I’ve been huge Star Wars fan since childhood, but was a bit disappointed overall with some of the inconsistencies that cropped up when the prequels were released. Keith Martin helps make sense of it all. He ties the prequels together with Star Wars: A New Hope (later to be called Episode IV) in his post “A New Sith, or Revenge of the Hope.” It is packed full of insights, some of which I’ve seen tossed around here and there, but he also adds a bit of humor in just the right places.
If we accept all the Star Wars films as the same canon (as it seems we must) then a lot that happens in the original films has to be reinterpreted in the light of the prequels. As we now know, the rebel Alliance was founded by Yoda, Obi-Wan Kenobi and Bail Organa. What can readily be deduced is that their first recruit, who soon became their top field agent, was R2-D2.
I wasn’t really expecting much when I heard about Surrogates, so waited to watch it until it came out on DVD. From the previews it looked like many other science fiction action films that seem to be pumped out by Hollywood. The main premise of the movie is that humans live their lives through “surrogate” (robot) bodies. I’m a huge fan of Asimov and his robot novels, so this was enough to catch my attention. The human interface is kind of like how control worked in Avatar, but instead of an organic body as the host, it is robotic. I would definitely not classify the surrogates as the cyborgs that Ray Kurzweil thinks we will eventually become. One of the main advantages to using a surrogate is that the owner is always protected, so in some ways they are better than cyborgs. There was no way for any harm to come to a user, until now.
Tom Greer, played by Bruce Willis, is in charge of investigating the destruction of a couple of surrogates. This is usually not that big of a deal, but one of the owners is found dead. Whoever wrote the script really wasn’t trying anything new as far as the murder/mystery approach is concerned. I was expecting a lot more action based on the previews that I saw. It felt like I was watching for 40 minutes before things started to get moving. This move was all around average in most respects. Nothing really stood out. It wasn’t bad, but not great.
One completely unrelated observation is that I found Bruce Willis’ upper lip (stash zone) alarmingly long. It looked almost twice the size I’d normally expect. I think of most of the roles I’ve seen him in, he’s got a beard of some sort, so that kind of hides that feature of his face. Am I alone here? Check out the pic on IMDB
Where have I been lately? A number of factors have resulted in me not posting since December. One of which was that over the past few months I’ve been chipping away at The Collected Stories of Arthur C. Clarke. At just shy of 1,000 pages, it has been my lunch time reading for a while now. There are a couple short stories that I plan on reviewing, as soon as I can remember to bring the book home from work. I’ve also been filling most of my free time, 177 hours now, with playing Battlefield 3 (my stats).
I’ve watched a few movies, but I didn’t get around to reviewing those. One was Gamer, which I didn’t expect much from. The other was Battle: Los Angeles, a cookie cutter “aliens attack, let’s fight back” movie. I didn’t really “watch” these as much as listened to them as I cleaned out my office. After going through my recent posts, I noticed that I never reviewed 28 Weeks Later. This was actually one of the sequels I’ve seen that I liked more than the original. I might have to re-watch, then write up a review. I watched a decent movie last night though, The Adjustment Bureau, which I plan on reviewing in the next few days, if not tonight. My goal for myself is to have it done before the end of the month. Thank goodness for leap years!
OK, enough excuses. Thanks to all of you that still have me in your newsreader. I’ll try to be better about posting updates in the future.
Tonight with my wife, I watched an interesting episode of Nova titled “The World’s Smartest Machine.” Romantic, right? You can tell we are a couple of geeks at heart. Being a huge fan of Asimov and his robot creations, I am continually amazed at the progress of robotics and artificial intelligence. As a kid I was playing chess as early as the 3rd grade. I’ve always thought of myself as a pretty good chess player. When I heard about a computer that supposedly could beat a world champion chess player, I was intrigued. Garry Kasparov battled IBM’s Deep Blue supercomputer in 1996 and won, however he eventually lost a rematch in 1997. Well, IBM is back at it, this time taking on Jeopardy. Nova takes us behind the scenes with the developers of “Watson,” the next step in AI. I was disappointed when the episode ended and it didn’t say who won. I didn’t realize until logging on PBS.org that the contest actually was taking place while I was watching Nova (on my media center PC). After some frantic Google searches, I eventually came across a Twitter feed with a link to a Youtube posting of the episode. This was not quite 2 hours after the episode aired! Isn’t technology great? I expect the Youtube post to be served a DMCA take down, so watch it soon if you plan on it. In addition to the episode at the end of this post, I’ve embedded the Nova preview and an humorous parody of the challenges Watson overcame during his development. I suggest watching the Nova episode first. If you are at all interested in AI, you must check these out!
There are two more nights to the match, airing Tuesday February 15th, and Wednesday the 16th. Be sure to check them out, along with some live blogging on PBS.org. I find myself rooting for Watson, not because I want to see humans defeated, but because I want to see humans capable of making something smart enough to do it. Who do you think will win? Who do you want to win?
