This is a fairly short entry, and remember that this will be the last one until this Thursday. I'll explain more of the details about why specifically this is in my next entry. However, until then, I'll explain about my philosophy for this year and one of the decisions I want to make about it. It all started with my New Year's resolution: This Must End.
Let me clarify that I don't mean any particularly crazy definition of this phrase. I don't me my life or the universe or something. I do mean the way my life is right now, however. I came to this realization late last year when the comfortable but dull life I've formed started to change for the worse. One of the programmers at work quit, which was jarring already; I figured I would be the first to go. But that means the workload increased for the last two of us by 50% or so, not to mention the sudden influx of more complex projects. Meanwhile, my roommate told me he planned on moving out. His girlfriend turned into a fiancée, and the two of them bought a house. He actually physically moved out this February, but the contract doesn't end until July. I can look for a roommate until then, and I have tried a bit, but it won't be essential until this summer.
But that is the deadline. Come July, I either have to find a roommate or move out. My life will change, and now it's a question of how I want it changed. Meanwhile, I can't ignore my problems at work, either; they became part of the problem at this point. I know exactly what I want out of life, but I have no idea if I can even get it at my current level of education and experience. So, if Plan A is still not available, what exactly IS Plan B?
I recently came upon one solution, at least. A friend of my suggested that a lot of my problems, including my relationship woes, come from living in the suburbs. I have to admit, she has a point. I recently learned to love going into the city, nearly all the girls I do meet already live there, and it would even make school easier. Most important, it would be change, and it would be me making the change for once. The hard part, of course, is the job.
Do I stick with the current job? If so, how to travel there and back again every single day? And if not, what do I do? Can I accept a pay cut, and how much? For me to do this, I'll have to figure out how to find a job, find an apartment nearby, probably find one or more roommates, and move. All in about 3 months. I'm a bit nervous, and I'm worried about where to start.
But, even when I thought about the idea, I'm happy. Sure, there will be some things I'd have to let go of, but there are surprisingly little left. My cat will stay with, I could continue running my D&D game by stopping into the area, and what else is keeping me here? Yes, there's the writer's group, but is that enough? More importantly, it will mean getting up and going to a new job, something I haven't done in almost six years. But that number alone is terrifying. Six years, all in one building, one room, one half of an office. That's 50% longer than I spent at any school I went to. At least most people change positions within a company every few years.
So, I'm torn, and to any readers I theoretically have, I ask you this: what now? I need to figure out a way to find a job, for starters, and from there get cracking on the apartment. And that's assuming I go through with this. But if I don't, what do I do?
Monday, March 31, 2008
Sunday, March 30, 2008
Reviews: Premature take on Simpsons, Season 7
This is technically not the way I want to do these things. My rule is to finish something, and then review it. Technically, I have four episodes to go on the DVD first. That being said, I did of course finish this season, back when in it was on television. Back when the syndicated Simpsons was worth watching, I saw pretty much every episode again a half dozen times or so. I may not remember which episodes were which season, but I easily can recognize one by name. More importantly, this is the closest I can get to a reviewable product. The latest video game hasn't been finished, nor the latest book, and I didn't even buy any music in time for a review.
So Simpsons it is, and this is an important season. It is, in some ways, the final Simpsons season, or at least the final one that counts. Okay, that's not entirely fair. There are plenty of quality episodes in later seasons, from the James Bond parody and the Insanity Peppers to the Behind the Music spoof many, many seasons later. But this, to me, is the last "pure" season. It's here that the excellence, or at least quality, of a Simpsons episode is guaranteed, sight-unseen. Later seasons could not make that promise. Some episodes from season 8 on were awful, quite simply. And they weren't the "even a bad episode of Simpsons is better than 90% of television" awful, either, unless you simply assume 90% of television is simply unwatchable, which I admit is possible, since I don't watch it.
But I came to praise Simpsons, not bury it! I mean, I can't; no one can. That show will be on until the end of days. After the nuclear war, the cockroaches will curl up in front of the TV to watch it while eating Twinkies. In the first post-Bomb episode, Homer will get a new job.
Season seven, despite a few weak but not awful episodes, was consistently excellent. Like every season of the Simpsons, though, it's impossible to comment on the overarching plot. There is none. There barely is any theme, but nonetheless there were seams that started to develop this season. In a way, it felt like the series' universe was falling apart, as expectations of character and story started to become false. For example, there was the episode where Lisa learned that the town's founder, the creator of Springfield itself, was a fraud. But that's minor compared to the way the story itself began to warp and self-reference. It was in this season that Sideshow Bob, the criminal genius, started with a scheme to destroy the entire city in an atom bomb, and ended it so defeated that he was rendered nothing but a joke for the entire last third of an episode. The other characters had to play down their abilities and were even bored with his antics. He just no longer mattered.
