Scott’s Perfect Iced Tea

Posted on August 10th, 2009 in Engineerboy,Recipes by EngineerBoy
scotts-perfect-iced-tea

Sweet Texas Iced Tea

When I was a young teenager, my family would always tell me, “You make the *best* iced tea!”.  I was quite proud of my iced tea, and would make it regularly for the whole family, and I always made sure we had iced tea available in the summer.

However, as I got older and wiser, I realized that while I was quite competent at making iced tea, my family had most assuredly been overstating its superiority because they knew that such praise would keep me in the kitchen slaving over a hot pot of boiling water.

Their behaviors (you know who you are!) were right on the border between encouraging and exploitative, but one of the side-effects is that years spent making iced tea has led me to a recipe and method that has become quite good, if I do say so myself.  It is a far cry from my original tea-making days, but it is still in keeping with the spirit of good, old-fashioned Texas sweet iced tea.

Ingredients
5 family-sized Tetley Iced Tea Blend tea bags
1 family-sized Luzianne Green Tea bag
1 regular-sized Lipton Mint Tea bag
¾ cup Florida Crystals Natural cane sugar

Gear
Revere Ware 3 quart sauce pan
Tupperware Impressions 1 gallon pitcher
Measuring cup
Nylon spoon
Stainless steel strainer (fine mesh/net)

Fill the 3 quart sauce pan with water up to within approximately ¾” from the top and bring to a boil.  While the water is heating, put all the tea bags in the pitcher, removing the paper tags from the Lipton and Luzianne tea bags (the Tetley Iced Tea bags are string-less and tag-less, made for iced tea!).

Once the water is boiling, *carefully* pour it into the pitcher over the tea bags.  Give the pitcher a few seconds of stirring to fully immerse the tea bags, then set aside and let it steep for 30 minutes.

After the 30 minutes are up, remove all of the tea bags (one at a time, and squeezing the excess tea out against the inside wall of the pitcher so that it runs back down into the pitcher).  Once the tea bags are removed, place the strainer over the (empty) sauce pan, and pour the tea through the strainer and into the sauce pan.  This step filters out any tea leaves that may have been released by the tea bags, which have a tendency to fall apart about 20% of the time.

Pour the strained tea back into the pitcher, add the 1 cup of sugar and stir to dissolve the sugar.  Note that this step is crucial because you want to dissolve the sugar in the water while it is still warm.

Once the sugar is dissolved (only takes 5-10 seconds of stirring), add ice and/or water to bring the tea level up to an inch or so below the top of the pitcher (leaving room for the lid to snug down without getting into the tea).  Chill and serve.  Note that if you used ice for the last step, it should already be cold enough to drink immediately.

This is the most refreshing drink I know, and we always have at least one (and usually two) pitchers of it in the fridge.  The mint and green tea are optional, but I have found that the mint adds a nice refreshing zip, and the green tea adds both a subtle flavor and rumors of health benefits.  Also, you can control the sweetness to your taste and/or dietary needs.

Now *you* make the best iced tea…enjoy!

Grilled Pineapple Salsa

Posted on August 9th, 2009 in Engineerboy,Recipes by EngineerBoy
Sweet, spicy, and tasty!

Sweet, spicy, and tasty!

We’ve been on a fish taco kick lately, trying various combinations of fish, salsa, toppings, and preparation methods.  Yesterday we cooked up a grilled pineapple salsa that was really tasty, and was great on the fish tacos, recipe as follows:

Ingredients
3 tbsp sugar
1 tsp chipotle chili powder
1 tbsp salt
1 tsp garlic powder
1 fresh garlic clove
1 fresh jalepeno
2 cans pineapple rings in juice
1 cup chopped fresh cilantro
1 cup chopped purple onion
2 limes
2 tbsp sesame oil

Combine the four dry ingredients (sugar, chili powder, salt, garlic powder) in a bowl and mix thoroughly.  Drain and spread the pineapple rings out on plates or a cookie sheet and sprinkle one side with the powder mixture, flip the rings and sprinkle the other side.

Heat a skillet on medium-high until hot, then add the sesame oil.  Swirl the oil around to coat the inside of the skillet and pour off the excess oil.  Add the pineapple rings in batches making sure that each ring sits flat on the skillet, and brown the pineapple on both sides – about 2 minutes per side.  Set the rings aside to cool.

Slice open the jalepeno and remove/discard the seeds, then chop finely.  Chop the cilantro and onions, and mince/mash the garlic clove.  Slice the pineapple rings into small wedges about ¼ to ½ inch across.  Combine the pineapple, cilantro, onions, jalepeno, and garlic, and squeeze the juice of two limes and mix thoroughly.  Refrigerate for an hour (or more) to allow the flavors to combine.

Options and alternatives:  As with all sweet/spicy dishes, feel free to dial the flavors up and down to taste.  Also, if you feel industrious, fresh pineapple would be great, as would cooking the pineapple on the grill (like with a flat basket and/or in large strips).

The salsa went great with our fish tacos (complemented with tasty Texas Twisters Creamy Cilantro Cotija sauce from H.E.B for you Texans), but should also be good with pork or chicken, or just with chips.  Yum!

Funny People (***)

Posted on July 31st, 2009 in Engineerboy,Movie Reviews by EngineerBoy
funny-people

L'Chaim...and the turkey, it's kosher?

