Sorry but I'm a huge fan of the SNL skit. I definitely think it could be the greatest SNL movie adaptation since Blues Brothers. If you've never seen the skit, look it up, especially those with Shia LeBeouf, possibly his best acting ever.
Friday, January 22, 2010
Monday, January 18, 2010
Tucker and Dale Vs. Evil
Im not gonna lie....i'll probably end up checking it out. Reasons to come later....
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
70 To 80 Percent Of Publishers Making Natal Games
70 To 80 Percent Of Publishers Making Natal Games
Whether you think motion-controlled gaming is the wave of the future or a gimmicky trend that should motion its way to the nearest gutter, either way, it's going to be around for the foreseeable future, so you’d better get used to the idea.
Case in point, Canada’s CBC News (via Gamasutra) reports that between 70 and 80 percent of publishers are currently developing games for Microsoft’s Project Natal.
"Our first party studios are [also] very focused on this,” said Microsoft’s entertainment and devices divisions’ president Robbie Bach. "We want to have a few titles from Microsoft that show the way and then we want the breadth and power of the ecosystem from our partners to bring lots of new ideas, new innovations, new concepts to the marketplace. Xbox games don’t go away; you have to think of all this as additive. I think it adds to the beauty of what’s going on."
Microsoft has been talking a lot lately about sticking with the 360 for the time being, rather than fully looking ahead to the next generation of consoles. The company has said that extending the console’s life through hardware and software improvements is the current strategy, and with the kind of support Natal is receiving from publishers, it appears that the strategy has the potential to be a very worthwhile one. That is, assuming the Natal-powered games can deliver the kinds of groundbreaking experiences Microsoft is promising.
Source: CBC News (via Gamasutra)
Read more: http://g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/701808/70-To-80-Percent-Of-Publishers-Making-Natal-Games.html?utm_source=g4tv&utm_medium=rssfeeds&utm_campaign=TheFeed#ixzz0cRDVixVg
Whether you think motion-controlled gaming is the wave of the future or a gimmicky trend that should motion its way to the nearest gutter, either way, it's going to be around for the foreseeable future, so you’d better get used to the idea.
Case in point, Canada’s CBC News (via Gamasutra) reports that between 70 and 80 percent of publishers are currently developing games for Microsoft’s Project Natal.
"Our first party studios are [also] very focused on this,” said Microsoft’s entertainment and devices divisions’ president Robbie Bach. "We want to have a few titles from Microsoft that show the way and then we want the breadth and power of the ecosystem from our partners to bring lots of new ideas, new innovations, new concepts to the marketplace. Xbox games don’t go away; you have to think of all this as additive. I think it adds to the beauty of what’s going on."
Microsoft has been talking a lot lately about sticking with the 360 for the time being, rather than fully looking ahead to the next generation of consoles. The company has said that extending the console’s life through hardware and software improvements is the current strategy, and with the kind of support Natal is receiving from publishers, it appears that the strategy has the potential to be a very worthwhile one. That is, assuming the Natal-powered games can deliver the kinds of groundbreaking experiences Microsoft is promising.
Source: CBC News (via Gamasutra)
Read more: http://g4tv.com/thefeed/blog/post/701808/70-To-80-Percent-Of-Publishers-Making-Natal-Games.html?utm_source=g4tv&utm_medium=rssfeeds&utm_campaign=TheFeed#ixzz0cRDVixVg
News: Have Your Say: Has The 'Reboot' Trend Run Amok?
News: Have Your Say: Has The 'Reboot' Trend Run Amok?
Posted using ShareThis
by Todd Brown, January 11, 2010 11:29 PM
Action, Sci-Fi & Fantasy, USA & Canada
Yes, I know that a good number of re-boot films have come off rather well in the past few years and I certainly prefer making a fresh start to beating a dead horse into the ground, but this is madness. I go into hospital for a few days and in that time Sam Raimi objects to the rushed timeline being forced on Spider-Man 4, either walks or is bounced or - more likely - some mutually agreed upon combination of the two, and already Sony has cut bait and moved on, announcing that their upcoming fourth film will bring in fresh talent - Maguire's gone now, too - and will reboot the franchise with Peter Parker still in high school.
