Review: Live Free or Die Hard

28.June.2007 at 17:49 (+0000) by Robin S.

Between the third and fourth installments of the Die Hard, twelve years have passed. Thankfully, though, that hasn’t diminished the series one bit.

John McClane is now a Lieutenant Detective for the NYPD, estranged from his children (and now divorced from Holly). He’s asked to do a favor for the Feds; pick up a hacker who is a person of interest in a recent attack on their computer system, and bring him to Washington. Of course, no sooner does John get involved in what should be a pretty minor task than he finds himself in the middle of a terrorist attack on the United States.

There are, of course, lots of unbelievable stunts, and if not for the blood on him, you’d wonder if this John McClane wasn’t just another alias for David Dunn, Willis’s character from Unbreakable. Some of the stuff he goes through should kill him ten times over. That isn’t something new to this series, though, and it’s still a heck of a lot of fun.

My biggest complaint, really, is just that there are so many scenes where you can tell that what the actors are seen saying isn’t what you hear them say. My date said, after the movie, that she hoped there was an unrated director’s cut, and I can’t say I disagree. The PG-13 rating didn’t diminish the action much, if at all, but John, thanks to the softened language, felt somewhat softer than he had in the previous movies, and that runs counter to what we see.

On Online Memorials

27.June.2007 at 6:49 (+0000) by Robin S.

Occasionally, when I’m just browsing online, I’ll stumble across something I really want to write about, but because it’s more than a few days or weeks old, I’ll be reluctant to do so. That was the case when I stumbled across the story of a WoW funeral being crashed.

A player died in real-life, and her online friends decided to honor her in the only way they could find to do so — they held a funeral in the online world that they’d shared with her. While they were doing this, a guild from the other faction raided the funeral, pretty much destroying what the gamers had intended as a solemn memorial service.

Supposedly, it was a PvP server, and they’d apparently chosen a PvP zone, as well. The choice of a PvP server seems to have confused some people, but it really shouldn’t; WoW isn’t the sort of game where you can switch servers at will, and that was the server they’d been playing on. The choice of location is probably just a sign of their naïveté. I’m honestly surprised that any Horde players would trust the Alliance to be respectful of anything. The only place it might have gone off without a hitch would’ve been in one of the major Horde cities.

Still, while the raiders were jerks, I’m not concerned about this specific incident (it’s well over a year past; my being concerned about it now, since I didn’t know the player in question, is kind of silly). What I’m more interested in are the questions it raises. For example, how real are the relationships we form in virtual worlds? Is it appropriate for players in these virtual worlds to bring real-world tragedies into the game?

For several weeks at the end of last year, I worked on a project with people in Montana, Wisconsin, and Maryland. It would not be an exaggeration to say that I spent more time talking to and working with those individuals than I spent with most of the people who work for our company here in the Charleston office. Obviously, the fact that I never met most of those individuals face-to-face did not make our working relationship any less real, so distance doesn’t define a relationship.

If it’s not the distance, is it the fact that most of their interactions were in a game that makes the relationship seem less real? I have friends who I rarely see anymore. When I do have the chance to interact with them, it’s usually through Xbox Live. Sometimes, we get to talk while we’re playing. Other times, the only real interaction we have is playing the game itself. Does that make us not friends? Of course not.

Some people believe that it’s inappropriate for them to have held a memorial service inside the game world. There are two very different stances held by those who feel this way. One group says that it’s disrespectful to the deceased to have a memorial service in which the deceased and all of the mourners are represented by computer generated characters. The other group thinks it’s disrespectful to the other gamers; gaming, they say, is a way to escape the harsh realities of real life, and bringing a funeral into the game world is an unwelcome intrusion of reality into their game.

I’ll address the second group first, because it’s the easiest to refute. Assuming this wasn’t a RP server (and even then, it’s just more muted, I’m sure), the claim that there is an expectation that reality won’t intrude into the game is simply absurd. When I was playing WoW, it wasn’t uncommon to “hear” people talking about school or work or whatever. Life intrudes everywhere; escapism is never perfect, and if you weren’t a part of this group, it is extremely unlikely that the memorial service would impact your gaming significantly.

Is it inappropriate to memorialize someone online, within a game? What we have here is a group of people who wanted to honor a friend that many of them likely only knew online. I’d be willing to wager that the group assembled here was scattered throughout the country (if not the world), and that attending a local funeral was simply not really an option for most of them*. They held their memorial service in what they felt was the best way available to them.

Compare that to the continuing existence of Acidman’s blog. After his death, the blog was maintained (with old posts being automatically reposted) in order for people to read, in accordance to his wishes. It’s an online memorial, maintained (as I understand it) by those who knew him primarily as an online presence. Or, what about the various tributes to Steven Malcolm Anderson? These men were remembered and honored on blogs by people who knew them and loved them primarily through those blogs.

Is it that much more unusual for people who have loved ones that they knew, primarily, through a game to use that game to honor and mourn them with mutual friends? Suppose that these had been football players; if a teammate died, and the team asks, at their next game, for a moment of silence, would we mock them for that? What if they held a service honoring their lost teammate during half-time? It isn’t disrespectful to use the forum where you interacted with a loved one most often to pay your respects to that loved one; even if the forum in question is an online game.