Funny People is the latest film from adult-comedy king Judd Apatow, and only the third that he has directed, after The 40 Year Old Virgin in 2005 and Knocked Up in 2007.  If you’ve seen either of those, or Superbad or Forgetting Sarah Marshall (where he was the producer), you should have a read on whether or not you’ll enjoy this new film.

George Simmons (played by Adam Sandler) is a successful star who parlayed his beginnings in stand-up comedy into a mega-career and a string of blockbuster films.  However, as the film opens, George receives bad news about his health, and faced with the gaping maw of his own mortality, begins to re-examine his priorities.

He picks Ira Wright (played by Seth Rogen) out of the string of aspiring comics performing for free at the local comedy club and asks him to take over as his personal assistant, and also write some jokes for him.  It’s difficult to tell if this move is selfish (he needs somebody around so his loneliness doesn’t consume him) or generous (he wants to pass on his comedic legacy by helping out a struggling nobody), and Adam Sandler doesn’t give us a clear read, because he plays the character as a realistic-feeling combination of neuroses, talent, affection, and dickish-ness.

Seth Rogen continues to be able to play a believable every-schlub, in spite of his rocketing stardom, and he imbues Ira with a sympathetic combination of self-doubt, opportunism, diligence, and nascent talent.

Part of the realistic feeling in their relationship may come from the fact that Judd Apatow wrote the script, and back in the day he and Adam Sandler were struggling unknowns together, but Sandler’s star caught fire long before Apatow’s, and it feels like some of the real-life dynamics they experienced have been folded into the story. 

I mean, if you look backward from today, you see that both Adam Sandler and Judd Apatow have parlayed their abilities into larger-than-life careers making people laugh, and back in the beginning they must have known that they were roughly equivalent in the talent department.  The fact that one of them (Sandler) hit it big before the other (Apatow) can easily be interpreted as luck, and the inexorable hand of fate plucking one of them from obscurity while leaving the other behind had to introduce some kind of tension and ill-feelings into their relationship (unless they were both saints).

And that dichotomy is played out in startling contrast in this film.  Ira Wright sleeps on a pull-out sofa in an apartment he shares with two other guys, one of whom (Jason Schwartzman) has scored a recurring role in a throwaway sitcom and finds endless ways to flaunt his new liquidity in the faces of his roommates, and the other of whom (Jonah Hill) is faring much better on the stand-up circuit and claims the other bedroom by virtue of being able to pay rent.

This leaves Ira as the bottom dog, working at a deli counter, struggling to get the comedy clubs to let him perform for free – hanging around and filling in for no-shows, and doing anything he can to try to hone his craft in front of an audience.  In contrast is the life that George Simmons leads – a house the size of a small apartment complex, meticulously tended grounds, beautiful pool with a beautiful view, and an endless stream of beautiful women who want nothing more or less than to be able to say they have slept with George Simmons.

But as the movie unfolds, we learn that George has no friends – no real friends.  He’s awkwardly estranged from his parents and sister.  Yes, he beds an endless stream of girls, but as he himself says – “They always leave disappointed.”  The scripts he gets are all throwaways, typecasting him from previous roles and/or trying to lure him into sequels.  Oh, and he threw away the only girl he ever loved by virtue of his constant infidelities.

And the story progresses from there.  I won’t give any more of it away, but it goes in directions that I would not have predicted, and, counter-intuitively for a story where the two main characters are named George and Ira,  it ends on a discordant note.  Not an unsatisfying one, but an unexpected and somewhat bittersweet final chord.

The good news is that while the story is serious, the people in the story are…well…funny, as the title says.  It’s refreshing to see people in a film who talk like people do in real life – referencing things that are happening here and now, companies and celebrities, events and reference points that are up-to-the-minute and sound like things you’d hear in a gathering of your own funny friends.  Well, maybe with a few more dick jokes – make that a lot more dick jokes, but why quibble.

By the end, the laughs have been laughed and the learnings have been learned, and it’s an engaging and enjoyable journey.  Funny People doesn’t raise the bar for Apatow, but it also isn’t a misfire – it feels like a necessary step in the evolution of a storyteller who has really only directed three films, including this one, and so could still be considered a newcomer, regardless of the fact that his name has become synonymous with the renewed genre of R-rate comedies.  I, for one, can’t wait to see the next Apatowian film.

Just Say No to Coconut Welcome Mats

Posted on July 25th, 2009 in Commentary,Engineerboy by EngineerBoy
Say No to Coco on the Flo' by the Do', Scro

Say No to Coco on the Flo' by the Do', Scro

Over the years I’ve owned many coconut floor/welcome mats, and I have finally come to the conclusion that they are both worthless and evil.  First and foremost, they violate their own design purpose – they are supposed to help reduce the amount of crap that you track into your house, but when you buy them they *immediately* begin shedding little bits of coconut husk fibers, so that the area inside the “protected” door starts to look like the floor of the Shredded Wheat factory.

Secondly, the mats themselves are impossible to keep clean.  The fibers are so densely packed that any dirt or mud that gets into them is virtually impossible to get out through any means that doesn’t also start causing pattern baldness.  If you spray it with the hose, that seems to simply compact the dirt further down into the fibers.  If you use a pressure washer it will simply blast the fibers loose from the backing, which will eliminate the trapped dirt, but at what cost?

