  I wasn't looking for anything deep, like "Black Swan."  I expected a movie that would keep me entertained.  Unfortunately, it looked like a movie crafted by a very young Michael Bay, with lots of guns and pretty explosions.

The movie follows a cute gang of middle-schoolers looking to shoot a short film for the Super 8 contest.  During one of their late-night shootings, they witness a train derailment and all chaos ensues.  They continue to shoot the film even though the small town of Lillian is quickly being destroyed.  There is a monster, the Air Force, and cute love story entangled together in this movie.

All of that being said, the movie wasn't terrible.  The grudge I have with it is that the title is rather misleading and unimportant.  But before I get to that, the good stuff is worth mentioning.

In some ways, this movie was a hit because it was so personal.  The movie takes place in the late seventies/early eighties, so the audience is clearly for the middle-aged.  "Super 8" refers to the type of film camera used during that time period, and the Super 8 Film Festival was a competition for indie movie directors at the time.  J.J. Abrams entered in this competition himself when he was younger, and it was his entry which caught Spielberg's attention in the earlier days.

As for the movie itself, the cast of fresh actors is remarkably good, and for the budget of around $50 million, this is certainly a good flick.

Now for the bad stuff...

The first issue I have with the movie is the title.  In an interview, it was stated that,

"The fact that the title is not a known thing is probably a sign that we're used to being pre-sold. I'm hoping that people see it, like it, and the title becomes what the title is. Certainly films like 'District 9' and 'Inception' had titles that didn't quite make sense but once they became known, people went, 'Oh yeah.'"

 The difference between "Super 8" and the two films he mentions is that "District 9" was about District 9, and "Inception" was about inception.  "Super 8" is NOT about the film.  In fact, the whole notion of the film reel with the rest of the movie seems completely out of place.  The only connection between the two is the accidental recording of the monster during the train crash.  Although it's important, it plays a small role in the movie since the reel is kept hidden for most of the movie.  And once it's presented to the Deputy, it's never seen again.

Seeing as the title really had nothing to do with the core of the movie, it almost makes it seem like there were two separate stories here.  The Super 8 film was definitely a look into Abrams' life, but it almost seems like the rest of the movie is more important.  It is the monster which brings together more elements of life and society, friendship and trust.

This movie would be especially confusing for viewers if they didn't know what a Super 8 was.  Holistically, the movie was quite watchable, but certain elements of the film handicap it, and the attention it's getting isn't really worthy of the quality.  Nevertheless, do watch it, but don't expect anything eye popping.

Analysis:
The movie had its moments, and there were nice elements that made it deeper.

1. The movie has a sense of "E.T." (which, interestingly enough, was directed by Spielberg).  "Super 8" contains a monster which people inherently assume is bad.
2. The concept of self-fulfilling prophecy is seen clearly in this movie.  Because humans inherently assume the monster to be destructive, they harm it.  In turn, the monster fights back, thus creating the notion of violence.
3. The movie says a word about innocence.  The monster is constantly "collecting" people until he meets Joe.  They converse, and all of a sudden, there is a shift in attitude.  Among the chaos, it is the pure heart that overcomes the destruction.
4. This next one is a bit tricky.  There is a parallel between the movie "Super 8" and the mini film the kids are creating.  Charles, the child director, adds in a love story between the detective and his wife in order to make his film more interesting.  It seems like Alice was the "wife" in Charles' movie, but in real life.  Alice falls in love with Joe, the hero of the disjointed movie.  It seems like this relationship is the only one that has a beginning and continuation in the entire movie.
5. It was mentioned in an interview that the allusion to the Hunchback of Notre Dame was an intentional look onto the story of "Super 8."  The monster in this movie is comparable to the Hunchback in that people are afraid of what they do not know.
6. The last scene with the water tower imploding is a cliché ending.  Many movies end with a rainy nighttime to show a change in characters.  This movie was no different.  The water rained over the kids, their parents, and the Air Force.  It was remarkably powerful, because it suggested that the world is really a pretty big society.  Lillian may be relatively unrelated to the Air Force, but guess what, they were all fighting for the same cause.  The water brought peace to the town, and it welded the people together.

If you want to read up on the interviews, they're here:

http://www.flicksandbits.com/2011/06/09/j-j-abrams-interview-for-super-8/12485/

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20110609/film_nm/us_jjabrams

Final Rating: B+

Thanks for reading,

cyoubx

Here's An Interpretation of Black Swan's Nina.

Hey all,

Here's a slopshodder interpretation of the movie Black Swan.  There's so much going through my brain right now that I'm having trouble comprehending this movie.  Thus, below is an array of thoughts I need to lay out on the computer screen.  I'm assuming you've seen the movie and won't be hurt as I discuss pieces from the whole movie.  I'm not going to give a plot summary because it's not that important.  I'm literally going to just discuss the psychotic nature of Nina.

So, first a diagnosis to further this interpretation/psychoanalysis of Nina.

I've read on some interpretations that Nina is purely psychotic, and not schizophrenic.  I disagree.  Schizophrenia is a psychotic disorder, so it makes sense that Nina could be schizophrenic.  She exhibits all of the common symptoms of the disorder, including social withdrawal, delusions, bizarre behavior, and loss of contact with reality.

Her mother is definitely a contributing factor towards Nina's condition - Nina's mother is almost undoubtedly sexually abusive towards her, and it's fairly apparent that this started a long time ago when Nina was still young.  Nina's room is decorated with stuffed animals, and has pink decor.  Furthermore, the mother constantly suggests Nina to take her clothes off...to check the scratching, of course (ahem).

