Archive for the ‘English’ Category

Review (003). Dead Snow.

Posted: November 19, 2011 in English, Reviews
Tags: ,

Deze horrorprent stond al een tijdje op mijn “to watch”-list (sinds er, begin 2009, een review van verschenen is in DS, meen ik me zo te herinneren). Dankzij een bevriende FACTS-handelaar mocht ik hem dan eindelijk in mijn Blu-Ray-lezer pleuren.

Zoals wel vaker het geval pleegt te zijn bij wat men gemeenzaam hooggespannen verwachtingen is gaan noemen, werden deze helaas maar ten dele ingelost.

Dead Snow tapt immers vooreerst, zoals het gros van de horrorfilms, vrij lustig in het cliché-vaatje. Zeven vrienden die in een godvergeten gat in een hutje gaan logeren? Check! (Evil Dead anyone?). De oude, wat bevreemdende man die hen waarschuwt voor naderend onheil ? Re-check. Diezelfde man die een gruwelijke dood ondergaat? Chhhhheck. De vrienden die de waarschuwing in de wind slaan? De enige regio waar GSM’s toevallig geen ontvangst hebben? Che… vul zelf maar aan.

Nu, op zich hoeft het gebruik van clichés geen probleem te zijn, voor zover de film nog iets meer te bieden heeft, nog ergens origineel uit de hoek komt. Laten we eerlijk wezen: het enige originele aan deze prent is de hoedanigheid van het wezen dat onze ‘helden’ de gruwelijkste ervaring uit hun leven zal bezorgen. Technisch gesproken is hetgeen volgt een spoiler, voor zover u (i) stekeblind bent en dus de cover van de Blu-Ray niet bekeken hebt en (ii) nooit ofte nimmer over Dead Snow hebt horen spreken en (iii) zorgvuldig alle menu’s zult ontwijken, aangezien het telkenmale op vrij in-your-face-achtige wijze wordt duidelijk gemaakt dat een nest zombie-nazi’s (sic) de boosdoeners van dienst zijn. Origineel op zich? Hoogstzeker. Origineel genoeg om een ganse film te dragen? Not really, let’s face it.

Ook de acteerprestaties zijn niet echt om over naar huis te schrijven / mailen / facebooken. Toegegeven, horroravonturen halen zelden veel Oscars binnen, maar bon, een aantal van de acteurs hebben toch echt wel hoge scores gehaald in de lessenreeks ‘van bordkarton zijn’.

Last but not least: het spreekt voor zich dat je bij dat soort films in hoge mate aan “suspend your disbelief” moet doen. Of komt u vaak zombie nazi’s tegen? (concierges die de kelders van bepaalde politieke partijen moeten uitkuisen mogen zich onthouden). Dat de monsters aan de gebruikelijke logica ontsnappen is part of the deal, maar de menselijke tegenspeler wordt wel geacht zich aan de wetten der logica te houden. Of kent u veel mensen die hun arm kunnen amputeren, vervolgens ter plekke dichtkoteren en dan lustig rondlopen als hadden ze zonet een splintertje uit hun vinger gehaald? Ik dacht het ook niet.

Is het dan allemaal kommer en kwel? Neen. Als je de film neemt voor wat hij is – een goedkope horrorfilm met een originele baddy – en je van dat genre kan genieten, dan is het op zich een vrij aangename film waarbij de obligate hamvraag – wie o wie zal het overleven ?! – tot het allereinde van de film blijft gesteld worden. Vals bloed loopt er met de liters vanaf, een nest zombies wordt vakkundig ingemaakt, de ledematen slingeren in het rond en er zitten voorwaar een paar echt spannende scènes in. Gooi er nog een sausje van heerlijk slechte special effecten bovenop, een wat onconventionele benadering van het zombiewezen (ze zien er zeer traditioneel zombie-achtig uit en lusten blijkbaar bijwijlen een mals stukje mensenvlees, doch zijn innoverend genoeg om bevelen te verstaan en zelfs te kunnen spreken, weze het in beperkte mate), schitterende besneeuwde landschappen en Dead Snow heeft genoeg te bieden om toch anderhalf uur met een glimlach naar uw tv-scherm te kijken.

Allez hop: 62/100. Und nau: Aufstehen ! ;)

The clock is ticking. Furiously. Mercilessly.