As clichéd as it may sound, the internet has changed the shape of the world for many people. It allows us to work, play, and interact with people that we would very likely have never met otherwise. I think that we, as a society, are still figuring out exactly what that means, and the concept of online memorials and such is just one aspect of the change.

—–

* Even if they’d been able to attend the local funeral service, would they have been welcome? It’s been my experience that many people think that online relationships aren’t “real”, and these relationships were online gaming relationships. I could very easily see family and friends who’d known this gamer in person being somewhat put off by the attendance of a medium-to-large group of people who knew her only through her character in an online video game.

Review: Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer

23.June.2007 at 14:50 (+0000) by Robin S.

The sequel to 2005′s Fantastic Four, Rise of the Silver Surfer finds Reed Richards and Susan Storm about to be married. The marriage has been planned and stopped several times at this point (due to Reed’s habit of responding to every crisis that pops up), and they’re determined that won’t happen this time… until the Silver Surfer arrives, heralding the coming of Galactus, Devourer of Worlds. Now, the team has to deal with not only the coming threat of Galactus, but the re-emergence of a threat they thought long gone.

All in all, this is a fun little superhero movie. It’s approximately of the same quality as the first movie, I think. I had a few quibbles here and there (if you hated Peter Parker’s dance scene in Spider-Man 3, you may want to cover your eyes during Reed’s bachelor party), but for the most part they were minor. The biggest complaint I had? Jessica Alba as Sue Storm.

I wouldn’t have cast Alba in the first place. She’s a beautiful woman and all, but she’s just not Sue Storm. Ideally, Sue should be a maternal type, and Alba’s a bit too young for that; they should’ve cast someone closer to Gruffudd’s age. But, that wasn’t my call. Once they’d cast Jessica Alba, though, they should’ve let Jessica Alba play the role. Between the atrocious wig and the even worse fake-blue contact lenses, I was convinced that Sue had been turned into a vampire at some point between the two movies. It was more than a bit distracting.

All in all, it’s a fun movie to waste an hour and a half on. Just don’t expect a masterpiece.

10-year-sentence overturned 2 years too late

22.June.2007 at 14:44 (+0000) by Robin S.

This was actually e-mailed to me a little over a week ago, but internet access issues kept me from posting about it.

Genarlow Wilson… has become a symbol for extreme cases of getting tough on sex offenders[. He] ordered released from prison by a judge who called his 10-year sentence for having consensual oral sex as a teen “a grave miscarriage of justice.”

…[T]he state’s attorney general announced he would appeal, which will keep the former honors student and football star behind bars for now.

Wilson is serving a 10-year mandatory sentence for having consensual oral sex with a 15-year-old girl in 2003, when he was 17. If his conviction is upheld, he will also be placed on Georgia’s sex offender registry.

Emphasis mine.

Regular readers may remember that issues like this are part of the reason I don’t like sex offender registries. Unless the registries are managed in a way to restrict them to truly threatening criminals who should still be in prison anyway, if we can’t trust them to be functioning members of society, there’s too much chaff in with the wheat. It unfairly makes people like Wilson a target of suspicion, even when the nature of his “crime” isn’t the sort that most people think of as dangerous.

Opponents of Wilson’s release said it could lead to similar legal challenges. Georgia prisons currently hold 189 inmates who were sentenced for aggravated child molestation when they were 21 or younger.

If one of those 189 inmates is imprisoned because of something similar to Wilson’s “crime”, then the cost of the legal challenge to every single case is a small price to pay, I think. Opponents of Wilson’s release need to stop and think about the actual matter at hand, and stop trying to confuse matters. A teenager who as consensual sexual relations (regardless of the nature of those relations) with another teen may or may not deserve to be reprimanded by his parents (and that should be left up to them, not a gang of busybodies). He definitely doesn’t deserve ten years in prison and a permanent reputation as a sex offender.

…[A] plea deal is on the table that would spring Wilson in a maximum of five years and also remove him from the sex offender registry. Not good enough, said Wilson’s lawyer, B.J. Bernstein. “It is really ridiculous when you consider that we had a judge that just said it is a misdemeanor that carries no sex offender registration,” she said. “It is extremely, extremely disturbing that the attorney general would take this action now.”

“It is really ridiculous” that consensual oral sex between two teenagers is a crime, whether it’s a misdemeanor or not. Again, I’m not saying it’s something we should encourage, but it’s not really the sort of thing that the legal system is equipped to deal with.

Hopefully the appeal will be over quickly, and Wilson can be out and moving on with his life. He’s served two years in prison already for this. That’s two years too many.

Quick Review: Pirates of the Caribbean 3: At World’s End [Edited]

18.June.2007 at 20:10 (+0000) by Robin S.

It’s been out long enough now that everyone knows this already, I think. It’s not a bad movie, but it’s very, very long. There’s my review in a nutshell.

Now, spoilers because I have a problem with the fact that this should’ve tied more closely to the first movie.

More …