I understand the trend to reboot 80s horror franchises, long buried under the dead weight of hideously substandard sequels. Superman made sense, too, what with the time gap and Richard Pryor and attempted foray into teen girl fandom. Batman? Anything that got Joel Schumacher away from that franchise was good by me. And as weird as I found rebooting the Hulk after just one film, at least it was a refreshing admission that the first one just didn't work they way they wanted it to. But this? Sure, the third film isn't great but this is still a franchise at its peak, with a ton of stories still to tell, just being tossed aside onto the scrap heap. Madness, I say.
Posted using ShareThis
by Todd Brown, January 11, 2010 11:29 PM
Action, Sci-Fi & Fantasy, USA & Canada
Yes, I know that a good number of re-boot films have come off rather well in the past few years and I certainly prefer making a fresh start to beating a dead horse into the ground, but this is madness. I go into hospital for a few days and in that time Sam Raimi objects to the rushed timeline being forced on Spider-Man 4, either walks or is bounced or - more likely - some mutually agreed upon combination of the two, and already Sony has cut bait and moved on, announcing that their upcoming fourth film will bring in fresh talent - Maguire's gone now, too - and will reboot the franchise with Peter Parker still in high school.
I understand the trend to reboot 80s horror franchises, long buried under the dead weight of hideously substandard sequels. Superman made sense, too, what with the time gap and Richard Pryor and attempted foray into teen girl fandom. Batman? Anything that got Joel Schumacher away from that franchise was good by me. And as weird as I found rebooting the Hulk after just one film, at least it was a refreshing admission that the first one just didn't work they way they wanted it to. But this? Sure, the third film isn't great but this is still a franchise at its peak, with a ton of stories still to tell, just being tossed aside onto the scrap heap. Madness, I say.
Monday, January 11, 2010
News: J Blakeson's THE DISAPPEARANCE OF ALICE CREED To Appear On US Screens In 2010
News: J Blakeson's THE DISAPPEARANCE OF ALICE CREED To Appear On US Screens In 2010
Posted using ShareThis
by Todd Brown, January 7, 2010 8:00 PM
Thriller, UK, Ireland, Australia & New Zealand
How fond am I of J Blakeson's tightly wound thriller The Disappearance of Alice Creed? Fond enough that when the film screened at the Toronto International Film Festival I commented that Blakeson may very well be the next Danny Boyle. Which is to say rather a lot.
In other years, when distributors were throwing money at substandard films like drunken sailors Alice would have been the type of film to spark an absolute feeding frenzy but things are quieter these days and very little has been heard about the picture since. Until now.
I've just gotten word that The Disappearance of Alice Creed has been picked up by Anchor Bay - who appear to be positioning themselves to step into the indie distribution void left by so many poorly managed companies exiting the sector over the last couple years - and that they are planning a platformed theatrical release for the picture, which means it'll start on limited screens and then push progressively wider if and as it performs.
This is a good one, people, so keep an eye out for it. And, in the mean time, check out a trio of clips from the film below.
For those of you who don't know who Danny Boyle is, he is the mastermind of Transpotting, Sunshine, and Slumdog Millionaire. While its not too far off to compare Blakeson with Boyle's rise from indie director to Academy MVP, I'd like to say that for this particular movie, I'm seeing thriller/ suspense comparisons to Rian Johnson's Brick.
Prediction: Low-Budget, small cast mystery driven by incredible dialogue and acting that covers a spectrum of emotions. Cult classic.
Thursday, January 7, 2010
What Have I Been Saying?
January 05, 2010
Rheny Pulungan
Taking On Regional Piracy Calls for New Direction in the Malacca Strait
To most of the world, Somalia could easily be renamed the land of pirates. Hijackings have become routine off the coast of this East African nation, earning it the unenviable title of most dangerous waters in the world. There have been 147 attacks in the Gulf of Aden between January and September 2009, according to the International Maritime Bureau in Kuala Lumpur.
The second most dangerous waters are closer to home in the Malacca Strait, the waters between Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore. Connecting the Indian Ocean and the South China Sea, this strait has been a pirate haven for years.
The Malacca Strait, together with the Singapore Strait, are some of the most important waterways in the world. The Malacca Strait provides the shortest route for tankers trading between the Middle East and East Asian countries and sees approximately 60,000 vessels a year. Furthermore, there are a large number of local vessels dealing with trade across the straits and various fishing vessels can be encountered in most areas.
The Malacca Strait is also vital to international energy trade — about 30 to 40 percent of the total traffic in the straits of Malacca and Singapore are oil tankers. About 80 percent of that oil is imported by Japan, South Korea and China from the Persian Gulf.