But the one that really gets me, the one that I wish the show really explored further, was the episode where Bart and Lisa accidentally got Itchy and Scratchy cancelled. At the end of the episode, they find a solution (though we never hear it,) but by then, the day was saved! By two never before seen incidental characters. Who look like first season Bart and Lisa. The episode ended with our main characters unsatisfied because, for once, the universe righted itself without their efforts. That's pretty damn zen, if you get right down to it.
I wish the show considered what it was doing here more; the repetition of the sitcom formula, now seven years old, was being recognized by the very characters, and it was breaking down. This is a fundamental aspect of the Simpsons universe, as much as the planet, skies, air, ground, etc. were. The ramifications, especially for a clever show like the Simpsons, were endless. Instead, we got...this.
I have reached the point where I won't hide my disdain for later Simpsons seasons. Oh, habit and hope have motivated me for longer than I should have; it wasn't until the last season or two where I didn't regularly watch every new episodes. But I can't say I truly enjoyed the show in a long time. It's not as bad as it's ever been; it's been years since we had jockey elves and Homer being raped by a panda. But the soul is long since gone, the characters empty vestiges of their past selves (except for sometimes Lisa, actually,) and the jokes repetitive and flat.
My review, therefore, is tripartite. The Simpsons, season 7: A. The Simpsons, as it is: C on a good week. The Simpsons, as it could have been: Unprecedented. A glorious end that both questions the very nature of the traditional sitcom and is hilarious. To summarize, let me tell you what I watched tonight was on. There was a new episode of the Simpsons on tonight. At that time of night, I watched an episode twelve years old and that was seen countless times instead. I laughed my ass off.
So Simpsons it is, and this is an important season. It is, in some ways, the final Simpsons season, or at least the final one that counts. Okay, that's not entirely fair. There are plenty of quality episodes in later seasons, from the James Bond parody and the Insanity Peppers to the Behind the Music spoof many, many seasons later. But this, to me, is the last "pure" season. It's here that the excellence, or at least quality, of a Simpsons episode is guaranteed, sight-unseen. Later seasons could not make that promise. Some episodes from season 8 on were awful, quite simply. And they weren't the "even a bad episode of Simpsons is better than 90% of television" awful, either, unless you simply assume 90% of television is simply unwatchable, which I admit is possible, since I don't watch it.
But I came to praise Simpsons, not bury it! I mean, I can't; no one can. That show will be on until the end of days. After the nuclear war, the cockroaches will curl up in front of the TV to watch it while eating Twinkies. In the first post-Bomb episode, Homer will get a new job.
Season seven, despite a few weak but not awful episodes, was consistently excellent. Like every season of the Simpsons, though, it's impossible to comment on the overarching plot. There is none. There barely is any theme, but nonetheless there were seams that started to develop this season. In a way, it felt like the series' universe was falling apart, as expectations of character and story started to become false. For example, there was the episode where Lisa learned that the town's founder, the creator of Springfield itself, was a fraud. But that's minor compared to the way the story itself began to warp and self-reference. It was in this season that Sideshow Bob, the criminal genius, started with a scheme to destroy the entire city in an atom bomb, and ended it so defeated that he was rendered nothing but a joke for the entire last third of an episode. The other characters had to play down their abilities and were even bored with his antics. He just no longer mattered.
But the one that really gets me, the one that I wish the show really explored further, was the episode where Bart and Lisa accidentally got Itchy and Scratchy cancelled. At the end of the episode, they find a solution (though we never hear it,) but by then, the day was saved! By two never before seen incidental characters. Who look like first season Bart and Lisa. The episode ended with our main characters unsatisfied because, for once, the universe righted itself without their efforts. That's pretty damn zen, if you get right down to it.
I wish the show considered what it was doing here more; the repetition of the sitcom formula, now seven years old, was being recognized by the very characters, and it was breaking down. This is a fundamental aspect of the Simpsons universe, as much as the planet, skies, air, ground, etc. were. The ramifications, especially for a clever show like the Simpsons, were endless. Instead, we got...this.
I have reached the point where I won't hide my disdain for later Simpsons seasons. Oh, habit and hope have motivated me for longer than I should have; it wasn't until the last season or two where I didn't regularly watch every new episodes. But I can't say I truly enjoyed the show in a long time. It's not as bad as it's ever been; it's been years since we had jockey elves and Homer being raped by a panda. But the soul is long since gone, the characters empty vestiges of their past selves (except for sometimes Lisa, actually,) and the jokes repetitive and flat.
