Updated my blogger profile again today, and clicked the box for another random question. The question was "The wicked backspin caught you off guard. How will you play it off without losing your footing?".
The Story
W. Backspin was one wicked dude. He grabbed me by the collar and I almost lost my footing, standing there on the edge of the cliff. Then he kneed me in the gut and let go. Over the side of the cliff I fell, presumably to my doom. At the last second, however, I grabbed hold of Backspin's ankles, and pulled his feet out from under him. He fell on his back, hard. Then he slid toward the edge. Right before going over the edge, he flipped over and stopped himself, just barely digging his fingernails into the packed earth. We both hung there for the time being. He barely holding on to the edge of the cliff, and me holding onto Backspin's ankles.
Backspin tried to shake me loose, but I held on for dear life. But Backspin's socks slipped down, and then his shoes started to come off. I screamed when I realized what was happening. Unfortunately for Backspin, at the same time his shoes came off and I plunged to my death, he lost his grip and fell. In midair Backspin flipped around and took a swipe at me, punching me cruelly in the face, blackening my eye. I shouted an obscenity and punched back at him. I missed and spun around in mid-air, my feet facing him. So I kicked out with all my might and Backspin slammed into the side of the cliff.
He bounced off the side of the cliff and then hit the ground with a thud. It was however, only a rocky outcropping. I, propelled a foot or so backwards, missed the ledge and continued my downward plunge. A few short seconds later my body hit the icy water. I sunk like a stone into the depths. I tried to swim to the surface, but an undertow drug me down into the murky blackness. My lungs felt like they were about to burst. I was about to open my mouth and suck in my last breath, which would of course fill my lungs with water and I would drown...
Image: Me, standing near the edge of the cliff moments before Backspin arrived.
This post concerns my reaction to the season four finale of the television series "Dexter". For anyone unfamilar with the show, here is a short synopsis from Wikipedia: Dexter is an Emmy and Golden Globe Award-winning American television drama series that airs on the pay-TV channel, Showtime. In February 2008 reruns began to air on CBS. Set in Miami, the series centers on Dexter Morgan (Michael C. Hall), a serial killer with standards who works for the Miami Metro Police Department as a blood-spatter analyst (see the Wikipedia page for an extended synopsis).
By the way, I advise against reading any further if you have not seen season four (or the shocker ending) and plan on doing so. Because spoilers will be discussed. I'm calling this a "reaction" and not a "review" because I haven't seen a single episode of season 4 (which concluded on 12/13/2009). Because it hasn't come out on DVD yet. I saw season one without subscribing to Showtime because DirecTV re-aired it on another channel, with, presumably, the intent of getting people hooked and feeling compelled to subscribe to a pay channel in order to find out what happens in season 2.
I did become hooked, but, unfortunately for Showtime, I am a patient person. I waited until season 2 came out on DVD and purchased it. I also waited and purchased season 3 on DVD. As for season 4, I inadvertently discovered that one of the major characters had accepted a part on another television program. Why? Because they killed her off on "Dexter". So, after I found that out I wanted to know why. Turns out she was murdered by another serial killer. After she married Dexter and gave birth to his son. (The character I'm referring to is Rita Bennett, who is portrayed in seasons 1-4 by Julie Benz. Julie Benz's current TV gig is as a "recurring" character on "Desperate Housewives", a show I have never seen and have no interest in seeing).
Someone on another message board I frequent posted the following response to the "Dexter" season four finale...
It was absolutely brilliant... The absolute horror and feeling of loss are what this show is about. ...it felt entirely appropriate. Dexter's little world gets shattered bit by bit as the series progresses ... I think what happened at the end of this season was as it should be. (I've shortened what this other person originally wrote, whittling it down to what I thought was essential. In any case, I wasn't comfortable stealing, verbatim, what someone else wrote).
Well, without seeing yet (although I know basically what happened) my response is general disagreement with this person. I wrote a response and posted it.
My thoughts (based only on what I've read) regarding the season 4 finale...
I haven't seen it yet, but I don't like the idea of killing off a character just to show you have "balls" (as an earlier poster put it) [this was a comment by someone other than person whom I quoted above]. They did the same thing on another show I really liked... Highlander. I was OK with the killing off of major characters on that show until they went to far and killed off Richie. They had established a prescient of not being afraid to kill off characters, and so they thought they needed to do something bold... but they made a mistake killing this character (and it didn't help that the episode was seriously lame-o).
With "Dexter" I thought what was going to happen was that he was going to become more and more normal (see things from an average person's point of view) as time progressed. When the show first started he wasn't even capable of participating in a romantic relationship - and now he is (or was, up until the end of the last season) a married father.
