Avatar

Wow. That really sums it up. Wow.

I know everyone is probably sick of hearing about Avatar, but we went to see it today, so you get to hear about it one more time. It reminds me of Terminator 2 and The Matrix, in that it took ideas that weren't really new and put them together in a new way with spectacular visuals to create something that feels ahead of its time. Remember when you saw the morphing effects in T2 or bullet time in The Matrix? These are old hat now, but at the time they were revolutionary, and they both changed the future of movies. That's how I felt leaving the theater today. I feel like I saw something special and that everyone else is going to spend the next few years trying to catch up or copy the style.

Was the plot the most original? No, not really. Some of it might even be cliched. You've probably heard some of the comparisons by now: It's Ferngully. It's Dances With Wolves. It's 90% of all undercover/spy movies ever. Those are all valid comparisons, but Cameron builds on these familiar themes, constructing a mille-feuille of layer after layer of world building, character, emotional investment and visuals far too stunning for me to even try to describe here. The end result is something pleasingly familiar, yet altogether foreign.

Yeah, "wow" pretty much describes it.

Public Enemies

We went to see Public Enemies the other night. I'm not going to review it too much other than to say that I definitely did like it.

What I did want to talk about was this feeling that I couldn't shake throughout the movie, a feeling that I'd seen this before. It's not that I've seen the story of John Dillinger previously, but rather that it seemed like Michael Mann was remaking Heat as a period piece. (I'm not saying it's a good or bad thing, just that I observed it.) I know I'm probably over-simplifying this, but let me give you a few examples of what I'm talking about.

vs.

Spoilers for both Public Enemies and Heat from this point on.

Of course, the most obvious similarity is the theme of bank robbery where the similarities go from the very general, machine gun fights outside the banks, all the way down to the very specific, a robber tells someone during a heist, "We're not here for your money. We're here for the bank's money."

In each film, Mann assembles big name stars as the headliners and then populates the rest of the film with other famous actors or character actors so that just about every scene leaves you saying "Hey, isn't that..." or "I've seen that guy before."

Two actors who usually don't share top billing play a criminal with a distinct sense of honor and a lawman who becomes obsessed with catching him to the point of being self-destructive. While these two actors do share the film, they share only a single scene together before the final showdown.

The criminal is always noting the bad ideas that the other robbers have and describes his philosophy about what to do and what to avoid to stay safe. He eventually gets involved with a young woman who gets inside his defenses and exposes the humanity underneath. Unfortunately, the feelings he has for the woman cause him to go against his better judgement and specifically violate the philosophy he outlined earlier in the film. In both cases, this leads to his downfall, and our criminal is not the type to be taken alive.

I'm sure there are others things that I've forgotten now, but stylistically, thematically and even in plot, the similarities between the two movies were quite striking. As I said at the top, I'm not saying it's a bad thing, just that I had a hard time not thinking about this while sitting in the theater.

Have any of the rest of you seen this, and did you notice the same thing?

Guess what? I have a blog. I know, I thought I'd forgotten about it, too.

In this post I shall attempt to slake your thirst for my opinions on the most mundane of matters through three brief advertising/shopping related discussions. Or maybe I just didn't have anything else to talk about so you're getting a bunch of junk that poured out of my head. It's a glass half-full/half-empty thing.

I've never been a big fan of changing the name of products, but when a company changes the name of similar products, making it hard to tell the difference between them, it is very frustrating. For years, if I wanted to buy a container of the lower fat Pringles¹, I knew that they were labelled as "Right Crisps." Was it a stupid name? Sure, but I knew what they were, and the name was always the same. Now there are Pringles labelled as "Light" and Pringles labelled as "Smart Flavors". One of these is the reduced fat version and the other is the "fat-free" olestra-containing version. If they aren't going to stick with one name, they should at least make it clear on the packaging whether or not you are buying the version that causes anal leakage.

The Wendy's commercials about "Threeconomics" bother me. The entire set of commercials bothers me because threeconomics is a stupid-sounding non-word. However, one commercial in particular really irritates me. It goes something like this:

[scrippet]
INT. BREAK ROOM - DAY

Three GUYS are sitting around the table eating SANDWICHES from Wendy's.

GUY 1
I'm going to use this Jr. bacon cheeseburger, crispy chicken and double stack to explain to you the basic principles of Threeconomics.

Guy 1 reaches across the table and takes the sandwiches from Guy 2 and Guy 3.

GUY 1
Supply.

Guy 2 reaches to take his sandwich.