If by August 2nd 2011 the American Congress and President Obama haven’t reached an agreement to raise the debt ceiling, America the world is going to face a financial storm from the likes rarely seen before. And it’s not as if the world economic health is topnotch right now. That this whole matter has evolved into a crisis is an understatement.

To summarize the whole debate: the Republicans will only raise the debt ceiling if spending is cut furiously (living up to their motto “less government spending”), while Democrats push for more taxes on the rich (or more accurately: put an end to some tax cuts granted to the (super)rich under the Bush area).

I don’t claim to have the whole picture and I’m the first one to realise that opinions and articles found on the web are often biased, yet I have the very clear impression that Republicans are the ones playing the most dangerous and unfair game:

- the debt ceiling has been raised numerous times in the past since its creation back in 1917,  some 74 times since 1962 (source);

- it has been raised many times between 2002 & 2010, when a certain G.W. Bush – Republican last time I checked – was mostly President (see a/o this page);

- the US debt doubled under Bush and even tripled under Reagan’s watch, the other Republican hero;

- US tax rates are now, to a great extent, lower than under Reagan and even under Eisenhouwer (source);

- tax rates for the rich have dwindled from some 30 % to 18 %;

- the Bush tax cuts and wars (Irak, Afghanistan) are the principle reasons for the recent surge in US debt (source);

- some Republican leaders acknowledge they’re playing with fire and that defaulting on America’s debt would lead to a financial catastrophe;

Why are the Republicans taking such risks? Has the Tea Party taken over? Have they still not overcome the fact that their President has a more tanned skin than his 43 predecessors? Have they all become fan of “après moi le déluge”? Or are they raising the stakes in a game of bluf poker to a level not seen before?

But the one question that I keep asking myself all the time: why isn’t the average Joe not responding to this ? How come the American public is watching this catastrophy in the making without reacting to it?

If anyone can provide a sound explanation : I’m all ears!

Alas, another part of knowledge which will remain unbeknownst to our youngsters, namely the link between the following two elements:

(in the vein of this). (if you don’t get it, click here).

Forget about planking.

Owling is so passé already.

And, please, do drop toothpicking in the trashcan.

Be more of a hipster than you’ve ever been, for here’s the all new trend, hot of the shelves, guaranteed to make you the talk of the town, totally unseen in the 21st century, so old-fashioned it’s bound to become the next hot thing!

Launching… actually doing some work!

Send in your pictures and join the revolution ! ;)

Hikikimori.

Posted: July 19, 2011 in English, Ramblings
Tags:

Sometimes, when browsing through an article, you find a new word to enrich your vocabulary.

As such, I recently stumbled upon “hikikimori” in a Time article. It’s, as you guessed, a Japanese term referring:

to the phenomenon of reclusive people who have chosen to withdraw from social life, often seeking extreme degrees of isolation and confinement because of various personal and social factors in their lives. The term hikikomori refers to both the sociological phenomenon in general as well as to people belonging to this societal group.

More info here.

Something tells me that, despite its extreme character, the group of Hikikimori will keep on extending, considering the growing social isolation in our current society. We might indeed be more electronically connected than ever, we seem to interact less and less with “real people”.

And now, if you will excuse me, I’m going to catch some fresh air.

P.S. Read ‘m and weep, M ! ;p

Them online comments.

Posted: July 19, 2011 in English, Ramblings
Tags: ,

Lately, whenever I’m scrolling through comments on a website, specifically on ‘sensible’ issues (mostly political and/or religious), I quite quickly get a feeling which translates best as follows:

 

Some ten comments later and I asked myself the next question at least half of the time:

And I almost inevitably end up with this feeling:

Don’t feed them trolls, peeps, don’t feed them.

The question of self-control is an age-old problem – puzzling the Greeks, haunting writers of the Enlightenment – which has risen to new heights in the 21st century, where temptations abound while boundaries falter. Never have so many guilty pleasures been offered to us (sugary drinks, fat food, snacks, internet, sex, gambling, etc.) so readily (mainly thanks to the ever progressing technology you don’t even need to leave your comfortable couch anymore to indulge yourself). Never has, in other words, our self-control been under so much constant pressure. Ask Tiger Woods if you must.

This notion of self-restraint is the topic of Daniel Akst’s delightful read “We have met the enemy”. Akst has gone at lengths to study the subject and takes you on a wonderful route from Odysseus who gets his crew to attach him so he can resist the sirens’ calling (a somewhat central theme in Akst’s book) to the influence of holding a hot or cold drink before interviewing someone, with guest appearances from the likes of Homer Simpson, Victor Hugo, Queen Victoria and Sigmund Freud (who has advocated self-control yet whose own inability to quit smoking would lead to many years of suffering and ultimately his death).