My review, therefore, is tripartite. The Simpsons, season 7: A. The Simpsons, as it is: C on a good week. The Simpsons, as it could have been: Unprecedented. A glorious end that both questions the very nature of the traditional sitcom and is hilarious. To summarize, let me tell you what I watched tonight was on. There was a new episode of the Simpsons on tonight. At that time of night, I watched an episode twelve years old and that was seen countless times instead. I laughed my ass off.
Saturday, March 29, 2008
My Inspiations: Toys that Aren't Transformers.
Most of my inspirations assume that some of the theoretical readers I may have or eventually will get have some idea what I'm talking about. This may not be true here. In 1985 or so, I first got a collectible type of toy called, in this country, M.U.S.C.L.E. And that's the first and last time I'll spell it like that. These toys were tiny, pink, plastic figures based on a Japanese manga/anime/etc. about professional wrestlers. From space. Or it's something like that; I never really bothered to learn the Japanese version of the story, and the American version didn't even exist per sec.
So, as far as I was concerned, story was irrelevant, which is ironic given my earlier posts, but still. It was about seeing virtually hundreds of strange, not remotely human figures, and figuring out their powers. I gave them names, backstories, levels of powers, and even ranks. The guy with a cross on his back and an antenna was Hospitality, who could heal or resurrect the dead. The various guys with weird symbols for faces had special ranged attacks tied to the symbol. An "X" killed with a shot (like how in cartoons characters that "died" had Xs in their eyes,) or one with a triangle face created dimensional portals. And the obvious cyborg was clearly one of the best characters. Even then, there was that bit of transhumanism.
Inspiration-wise, one can’t really discount these toys, no matter how silly they are. They were, after all, one of the first inspirations that don't just inspire a creation, a setting, a genre, or a medium; they inspire me to actively create. Now, there were limits, since I had to base any powers on the actual physical bodies. But working within limits is one of the greatest tests a creative person can perform. That's infinitely more so for hopeful video game designers, who have graphical power, processing power, space limitations, and the constant battles against other designers, executives, writers, test groups, and customers struggling against your creative vision. This was sort of superhero/villain fuel, and in addition to creating characters, it makes it easy to create your own plots. Pick up a few of the tiny plastic inaction figures, pretend they fight, and you have a functioning comic book battle and such.
Unlike most of my inspirations, this is one that hasn't come up often in my life, but as creativity gristle, this was crucial for my development. Remember that, in the 20 or so years of creation, I have literally thousands of characters made. This is not an easy thing to do, especially making them all unique in at least some power, personality, or physical form/appearance. Every development of this sort requires a first step, and these little figures provided it, no matter how obscure they were. Or, for that matter, how pink they were. I have no idea why they ever thought these would sell.
So, as far as I was concerned, story was irrelevant, which is ironic given my earlier posts, but still. It was about seeing virtually hundreds of strange, not remotely human figures, and figuring out their powers. I gave them names, backstories, levels of powers, and even ranks. The guy with a cross on his back and an antenna was Hospitality, who could heal or resurrect the dead. The various guys with weird symbols for faces had special ranged attacks tied to the symbol. An "X" killed with a shot (like how in cartoons characters that "died" had Xs in their eyes,) or one with a triangle face created dimensional portals. And the obvious cyborg was clearly one of the best characters. Even then, there was that bit of transhumanism.
Inspiration-wise, one can’t really discount these toys, no matter how silly they are. They were, after all, one of the first inspirations that don't just inspire a creation, a setting, a genre, or a medium; they inspire me to actively create. Now, there were limits, since I had to base any powers on the actual physical bodies. But working within limits is one of the greatest tests a creative person can perform. That's infinitely more so for hopeful video game designers, who have graphical power, processing power, space limitations, and the constant battles against other designers, executives, writers, test groups, and customers struggling against your creative vision. This was sort of superhero/villain fuel, and in addition to creating characters, it makes it easy to create your own plots. Pick up a few of the tiny plastic inaction figures, pretend they fight, and you have a functioning comic book battle and such.
Unlike most of my inspirations, this is one that hasn't come up often in my life, but as creativity gristle, this was crucial for my development. Remember that, in the 20 or so years of creation, I have literally thousands of characters made. This is not an easy thing to do, especially making them all unique in at least some power, personality, or physical form/appearance. Every development of this sort requires a first step, and these little figures provided it, no matter how obscure they were. Or, for that matter, how pink they were. I have no idea why they ever thought these would sell.
Friday, March 28, 2008
My Ideas: Mega Man Ideas! Round 1!
And so begins the start of a series that will last a while, especially since I'll be breaking them up as well. This refers to the very first video game ideas I ever wrote, ideas that started many of my later series. Megaman ideas were simple to make even when I was eight, as all it takes was toss an adjective to man eight times, drawing up some maps, and it's done! Sadly, in the first game idea, I didn't have that much.