Also, I thought they were setting up a lot of threads (in regards to his relationship with Rita) that were going to be examined later on - like the fact that she had been married before Paul. And Dexter being in a relationship gave the series an excuse for gratuitous sex and nudity (which, of course a cable pay channel wants - to attract viewers). Now, how can he become involved with anyone else? He only kills other killers - wouldn't he think twice before putting another innocent woman in harm's way (as people around him seem to always be getting bumped off)?
Another reason Rita's murder bothers me... He spent the entire second season being led astray, but ended up back with her at the end. Now they've killed her off. Reminded me of Aliens, where Ripley spent the entire second half of the movie saving Newt, and then they killed her off at the beginning of the third movie. I hate it when they do that.
Also, what happens to Rita's kids? Is Dexter now going to be a single dad of three? Or will he only be a single dad of one? Will Rita's mom want custody of Cody and Astor [Rita's two children from her previous marriage to Paul]? In any case, I'd think that Dexter may want to find another home for them, seeing as it is dangerous to be around him. Who will they kill off next? His sister? I doubt it, but then again I thought Rita was safe.
Seems to me the only reason they killed her was for the shock value. They thought they were being clever in mimicking Dexter's experience of seeing his mother killed in front of him. Whatever his INFANT son saw, I doubt he will remember it. He was just to young for something he most likely won't remember to haunt him for the rest of his life (and turn him into a killer like his dad).
I know that people here generally don't approve of others judging things they have not seen or heard, but I don't have a problem doing so. This move gets a thumbs down from me. They could have come up with something better than this cheap and intellectually lazy "shocker" ending. Maybe I'll change my mind after actually seeing it, but for now this is my opinion.
6/6/2015 Update: I wrote the reaction above before watching the actual episode. In retrospect it was not that bad. I did not then (and still do not) think Rita should have been killed off, but the show went on and I still liked it... up until the last episode. "Dexter" ended on 9/22/2013 after 8 seasons and 96 episodes with Remember the Monsters?. In regards to the last season, some people did not like it, but I thought it was OK. In fact I was onboard until the last few minutes of the final episode... which is when it totally derailed.
Many reviewers have said the finale was one of the worst, and I must agree. Although, perhaps not for the reasons some give. While many people seem to think Dexter should have gotten his comeuppance, I don't know why a happy ending would have been that terrible. He already decided he no longer needed to kill, so why couldn't he have gone off with Hannah and lived happily ever after? Apparently that ending was NEVER considered. The showrunner wanted to kill Dexter but the Showtime bigwigs said no.
Instead they had Dexter come to the incorrect conclusion that he had to leave his loved ones for their own safety. Even though what put them in danger was him killing other killers, and he had just decided he no longer needed to kill. So, obviously this would not be a problem in the future. Although he should have finished off Saxon instead of deciding to turn him over to the police. Which was his real problem... that he let some people live too long. Like Trinity. He let him live thinking he could learn something from him, and Trinity ended up killing Rita.
Because Dexter learned the absolutely WRONG lesson when the writer made it appear that he had made a breakthrough, my rating for "Remember the Monsters?" is LAME-O. Killing off his sister was not right either. Not after the entire season up to that point was her suffering and finally accepting what happened at the end of the previous season. Then when she does, she's killed off! A much worse decision than killing Rita, IMO. As a faithful viewer for 8 seasons I feel betrayed. Still. Screw whoever was responsible for this horrible ending that ruined an otherwise awesome series. Seriously, you suck.
Updated my profile today, deciding, on a lark to, as I often do on my political centered blog, ramble on as much as possible. Although on that blog the rambling is not deliberate, it just happens. Anyway, the "about me" section allows for 1200 characters. I typed as much as I decided I could without really saying anything, and, without knowing how many characters I had, saved my profile. Obviously less than 1200 characters, as the profile save was successful.
Next, although I had never done so before, I decided to answer the "random question", which was, "The children are waiting! Please tell them the story about the bald frog with the wig". Because there was no noted character limit, I assumed that there wasn't one. So I proceeded to enter my story. When finished I clicked "save"... and was informed that there was an problem.
My profile could not be saved because I had exceeded the 400 character limit with my answer to the random question. The 400-character limit was displayed in red, and had not been there before. Turns out I exceeded it by a significant number of characters. After cutting and pasting my story into Word, I clicked on "tools" and then "word count". The count was more than 10 times the allowable number. Instead of letting my story go to waste, I decided to turn it into a post for my blog. Given the fact that this blog gets very few visitors, and given the fact that my goal with this story was to ramble on for as long as possible, I doubt anyone will read the story. Oh well, we shall see.
