STS-128 Discovery Shuttle Launch

Retrieved from NASA TV.



Night launches are sick. Nothing else comes close.

Inglourious Basterds

My mind is still recovering from the all assault of Tarantino brutality. His latest work leaves divided opinions.

Part of me loves the film. The no-holds-barred approach to a Nazi vengeance film ranks the work on the level of Saw, High Tension and Hostel in terms of violence. Make no mistake: your $12.50 admission is not covering plot. It's going towards the number of props that were destroyed by explosions, blunt force trauma, knives, machine guns and a various array of other weapons. It's probably also going to cover some of the inevitable complaints from Germany and whoever decided this film was 14A. Laced with his well known dialogue and comedic relief, the film had the audience laughing and reclining in horror from second to second.

And yet, despite immensely enjoying the movie, a part of me hates myself for enjoying it. Not because it's a senseless attack on the Third Reich. Not because it had Brad Pitt in it. Simply put, this movie was a sell-out. As game developers have learned, brutalizing Nazis sells. Hardcore. To me, this was nothing but an underhanded attempt to cash in on the latest violence fetish in moviegoers combined with North American society's love for bashing the Reich. I had always held Tarantino above that standard, his films were unique and stood in a league of their own. I'm not deifying him, only pointing out that previous films had a fantastic ability to take a simple story and spice it up in a new fashion. Well, this certainly isn't an original story, but it lacks that unique flair that I so enjoyed about his films.

Comprehensive analysis aside, everything else about the film was fantastic. Brad Pitt and his 'Basterds' were delightful. Negative reviews often say they didn't have enough screen time, but I'd beg to differ. Pitt's few scenes and distance from the story only enhanced his character. After all, that fleeting moment where Dracula crosses the scene is far more spectacular then following his every step. The acting was top notch across the cast. Christopher Waltz played Col. Hans Landa and stole the show. Even with Pitt failing miserably (and hilariously) at an Italian accent, Waltz kept the spotlight on himself. Definitely the star of the film.

The music and cinematography was standard Tarantino. Read: excellent. In his style of filmmaking there is no competition. The scene where the German Sergeant is about to be interrogated is a fine example of this.

Despite having so much fun, my reservations still hold. I think this movie is going on the list of guilty pleasures I so loathe and love simultaneously. I hate myself for loving it. After all, despite all the ingenuity and creativity, this movie wasn't made to tell a story. It seemed tailor made to appeal to a wide variety of audiences who would pay to see this movie again and again, and then buy the DVD with deleted scenes full of violent brutality. Damn Tarantino for selling out, and damn him for doing it so well.

Defying Gravity

I cannot believe a) I watched this and b) I'm going to write about it. Let us be straight from launch time: this is Grey's Anatomy in space. Everyone either has or is sleeping with everyone, and this show is not propelled by science or science fiction: it's a drama. In space. Like the Titanic buffs who claimed they watched the movie six times "for the ship", I'm watching this one in hopes of some light entertainment in a fashion that I don't find horrid. I binged three episodes, and have a few remarks.

This show has potential. There is enough drama in the introduction episodes to keep the show going, as long as the ideas flow. If the storyline is drawn out any more than it is now, Defying Gravity is going to crawl to a halt and flop. At least in my eyes. As much as I prefer something a little more intellectual, it's nice to relax every now and again with something a bit lighter. With a show that still takes place in space, I can deal with the drama. Some of it is mildly entertaining. My only caution: this show thinks it has some monumental messages to share with you about dating, life, sex and work. I pray to dead gods that nobody EVER listens to advice they received on a show like this.

That aside. Ron Livingston earned enough street cred in Office Space for me to watch the rest of his acting career. Having him as the star is a HUGE plus for me. The rest of the actors are popular, but not Hollywood. They can certainly hold their own, and I haven't had any serious problem with the acting thus far.

Onto the science. Of course, this type of show doesn't cater to those who lose their minds in the intricacies of time dilation and interstellar travel. It's for Grey's fans. I should hope that they would be smart enough to question the science, but I'm not that optimistic about our species. People are easily sated. First off, gravity. It made me REALLY happy that they inserted a stupid one liner that answered the question of gravity on the ship. It's actually a cool idea, electromagnetic forces in the astronaut's suits hold them down, but everyday objects float in microgravity. They demonstrated how this worked on a tomato, but dropped the ball on other objects. That's fine with me - I know this show isn't about science.

However, I have one VERY large bone to pick with the producers. Or editors. Or ANYONE I can speak to who is involved with this show. I think it was episode two when they had launched the vessel on its mission and began to broadcast a science lesson back home to children in elementary school. If this isn't ringing any bells, fear not, I won't hit you. Maybe with a book, but not my hand. One of the objectives of Christa McAuliffe's presence on the 1986 Challenger mission was to broadcast a space lesson to elementary school children. For those living under a rock, Challenger exploded tragically 73 seconds after takeoff in January of 1986 due to an O-Ring's exposure to cold temperatures. If this was meant to be a tribute, it missed the mark SLIGHTLY by not making it more obvious. The plot line in the show was tasteless and offensive, and I wasn't even born then. If your going to put such a topic into your show, you must, MUST tell your audiences about it's purpose. After all, Grey's Anatomy fans aren't likely to know anything about that tragedy.

Phew. Got that off my chest. One last one: the opening of the pilot shows Ron Livingston blasting off of Mars and abandoning two astronauts APPARENTLY because of a storm. Of course, his character demands to stay to save them but is overrode by mission control. And he bites the bullet for the decision. Without further development, this is ENTIRELY implausible. I'm willing to buy that communications between the ship and earth isn't subject to time delays, it would make for VERY slow television: I'm sorry, but your message has taken the entire sixty minute time slot just to REACH EARTH, you'll get a response next episode. I can let it slide. But there really needs to be more development on that decision to abandon the astronauts, it just plain looks bad. It seems that this plot line is being investigated, so I'm holding out hope that it may be drawn out a bit more.

Ranting aside, there is one aspect of the show that stands out as extraordinary to me. Defying Gravity is aimed for a mainstream audience. I imagine a scenario where students are discussing the latest developments on some TV show that I have zero interest in and have never watched. This actually requires little imagination. However, in the case of Defying Gravity, I would be able to contribute and participate in this conversation. This should be qualified. I don't care in the least about talking about stupid television shows with brainless slobs, I'd rather listen to music and stay in my own world. The benefit is on the other end: for the first time since Apollo, space could be mainstream and appeal to a wide audience. This show has the potential to bring space exploration and developments to a popular audience who, as much as it pains me to admit, NASA and other agencies need the support of.

Contrast this with Battlestar Galactica. One of the most incredible science fiction shows to take place on television, it remained the realm of the dork. Which I was perfectly content with: dumb commentary is hard to come by when your audience has an IQ over 100. I can't say the same for shows like Canadian Idol or So You Think You Can Dance. More like So You Think You Can Make Me Dumber? In any case, Defying Gravity may be a baby step which reinvigorates public interest in space. Especially in light of NASA's desire to return to the moon by 2020 and Mars thereafter.

Soft science fiction to be sure, but entertaining. This shows greatest potential in my eyes is its chance to bring space to a popular audience. For BSG fans, this is a nice break until Caprica starts up in September. Watch with an open mind.