The names of the characters at the time were Fastman, Explodeman, Webman, Stoneman, Waterman, and...that's it, at least briefly. My original plan was to have one boss from Megaman 1 and two from Megaman 2 to finish the list. Why those two? Those were the only two Megaman games that existed!
That eventually didn't last, as I realized it was a silly idea. Fortunately, I already planned on adding two characters that didn't match the normal nonlinear set; an intro boss named Garbageman and a Wily-based robot master boss named Rayman (as in Ray-gun, like the hi-tech laser guns as we imagined them in the 1950s.) Garbageman was based on a Captain N joke-cameo, so at this point things had to be improved upon. Eventually, Garbageman became Grinderman, Explodeman was just Explosionman, Rayman became Laserman, and a few other robots had to change their names because other games or even Megaman sequels already used them. Stoneman became Graniteman, for example. As for Waterman, well, that changed because it was stupidly generic. It was Aquaman, Hydroman, and others, and finally I gave up. It's Generic Water Boss in "canon" now. Oh, and I tossed in a generic fire robot boss, called him Infernoman, and we had our 8!
Hilariously, after taking years to make just eight bosses, I eventually went mad and tossed in twelve bosses. This became a recurring theme in later Megaman games, save for one. The assumption was either that four were later "advanced" characters, or some would be editted out and we'd have our eight. The four new guys were Tornadoman, Hawkman, Rocketman, and Nightman.
The second major feature I made for this game is one I'm sort of proud of. Midway through the development above, half of the "man" characters became "woman" in an attempt to have gender equality. So I had to come up with which gender each boss had; for the record, the women were Fastwoman, Webwoman, (Water/Hydro/etc)woman, Infernowoman, Hawkwoman, and Nightwoman (who was Nightmarewoman at this point.)
Here's my opinion on this game, overall. It wasn't good; come on. Most of this was conceived of when I was in elementary school. By junior high even, the games were much more clever. There were some clever game ideas, mind you. Fastwoman's level was autoscrolling, Waterorwhateverwoman's level had a series of paths you could choose from, and there were a few other platforming elements that I still want to use one day. Otherwise, the story was simplistic even for this series; Dr. Wily wanted to conquer the world, beat his robots, and game over. This represents just a tentative step, not a revolution. I did my first "design documents" at this point, but it was about 5 pages or so at the most. It also had "drawn" designs, which means I made pictures of the levels, using my 8 year old art skills. And like all video game ideas, they later brought new concepts to later games. Even Grinderman, one of the first characters I ever made for a video game and little but a lame transfer from a cartoon when I started, became a major enemy for one of my most recent and advanced games. I'm sorry that there are less to review for this game, but it does set the stage for the other ideas of this series. All 6 or so of them; like I said, this arc can last a while.
The names of the characters at the time were Fastman, Explodeman, Webman, Stoneman, Waterman, and...that's it, at least briefly. My original plan was to have one boss from Megaman 1 and two from Megaman 2 to finish the list. Why those two? Those were the only two Megaman games that existed!
That eventually didn't last, as I realized it was a silly idea. Fortunately, I already planned on adding two characters that didn't match the normal nonlinear set; an intro boss named Garbageman and a Wily-based robot master boss named Rayman (as in Ray-gun, like the hi-tech laser guns as we imagined them in the 1950s.) Garbageman was based on a Captain N joke-cameo, so at this point things had to be improved upon. Eventually, Garbageman became Grinderman, Explodeman was just Explosionman, Rayman became Laserman, and a few other robots had to change their names because other games or even Megaman sequels already used them. Stoneman became Graniteman, for example. As for Waterman, well, that changed because it was stupidly generic. It was Aquaman, Hydroman, and others, and finally I gave up. It's Generic Water Boss in "canon" now. Oh, and I tossed in a generic fire robot boss, called him Infernoman, and we had our 8!
Hilariously, after taking years to make just eight bosses, I eventually went mad and tossed in twelve bosses. This became a recurring theme in later Megaman games, save for one. The assumption was either that four were later "advanced" characters, or some would be editted out and we'd have our eight. The four new guys were Tornadoman, Hawkman, Rocketman, and Nightman.
The second major feature I made for this game is one I'm sort of proud of. Midway through the development above, half of the "man" characters became "woman" in an attempt to have gender equality. So I had to come up with which gender each boss had; for the record, the women were Fastwoman, Webwoman, (Water/Hydro/etc)woman, Infernowoman, Hawkwoman, and Nightwoman (who was Nightmarewoman at this point.)