GUY 2
Can I have my doubl-

GUY 1
(Pushing Guy 2's hand away)
Demand.

[/scrippet]


Clearly this commercial works only because the guy getting his burger stolen isn't a fat guy². If that were the case, the commercial would go more like this:


[scrippet]
INT. BREAK ROOM - DAY

Three GUYS are sitting around the table eating SANDWICHES from Wendy's.

GUY 1
I'm going to use this Jr. bacon cheeseburger, crispy chicken and double stack to explain to you the basic principles of 3conomics.

Guy 1 reaches across the table and takes the sandwiches from Guy 2 and Guy 3.

GUY 1
Supply.

GUY 2
What are you doing?

GUY 1
Demonstrating demand.

Guy 2 reaches over the table, punches Guy 1 and takes the sandwiches.

GUY 2
Hostile takeover.

[/scrippet]

My favorite thing about commercials now is that just about every one has the phrase "these days" or "in the current economy" while talking about how much you will save if you use their product. Do they enjoy trying to scare and/or depress people or do they really think people don't know that anything is going on³? I guess that's a possibility. It's not like it's been mentioned on the news, every TV show, ads, and articles as well as every other conversation that people have had with friends or coworkers.

¹ Shut it.

² I'm allowed to say that because I'm talking about my people. Unless you're one of us, you can't.

³ I know. They don't really enjoy it; they're just trying to use everyone's problems and fears to sell their product and who are we to criticize them for it.

What Lies In The Shadow Of The Statue

I have less time than I'd like to write this and I have not had nearly enough time to digest what happened, so this Lost finale post will probably be fairly short.

By the way, this would be a good time for those of you who haven't seen the finale or who really just don't care about Lost to wander off and find something else to read.

As I said, this will not be a review nor will it be comprehensive. It's mostly going to be thoughts I had that I wanted to get out as well as some questions and almost certainly incorrect theories.

-I've never been a huge fan of the love triangle or love triangle plus Juliet part of the show. Juliet and Sawyer together after those three years in the DI worked better than any of the other attempted couplings of this group of four, so it disappointed me to see how Sawyer looked at Kate.

-I'm not one of those people who claims they'll stop watching if a character dies, but Hurley and Sayid are two of the characters who I would hate to have the show be without, so I hope Sayid pulls through somehow.

-I'm so used to Ben lying that I thought he was lying when he said that he didn't know Locke would come back to life and that he'd never seen the island do anything like that.

-This was the first time since at least the second season maybe even the first season that I had not heard (intentionally or inadvertently) what happens in the finale. I like it better this way, but at the same time theories take longer to form.

One of the big topics of discussion is what happened with the bomb and whether it really did what it was supposed to do. I don't think it did, and (if you'll forgive me for quoting myself from a comment I left elsewhere) I'm with Miles that what they did was cause the incident. Whatever happened, happened. See also: Chang staying, but sending his wife and child, just like before. Chang loses an arm, just like before. Daniel's mother shoots him, just like she knew she would have to when she sent him back. All of these things were already going to happen, and they happened in the events leading up to dropping the bomb down the hole. They are causing the events that are in the past, not changing them. Jack always threw the bomb down into "the pocket" and caused the incident and Sayid always shot 12 year old Ben, the events happened in the past, but they didn't remember because it was their future. You basically have two options with time travel (ok, more if you start creating new realities, but what does this look like, Star Trek?), you can change nothing important or you can have issues with the Grandfather Paradox (simply stated, you cannot go back in time to kill your own grandfather because then you would never have been alive to kill him). Allowing the 815ers to change anything that brought them to the island creates a paradox: The bomb keeps them from coming to the island, but if they never came to the island they couldn't have set off the bomb, and if they didn't set off the bomb they would come to the island and set off the bomb, preventing them from ever crashing on the island. This goes on in an endless loop. The only way to have a change of this nature work would be to have someone who exists outside of time (or has a paradox-correcting time code) be the one to reset things. Someone special. Someone like Desmond. Craphole Island's not through with him yet.