Prior to 1989, the Malacca Strait was relatively safe with, on average, only seven reported cases of piracy and armed robbery every year. In 1989, the number of cases increased to 28 and rose significantly to 50 cases in 1991. In 2004, about one-third of the 325 cases of armed robbery and piracy against shipping worldwide were in Southeast Asia, including the Malacca Strait and Indonesian waters. In the last three years the number of piracy attacks has declined, but attacks remain a significant threat for shipping in the region.
Often the pirates have satellite phones and can eavesdrop on communications from the targeted vessels. Moreover, assaults are becoming more violent — automatic assault rifles, rocket-propelled grenades and hand grenades are increasingly carried and used by pirates. Ships and their crews are facing regular threats of unauthorized boarding; theft of personal property, cargo and the ships themselves; and violence against, and kidnapping or murder of, seafarers.
How have the three littoral states, namely Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore, reacted? Thus far, not nearly enough to suppress piracy and armed robbery against ships. For example, in 2004 the countries joined forces on “coordinated naval patrols,” each nation contributing up to seven patrol ships that remained under their separate national commands. In practice, the action will not solve the problem because it is carried out on an infrequent basis, depending on the situation or, more obviously, depending on international pressure.
The coordinated patrols conducted by the littoral states are obviously a great change in relation to suppressing the act of piracy and maritime terrorism in the Strait of Malacca. However, since these are not joint patrols, meaning vessels of each country remain in their own territorial waters, they have limited implications especially in relation to reducing the act of piracy.
Joint patrol areas should cover the areas where there are the most incidents of piracy against vessels plying through the straits, particularly if these areas are where the territorial boundaries are undecided. The joint patrol areas may also include waters within the territorial sovereignty of one or more states. By such an arrangement, the three countries would effectively give each other “quick” permission to enforce jurisdiction within the joint patrol areas, even if the incident occurred in the territorial waters of another state.
In relation to the joint patrol areas, the three states could also agree to pass domestic legislation stating that all acts of piracy conducted against vessels and persons in the joint patrol areas is a crime under their domestic law and will be punished with severe penalties. With this arrangement, no state would complain if, for example, Indonesia and Singapore made attacks against pirates in joint patrol areas in the Singapore Strait even if the crimes were conducted in areas beyond the territorial waters of the arresting state.
An argument can be made to assert the right to such jurisdiction, since acts of piracy in the strait run counter to the fundamental interest of each state and the safety of international shipping.
One major difficulty in protecting shipping from pirate attacks is related to the fact that perpetrators and law enforcement officials are not bound by the same rules. Pirates do not respect maritime borders or national sovereignty, while law enforcement and military officials respect both these limits. Due to a lack of mutual trust, law enforcement vessels in pursuit of criminals have not been permitted to enter foreign territorial seas. Particularly to Indonesia and Malaysia, sovereignty is still a crucial issue when we talk about allowing foreign vessels to enter territorial waters. Thus it often happens that when Singaporean authorities are in pursuit of a pirate ship, this ship merely escapes to Indonesian waters.
Recently, the United Nations Security Council unanimously voted to allow countries to send warships into Somalia’s territorial waters to combat pirates. None of the three countries in the Malacca Strait are failed states such as Somalia, however, meaning that no foreign vessels would have the right to enter their territorial waters in the name of antipiracy efforts. Nevertheless, we have to be aware of the fact that there have been some attempts, supported by the Singaporean government, to invite US and Japanese warships to help patrol the Malacca Strait.
The answer to this problem is quite clear: mutual cooperation among the three littoral states. An agreement that allows other county’s law enforcement officials to enter the territorial waters of another country in the incidence of piracy, without having to wait for permission, is inevitable. Together with information sharing and joint patrols throughout the strait and in surrounding areas, such cooperation can be the answer to combating piracy at home and across the region.
Rheny Pulungan is a doctoral candidate in law at the University of Melbourne .
Rheny Pulungan
Taking On Regional Piracy Calls for New Direction in the Malacca Strait
To most of the world, Somalia could easily be renamed the land of pirates. Hijackings have become routine off the coast of this East African nation, earning it the unenviable title of most dangerous waters in the world. There have been 147 attacks in the Gulf of Aden between January and September 2009, according to the International Maritime Bureau in Kuala Lumpur.
The second most dangerous waters are closer to home in the Malacca Strait, the waters between Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore. Connecting the Indian Ocean and the South China Sea, this strait has been a pirate haven for years.