And a word of dire, dire warning – do not, under any circumstances, attempt to run a coconut mat through your washing machine.  Not even for a quick wash and rinse.  Trust me.  Really.  Trust me.

The reason I know this is that, like all men of progress, I was willing to take risks on behalf of my fellow men (and women) and learn hard lessons by not being too embarrassed to end up in a catastrophic failure of epic proportions.  Heed the following tale of warning.

Let me begin by saying that those of you who are smirking at the stupidity of attempting to clean a coconut welcome mat in the washing machine, and who confidently presume that such an activity could only end in tears, are suffering from a lack of imagination that is all-too-common, and which is a primary contributing cause of humanity’s failure to solve some of our most challenging problems, such as curing cancer or eliminating the designated hitter, because of our timidity in trying solutions that might seem idiotic at first, but whose true efficacy can only be measured by practical experimentation and the willingness of the experimentor to risk great failure while striving for great success.

In other words, I really fucked up.  We had family coming to visit for the weekend, and I was doing some early, proactive house cleaning to try to get ahead of the curve.  If you exit the back of our house, you will first step out into the laundry room and from there step out into the back yard.  We have three big, rambunctious dogs who have free access to the fenced backyard by virtue of a dog door through the back door.  And our dogs show no hesitation in tracking in anything and everything they step in, which is particularly irksome when it’s raining.

In order to try to control the influx of dirt and crap, we implemented a three-phase system.  Outside the dog door there are rubber mats, that are in a lattice-like pattern, meaning they are not solid rubber, but have regular openings that go all the way through.  These mats provide a wonderful first-stage cleaning station for our inbound dogs, because they have to traverse the mats to get to the dog door.  We have two of the mats stacked up and held together with zip ties in order to increase the capacity of the gaps to trap and hold dirt.  This step works really well and removes 60%-70% of the inbound crud.

Step two is (or was) a coconut mat on the floor of the laundry room, and step three is (or was) a coconut mat in the kitchen just inside the door from the laundry room.  This three-stage setup worked great, for a couple of weeks.  But then we noticed that, while the coconut mats were good at absorbing wet dog prints, they were also prone to releasing loose fibers.  Constantly.  So many fibers that if we vacuumed the mats they would clog the vacuum.  I began taking them outside and spraying them down to clean them, but that seemed to only more deeply imbed the dirt into the fibers, while also conveniently loosening more fibers to fall out later.

So, our three phase process was broken – dirt coming in from outside was being controlled, but the cost was coconut fiber husks everywhere.

What I didn’t know at the time was whether or not the shedding of coconut husks was an ongoing issue for these mats, or if it was some kind of shake-out that had to occur, and which would stop once all the loose fibers had been removed.  I figured I’d decide one way or the other by running one of the mats through the washing machine.  I planned the event carefully, and even accounted for the fact that it might fail miserable, and I was standing by to yank the mat out of the washer at the first sign of trouble.

So, I took one of the mats, put it in the washer, set it on a gentle cycle, and let it rip.  The basket filled with water, the agitation started, and stood there watching with the lid open.  The water got dirty very quickly, but there didn’t seem to be a huge number of fibers coming loose.  I watched it for about five minutes, and things seemed to be working, so I decided to wander away and do some more housecleaning and check on it every few minutes.

What I didn’t realize was that at some point between the five and ten minute marks would be when hundreds of thousands of little coconut fibers would all release at the same time.

When I came back, the washer basket was filled with free-floating little coconut fiber husks.  I immediately stopped the washer, flung the dripping, foamy rug out onto the back driveway, and scooped out as many of the fibers manually that I could.  I then ran the washer through a cycle to flush the pipes…or so I thought.

What actually happened is that the coconut fibers had clogged the drain line for the washer, so when the washer would drain, the water would simply back up the drain pipe and flood out onto the floor of the laundry room.  Our washer drain line is prone to clogging anyway, so I have a plumbing snake there, but couldn’t seem to punch through the clog. 

I finally determined that the clog wasn’t at the nearest elbow, but somewhere further down the line.  The line wasn’t fully clogged, just running really slowly.  I poured four large bottles of drain cleaning gel down the line and let it set overnight.  In the morning, voila, it was draining cleanly!  Happy ending, yes?

No.

I then went to the kitchen sink to wash dishes, and as I washed I noticed that the water was draining slowly – so slowly it started filling the sink.  If I stopped the water at the faucet, the sink would eventually drain, but it was s—-l—-o—-w.  Apparently, the coconut husks had managed to backwash up into the drainline for the nearby kitchen sink.  I resolutely applied the same solution to the kitchen sink as I had applied to the washer – four bottles of drain cleaning gel, and let them set overnight.

And in the morning, voila, no difference.  What?  How could four bottles of drain cleaner have failed?  I don’t know, but they had.  At this point, our visitors were set to arrive later that day, and plumbing problems plus houseguests is never a good combination.  I was at the point that all handymen dread – I was considering calling a plumber.

A point of order here – even I find it ironic that I would refer to myself as a “handyman” when I had just done something as stupid as washing a coconut door mat.  However, in my defense, I fully expected that the experiment could go awry.  I just underestimated the degree.