Here's my opinion on this game, overall. It wasn't good; come on. Most of this was conceived of when I was in elementary school. By junior high even, the games were much more clever. There were some clever game ideas, mind you. Fastwoman's level was autoscrolling, Waterorwhateverwoman's level had a series of paths you could choose from, and there were a few other platforming elements that I still want to use one day. Otherwise, the story was simplistic even for this series; Dr. Wily wanted to conquer the world, beat his robots, and game over. This represents just a tentative step, not a revolution. I did my first "design documents" at this point, but it was about 5 pages or so at the most. It also had "drawn" designs, which means I made pictures of the levels, using my 8 year old art skills. And like all video game ideas, they later brought new concepts to later games. Even Grinderman, one of the first characters I ever made for a video game and little but a lame transfer from a cartoon when I started, became a major enemy for one of my most recent and advanced games. I'm sorry that there are less to review for this game, but it does set the stage for the other ideas of this series. All 6 or so of them; like I said, this arc can last a while.
Wednesday, March 26, 2008
A Missed Update and An Announcement
Yes, unfortunately, I must take another day off. I didn't even get home until 11 pm or so tonight, so I didn't really have time.
I also have an announcement: I likely will change my schedule into a 3 a week system. My current plan is to have updates on Tuesday, Thursday, and Sunday. Doing four updates in a row was getting to me, I'm afraid, and I'll be working on some other writing projects, which I plan on discussing more on Friday or next Monday. Starting next week, I'll do Life and Rant updates one week, Ideas and Writings the next, and Reviews on weekends if I finished anything reviewable over that week.
This change will almost definitely happen this coming month, and I'm not sure if I'll revert back in May. I have to admit, one reason for a lack of as many updates after April is the lack of responses. I never set out to become a huge public success with this thing, but one reason I write in public is to get public feedback, comments, recommendations, even criticism. If I don't get any, it's hard for me to evaluate my work and improve, or at least the enjoyment of knowing other people read some of what I wrote. Hopefully that will change with time, though.
I also have an announcement: I likely will change my schedule into a 3 a week system. My current plan is to have updates on Tuesday, Thursday, and Sunday. Doing four updates in a row was getting to me, I'm afraid, and I'll be working on some other writing projects, which I plan on discussing more on Friday or next Monday. Starting next week, I'll do Life and Rant updates one week, Ideas and Writings the next, and Reviews on weekends if I finished anything reviewable over that week.
This change will almost definitely happen this coming month, and I'm not sure if I'll revert back in May. I have to admit, one reason for a lack of as many updates after April is the lack of responses. I never set out to become a huge public success with this thing, but one reason I write in public is to get public feedback, comments, recommendations, even criticism. If I don't get any, it's hard for me to evaluate my work and improve, or at least the enjoyment of knowing other people read some of what I wrote. Hopefully that will change with time, though.
Monday, March 24, 2008
My Life: Proof My Weird Taste Doesn't Just Lie In Games.
It's about time for another post that's weird, possibly too personal, and kinda dark. Off we go, then!
This one was inspired by, well, my life in general, but also dinner. I went out to a local, cheap noodle place. There was a cute girl who was in front of me in line. She was also alone. She ordered her food, and then I did the same. We ate well apart, she finished first, and then she left. I'll probably never see her again.
But still....
This is a problem for me in general. I mean, in this specific case, I don't think I could've done much. It was a crowded, public restaurant, and she probably wanted to eat in peace. I just wish, if not this case, I'd find some situations where I could meet woman. Because I really suck at this part.
But this isn't about missed opportunities, no matter how numerous. This is more about what I'm looking for in the first place, irregardless of how unlikely it is that I'll ever find it.
Though if I was good at describing it, maybe it wouldn't be a problem in the first place, now would it? Well, there are the basics. I'm looking for someone intelligent, attractive, nice, funny, all the generic stuff people say at this point. It's the "Long walk on the beach" step, save for the part that people actually want them.
Most of them require clarification, anyway. Intelligence is a pretty easy one to discuss. I want someone intelligent enough to carry on a conversation, who knows enough to get around in the world in general, and who understands at least the basics of philosophy, politics, science, etc. More importantly, I want someone who has at least some creative or intellectual passion. It doesn't have to be mine, though we'll get more to that. But it has to be something beyond just getting through life.
Next up is funny. That's pretty subjective, and a lot of it comes down to similar interests. I don't expect her to share all the movies, television shows, books, etc., that I like, but a few that I like would be nice. My humor tastes range from surreal to more sarcastic, with lighter things like cartoons thrown in. A Buffy or 30 Rock fan, for example, would score big points. And beyond fun, having similar concepts of "fun" are nice. Finding a girl who likes Dungeons and Dragons is a pipe dream, I know, but someone who wants to play video games sometimes, or head into the city to explore, or go biking, would be great.