The Story
The bald frog did not know that all frogs were bald, and so, to cover his embarrassment, he wore a wig. The other frogs laughed at the wig-wearing frog, causing him even greater embarrassment than being bald did. Even so, he decided to continue wearing the wig, because his head was cold, and he didn't have a hat. Frogs have no money, so a trip to the hat store was out of the question. The wig-wearing frog cried himself to sleep every night, cursing his baldness and lack of a hat. Why me? he often wondered, sometimes thinking that he should just end it all.
One day, after a particularly nasty group of young punk frogs surrounded him and jeered him relentlessly, he decided to do just that. He considered leaving a note for anyone who might find his lifeless body to read, but realized that, most likely nobody would be interested in "why", but that they would, if they cared in the least, probably be glad that the world was minus one loser. The next thing to consider was how to do it. That is, how would he put an end to his miserable existence? The wig wearing frog considered hopping onto the nearest freeway and allowing a fast moving vehicle to smoosh him flat, but decided that was far to horrific to even think about.
Guts squirted everywhere, and vile flies landing, and pooping on his pancaked road kill corpse was a vision that haunted him for several days. He couldn't come up with another method to off himself; he couldn't even think seriously about it. Because so much of his time was taken up with thoughts about how awful being road kill would be, or how awful the moment just prior to becoming road kill might be. And, avoiding other frogs and their taunts regarding his wig was also time consuming.
A visit to the location where the most delicious flying insects were meant the possibility of an encounter with another frog. And so he just lay in bed and did nothing all day. Not going out meant not encountering any other frogs who might make fun of his bald head or wig. The wig-wearing frog was more miserable than he had ever been in his life. He didn't have the nerve to seek the sweet relief he craved, although he was completely convinced that there was no other answer. Every day he grew continually weaker, due to a lack of food and exercise to keep his muscles from wasting away. He wasn't even sure he wanted to eat any more of those insects, realizing now that eating them whole meant that he was also eating their feces.
This was an idea that entered his head when he first imagined the nasty bugs defecating on his flattened carcass, and decided then and there he would never consume another. After that decision it did not take long before the wig-wearing frog was so weak from hunger that he could no longer rise from his bed. The end is near now, the wig-wearing frog reflected one evening. He had, a long time ago, had some "friends" over for a visit, but that ended when the so-called friends criticized his (then) newly found wig. It was a casual get-together during which he had expected them all to be impressed with his now covered head. Instead they laughed, at first thinking he was pranking them. When they realized he was not, they laughed and called him names.
Looking back now, that was when the trouble began. If he could go back and do it all over, he would never have picked the wig out of the muck where he found it. But, as much as he hated the wig, he hated his bald head more. The wig-wearing frog drifted off, dreaming of the life that might have been if only he had found a stylish hat instead of the ugly smelly wig.
I'm watching MSNBC News Live and a story about the new version of the iPhone, iPhone 4, just concluded. The story covered the "iPhone frenzy", or "iPhone-demonium" - people standing in line to buy the new iPhone 4. The correspondent reporting live from the scene called it "super cool". The anchor back in the studio said she was jealous because she thought that the iPhone 4 that the correspondent was holding up was his own. It turned out to be a prop, and an Apple rep was standing by, waiting to retrieve the phone when the segment was over. My response? WTF?!
They did not say how much it cost, but I'm guessing around $400. In my opinion these people are idiots. Although you may find this hard to believe, I do not own a cell phone. I have no use for one, mainly due to the fact that I am not an important person. Nobody has the need to contact me "on the go". That, however, is not why iPhone owners tick me off.
The reason iPhone owners tick me off is because this is simply way to damn much to spend on a phone. If you have so much disposable income that you can afford to throw it away on an unneeded and overpriced gadget, when another lesser phone is more than adequate, you are either wrong, or should consider giving the money to a worthy charity. By being "wrong", I mean you're wrong about being able to afford an iPhone. Put the money towards your retirement, your children's education, or simply save it for a rainy day. Or, if you aren't wrong (you CAN afford the iPhone), it has got to be because you are a rich selfish arrogant Republican who isn't paying enough in taxes.
On the other hand, it is early adopters of new technologies that make it possible for people like me to buy the tech item later, at a much lower price. Without you companies wouldn't be incentivized to continually improve their tech products, which has the effect of driving down the cost of older models. That, at least, makes you useful idiots. However, as I already pointed out, I don't own an iPhone or even a basic cell phone, so these idiots are of no use to me. You're not driving improvements or the cost down of something I ever plan on buying.