So, there I was, main drainline clogged with coconut husks.  An overnight session of drain cleaner had done nothing.  Incoming houseguests already launched and approaching target.  Expensive plumbers just a phone call away, but timeliness could be an issue.  I wracked my brain for one last attempt at fixing it myself.  My brain was racing – the clog was too far back for the snake to reach.  The husks were too tough for drain cleaner to eat them.  Time was too short for me to start disassembling plumbing.  What to do?

And I then had a wild thought – what if I try to boil it out?  Specifically, what if I boil two huge pots of water, then pour them down the slow sink?  I mean, even coconut husks would have to soften under the onslaught of boiling water, right?  Right??

Right!!!  It worked beautifually.  I boiled water in two of our largest pots.  While the water was boiling I let the sinks drain, so that there was not a lot of standing water to contend with.  When the first pot was boiling I poured it right down and waited.  Nothing.  However, I could sense (or maybe it was just hope) that this first pot of boiling water was softening up the coconut, making it looser and more amenable to being flushed away.  Once the first pot of water had mostly drained, and the second pot was boiling, I poured the second pot of boiling water down the drain.

And waited.  Fifteen seconds – nothing…twenty seconds – nothing…thirty seconds – audible burbling…forty-five seconds – visible burbling in the water…sixty seconds – blurp/whoosh, there it went!  Woo hoo!  It worked.

Yes, it worked.  But it was a close one.  In retrospect, trying to wash a coconut floor mat was one of my least bright ideas.  However, I feel I offset that stupidity with the boiling-water trick, and so this turned into a zero-sum event from the perspective of my handy-ness.

And to all you who are considering coconut floor mats – think again.  They don’t work.  They can’t be cleaned.  They can’t be bargained with, they can’t be reasoned with, they don’t feel pity or remorse or fear, and they absolutely will not stop shedding husks, ever, until you throw them out and/or douse their progeny with gigantic pots of boiling water.

You’ve been warned.

The Hangover (***½)

Posted on June 27th, 2009 in Commentary,Movie Reviews by EngineerBoy
We call this "The Loser Bench"

We call this "The Loser Bench"

It would not be possible for me to recommend “The Hangover” highly enough.  This movie is laugh-out-loud funny from beginning to end, and is driven by the script, the story, and the situations, not by “stars”.  Hollywood has gotten lazy about making deals instead of making movies, and have developed a pattern of putting A-list stars into films with mediocre scripts and huge advertising budgets, and just expecting us to show up because we don’t know any better.

Well, now you know better, at least about this film.  Parts of it are raunchy, but that’s not its purpose – the raunch is essential to the plot.  And the plot sounds hackneyed, but it is *not*.  This is the story of four friends who go to Las Vegas for a bachelor weekend to send off one of their group.  They plan to spend the night doing anything and everything, and then leaving it all behind because what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas.

The film starts conventionally, setting up the four main characters – Phil the school teacher (Bradley Cooper), who feels trapped by his wife and family and thinks nothing of pilfering his students’ field trip money to embiggen his Vegas stake; Stu the dentist (Ed Helms), whose harpy girlfriend is the distillation of every man’s worst nightmare; Doug the groom (Justin Bartha), the nice guy marrying the nice girl and whose nice families are nice; and Alan (Zach Galifianakis) the…the…cipher? …the…uh…weirdo? …er…pedophile? …um…genius??  Well, Alan is a puzzle as it’s hard to describe a man who is legally restricted from getting with 200 feet of a school (or a Chuckie Cheese), who learns card counting from a book and scores a bundle at the tables, who wonders if Caesar ever really lived at Caeser’s Palace, who blames Al Qaeda for society’s intolerance of masturbating on a commercial airliner, and who actually seems like a nice, if misunderstood (or un-understandable) guy.

These four borrow the prospective father-in-law’s classic convertible Mercedes and head across the desert to get their groove on in Vegas.  After they check-in to the hotel and do Jäger shots on the roof, the story flashes forward to the next morning, when Phil, Stu and Alan wake up to a Gordian knot of repercussions from the previous nights festivities.  Their $4,000/night suite is a wreck, a rooster struts and clucks among the carnage, there’s a baby in the closet, a tiger in the bathroom, and Doug is missing (and so is one of Stu’s teeth).

The rest of the film is the story of them trying to remember what happened so they can find Doug and get him to the church on time.  They piece the night together from clues and guesses, and retrace their steps on their quest for Doug.  And their path was long and winding, as well as outrageously hilarious.  I won’t go into any more details, but let’s just say that the movie deserves a second viewing, if only to catch the things you missed while you were laughing.

And it’s always nice to see the birth of a star – Zach Galifianakis shines throughout this film, in such a way that you can see that he has vaulted up the Hollywood pecking order on the strength of this performance alone, and should be able to leverage this appearance for a long and prosperous career, if that’s what he wants.  He doesn’t exactly steal the show, because the show is outrageous and over-the-top to begin with, but he definitely shines the brightest.  And the other central players should also see career boosts from this, although maybe not to the degree of Galifianakis.

Put it all together and you have a movie that is both intelligent and stupid, and is a true laugh riot.  Note that if you are easily offended by…well…anything, then you may want to skip this movie because there are a lot of offensive things in it.  However, they are not done for shock value, they flow naturally from the characters and storyline – but they are no less shocking.