As for nice, that's a bit trickier. Some of that is similar politics and religion, if you think about it. I still don't want to talk much about either here, but as a relatively young, technology-embracing futurist, you can guess I aim towards more open-minded and tolerant beliefs, and I would have trouble dating someone who believed otherwise. She wouldn't have to have the exact same religious beliefs, but at the very least she doesn't have to think, say, that I'm going to burn in Hell. But there's more to "nice" than that. I have to face it: being single for so long makes it harder for me to trust the concept of relations. I'd need a girlfriend that was caring and affectionate, who showed me that she felt strongly about me as I did for her, that she cared basically. I want someone to rest on or near me while sitting on a couch and who rested on me in bed. I want someone who is nervous about romance; who giggles and is awkward at times, because I know I sure as hell will be.
As for attractive, that's the most subjective of all, and it's easy to sound picky about it. I like to think I'm not, though. I mean, there are some restrictions; I don't find myself attracted to people who are extremely overweight, to use one shallow example. But what I am attracted to is more nebulous. I generally like people who have an unusual sense of style, so I like people who identify with a sub-culture. For example, I've often been attracted to goths, but I also like women who have a more "indy" style, or even classical geeks. It probably has something to do with the fact I'm already interested in designs and archetypes; if you think that way enough, it becomes the way you see the world. One of the most unusual of these attractions, though, is that I find myself attracted to smokers. I don't know why, exactly: I never even tried smoking and have no interest in doing so. It's just another archetype to me, I think, or perhaps an intellectually intriguing element of someone. It could even be a subset of my interest in goths or other classical styles, like the flappers. But that's about my weirder interests, I think.
I guess it's not that strange a list of things to want. Similar interests, personal beliefs that don't repel me, etc. It doesn't help that I have absolutely no way to find someone even closely matching these requirements, especially, for some reason, the one that means they care about me. But that would have to be another update, I think. Assuming it ever is one.
This one was inspired by, well, my life in general, but also dinner. I went out to a local, cheap noodle place. There was a cute girl who was in front of me in line. She was also alone. She ordered her food, and then I did the same. We ate well apart, she finished first, and then she left. I'll probably never see her again.
But still....
This is a problem for me in general. I mean, in this specific case, I don't think I could've done much. It was a crowded, public restaurant, and she probably wanted to eat in peace. I just wish, if not this case, I'd find some situations where I could meet woman. Because I really suck at this part.
But this isn't about missed opportunities, no matter how numerous. This is more about what I'm looking for in the first place, irregardless of how unlikely it is that I'll ever find it.
Though if I was good at describing it, maybe it wouldn't be a problem in the first place, now would it? Well, there are the basics. I'm looking for someone intelligent, attractive, nice, funny, all the generic stuff people say at this point. It's the "Long walk on the beach" step, save for the part that people actually want them.
Most of them require clarification, anyway. Intelligence is a pretty easy one to discuss. I want someone intelligent enough to carry on a conversation, who knows enough to get around in the world in general, and who understands at least the basics of philosophy, politics, science, etc. More importantly, I want someone who has at least some creative or intellectual passion. It doesn't have to be mine, though we'll get more to that. But it has to be something beyond just getting through life.
Next up is funny. That's pretty subjective, and a lot of it comes down to similar interests. I don't expect her to share all the movies, television shows, books, etc., that I like, but a few that I like would be nice. My humor tastes range from surreal to more sarcastic, with lighter things like cartoons thrown in. A Buffy or 30 Rock fan, for example, would score big points. And beyond fun, having similar concepts of "fun" are nice. Finding a girl who likes Dungeons and Dragons is a pipe dream, I know, but someone who wants to play video games sometimes, or head into the city to explore, or go biking, would be great.
As for nice, that's a bit trickier. Some of that is similar politics and religion, if you think about it. I still don't want to talk much about either here, but as a relatively young, technology-embracing futurist, you can guess I aim towards more open-minded and tolerant beliefs, and I would have trouble dating someone who believed otherwise. She wouldn't have to have the exact same religious beliefs, but at the very least she doesn't have to think, say, that I'm going to burn in Hell. But there's more to "nice" than that. I have to face it: being single for so long makes it harder for me to trust the concept of relations. I'd need a girlfriend that was caring and affectionate, who showed me that she felt strongly about me as I did for her, that she cared basically. I want someone to rest on or near me while sitting on a couch and who rested on me in bed. I want someone who is nervous about romance; who giggles and is awkward at times, because I know I sure as hell will be.
As for attractive, that's the most subjective of all, and it's easy to sound picky about it. I like to think I'm not, though. I mean, there are some restrictions; I don't find myself attracted to people who are extremely overweight, to use one shallow example. But what I am attracted to is more nebulous. I generally like people who have an unusual sense of style, so I like people who identify with a sub-culture. For example, I've often been attracted to goths, but I also like women who have a more "indy" style, or even classical geeks. It probably has something to do with the fact I'm already interested in designs and archetypes; if you think that way enough, it becomes the way you see the world. One of the most unusual of these attractions, though, is that I find myself attracted to smokers. I don't know why, exactly: I never even tried smoking and have no interest in doing so. It's just another archetype to me, I think, or perhaps an intellectually intriguing element of someone. It could even be a subset of my interest in goths or other classical styles, like the flappers. But that's about my weirder interests, I think.
