Aphids for Jesus
Tree Has Patrons Crying For Joy – Philadelphia News, Weather and Sports from WTXF FOX 29.
Christians in the USA declare aphid excretions as miraculous. WTXF – What The Xtian Fuck?
Man Of Steel – more good book than comic book
Danger – contains spoilers
Last night I went to see the new Superman film Man Of Steel. As superhero films go, it managed a just good enough job of attempting to reboot the Superman mythology, but it had none of the slickness, brash confidence and humour of last year’s Avengers. If anything it took itself too seriously, with a thick paste of grim stoic inevitability that made the Dark Knight trilogy look like Bachelor Party. Then again, this is a Zack Snyder film; he’s not going to have his characters resolve problems by taking a spoonful of sugar or singing a cheery tune. This Superman character had a dark if simplistic edge, a man of two worlds but neither, haunted by his powers and imprisoned by doubt – and without any shred of charm or personality. Superman’s nemesis, General Zod, was my favourite character, and the most logically constructed. This wasn’t a camp “kneel before Zod!” comic book caricature bad guy out for revenge, this was a man with a mission, to which every other consideration was secondary, even when it came to all life on earth. He didn’t hate the planet’s residents, they were just in his way.
A constant theme in the film which verged on creepy was the reference to religion. Right from the beginning, Kal-El was being bigged up by his dad Jor-El; he would be a god to the people of earth and guide them to peace. I know all dads have high hopes for their newborn kids, but at this point Kal-El was a couple of years away from being potty trained, so really Jor-El wouldn’t know if his boy would be Jesus in a blue suit and red cape or a corner crack dealer.
And this is who Snyder’s Superman is; Jesus with laser eyes. They couldn’t have laid it out any more obviously if they had put a big ‘J’ on Superman’s leotard instead of the trademark ‘S’. The difficult childhood, years rambling in the wilderness, the random acts of miraculous life saving, ticking all the boxes but the virgin birth.
Ah, the virgin birth. Here, it is nicely turned on its head. On Krypton, it’s people had their offspring through genetic manipulation, with foetuses grown in glowy bottles Matrix-style, their society considering the act of physical birth a heresy. In a world where all babies were born in essentially virgin births, Kal-El was born from his mother. Jor-El had decided that bottle babies were part of the corruption of Krypton and contributed to the short-sightedness that was causing the planet’s destruction. This is a clear reference to our own scientific advances in genetics and a clumsy attempt at critiquing the ethics surrounding the application of science.
Despite Jor-El’s lofty disdain for Kryptonian science (he also rides a kind of flying bug-lizard instead of machines), he uses technology to shoot his baby into space.
Once on Earth, Kal-El is raised by the Kents as their son Clark, and they never cease to keep blowing it up his arse about how awesome he is and how there’s a plan for him, that he was sent to Earth by his father for a reason, that everything happens for a purpose, and how he needs to choose good over evil. After all this, quite how Clark becomes such a narcissist is a surprise.
When Zod turns up on Earth demanding Superman be turned over to him or face an ass-whoopin’, in a fugue of doubt Superman agonises over what to do. Should he sacrifice himself for humanity? So he asks a priest, who goes on to tell Superman that he should have faith and follow his conscience. So he hands himself over, like any good stoic Jesus would do.
Just to reinforce how bad the bad guys are, once they have him they tell Superman how they’re going kill everyone on Earth, using a big machine which looks like a lemon squeezer which will turn the planet into Krypton v2.0, and repopulate it using some Kryptonian babies in bottles they had found earlier. The rationale for this, according to henchwoman Faora-Ul, is that Kryptonians are superior, more evolved, and past the need for emotions like compassion which they consider weak. That’s right, these Krypton bad boys and girls are space-Nazis espousing some kind of social Darwinism. Kal-El, brought up by god-fearing merka-loving Kansas rednecks, ain’t havin’ none of it, and gets his freak on smashing bad guys through walls and so forth.
There’s probably more that I missed, something subtle which would need a second viewing to catch, but there’s no mistaking that Man Of Steel is a Christian allegory, and will no doubt provide social scientists and film critics plenty to chew over, in much the same way as After Earth’s action tribute to Scientology.
Greens are go for May 2nd
Unashamedly democratic socialist in flavour, with a raft of bold pledges that go far beyond the grey focus group designed middle-England pleasing platitudes that the three main parties seem satisfied to place one their stalls. No kneeling before the Chicago School neo-liberal consensus. That’s the Green Party party political broadcast for the May 2nd elections. Gutsy, and a demonstration that Green politics go further than recycling and ecological conservation. Much further. Sadly there won’t be a Green standing for the parliamentary by-election in South Shields, but it’s understandable – £500 could be spent better elsewhere rather than losing it fighting to be an also-ran in a safe Labour seat where the other parties are scrabbling for the honour of second place.
It isn’t just an election broadcast, it’s a proclamation of what is possible. Watch it.
Fact free foolishness
“Facts do not cease to exist because they are ignored.”