Akst covers the issue quite extensively, starting with the central question: is there even something as free will? Study after study has indeed shown that a lot of our choices and reactions are, to an extent far greater than many would be willing to acknowledge, influenced by outer circumstances, guided by our genes and in the end decided by the primitive parts of our brain. The best answer is probably a compromise : much of what we do and who we are is determined by elements we have no control on, with only the remaining part being filled in consciously.

If one could discuss the extent of our self-control, one thing can, as said, not be denied however: it’s being strained more than ever before. Akst aptly demonstrates how our brain’s primary preferences (short time rewards like sitting in a couch eating a packet of crisps) are being tempted more than ever before in history, making it harder to focus on our secondary preferences (being fit and healthy in the long run by exercising regularly and resisting the urge to empty said packet of crisps). To name but one example : where not so long ago gambling was prohibited in all but a few states in the U.S. , it’s now been made legal in all but a few rare exceptions. And even in those latter states the web offers plenty of possibilities to risk your entire savings on a virtual poker table. Think of any other sinful delights and their availability has skyrocketed in the recent decades, many now being a mere click of the mouse away.
At the same time, the classic restraining mechanisms have slowly but surely eroded. Social control in small villages – with the community being a gentle yet omnipresent Big Brother – has been replaced by anonymous lives in great cities, where you can get anyway with almost anything you want without anyone even noticing. Religion, whose notions of sin, guilt and God’s reward or punishment in the afterlife has guided many humans in the past, often putting a lock on their desires and pushing them to concentrate on work and family, is losing its influence fast. And society as a whole has shifted its focus from praising the virtues of self-restraining men and women to applauding those who live life to its fullest. Society urges us to `carpe diem’, but reduced to a pale “eat as much as you can” vision. Or in other words: “resist the temptation to resist the temptation” as an ad quoted in Akst’s book would usher you to do.
This enduring pressure on our self-control is not without consequences, from the somewhat benign phenomenon of procrastination (if you’re reading this review while you’re at the office, you know exactly what I’m talking about!) to excesses of the likes we’ve seen with people like Charlie Sheen, Tiger Woods and Robin Williams or even events like the financial crisis of 2008 (being in a way the result of a global lack of self-restraint).

Is all lost? Are we all doomed to succumb to a tsunami of temptations, leading us all to a bloblike existence not so different from the humans portrayed in Wall-E? Luckily not, for Akst offers some solutions in order to reign in our self-control and make sure that our secondary long-term preferences take the upper hand again.
First off, you need to determine some clear targets, some well defined goals you want to achieve in the future which will provide you with a bigger sense of happiness than the ones offered by responding to your immediate urges. Instead of mindlessly surfing hour after hour on the web at the office, you should focus on the positive outcome of remaining concentrated on your job (happy clients, more money coming in, a promotion, etc.).
Furthermore, it’s important to be aware of your environment, since it might very well contain triggers, which will steer you off the right path. Is opening your browser the first thing you do when arriving at the office, then why not hide it away or install a Internet blocker? Do you head for the candy reserve whenever something bothers you, then fill it up with fruit instead. Are you being distracted by that huge stack of comics that fill up your office, then move your office to another place more prone to work!
Do also make sure you enlist the help of your friends. Mention the targets you wish to reach to them and even make a deal with them: if you fail at upholding your undertakings, you’ll for example have to pay them a (hefty) sum of money as a penalty (I did that and it worked wonders for me!).
And so, with a little perseverance you might turn your deliberate choices (exercising twice a week, starting work upon arrival, stop gambling, etc.) into habits, moving those choices into the automatic parts of your brain, making it that much easier to uphold them.

All this and much more can be found in Akst’s compelling book, in which I could only find two (rather minor) flaws. First off, Akst is sometimes too generous with quotations from other writes, from studies, from movies, songs and the likes. While most are to the point and underline the, well, point he’s trying to make, some seem unnecessary, seemingly included more to show off the author’s vast knowledge than being really useful. Some self-restraint on Akst’s behalf might have been needed in that respect (pun obviously intended!). Secondly, after a flying start, the structure of the middle of the book is somewhat `muddy’ and it’s not always clear where Akst is heading for. Thankfully this is only a temporary slump and the book catches a second breath quite fast, leading to a powerful and poignant conclusion, leaving you with the burning question how much of Homer and/or Ned reside in you!