And stay for the credits. 🙂

Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian (***)

Posted on May 25th, 2009 in Commentary,Movie Reviews by EngineerBoy
Honest(ly huge) Abe

Honest(ly huge) Abe

We had never seen the first movie in this series, Night at the Museum, but ended up watching it a couple of days before going to see the new installment, Night at the Museum: Battle of the Smithsonian.  We found the first movie to be enjoyable and forgettable, but funny enough that we decided to go out and see the sequel this weekend.

Battle of the Smithsonian is, quite enjoyably, more of the same, but on a larger scale.  Many of the familiar characters from the first film are back again, and a host of new characters are added.  Also, this film takes place across the campus of the Smithsonian museum buildings, and makes sure to pull some of the personality of the museum itself into the mix.  Smithsonian isn’t trying to hide a history lesson inside a Ben Stiller action-comedy, far from it.  There are historical references, many of which will fly over the heads of the young target audience, like Sputnik.

For example, at one point in the film a couple of the characters step into the life-size print of the famous Life magazine photo of a returning sailor kissing a nurse in Times Square.  The characters wander around Times Square chased by Egyptian spearmen, and eventually step back into the Smithsonian.  Unfortunately, one of the characters has dropped his cell phone in the crowds, and a young serviceman picks it up and shouts after him that, hey, mister, you dropped your…whatever this thing is.  Later, over the end credits, we see that same young serviceman working at an electronics bench in the 40’s, and his mother calling him to dinner from the other room.  He tells her just a minute, he thinks he’s onto something, and she shouts back with the unbending will of mom’s everywhere and says, “You put down whatever that is and you get in here right this minute, Joey Motorola!”  There was a row of about a dozen 8-10 year old boys sitting in front of us, and they all spun around and stared at us when we cracked up at that line.

There are also Tuskegee airmen, simian astronauts, gangsters, Tsars, emporers, huns, painting subjects, and even NASA mission control techs (played by Clint Howard, who has recognizably played such techs in many other films) that will resonate much more deeply with older audience members, but which also provide an extra layer of humor apart from yet another predictable round of slapping the monkey.

The story of the current installment is that Kahmunrah, the evil older brother Ahkmenrah, has come to steal the magic plate from his younger brother.  The plate is what brings all the museum characters to life between sunset and sunrise each night.  Kahmunrah knows that the plate can be used to summon the army of the dead and allow him to take over both the day and night-time worlds.  It’s up to Larry Daley (Ben Stiller) and his band of pals to stop him.

Let’s just say that hilarity ensues, some of it juvenile, some of it more refined, some of it falls flat, but overall this is a funny and enjoyable film.  It won’t win any awards for the story or the acting, although it might get some technical awards for the effects, which are beautifully done.  Don’t go in expecting great art or even classic comedy – this film is a fine Memorial Day break, worth the price of a ticket and concessions, and you’ll walk out smiling.

An Open Letter to the Producers of American Idol

Posted on May 21st, 2009 in American Idol,Commentary,Television by EngineerBoy

Dear American Idol Producers,

American Idol...Reborn?

American Idol...Reborn?

Sigh.  Another season has ended, albeit with a surprise ending (Kris Allen defeating Adam Lambert), but the finale wasn’t watched in my household.  Again.  We didn’t watch last year, either.  And although we watched most of the episodes this season, we still watched many fewer than last season.

Over the years there have been several consistent issues we have with the show which continue to drain our enthusiasm.  If you care to know them, here they are:

Issue #1: Obvious no-talents singing before the judges during tryouts
I can see you all huddled in your planning meetings, hoping to strike some more William Hung-like ratings gold by putting through idiots, freaks, sad losers, and people whose singing talent is measured in the negative range.  However, that schtick is old and played out and should be retired.  As the judges are so fond of saying, and what keeps me watching, is that this is a singing competition.  Having your screeners put through some croaking clown to sing before the judges is a ludicrous and transparent ploy, please stop it.

Issue #2: The endless, manufactured backstories
During tryouts, you pick supposedly interesting/appealing contestants and provide us with behind-the-scenes looks at their lives, toils, challenges, and troubles.  However, at this early stage these are anonymous singers, so the program would be much more interesting and lively, in our opinion, if you would simply stage the singing competition.  Now, when you get to Hollywood and start paring down the contestants to an identifiable bunch, we might like to learn a *little* something about them…but just a little.  The endless biographing and attempts to manufacture pathos and drama are irksome.

Issue #3: Kara DioGuardi
Who?  Why?  The best way to describe her is to paraphrase Shakespeare thusly:  “Kara is but a walking shadow, a poor player that struts and frets her hour upon the stage and then is heard no more.  Her’s is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”  Kara did not have one moment that we saw this season that wasn’t useless, irritating, or both, or somewhere in between.  And don’t get us started on her “song”, which is addressed further down in this article.

Issue #4: Country week
Do you have to kowtow to that demographic?  Have you even stopped to consider how many viewers it drives away (like us) compared to how many it attracts for that one, single episode?  Country music is not what American Idol is about, period, so don’t try to put a pig behind the lipstick – it insults the fans of both kinds of music.