Aldous Huxley
David Potts, South Tyneside’s councillor for the bunga bunga party, put a remarkable example of science illiteracy on display for everyone to see. Last Thursday, he declared on Twitter:
“I wish people would realise that climate change is a total myth backed by zero evidence.”
I’m not sure what he thinks of the masses of evidence for climate change that has been collected over decades. The many years of work dedicated by scientists, the millions of pounds worth of experiments, the satellites and a planetary network of climate data collection. If it’s a ‘myth’, did the legions of scientists make it up? Is there a massive conspiracy by a shadowy green cabal with a diabolical plan for mind control? Could all of those scientists be wrong?
Not likely.
Most climate scientists agree that the evidence points to one conclusion: climate change is proven. If there’s any uncertainty, it’s the pace and severity of the changes that will come. The impacts of climate change pose a real risk to current and future generations. For the UK, it is a national security issue. Ignoring it is foolhardy and dangerous, and addressing the risks is a sensible approach. A destabilised ecosystem means a destabilised food supply, infrastructure and ultimately, society. It’s also an ethical issue. Those who are likely to suffer the most will be those from low incomes, or from countries where the support infrastructures are poor or non-existent.
The denial lobby have no credibility – scientific or otherwise.
From a party political standpoint, Potts’ view is entirely consistent with UKIP policy. Xenophobia and homophobia aren’t the only personality disorders that UKIP shares with the BNP. Like the BNP, UKIP holds a position denying that the planet’s climate is changing, or that the activities of homo sapiens could be responsible. When challenged on Twitter, Potts responded:
“Show me one solid, irrefutable piece of evidence and I’ll believe it”
What about the mountains of evidence? This is remarkably similar to his comment piece in the Journal newspaper in 2005 where he called on:
“anyone to show me just one single solitary shred of concrete proof that humans contributed or are at all responsible for global warming”
…and claimed that:
“reducing emissions is a complete and utter waste of time and money.”
Such buffoonery would be comical if it wasn’t for the fact that Potts sits in a position of responsibility. There’s no excuse for a politician not to be familiar with climate change after all this time; the causes, the science, the risks, and the possible solutions and mitigation actions. Potts makes decisions on policy. He has a responsibility to be informed, to know what the science says. If a politician claims the science to be a “myth”, then that’s not the voice of rationality, but an ignorant opinion poisoned by the confirmation bias of political ideology.
As Huxley also noted:
At least two-thirds of our miseries spring from human stupidity, human malice and those great motivators and justifiers of malice and stupidity: idealism, dogmatism and proselytizing zeal on behalf of religious or political ideas.
Jon Lord – Lazy
Sad news of the death of Jon Lord from cancer. One of the greatest of his generation, and the master of the Hammond organ.
International Women’s Day
Shaking the Tree with Peter Gabriel and Paula Coles.
Three the magic number?
The past couple of weeks has seen the release of two first person shooter games (FPS) which are part of two separate franchises which have been around for nearly ten years: Battlefield 3 and Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3. Both games, whilst being first person shooters, have different gameplay styles and have been competing with each other since they first launch. The launch of the ‘3’ games within two weeks of each other means a lot of gamers (including me) have parted with their pounds.
Battlefield 3
I’ve followed the Battlefield series since Battlefield 1942 on the PC back in 2002. Through Battlefield Vietnam to Battlefield 2, then onto the console with Battlefield 1943 and the Battlefield Bad Company games. Battlefield 3 (or BF3) is the latest installment, and one which has been eagerly awaited.
The singleplayer campaign mode is disappointing. The plot went from one linear firefight – chase – set piece to the next, with the set pieces very much a Simon-Says style follow the screen prompts sequential button press-a-thon which would be embarrasing on a children’s game. The game designers learned nothing from last year’s Medal of Honor, which whilst still linear, offered the player some flexibility in routes and flanking positions, which was sadly lacking in BF3. In the previous incarnations of Battlefield before Bad Company the campaign mode was little more than a series of training missions for online play, with a plot which was little more than a series of battle locations around the world. However, whilst a cinematic plot driven campaign is welcome, it also has the disadvantage of not giving enough practice with weapons and vehicles before going online.
Online multiplayer has always been what Battlefield was about. The first Battlefield 1942 had no character progression or weapons and kit development; you had a choice of five character classes, each class with a different weapon and kit loadout between Scout, Assault, Medic, Anti-tank, and Engineer. But this simplicity meant everyone started with the same choice of kit loadouts, so skill, tactics and team playing rather than the advantage of superior upper rank firepower sorted out the noobs from the top guns. As well as the classes, there was an array of vehicles to spread mayhem with. From jeeps, to to tanks, to aircraft, all the way to battleships.
This theme has continued throughout the series, and BF3 has all the vehicles and equipment of the modern battlefield and more: tanks, helicopters jets and even dune buggies. However, I feel this game is less a Battlefield 3 and more like a Bad Company game. It has much the same weapons and class progression as BF:BC2 as you rise through the ranks online and even the same environment physics. There is I feel a step backwards in this game, which drops the tactical command features of BF2 which were so integral to encouraging team play rather than the lone run-and-gun style so prevalent at the moment on BF3. Perhaps this will be addressed in future downloadable content packs.
