Saturday, June 20, 2009

The PC - unknown being made by the devil's company (I am, of course, referring to Microsoft)

On my list of things to never do with your PC, I can add another one today: Compressing emails. My outlook express comes up to me every once in a while and asks me if it can compress files. I usually say "yes" then because I don't see a problem with it. It's supposed to keep things compact, it's there to stop the ongoing "slowing down" process of the computer (this is like global warming, you can't seem to stop it, only postpone it), so why would you not allow it to just go on with what it advises you to do?

I just checked my emails again and I was surprised. First I thought there was a new message, because it seemed so unfamiliar to me. Strangely, it didn't open, I got this screen that I get when I have an internet explorer open but the page doesn't load. So the message was not available?! "Hmmm", I thought, and looked at the date. It was 2008. What? The last message on my outlook is from 2008? Why? Is the order mixed up? No... I can click on different things but all the emails I have here are from 2008. In the other menu I can see all the messages I sent, and they are up to date, but the emails I received after some point in 2008 are now all gone. Why?

This must have to do with the compression process, because it's the last thing I did last night before I left my email account. What's going on? I also checked the trashcan on my desktop. It had some email-related files. Not knowing what was going on, I said "restore" and it asked me if it was supposed to replace existing ones with the same name. First I said "no" to that, but when nothing happened that changed anything to the better, I said "replace all", but there is still no change.

I never asked my email account to delete all my emails from 2009 up to now. But thanks anyway, you stupid piece of shit! I will never compress emails again.

Monday, June 15, 2009

Twilight - My review!

Oh man.... did you see this one coming? I'm actually reviewing twilight - the movie. I never saw that coming, not even this morning, when I went to work. But yes, it's true. Colleagues at work (female colleagues, I might add) talked about it and left me and my (male) boss just watching helplessly and cluelessly, wondering what's so special about a movie that features vegetarian vampires.

I just watched it and I'm still trying to figure out what's so appealing about the movie. What I heard from my colleagues is that the main actor is totally beautiful and that he "sparkles" in the light... and that seems to be 90 % of why that movie is so good. After watching, I must say that I get the same feeling... there is not much else except for the good looks and a lot of make-believe.

To describe the whole movie in one word, I'd have to say it's "thin".... and maybe people who like it would go with "subtle". I would like to point out that I can understand the romance in "Titanic", and I can understand why women like that, but in this movie, I simply can't understand what's so appealing.

The romantic relationship between the main characters is very superficial and not based on anything except good looks and mystery. In fact, the relationship between the average viewer (female, in her 20s, in love with Edward Cullen) is about as deep as the relationship between the main female character and Edward Cullen itself. He looks good, he is mysterious, and most of all, he is unapproachable and untouchable... and women need this sort of distance to fall in love with a guy (if I'm wrong, girls, you correct me, but then you explain the logic behind it). In the first third of the movie, Edward is a person I find very unlikeable as a guy. He gets more female attention than he deserves, and in reality, he would probably turn out to be a bad boyfriend.
The female character (sorry, I don't know her name any more) falls in love for no reason... and don't tell me there are no reasons for falling in love, there are! But in her case, she is just intrigued by him, but shortly after getting to know him, she already feels as if she could sell her soul for him. If she said she was "in love", with butterflies and all, I could at least believe that. But she truely loves him for.... being a rude, complicated, good-looking guy?

Another side of this movie I can't understand is the dramaturgy department. One example: In "Interview with the vampire", the vampires face the choice between turning a person into a vampire (a cursed life of immortality and restlessness) and killing a person. In "Twilight", Edward faces the remorseless choice of either turning his love into a vampire, letting her die, or CURING HER COMPLETELY. Where is the drama in that? Where is the heartbreak? What's so special about it? Why do I hear my colleages say that they cried during this movie? Somebody explain!
What is the sacrifice in there anyway? Edward saves her when he could have sucked out all her blood. Is that proof of his love for her? That's like saying I'm a romantic hero if I don't kill and cook my girlfriend although she tastes really good.... wow....

There is a fragile romance that I can sense somewhere deep below. I try to let myself be touched by it, but it doesn't really happen. There is nothing "out of this earth" about the love relationship. They don't really touch any topics of interest. Neither of them dies in the movie, so there is no particular kind of hurt either. The only kind of hurt seems to come from the fact that the girl eventually faces mortality, although that might take place 60 years or more in the future. Is that supposed to make me feel heartbroken? She can still turn into a vampire, but she might as well have children with him, become sick of him and get divorced (just to explain that so much can still happen).

Apart from that, it's an average movie to me. It has some action sequences that are okay, some mystery elements, the atmosphere is always "twilightish", rarely sunny. It's as if most of the movie takes place in the morning hours, which seems to be on purpose. I like the baseball scene.

What can I say? It's not so bad, but not worth the hype, let alone the tears. I feel that Edward Cullen is just another Brad Pitt kind of person... all the girls talk about him, but in 20 years, when he is married, has children and doesn't look so super good (I mean the actor, not the actual character, of course), the girls will be after someone else then.

This movie was made by women, for women. I can only repeat: I understand Titanic, I don't understand Twilight. It really doesn't seem so romantic to me. If the good looks are all that matters, then I'm really sorry for women because they have proven another prejudice I had against them. I don't even want to start with "logic"... I will just stay with the shallowness of the movie. At least, not every girl loved it to death, that gives me hope.