Issue #5: Golden Idol awards
Really?  Just shorten the damn show by 15 minutes.  Please?  Even 15 minutes of dead air would be preferable.

Issue #6: An even number of judges
This puts too much power in the hands of Lord Cowell.  Have three judges…or five judges…but not four.  Having Simon deciding ties also renders the new “Judge’s Save” useless, and makes it “Simon’s Save”.

Issue #7: Lip-synching
This is a singing competition.  If the guests can’t sing live, or the group can’t learn to sing together live, then skip it.  It taints the rest of the program to see such obvious lip-synching by the guests and during the group songs.  It would be like having a slam-dunk competition in basketball, and inviting revered, retired players to perform, but then having to lower the backboard and/or provide them with a springboard in order to actually dunk.  It’s demeaning to the performers and insulting to the viewers, so please stop it.

Issue #8: The horrible finale song
This is the worst issue of all.  When each new season starts, we already start dreading having to sit through the inevitably atrocious, amateurish, pathetic, soulless, empty, fawning, shallow, superficial song that is written for the last show.  There hasn’t been a single one that wasn’t a horrific affront to all things musical.  And it is the absolute wrong note to strike at the end of American Idol.  Over the course of the season, contestants improve.  The bar gets raised each show.  The songs and themes get better and better.  Tension builds.  Over the last two or three weeks each contestant has proven their worthiness, and each is a valid potential star.  They swing for the fences, and we all get swept along with them, big voices and big talents tackling big songs, the skill and expertise are awe-inspiring, the artistry is soul-enriching.  Until…like the giant, wet fart of an incontinent walrus….bbrrrppfppfppptttthhhh…that lame-ass final song.  *That’s* what we’ve been building up to?  A crappy and trite slice of pabulum not even fit for the discount bin?  Please, in the name of all humanity, please stop torturing us with this horrific ending.  Please.

I see today that the finale had all-time low ratings, and I can’t say that I’m surprised.  Listen, Idol Producers, your show is still solid.  You don’t need to do more non-singing-related bullshit, you need to do less.  Strip it down to a singing competition.  If you want to add something to it, make it about the singing and performing.  How about a jury night in Hollywood?  Bring in nine additional musical noteworthies/legends, make Simon the foreman, and have the jury decide on the final 24, or something like that? 

Make sure that the entire focus of the show is on the quality of the singers and of the songs.  Go back to the original three judges: Simon Cowell, Paul Abdul, and Randy Jackson.  If you end up having to make changes, please pick people who will be interesting and relevant, unlike Kara, who is neither.  And keep Ryan Seacrest, he continues to be an affable and unflappable host, the circus master who always seems to strike the correct note.

You have a great product, but it’s like you’ve taken a classic Rolls-Royce and tricked it out with fiberglass effects, tinted windows, neon running lights, and subwoofer in the trunk.  Strip away the cheap bling and flashy trash, and be what you are – a pure and classic singing competition.

The Moon, the Sun, and Cosmic Coincidence

Posted on May 10th, 2009 in Commentary,Engineerboy by EngineerBoy
Astronomical Coincidence

Astronomical Coincidence

The Sun is 400 times larger than the Moon, but it is also 400 times further away.  What this means is that, when viewed from the Earth, the Moon is *exactly* the correct size to perfectly obscure the Sun when they are aligned during a total eclipse.  As you can see in the picture to the right, the Moon covers the sun perfectly, leaving only the corona visible around the edges.

I have a compulsion, for lack of a better term, to understand things.  How they work.  Why they happen.  What they mean.  It took a few years for Marie to get used to me going into EngineerBoy-mode when she did something I didn’t understand, and so would begin quizzing her about it.  For example, if she drove a different route to a familiar destination I would ask her why she chose that route.  In the beginning, she interepreted it as me questioning her route choice – in the sense of doubting that it was the most correct/efficient route.

But what I was doing was actually paying her the compliment of knowing that she wouldn’t just absent-mindedly pick some unexpected route, and that there must be a logical reason for it, and I wanted to know her reasoning.  In retrospect it’s easy to see why it was annoying, because I did a poor job of couching the questions in any sort of way other than, “Why did you turn left there?  Aren’t we going to Place X?  We usually go *that* way, why would you choose to go *this* way??”.  That sounds like skepticism and doubt, and what it really is is the quest for information and knowledge, and the answer of “I just felt like taking a different route today” makes perfect sense, I just hungered to know “why?”.

Eventually she realized that I do that about anything and everything that I don’t understand.  If we pass by an interesting door and I can’t figure out how the hinges work, I’ll stop and assess it (within reason, given other pressing matters).  It’s not that I think the door is “wrong”, it’s that I don’t understand it, but it obviously works, and I want to *get* it.  I know that me understanding how a particular door works doesn’t really do anything other than satisfy my curiosity, and as long as it works that should be good enough for a random door.

And it’s not every door that I have to figure out, just those that seem to me to not fit what i already know about doors.  I’m the same way with people – when they behave in ways that I don’t understand, I have to try and figure them out.  For the most part it’s not about agreeing or disagreeing with the way a person behaves, it’s about being able to understand a person’s motivations to act in a way that doesn’t make sense to me, when it obviously makes sense to them, because they’re doing it.