For that reason I say, you tick me off. Especially if you already own any previous version of the iPhone and plan on buying the new one immediately. You have more money than sense, and, in this case, are not even a useful idiot. And, don't tell me that your old iPhone is going to your kid, and therefore your purchase is excusable because the phone isn't simply going to be tossed.
Don't tell me this because it will tick me off even more. Children do not need, nor should they have expensive tech gadgets. They will end up spoiled and with a feeling of entitlement. Unfortunately, a rich Republican a-hole probably won't see anything wrong with that.
The impetus for this post came in the mail some weeks ago. It was the September issue of the "Collector's Choice" music catalog. I've ordered a few things from them in the past, so now I'm on their mailing list. Most of their prices are to high, but they have released a few soundtracks on their own label (one reason to buy from them), and have had an occasional sale in the past, during which I purchased some limited edition soundtrack CDs from them (which I collect).
My purchases from Collector's Choice have been made mainly from their website because their catalog only offers a half page of soundtracks! What caught my eye was the cover of the catalog, which advertised the new Beatles' remastered box set. I was interested in what the content and presentation for the new box set containing all the Beatles albums would be. Of course I already have them all, but I was eager to be talked into buying them again. The Collector's Choice description says that the "long awaited" re-mastering was labored over for four years by an "engineering team" and are thus worth re-buying for the improved sonics alone!
After examining what it was that was being offered up for sale I am disappointed to report that this new box set fails to deliver the goods. Content-wise the box set (presented in stereo) is missing the mono mixes. According to the description the "markedly different" mono mixes are "the way George Martin and the Beatles intended the albums to be heard". Why weren't the stereo and mono mixes included on the same disc? Certainly this was possible, since most of the Beatles albums are under 40 minutes in length.
Instead, in order to get the "markedly different" mono mixes, Beatles enthusiasts – who most definitely would want to hear the music "the way George Martin and the Beatles intended" are forced to buy the mono set - and, either pass on the stereo set, or shell out more than $400 for both.
This, IMO, is an obvious ploy to take advantage of Beatles completists. Yes, this may be the last time in the foreseeable future that the Beatles catalog will be reissued, so they are milking it for all they can get. I understand that. Still, I can't help but think that the marketing executives are taking Beatles fans for a ride with this release. For that reason I rate this release "poor", value-wise.
Another reason to rate this release a poor value is because the limited edition mono set is more expensive - even though it lacks three of the albums in the Beatles catalog. "Yellow Submarine", "Abbey Road" and "Let It Be", because they were originally released in stereo, are excluded from this set. Although both the "Help" and "Rubber Soul" discs contain mono and stereo mixes. Because, according to Wikipedia, they were remixed in stereo in 1987 for release on CD. The rational doesn't make any sense to me.
Presentation-wise the box is also lacking. Instead of the industry standard jewel box, the individual discs are housed in cardboard envelopes. Cardboard envelopes are the absolute worst CD packaging option. Cardboard envelopes usually result in scratched discs. A few examples I can cite include the laser etched 2-disc deluxe "Star Wars", and the pop-up dino release of "Jurassic Park: The Lost World".
I purchased these discs new and found them to be scratched when I unsealed them. There is a reason why the jewel case is the industry standard. It is the best way to protect CDs from scratches.
In summary - this box set fails to deliver in three of four categories - content, value, and packaging. As far as the mono set being "limited"... first of all why? If this is "the way George Martin and the Beatles intended the music to be heard", it should NOT be limited. This is a historically significant release, and should be available for anyone who wants to buy it for the foreseeable future.
Secondly, I don't trust the "limited" claim. Wikipedia says initially 10,000 units were released, but they quickly sold out and the label decided to press more. But it is still limited, or so they claim. Sounds like a scam to get people to "act fast" or miss out.
I previously mentioned that I collected limited edition soundtracks. In that community most collectors view the "limited edition" claim to be sacrosanct. Pressing more copies, even if you vastly underestimated what the demand would be, is considered a betrayal of trust. It rarely happens (apart of the fact that the labels who release limited edition soundtracks are almost always 2nd party licensors and contractually limited regarding many copies they can release).
Also, because of the historical significance of this release, I seriously doubt the mono mixes will be shelved and unavailable forever. Not having heard these discs I can't address category four, which would be how they sound. And I won't be able to judge them sonically anytime soon, since I'm going to be sticking with my original releases for now. I want it, but aside from not being able to afford it, I'm upset that they didn't release ONE set with both the mono and stereo mixes.