I guess it's not that strange a list of things to want. Similar interests, personal beliefs that don't repel me, etc. It doesn't help that I have absolutely no way to find someone even closely matching these requirements, especially, for some reason, the one that means they care about me. But that would have to be another update, I think. Assuming it ever is one.
Sunday, March 23, 2008
Reviews: The Last Angel Reviews For Awhile
This weekend (hell, this afternoon,) I finally finished a second season of Angel DVDs in the strike-themed lapse of new television shows. This time, it's Angel's third season, the last season I saw nothing about when it was still on the air. Previously, I never got hooked on it, but I watched the second half of Season 4 so I could connect its plot to the series finale of Buffy. And of course I watched all of Season 5; Buffy was gone by then, and that was the only way to get a Joss Whedon fix.
But that means that once again I knew the major plot points, but none of the reasons how or the nature of the characters involved. This also feels like the first season of Angel where the year long plot arc went according to the creator's plan. An early actor departure derailed season 1, and the entire arc of season 2 short-circuited where guess actors were unable to play in the final episodes, bringing in some "alternate dimension" goofiness.
This time, the story revolved from episode one about the birth, growth, and adulthood of Angel's child, impossibly a human, and about another arch-nemesis from his past. The arch-nemesis is Holtz, a vampire hunter from Angel's evil days, brought back into modern times. This is a very unusual concept, especially in the Buffy universe. Instead of a season-long Big Bad villain, they brought back a Big Good; a hero suddenly faced with the fact that his greatest enemy is another good guy. So instead of inducing new personalities, goals, and at least some moments to offer sympathy for an evil out to conquer the world/universe/etc., we see the good guy sink into his own flaws, deceit, and justifications.
Meanwhile, we see Angel's own transformations. If the first season was about turning a brooding anti-hero into someone forced into dealing with friends and people again, and the second was seeing him at his lowest and struggle to return to the position of hero, this season was about seeing him deal with a complication almost all humans must endure. It's the opposite of last season, as he slowly reaches his emotional peak, and then it drops him down again. Angel first has to deal with his returning, pregnant, semi-evil ex-girlfriend, and then a needy and healthy human baby. This creates all the problems of single fatherhood, coupled with the less typical handicaps of his vampire nature and the violent enemies he accrued, but it also shows the joys being a father, finally showing a form of love from Angel outside of the romantic or semi-platonic.
But babies are boring, so of course the plot fixed that soon enough. After his child is abducted to a hell dimension, Angel's darkness returns and becomes personal. That was temporary, but soon the child, Angel, came back as a teenager. Now we see the path of fatherhood at another stage, and again Angel reaches his peaks and valleys, ending in one hell of a valley. His nemesis, despite dying, finally got his revenge through Angel's own son, leaving Angel in an uncertain fate at the end of the season.
This season also had one more element to it: the long game. I can't speak much until I finally finish the next season, but I will say that there are hints of a much larger plot, beyond even one season. Well, it's possible that the major plot of next season is just being ad-libbed from hereon and they just tossed in some plot points from first season, but regardless there were other advanced plots beyond Angel's. The first is that of long-term secondary heroine Cordellia, who went from a human with occasional prophetic visions to a half-demon with the same visions to an ascended higher being, off to a fate as uncertain as Angel's. And Wesley, the last major character left from season 1, was torn between loyalty to his allies and fear that Angel would one day endanger his child and the attacks by Holtz would hurt his friends. He elected to betray Angel by abducting his child, on the hopeful condition that this would save the child's life and keep Holtz at bay. Instead, the child was sent to a hell dimension, Holtz attacked anyway, Wesley was almost killed, and Angel and the rest of the regulars hate him for his traitorous actions. This brings Wesley even further down the darker but more pragmatic path.
These arcs were handled competently, but others were less successful. Fred, a minor character introduced last season, became a regular this season, but she hadn't yet developed much of a personality. She's cute, spunky, smart, awkward with a tendency to ramble or obsess about science, and both Wesley and Gunn, another Angel regular, had the hots for her. But she didn't really develop as a person beyond this point, nor did she do much to become competent with the normal series violence. And many single-plot episodes felt like they needed at least one revision. An early episode where Gunn's old friends revealed a darker side was one example, as was a very strange episode about a demon who somehow owned Gunn's soul. (Gunn had a lot of weird development arcs, actually.) Often, they were resolved too quickly, aiming for a clever subversion of a normal trope but without actually explaining how that subversion makes sense within the universe of the series.