So a lot of my curiousity comes from the fact that I freely acknowledge that I don’t know everything.  In fact, given the totality of human knowledge, and the unfathomable scope of all possible knowledge, I really don’t know anything much at all.

But if I can observe something, and understand all of its facets, and it still doesn’t make sense, that bothers me.  A lot.  And it doesn’t happen much – not that I am somehow able to figure everything out, it’s more that I’m usually able to see the line that separates things that I personally can’t explain and things which cannot be explained, period.

One of the things-which-cannot-be-explained-period is the relative visual size of the Sun and Moon.  There are two possible explanations for their perfect ratios.

1) Coincidence

or

2) Design

Both of those explanations leave me skeptical, frustrated, and continuing to search for answers.  As for it being a coincidence, the odds of all the factors occuring randomly are so astronomically high that I can’t blithely accept that as the answer.  If the Moon were slightly farther away from the Earth, or slightly closer, it wouldn’t happen.  If the Moon were slightly larger or smaller than it is, it wouldn’t happen.  If the orbit of the Moon didn’t have it line up perfectly with the Sun regularly, it wouldn’t happen.  If the Sun were slightly larger or smaller, it wouldn’t happen.  If the Earth’s orbit it kept is slightly closer to or further from the Sun, it wouldn’t happen.

But *all* of those things happen.  The odds of it being a coincidence are staggering.

But if it’s not a coincidence, that leaves purposeful design.  Well, whose design?  God(s)?  Aliens?  Ancestors?  Some combination of those?  I mean, it’s hard to argue with evidence – there’s the Moon, there’s the Sun, and a couple of times a year, there’s the demonstration during an eclipse.  We can all see it, we can all understand it from the purely physical aspect.  There’s nothing to interpret, because it happens, an event that all humanity can observe and which cannot be denied.  It’s not a fake, it’s not a stunt, it’s not a legend, it’s not a myth, it’s not Photoshopped.  It’s just there for all of us to see.

But if we are assessing the “design” explanation, then the phenomenon is clearly a message. It has meaning.  It says something.  But what?

If we start with just the facts, the message is obviously directed at inhabitants of Earth, because it is only from the perspective of the surface of the Earth that it can be seen.  But what is the message?  The actual obscuring of the sun by the moon doesn’t seem to convey much in and of itself.  What seems to be the important part is the exact fit during a total eclipse.

The closest explanation that I can conjure up is similar to a plot point from the film “2001: A Space Odyssey”.  In the film, there is a rectangular black monolith that is not a random object, it was obviously created by something intelligent.  The monolith is buried on the far side of the moon, such that man will not discover it until he has made enough technological advancement to actually go to the dark side of the moon and find it.

And once men uncover the monolith, it responds by beaming a signal elsewhere in the solar system, indicating that man had sort of stumbled across a tripwire that indicated that we had advanced enough to travel to the moon.  One element of the Moon/Sun eclipse phenomena could be that humans couldn’t understand until such time as we grasped the nature of the stars and planets, and even further, until we realized that the chances that the perfect fit is a random coincidence is nearly 0%.

So, okay, we did it.  We’ve figured out the stars and planets, at least at a basic conceptual level.  We understand the effects of gravity and the nature of orbital mechanics.  We’ve been to the Moon and back.  We’ve even sent man-made objects out of our solar system and into deep space.

But…now what?  The Moon perfectly obscures the Sun during a total eclipse, it’s improbable that it’s pure coincidence, we *get* it.  But, now what?  What does it mean that we understand it?  What should it be telling us?  What should we be learning from that?

There are some whose philosophy will allow them to attribute this phenomenon to a higher power, and thus endeth the inquiry.  However, to me, no matter who set it up or why, there has to be more to it than a simple display of god-like powers – that would seem so…conceited of him/her/it/them.

My take is that the purpose of this astronomical alignment is for us to understand two things:

Thing Number One
The first thing that this is trying to tell us that we are not alone.  There is someone or something else out there, and they are far more advanced than we are.  They were able to set the size and shapes of planets to the precise ratios such that, once our puny-but-ravenous human brains advanced enough to understand it, we would *get* it.

Thing Number Two
The second thing that this is trying to tell us is that, compared to the vastness of available knowledge, we know nothing.  Right now, humans know enough to see the phenomenon, to understand the mechanics of it, and to begin to question the meaning of it, but that’s it.  So, in this sense, it’s like a trail of breadcrumbs, designed to lead us to the desired destination (both physically and intellectually).  It’s saying, come on, take a few more steps, make a few more theoretical leaps, come out of our shell of earthboundedness and step into the wider universe.

In closing, I freely state that all of the above is pure conjecture and deduction and has a high probability of being completely wrong in every facet.  However, it represents my best interpretation of the undeniable facts.  The fact that there isn’t more discussion of and amazement about this phenomenon serves to both frighten and confuse me.  There are many who say, show me proof of a higher power and/or of other intelligent life in the universe.  Well, there it is.  There are many who say, I already knew about the higher power, I know that he/she/it is omnipotent, and so the phenomenon is nothing more than confirmation of what I already knew and no further introspection is needed.  Uh, really?

I will also freely state that there is a very small, but non-zero, chance that this phenomenon is purely a coincidence.

But I doubt it.

