As some of you may know, there’s something called the Large Hadron Collider underneath Switzerland. It’s a 17-mile long ring that runs under Franco-Swiss border, and when activated on September 10th (known throughout the science community as Beam Day,) it’ll smash two beams of protons against each other really hard, recreating something called the Higgs Boson effect and something with molecules… particles… physics… and molecules again! I’m still iffy about how or why they built this thing, but here’s the Wikipedia entry on it which will explain things better than I do (and you’re more likely to look it up after anyways.) It’s a really important deal though, because if it works properly and scientists get what they want, we’ll be ushered into a whole new era of technological possibilities. And if physics is wrong, we may all die on Wednesday.
There’s been a lot of controversy over turning this on, with non-scientists suggesting that the Collider will create black holes that will suck in the Earth. Meanwhile, the scientists are denying this possibility because they don’t learn about science from cartoons. My good friend has linked me to a very helpful and easy-to-understand article that has calmed my fears of black holes. The short of it is that in the rare possibility that a black hole is made, it’ll wither out of existence in moments, and only suck in whatever’s immediately next to it. In order to actually create a black hole big enough to destroy the Earth, you’d probably have to smash two stars together really fast, but then there wouldn’t be any Earth left to destroy anyway.
She also linked me to this other neat article about what they expect to find when they turn it on, and the odds of what we’ll find as a result. It’ll probably be decades before we can find anything practical to apply these findings to, but hopefully the end result will be teleporting pizza and Sea Monkeys that actually look like the ones on the box.
Or science is wrong and we all die. If anything, it’s a good excuse to get laid on Tuesday.
The movie word of the day (or decade) is “reboot” – to discard all previous continuity in a fiction series and start anew. So it’s essentially the same as a remake; it just uses an edgier word to appease the masses who are sick of remakes.
It started with Batman, then 007, Halloween, then they sort of rebooted “Incredible Hulk,” and now they’ve got a new “Star Trek” coming out, followed by a billion other reboots because it’s the new craze. In some of the latest news, they’ve announced that they’re rebooting “Superman” so soon after “Returns.” So we’ve got a new Superman trilogy coming out that completely ignores “Returns,” which was supposed to reboot the story from “Superman II,” while we’re supposed to ignore “III” and “IV” ever happened. Then there’s a new live-action Ninja Turtles reboot in the works which is asking us to ignore the already-good animated “TMNT,” as well as ignore the very first movie because they want to do the Shredder thing all over again. Is the difference between a remake and a reboot supposed to be that a remake doesn’t cause our heads to explode?
In both cases of “Superman” and “Ninja Turtles,” they’re being re-imagined as darker and grittier, just like EVERY other reboot on the slate. And right after the success of “The Dark Knight” too, I might add. But everybody liked that movie, right? Just like we liked “Shrek?” And we still like watching celebrity-voiced animals farting in each other’s mouths while singing Ricky Martin songs, right? That’ll never get old and they made a billion of those too.
I miss the good old days when filmmakers just tried to write a better sequel instead of cover up their incompetence by redoing everything until they got it right. Their attempts at better sequels would often fail, but at least we didn’t have to ignore continuity just to hate them.
New movie this weekend:
And the movie video for the week: this delightful VISA commercial starring Pierce Brosnan that my uncle sent me. I should probably save this for the new James Bond flick, but… meh.
Stop laughing. Wasn’t my idea. Turns out my dad was a big fan of theirs in the 90’s and thought it’d be great idea to buy tickets for the whole family to go see them. And believe it or not, it was actually enjoyable, in a retro-cheesy kind of way. The kind of way where we point and laugh at the absurdity of a group of old men still trying to play the sex symbol angle.
The worst part was the audience. For about 90% of the show, we had three teenage girls standing up in front of us dancing and blocking our view of show. It’s times like that I wish they gave us tranquilizer darts at the door. I will give them credit for drawing in a massive audience, though. Even the immortal Meat Loaf and Weird Al combined didn’t suck this many people into one room, and their tickets were cheaper with better performances.
The second worst was the opening act: Girlicious. One of them couldn’t dance, another couldn’t coherently speak, and another had short-term memory. She kept asking the audience how they were doing after every set, and liked to talk about their reality show. Then there was this little bit she did with the audience:
“Ok, everybody! I say GIRLICIOUS! You say GIRLICIOUS! GIRLICIOUS!!!”
“Now I say GIRL, you say LICIOUS! GIRL!!!”
“Now I say LICIOUS, you say GIRL! LICIOUS!!!”
Not quite like that, but same general idea.
BSB layed the cheese on pretty thick too. Between sets, they’d chatter amongst themselves about how cute all the girls are in Edmonton, and that they should move here, bringing on waves of screams. Then they’d do that thing where they kneel down at the edge of the stage and sing sensually to whomever’s in the front row (mostly old ladies and fat chicks.) But they still got all the crazy 90’s moves and a pretty rocking guitarist, so it’s all good.
We took some pretty funny pictures, and I’ll post them up as soon as they get sent to me.