So the entire season got, say, a B+ or A-. I liked it better than last season, due to its much better story arc and moral complexity, but it still never reached the archetypal appeal of Buffy. Maybe that's unsurprising; after all, I have been a high-schooler and an awkward oddball trying to live a normal life, but I never was a centuries old superhuman or a fallen being struggle for redemption. Nor was I a resident of a large city, for that matter. But while I never was a father, either, I at least understand the theme of family it means. Who knows if that will become a part of my life as well?
But that means that once again I knew the major plot points, but none of the reasons how or the nature of the characters involved. This also feels like the first season of Angel where the year long plot arc went according to the creator's plan. An early actor departure derailed season 1, and the entire arc of season 2 short-circuited where guess actors were unable to play in the final episodes, bringing in some "alternate dimension" goofiness.
This time, the story revolved from episode one about the birth, growth, and adulthood of Angel's child, impossibly a human, and about another arch-nemesis from his past. The arch-nemesis is Holtz, a vampire hunter from Angel's evil days, brought back into modern times. This is a very unusual concept, especially in the Buffy universe. Instead of a season-long Big Bad villain, they brought back a Big Good; a hero suddenly faced with the fact that his greatest enemy is another good guy. So instead of inducing new personalities, goals, and at least some moments to offer sympathy for an evil out to conquer the world/universe/etc., we see the good guy sink into his own flaws, deceit, and justifications.
Meanwhile, we see Angel's own transformations. If the first season was about turning a brooding anti-hero into someone forced into dealing with friends and people again, and the second was seeing him at his lowest and struggle to return to the position of hero, this season was about seeing him deal with a complication almost all humans must endure. It's the opposite of last season, as he slowly reaches his emotional peak, and then it drops him down again. Angel first has to deal with his returning, pregnant, semi-evil ex-girlfriend, and then a needy and healthy human baby. This creates all the problems of single fatherhood, coupled with the less typical handicaps of his vampire nature and the violent enemies he accrued, but it also shows the joys being a father, finally showing a form of love from Angel outside of the romantic or semi-platonic.
But babies are boring, so of course the plot fixed that soon enough. After his child is abducted to a hell dimension, Angel's darkness returns and becomes personal. That was temporary, but soon the child, Angel, came back as a teenager. Now we see the path of fatherhood at another stage, and again Angel reaches his peaks and valleys, ending in one hell of a valley. His nemesis, despite dying, finally got his revenge through Angel's own son, leaving Angel in an uncertain fate at the end of the season.
This season also had one more element to it: the long game. I can't speak much until I finally finish the next season, but I will say that there are hints of a much larger plot, beyond even one season. Well, it's possible that the major plot of next season is just being ad-libbed from hereon and they just tossed in some plot points from first season, but regardless there were other advanced plots beyond Angel's. The first is that of long-term secondary heroine Cordellia, who went from a human with occasional prophetic visions to a half-demon with the same visions to an ascended higher being, off to a fate as uncertain as Angel's. And Wesley, the last major character left from season 1, was torn between loyalty to his allies and fear that Angel would one day endanger his child and the attacks by Holtz would hurt his friends. He elected to betray Angel by abducting his child, on the hopeful condition that this would save the child's life and keep Holtz at bay. Instead, the child was sent to a hell dimension, Holtz attacked anyway, Wesley was almost killed, and Angel and the rest of the regulars hate him for his traitorous actions. This brings Wesley even further down the darker but more pragmatic path.
These arcs were handled competently, but others were less successful. Fred, a minor character introduced last season, became a regular this season, but she hadn't yet developed much of a personality. She's cute, spunky, smart, awkward with a tendency to ramble or obsess about science, and both Wesley and Gunn, another Angel regular, had the hots for her. But she didn't really develop as a person beyond this point, nor did she do much to become competent with the normal series violence. And many single-plot episodes felt like they needed at least one revision. An early episode where Gunn's old friends revealed a darker side was one example, as was a very strange episode about a demon who somehow owned Gunn's soul. (Gunn had a lot of weird development arcs, actually.) Often, they were resolved too quickly, aiming for a clever subversion of a normal trope but without actually explaining how that subversion makes sense within the universe of the series.
So the entire season got, say, a B+ or A-. I liked it better than last season, due to its much better story arc and moral complexity, but it still never reached the archetypal appeal of Buffy. Maybe that's unsurprising; after all, I have been a high-schooler and an awkward oddball trying to live a normal life, but I never was a centuries old superhuman or a fallen being struggle for redemption. Nor was I a resident of a large city, for that matter. But while I never was a father, either, I at least understand the theme of family it means. Who knows if that will become a part of my life as well?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