The Malacca Strait, together with the Singapore Strait, are some of the most important waterways in the world. The Malacca Strait provides the shortest route for tankers trading between the Middle East and East Asian countries and sees approximately 60,000 vessels a year. Furthermore, there are a large number of local vessels dealing with trade across the straits and various fishing vessels can be encountered in most areas.
The Malacca Strait is also vital to international energy trade — about 30 to 40 percent of the total traffic in the straits of Malacca and Singapore are oil tankers. About 80 percent of that oil is imported by Japan, South Korea and China from the Persian Gulf.
Prior to 1989, the Malacca Strait was relatively safe with, on average, only seven reported cases of piracy and armed robbery every year. In 1989, the number of cases increased to 28 and rose significantly to 50 cases in 1991. In 2004, about one-third of the 325 cases of armed robbery and piracy against shipping worldwide were in Southeast Asia, including the Malacca Strait and Indonesian waters. In the last three years the number of piracy attacks has declined, but attacks remain a significant threat for shipping in the region.
Often the pirates have satellite phones and can eavesdrop on communications from the targeted vessels. Moreover, assaults are becoming more violent — automatic assault rifles, rocket-propelled grenades and hand grenades are increasingly carried and used by pirates. Ships and their crews are facing regular threats of unauthorized boarding; theft of personal property, cargo and the ships themselves; and violence against, and kidnapping or murder of, seafarers.
How have the three littoral states, namely Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore, reacted? Thus far, not nearly enough to suppress piracy and armed robbery against ships. For example, in 2004 the countries joined forces on “coordinated naval patrols,” each nation contributing up to seven patrol ships that remained under their separate national commands. In practice, the action will not solve the problem because it is carried out on an infrequent basis, depending on the situation or, more obviously, depending on international pressure.
The coordinated patrols conducted by the littoral states are obviously a great change in relation to suppressing the act of piracy and maritime terrorism in the Strait of Malacca. However, since these are not joint patrols, meaning vessels of each country remain in their own territorial waters, they have limited implications especially in relation to reducing the act of piracy.
Joint patrol areas should cover the areas where there are the most incidents of piracy against vessels plying through the straits, particularly if these areas are where the territorial boundaries are undecided. The joint patrol areas may also include waters within the territorial sovereignty of one or more states. By such an arrangement, the three countries would effectively give each other “quick” permission to enforce jurisdiction within the joint patrol areas, even if the incident occurred in the territorial waters of another state.
In relation to the joint patrol areas, the three states could also agree to pass domestic legislation stating that all acts of piracy conducted against vessels and persons in the joint patrol areas is a crime under their domestic law and will be punished with severe penalties. With this arrangement, no state would complain if, for example, Indonesia and Singapore made attacks against pirates in joint patrol areas in the Singapore Strait even if the crimes were conducted in areas beyond the territorial waters of the arresting state.
An argument can be made to assert the right to such jurisdiction, since acts of piracy in the strait run counter to the fundamental interest of each state and the safety of international shipping.
One major difficulty in protecting shipping from pirate attacks is related to the fact that perpetrators and law enforcement officials are not bound by the same rules. Pirates do not respect maritime borders or national sovereignty, while law enforcement and military officials respect both these limits. Due to a lack of mutual trust, law enforcement vessels in pursuit of criminals have not been permitted to enter foreign territorial seas. Particularly to Indonesia and Malaysia, sovereignty is still a crucial issue when we talk about allowing foreign vessels to enter territorial waters. Thus it often happens that when Singaporean authorities are in pursuit of a pirate ship, this ship merely escapes to Indonesian waters.
Recently, the United Nations Security Council unanimously voted to allow countries to send warships into Somalia’s territorial waters to combat pirates. None of the three countries in the Malacca Strait are failed states such as Somalia, however, meaning that no foreign vessels would have the right to enter their territorial waters in the name of antipiracy efforts. Nevertheless, we have to be aware of the fact that there have been some attempts, supported by the Singaporean government, to invite US and Japanese warships to help patrol the Malacca Strait.
The answer to this problem is quite clear: mutual cooperation among the three littoral states. An agreement that allows other county’s law enforcement officials to enter the territorial waters of another country in the incidence of piracy, without having to wait for permission, is inevitable. Together with information sharing and joint patrols throughout the strait and in surrounding areas, such cooperation can be the answer to combating piracy at home and across the region.
Rheny Pulungan is a doctoral candidate in law at the University of Melbourne .
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)