All in all, I can only wholeheartedly recommend Akst’s book as a great and compelling read, providing some very insightful information, allowing you to clarify lots of issues, making you ponder about some of life’s essential turns and twists and offering you ways to reinforce your self-control. Throw in a fluent pen and a great vocabulary, punctuated by a humoristic touch and you got yourself a book that should truly be in everyone’s library!

And so Arnold – I’ll be back – Schwarzenegger is getting a divorce after some 25 years of mariage.

So says Yahoo news. It’s sad news, but it happens to quite a few people every single day (what are the latest statistics again? Some 50% of nuptial promises to stay together “in good and in bad times” are terminated early?).

What struck me most in the article however was the following passage:

Prior to the announcement, there were hints of a rift. The former governor tweeted frequently during his recent travels to Brazil, Nigeria and France, but Shriver was not mentioned in his online updates from the road. Shriver, also active on social networks, posted three updates on her Twitter page on the day of their 25th wedding anniversary, April 26, but did not mention the milestone.

Now, that’s creepy. Imagine being scrutinized to the extent that every word you say or even every word you don’t say is subject to speculation about your life. Imagine having to weigh the consequences of each and every word you type on a public forum since it can and will be used against you. Imagine the suffocating effect of being held under a microscope all day long, 24/7.

This article illustrates the ‘dark side’ of being famous. In these times were people strive to have thousands of ‘friends’ on Facebook and will share the most embarrassing personal information just to taste some semblance of fame, it might be worth remembering that, as Cracked already pointed out brilliantly before, you might thank fame will make you happy, but it really won’t.

P.S. The title is of course taken from the brilliant opener to War of the Worlds, the eve of the war.

And so, the big news of the day is that President Obama succesfully ordered the execution of Osama Bin Laden.

Truth to be told, I hesitated about the word I would use: execute, kill, murder or assasinate? Indeed, as far as I know, Osama Bin Laden hasn’t been brought to justice, hasn’t been tried nor assigned any defense attorney whatsoever. Killing someone without a due trial is and remains murder in my book (except for cases of self-defense or requested euthanasia). And yes, I do know the 9/11 victims didn’t have a chance either. But when you start using the methods of those you despise, you start lowering yourself to their level (and one can wonder who truly lost in such scenario).

But I guess this is a rare voice of discord, since people (in the West) rejoice about the disappearance of Osama Bin Laden and congratulate President Obama with this handling of this matter, to the point that one article concludes : “All in all, it was a good night to be president“.

Was it? I honestly hope it wasn’t!

For I would hope that any man who orders the execution of another man spends at least an uneasy night. Being a politician, leading a country inevitably calls for some tough choices – if you think about the common good in the long run, that is. Some of those decisions, quite a few actually when the sea’s rough, should keep you up, wide awake, all night long, since you know that some people will suffer because of the way you handle certain matters.

But making the conscious decision to have a human being executed is from a whole other level. So, if the leader of my country were to take such decisions, I sincerely hope he would spend quite a few sleepless nights prior and after he’s giving his order.

P.S. This all reminds me a lot of a subplot in the superb West Wing series, which I can only wholeheartedly recommend for any of you who haven’t yet seen it!

And so President Obama released his Birth Certificate, giving in to a swelling tide of doubts that were cast as to his real birthplace.

Yet, the so-called Birthers shouldn’t celebrate any victory tonight, for:

1) they lost, since no smoking gun was found. Barack Obama is indeed an American citizen and as such complies with the constitutional conditions. He was rightfully elected President and nothing in the birth act shows the opposite (but do check out this delicious parody right here).

2) they scored a victory as well though, since they forced the President of the United Stated to answer their queries, despite the fact that evidence previously produced by Mr. Obama had addressed the issue sufficiently.

3) but they lose again, for they find the question of where the President is born more important than him handling issues that are – in any sound person’s opinion – way more urgent and important to tackle (the state of the US economy; the fact that one out of seven US residents is actually poor; three (!) wars being handled at the same time; the US debt; the quick deterioration of the US educational system; growing inequality between rich and poor; and countless others).

4) and they truly lose in the end, for this whole question reveals, imho, their true problem: they simply can’t handle the fact that a ‘black’ man is their President.

Quo vadis, USA?!