There is also something eerie about the scene where Nina "feels" herself only to later find out her mother is sleeping on a chair beside her.  The scene is brief but creepy.  I can't help but think that the mother was not sleeping at all, merely pretending to sleep as to spy on her daughter.

Now that the precedence for the mother and Nina's condition is set, I will proceed to the more compelling portion of this interpretation - who's real?  Who's just imagination?

I'm going to assert that the mother is fake.  Why?  Because there are unsettling things about the character that can't be explained.  The most obvious is when Lily comes over; the mother quickly closes the door without asking who it is.  However, there are other subtle hints.  When Nina closes the door on her mother's hand, the fingers are almost invariably injured.  This is shown on Nina when she wakes up the next morning with mittens over her hands.  Also, Nina wakes up later than usual to find that her mother did not wake her up.  Why?  Well, Nina did take hallucinogens the night before, and perhaps that altered her delusions.  There is another subtle hint.  Nina's mother's room is extremely sketchy.  It's never clear if those drawings on the wall are of Nina or someone else.  Thus, I make the claim that those paintings are actually of Nina's mother drawn by Nina herself.  It creates a sense that maybe her mother is still with her.  They're also not positive images, possibly suggesting the fact that they had a rough relationship in the past.  Finally, we never find out why Nina's mother is crying - is it because of her failure as a ballerina or something more?

Lily is for sure real.  The fact that the other characters interact with her is a testament of that.  The scene where Lily and Nina have sexual relations is actually key in my opinion.  There was definitely a change in that part of the movie.  Lily is very clearly a character foil for Nina.  They are polar opposites.  Lily is what Nina wants to become.  In the scene where they have sex, it's unclear whether or not it actually happened, but it shows something nevertheless.  At one point in the scene, Lily's face transforms into that of Nina's.  This is a clear representation of what is going through Nina's mind.  Nina has tried to masturbate twice before, and perhaps the third time really is the charm.  The fact that Nina imagined her own face on Lily is a testament of how Nina strongly feels like she needs to accomplish Thomas' "homework."  From that point onward, it becomes unclear whether or not the Lily's in the scenes are real or fake.  The fact that this transformation takes place explains why Nina didn't really stab Lily in the changing room, but really just injured herself.

This interpretation isn't really that compelling, but it helps me get some stuff down in writing.  I hope you enjoyed it, anyway.

Thanks for reading,
cyoubx

Facebook Finally Did Something Right!

Hey all,

I was sending a Facebook message to one of my friends when I noticed that the system had changed.

Facebook now allows users to create a Facebook email thus making sending messages a much more enjoyable experience.

Not only is the user interface cleaner, and more contemporary, the additional feature is pretty nifty as well.  You are now able to attach files to send in your messages, although the size limit of these files is unknown to me at the time of this post.  Either way, sending text files in and of itself will be better since the native Facebook message system was unable to convey "tabs" at the beginning of paragraphs.

Facebook is notorious for its miscellaneous changes which aren't really that helpful.  But I'm happy that they finally did something useful, not just something aesthetic.

Thanks for reading,
cyoubx

It's the Cuber, Not the Cube

What more can I say?  Well, a lot.

Based on the frequent forum posts on speedsolving.com, I can attest to the fact that there is this huge hype about new cubes.

In the past months, or year, if you will, we as cubers have gotten a plethora of new cubes.  Now, this encompasses all types of cubes, including the 4x4, but I'm less concerned about the hype of those.  Why?  Because there are clear flaws in ALL 4x4s.  Lock-ups, pops, etc.  3x3s on the other hand are way too overrated.  Here's why:

1. If you average anything over 20 seconds, you need to work on your own style, not on your budget for cubes.  New cubes will not make you faster.  Practicing will.
2. Pick a preference and go with it.  I understand if you are a hobbyist who collects all puzzles.  I also understand if you make consumer reviews.  I don't understand overconsumption if you are just an average cuber, like me.  Why do you NEED to get EVERY SINGLE CUBE AVAILABLE?!  You don't.  Stick with what you have and practice.  Now, granted, some cubes fit some cubers better than others.  However, if you're buying 52 cubes a year, you should realized by now what your preference is.  If you like smooth, go with the GuHong, if you like clicky, go with Alpha.  You don't need both.
3. New cubes does not equate to better cubes.  What makes a LunHui better than a GuHong?  Unpoppable?  My anus.  All cubes pop.  Plus, cubes can't have it all.  The LunHui suffers from less speed.  If you prefer speed to minor pops, go with the GuHong; it rarely pops anyway.
4. Stop obsessing over corner cutting.  If you rely on 45 degree corner cuts, you need better turning.  Period.
5. Stop obsessing over reverse corner cutting.  If you need anything more than what a tightly tensioned GuHong can do, you should feel ashamed of yourself.
6. Stop obsessing over speed.  This is a persistent issue.  People say Eastsheens suck because they don't cut corners.  I disagree; I say they suck because they can't turn properly.  Why would anyone want a frictionless cube?  That's absolutely ridiculous.  If you can't turn a GuHong effortlessly, work on that.  If you think fast is good, think again.  If you average 30 seconds, it's not speed you need.
7. Finally, stop obsessing over Lubix.  Lubix is a great product, but it's not the solution to every cube.  Sure, it works on 3x3's.  However, I highly doubt it's better than silicone spray for 5x5s and other big cubes.  Again, stick with what you have.   

Don't buy new cubes - just practice.

Thanks for reading,
cyoubx