Star Trek (***½)

Posted on May 8th, 2009 in Commentary,Engineerboy,Movie Reviews by EngineerBoy
startrek

Boldly Going Again

We saw the new Star Trek movie today (opening night), and it was fantastic.  To give some context, I’m an old geezer and religiously watched the original Star Trek series during its initial run, and many more times in syndication.  I’ve seen the Star Trek movies that included the original cast.  I never really got into any of the subsequent Trek series, films, fanfic, spin-offs, books, conventions, etc, so I’m not a slavish Trek nerd, but I’m an old guard, indigenous Trek fan.

And coming from that perspective, my take is that J.J. Abrams did a great job of refreshing and updating the original Star Trek series with this prequel, and he was both faithful to the original and also daring enough to make changes in what felt to be a near-perfect proportion.  The new cast, playing younger versions of the original characters, do a pitch-perfect job of capturing the essence of their characters without seeming like they are doing imitations. 

The Original Star Trek (TOST) has been around for so long that I was skeptical that it could be refreshed in any meaningful way.  However, this new episode should jump-start a whole new incarnation of the franchise.  I can tell you that I’m excitedly awaiting the next film in this series, after having seen this version once a few hours ago. 

WARNING: Spoiler ahead, don’t read any further if you don’t want to know anything about the plot.
.
.
.
.
The film starts with a sequence that includes the birth of James T. Kirk, and I have to say that it was so well done that I got a bit misty-eyed.  As the film progresses we see early scenes of many of the main characters, prior to their meeting each other.  Eventually, fate plays a hand and puts *most* of them aboard the Enterprise, albeit not in their familiar roles/ranks, at least not initially.  However, by the end of the film, all of the key characters from TOST are present and accounted for (and in their correct roles).

In between there is a reasonably engaging story that involves time travel, the destruction of one character’s home planet, a meetup between a character’s new incarnation and their older self played by the original actor, dealing with a vengeful enemy, and unexpected love blooming.  The action and effects sequences are superbly well-done, and don’t jolt you out of your enjoyment like so many other of Hollywood’s expensive-yet-clumsy digital effects behemoths.  This film is more along the lines of Iron Man, where the effects serve only to enhance the story, never to *be* the story or distract you from the storytelling.

All of the new cast members inhabit their characters fully, and capture the essence of the original characters beautifully.  I didn’t quite buy Chris Pine as Kirk for the first few scenes, but by the end, in my mind, he *was* Kirk – and it’s hard to consider anyone but Shatner as Kirk.  But Pine does a great job with what could have been tragicomic mockery of Shatner’s Kirk.

Zachary Quinto does a great job as Spock, and his character has the most emphasis in the ensemble.  John Cho (yes, Harold from Harold and Kumar) is solid as Sulu, Karl Urban almost seems like DeForest Kelley Junior, Anton Yelchin is suitably non-fluent as Chekov, and Zoe Saldana plays Uhura complete with cat-eyelashes and enough sex appeal (and smarts) to entice a young Vulcan.

Bruce Greenwood plays Christopher Pike, who will be familiar to any TOST fan as the immobile, wheelchair bound, disfigured character from the initial episodes of Trek.  Here he is the elder statesman, dealing with (and educating) his young charges.

There are also familiar faces in various roles.  Winona Ryder plays Spock’s human mother, while Tyler Perry (yes, from Tyler Perry’s This and Tyler Perry’s That) plays a Star Fleet Admiral.  But most enjoyable of all is Simon Pegg as Montgomery Scott.  Yes, Shaun of the Dead is Scotty, and he is hilarious.

The film also manages to include a lot of the catch phrases and conceits of the original series without them seeming forced.  Spock says “Fascinating”.  Bones says “I’m a doctor, not a ____”.  Kirk slouches on one elbow in the captain’s chair, looking pensive.  Scotty has to struggle to deliver more power.  The ensign in the red shirt dies.  Bones calls Spock a green-blooded hobgoblin.  Phasers are set to stun, shields are set to full power, photon torpedoes are fired, and people are beamed all over the place.  In other words, this film *is* Star Trek, and I hope this new incarnation will live long, and prosper.

Nyuck, Nyuck…What the Fy**k?

Posted on March 27th, 2009 in Celebrities,Entertainment by EngineerBoy
larry-moe-curly

Carrey, del Toro, and Penn?!?

If today were April 1st I might think that this article was a joke:

http://artsbeat.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/25/nyuk-nyukhuh-sean-penn-joins-three-stooges-movie/?ref=movies

That’s a blog post on the New York Times site which claims that Hollywood will be making a Three Stooges movie, and the Stooges will be played by…brace yourself…get ready…Jim Carrey (getting fat to play Curly), Sean Penn (as the bozo-fringed Larry), and Benecio del Toro (as Moe, the living superego). 

Uhhhh….huh?  My confusion led me to deduce that the film would be a tortured look at the sad reality behind the farcical public personas, but then I noticed that the screenplay is being written by the Farrelly Brothers (Bobby and Peter, most famous for There’s Something About Mary and Kingpin, neither of which had much seriousness to them).

So I can’t reconcile this information – something has to be wrong and/or it will never happen.  However, if this amalgamation ever makes it to the screen, I’ll be first in line.

« Previous Page — Next Page »