"They mostly come at night. Mostly."

I just watched Aliens (1986).
Some think it is, like often, inferior to the first one, Alien. But I thought it was actually a good movie (I hadn't seen it since the eighties). Expectations might lead one astray, though, because they are very different movies. Alien was an avant-garde SF Horror movie. Abstract and slow. The second one was a thriller, action SF movie. And it pretty much had to be, because unlike the first one, the monster was now known, there was no way to milk the unknownness-terror and slow reveal like there was in Alien.




Sigourney did an excellent job, as always. And so did Carrie Henn as young "Newt". It seems Carrie had no intentions of continuing making movies, and has kept that, she's a teacher in California.

Update:
Bron said:
Aliens was the rare case of the sequel being more fun than the original. Alien was terrifying.

Indeed. Geiger's monster really is excessively scary. I read some actor complaining that some people said it was *too* scary. "It's art, he said, how can it be 'too strong'". :-)

Despite this, I don't think it will ever be a "classic monster" in the sense of those old Universal critters. Maybe because there is nothing humanoid about it, maybe we have to relate in *some* way to a monster in order to be really invested. And Alien is basically just an excessively dangerous animal. While it's clever, you never get the impression that it's capable of thinking, really.
... Hehe, it's even a bit stupid, because like all movie monsters, it does the timeless "scary pose"... it stops for several seconds and poses impressively in order for the victims (and the camera) to get a good look and a chance to flee. This can't be optimal monster behavior!

Lord of the Ring

TCGal sent us this cool street acrobatics video.
(I wonder how many times he's mashed his fingers.)

Extremities fetish

I've noticed that whenever I look up an actress in Google Images, one of the selectable popular searches shown is her name plus the word "feet"... I guess one specific fetish either has grown or has just been revealed!

Kim's winter song

I like her music, but even if she was tone-deaf, I'd still be butter, exposed to those eyes and smile.

MyFonts of the month

Myfonts newsletter has some quite nice fonts this month.

Supergeek question: why do computers age?

Adam Engst, founder of tech newsletter TidBITS, has said that he believes computers become slower with age, a process which can't be reversed with a reinstall  or such, in other words, the hardware changes.  

Last week I fished out two laptops, both like 5-7 years old. (They've been keept snug and dry.) And they both sort of didn't work. There was just odd things going on, like they refused to connect to the networks though they could see them, or the external DVD drive did not work with them. It just felt like machines on the brink of death. You know how you can sense that sometimes? When I was young, I once sold a used bike. I had been pretty much used. Everything worked on it, but just the whole feel of the bike said to me it was working on it's last breath. And true enough, shortly after the sale, it just broke down all over, and never was used again. (I think I later offered him his money back, but I'll try and make sure.)

Now, back to computers, I can understand a battery getting old or dying, because it is chemical in nature. But the other parts in a computer, why would they get old? (It seems to apply more if the machine is not used.) They are plastic, metal, and silicone. Not, so far as I know, materials which deteriorate quickly, outside of damp or extreme temperatures. So...

For me emotionally, computers should be like Charles Babbage said of his mechanical computer the Difference Engine: "It does not make errors. Either it works or it doesn't at all." There should be no odd grey-area or weird on-and-off malfunctioning. But there is. I guess they are just so complex that this stuff "develops" somehow.

Any ideas?

The unkillable skinny ideal

It is striking to me how, despite a lot of campaigning against it, the omnipresence of super-thin fashion models is still king in the world, seemingly invulnerable.
They claim it's because it is easier to make clothes "hang" well on thin models, and perhaps it is, but there must be more to it, because it seems to me it's a minority of people who really like that kind of thin, and most of them work in the fashion industry.
It is like it is an idea, a self-destuctive idea from our collective subconscious, which has attached itself like a leach.

For instance, this one, from an ad on my Kindle Fire, she's probably envied by many women, but she strikes me as more... Scary, than anything else, yea?

By the way, in the wonderful and funny collaboration between Neil Gaiman and Terry Pratchett, Good Omens, they present it as one of the more effective ideas which the main demon has introduced in the world. He has created a line of food producs ("Mealz" or something), which is addictive but contains no nutrients whatsoever. And a newer line which is the same plus suger and fat, you bloat up while starving to death.
A fan walks up the demon (in human form) and thanks him heart-feltly for his products, they have changed her life, she says. He describes her as skeletal and estimates with satisfaction that she has about two months to live.

I think the lesson is not so much to blame or attack the fashion industry or the food industry or anybody else, but to realize that we have deep destructive impulses, including self-destructive, and recognize them and see the for what they are. This all takes time and work, perhaps even therapy for some, but I think it's the only way to really change things.

Odd LinkedIn recoms

I've had a couple of odd, reality-disconnected recommendations on LinkedIn. The latest one says:
"Eolake is a very honest, likeable, scholar of early Greek literature as well as webmaster for list server which focuses on Meher Baba and his work."
I've no clue who Baba is, and I haven't read much early Greek literature since school.

I wonder what this new phenomenon is? Maybe a new kind of spam. Fake profiles building up good reputation just based on those who respond to the kind thought rather than to whether it really applies?

So I'm 51 today...

I was sent this.

Slastyonoff's "Two Oceans" film

Back in the nineties when Domai was a new site, Andrey Slastyonoff was one of the great finds for me. Not only did he have great models with exceptionally womanly figures, he also made very interesting, artistic photos which I was delighted to buy and present to my members, many of which became fans of his.

Some of the time since then, he has been busy with his own site, but I have kept buying from him from time to time.

Slastyonoff's latest project, in progress, is a lyrical nude art movie (not porn at all) called "Two Oceans", about the two "universes" of the ocean and woman meeting. I suggest you check it out, and if you like, support the project. (I have.)

Two Oceans home page.

Two Oceans Indiegogo page, where you can help.

Starling Murmurations

[Thanks to Tommy]

I think I blogged this phenomenon a couple of years ago, but this is the best video I've seen of it.




Personally I think that no matter how one looks at it, there has to be some non-material or at least some speed-of-light communication involved to make a couple hundred thousand bodies acto so coordinatedly.

High Dynamic Range? There's an app for that

High Dynamic Range? There's an iPhone app for that. (Am I behind the times, using that phrase?)