The stereo albums are currently available separately. The mono mixes are not. If the mono mixes ever do become available separately I MAY eventually buy them. I'm guessing that they will be. Although I'm fairly certain that the stereo and mono mixes will NEVER released on the same disc. It wouldn't make sense when the way this release has been handled has made it clear that the goal is to squeeze as much money out of these reissues as possible.
As detailed in my inaugural post, this blog was created as an outlet for all my NON-political thoughts. I've decided to break that rule however. It's my blog and I can do whatever the hell I want. The NEW rule is that all posts will be quick off-the-top-of-my-head affairs for which no research will be done. I may claim that a "fact" is just that, a FACT, but I will do no research to be certain of it or provide any links to confirm that anything I'm claiming isn't simply made up.
Politics will be brought up in this post. And possibly others. On my politically themed blog I've been largely discussing healthcare and my support for a public option. Although what I really believe the US should adopt is a single-payer system.
I truly believe that the adoption of such a system would be good for our economy. Small businesses would no longer be burdened by the rising cost of providing healthcare for their employees. According to this website "Medicare for all would be a windfall for businesses". Workman's comp claims would be "cut in half". People wouldn't be tied to their jobs, or be scared to leave because they wanted to change jobs - or start their own businesses.
There are a bunch more reasons. I encourage you to check out the website. See the link I provided earlier - a link I said (even earlier) that I wouldn't provide, but decided to anyway. I'm still typing this directly into blogger however, and don't plan on spending a lot of time composing this, or any other post. Unlike my other blog where I do a lot of research.
Anyway, the reason for me, personally, wanting a national healthcare system is because I do not have healthcare insurance. And I have a pre-existing condition. A chronic disease that is currently untreated, makes my life miserable, but probably won't kill me (anytime soon, in any case). The health care reform bill we eventually end up with may or may not include a public option, although it appears that exclusions for "pre-existing" conditions WILL be one of the issues addressed. The healthcare companies are running TV spots saying so. But I'll believe it when I see it. Not that it will help me at the moment. My current economic circumstances are such that I could not afford to pay even if they would accept me.
I have largely been without healthcare insurance for most of my adult life. During the period I last had health care insurance I went to see a specialist several times. The medicines prescribed, while very expensive, were otherwise completely useless. My out-of-pocket was only a small co-pay, but I still felt ripped-off because huge amounts of money were paid for medicines that had no effect what-so-ever. The insurance company paid for something that may have as well been a placebo (who cares, screw them), but the drug company (screw them too) was very well compensated for a product that would have most likely cost a lot less in Canada. Or any other country where the Government negotiates for lower prices.
This is bullcrap and I'm sick of it. Soak the rich I say. The lives of everyone will be improved greatly. The likelihood of that happening is, however, quite low, IMO. The class war is winding down, and it is the wealthy who have prevailed. Not a surprise really, although we did beat them back several times over the course of our nation's history. Barack Obama doesn't appear to be a an FDR type president. Although FDR wasn't the transformation kind of liberal that we need now when he first was elected president.
Even though I'm not an optimist I haven't given up yet. I'm not dead yet and my health has deteriorated to a point where I wish I was. Although I can foresee a time where that will be the case, that time isn't here yet.
This is the first post on my new blog. The reason I started this new blog was because I wanted to test out some of the new features Blogger has added recently. I did try to upgrade my template, but what I got discarded all the hard work I had put in to customizing the look of my blog.
They warned me, but I tried it anyway. And I found out that the upgraded template is written in XML instead of HTML. I took a look at it and I really didn't think I'd be able to customize a new XML template and end up with something that looked even somewhat close to what I have now. I'm fairly comfortable coding in HTML, and really like the look of my blog.
I'd still like to add the "Followers Gadget", although it apparently works only if you use the XML template. There should be a way to add the XML code inline to an HTML template. So far I haven't been able to get it to work though. If anyone has any inside info I'd be grateful if you could share.
10/12/2016: This post asks a question that is now irrelative. Anyway, I was talking about my other blog, Sleeping with The Devil (SWTD). Re-reading what I wrote above, that isn't clear. Back in 2006 Blogger didn't have templates. I customized SWTD using HTML. In any case, I've since updated SWTD by adding a template. Years ago, actually. And IMO, it looks pretty good.
But knowing some HTML basics (as well as CSS) helps. I've seen some bloggers who don't even know how to do paragraphs. Here, for example. When this guy wants to indicate a new paragraph, he does so with a bunch of periods. You'd think that after 9 years he'd have figured it out.