However, BF3 is still enjoyable, provides plenty of game modes and options for your I’m particularly looking forward to release of the Return to Karkand add-on pack, particularly as Karkand was one of my favourite BF2 maps and it’ll be interesting to see what the developers have done in their reboot of a fan favourite.
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3
Like the Battlefield series, MW3 has a long heritage going back to the first Call of Duty game in 2003. Like the Medal of Honor series, the CoD singleplayer campaign mode was tightly scripted, a feature that has followed the game’s incarnations over nearly ten years.
The MW3 campaign continues the MW story of Capt Price and ‘Soap’ MacTavish in their mission to end a war between Russia and the West, and resolve an ongoing personal grudge with evil warmonger Makarov. It’s definitely not one for the kids. Even though it’s 18-rated, many parents buy MW games for their children, but this episode in the series takes it even further than the civilian murder carnage of MW2, and being very cinematic it places the player right inside the action, witnessing events you wouldn’t want children to see.
The online mutliplayer mode has always featured smaller maps than the Battlefield franchise, which made for fast and frantic gameplay, often the fortune of games flipping in moments. The game is called MW3, and it’s a worthy name for the campaign, but in terms of the online play it’s definitely MW 2.5. It features much the same weapons, perks and upgrade options of MW2, albeit with a revamped interface and lobby. Even the infamous ‘quick-scope’ remains. I thought that some tips would have been taken from CoD: Black Ops in which the weapons were much more balanced, and the perks were purchased with upgrade points rather than achieving challenges, allowing the player much more choice rather than being forced through a restrictive upgrade path.
The new online maps seem to be much smaller than their MW predecessors, although they are graphically more complex and structured in such a way to discourage camping and encourage more ‘run-n-gun’, making hold points almost a thing of the past. However, it’s early yet, definitely too early for me to identify particular map areas which give a tactical advantage. It’ll be interesting to see how this develops in future map releases.
There are some weapon aiming issues and some weapons seem too overpowered, but hopefully these will be patched.
However, MW3 offers some new online game modes, including the new ‘Kill Confirmed’, where you collect enemy dog tags after killing them, and I predict this will be the big hit of MW3 online. There’s also an upgraded ‘Survival’ cooperative game type, which is probably aimed at the fans of Zombies in World at War and Black Ops.
Summary
Both of the ‘3’ games are fun, whilst at the same time a little disappointing in what they could have done; missed opportunities. One thing both games have failed to do is to add anything startingly new. They are simply a slight evolution of what came before, and while you give the fans what they want, the first person shooter market is so saturated that it needs a game to shake things up a bit. Even the ‘Elite’ optional addon for MW3 is merely an iteration of a feature first launched as a beta with Black Ops. One of the things missing from both games is online character customisation allowing you to create a unique looking online playable avatar. Medal of Honor went a small way allowing you to unlock a couple of character skins, but games like SOCOM and Brink have shown what is possible with character customisation.
Despite these minor irritations, I’ll still be playing both ‘3’ games, and probably get sucked into rising through the ranks and completing challenges, enjoying meeting people around the world, and fragging them to bits.
Can I haz some defamation money pleez?
South Tyneside Council’s legal foray into Twitter’s nether data regions doesn’t seem to be going away. Today’s Guardian legal blog has some comment questioning the legal basis for South Tyneside Council’s use of public money for the case, and news site the Register has covered the news, kindly linking to the original Demand For Jury Trial at San Mateo Superior Court over the alleged defamation on various Mr Monkey WordPress blogs.
I didn’t know the document was in the public domain until it was featured on tonight’s BBC North East news so I’ve not read it before. It does make interesting reading. On page 58, referring to False Defamatory Statement number 94 against David Potts, the local blogger Rossinisbird is mentioned. It refers to a post on the Mr Monkey ‘Monkeyhouse’ blog in July 2008, which I’d forgotten all about. However, the Monkeyhouse blog post selectively referred to in the statement mentions me specifically by name.
If you’ve read the original full blog post, you’ll see that David Potts wasn’t the main target. I was. David Potts was drive-by collateral damage in the Monkey’s sub-literate attempt at humour at my expense, which contained nothing truthful about me. Despite the horrendous slight on my good name, I resisted pursuing anyone in the courts for comparing me to David Potts.
Besides, I’ve been called much worse than a malfunctioning dildo and likely will again, and making a big issue of it would only have raised the silly simian’s profile and ego. Anyhow, I don’t have the deep and generous pockets of South Tyneside’s council-tax payers to back expensive legal actions.
It’s already been suggested to me that I should have a tee-shirt made with “I was defamed by Mr Monkey” to wear as a badge of honour. Given the number of people the Monkey maligned in South Tyneside, it might be a lucrative seller too.
Brian Paget 