Now, about the whole NotLocke thing...Early in the episode, we see Jacob and some other guy (he needs a name, so I'm calling him Esau...He's got a nice rivalry going with Jacob and it's better than calling him that guy who isn't really Locke.) watching the Black Rock approach the island, and we find out that he wants to find a loophole to kill Jacob. As we saw toward the end, that loophole was to become Locke, who is dead and take the position of the leader of the Others. So, was Locke ever truly special? I think so. He always had a connection with the island and it healed him. In addition, we saw Jacob speak to him just after he was thrown from the building by his father. (For the sake of my theory, I'm going to assume that whenever we saw Jacob off the island, we really did see Jacob.) This connection made Locke the choice as leader of the Others and meant that when Esau pretended to be Locke, he could get access to Jacob. (Tangent: It's interesting to see that he was able to be Locke, because this makes me wonder if perhaps the other dead people we have seen might also have been him: Christian, who sent Locke off the island and told him he'd have to die, Alex, who told Ben to do whatever Locke--who wasn't Locke anymore-- said, anyone else who was dead and gave advice that lead to Ben killing Jacob. Ok, tangent over.) With Jacob and Esau, I couldn't help thinking back to the theme of duality that has run through the entire show. Black and White. Good and Evil. Locke is a playing piece in that centuries-long game of backgammon. Just before Esau-Locke takes Ben to meet Jacob, the new group from Ajira 316 reaches Richard and asks him what lies in the shadow of the statue. He knows the answer, so they show him what's in the box, and rather than Gwyneth Paltrow's head, it's the corpse of John Locke. With Jacob stabbed and apparently dying, I can't help thinking about what lies in the shadow of the statue. "Ile qui nos omnes servabit"He who will save us all." And who is lying there right now is John Locke. Could this mean that we will soon see a Jacob version of Locke and an Esau version of Locke? I don't know, but at this point nothing seems to be out of the question.

You Know You Want To Watch This Too

Throughout history, mankind has asked one question more than any other: "Why am I here?" We need a sense of purpose to feel fulfilled; we need to feel as if we are part of something larger. Individuals have come up with their own answers, but never has a single event or a single theme been able to unite us all.

That, my friends, is about to change. All of modern technology has been building to this, the pinnacle of this or any other civilization. Yes, I speak of Mega Shark vs. Giant Octopus.

Why are we on this planet? So that this can be made and so that we can watch it.

Movie Trailers - Movies Blog

I know it's difficult to wrap your mind around this if you are just learning of it, but let's consider just a few of the glorious things we see in this trailer.

1. Lorenzo Lamas
2. Debbie Deborah Gibson
3. Not just a shark, a Mega Shark
4. Giant Octopus
5. Mega Shark and Giant Octopus fighting each other
6. The octopus is so giant that it destroys an oil rig
7. And slaps a fighter jet out of the air
8. The shark is so mega that it attacks what appears to be a battleship*
9. And the Golden Gate Bridge**
10. And a commercial airliner--in flight
11. One or both of them appear to destroy a submarine
12. Something is making the smoke monster sound from Lost

The movie comes straight to DVD later this month and it may or may not*** be at the top of my Netflix queue waiting for the release date.

*I can only hope this leads to a "It sank our battleship!" line in the actual movie. Movies this bad need lines that awful.
**The bridge, people! It jumps up to take a bite out of the bridge. Can sharks in any other movie do that? No, they aren't Mega enough.
***Oh yeah, it is.

Oh Look, Something Involving Science Is in the News and Craig Is on a Soapbox. Everyone Act Surprised.

I've debated on posting something about all of the swine flu panic and have restrained myself because I don't want to try to sound like I'm putting myself out there as an expert (mostly because I'm not even remotely qualified to be one). In a turn of events that is surprising to absolutely no one, I can't keep my thoughts to myself and have to at least give you a little bit of commentary. 

I went to the store yesterday after work, and as I walked down an aisle I saw this.

That's where the hand sanitizer should be, but there are only a few bottles left. Alcohol-based hand sanitizers are good and should be effective at eliminating influenza on your hands¹. So, I suppose it's understandable (though perhaps a bit sad) that people have reacted to stories of the potential spread of the flu by buying so much hand sanitizer that it's almost sold out. 

However, do you know what else does a good job of inactivating influenza? Soap. Yeah, just plain old hand soap. It doesn't have to be any special soap, just soap. With this in mind, it bothered me to see this right next to the almost completely empty sanitizer area.

Sanitizer is great for when you can't get to water, but the reality is that your best bet in avoiding illness is hand-washing. Seeing the Purell, Germ-X and every other brand of sanitizer sell out while hardly a dent was made in the stock of soap² seemed a sad, but perhaps fitting, metaphor for panic winning out over common sense.

¹It does work for influenza and for many bacteria, but there are still a lot of things from various bacteria to Norovirus that it doesn't do much for, so washing your hands is still more effective.

²I realize I may be oversimplifying the reasons behind the shelves being this way, but I'm trying to make a point.

Trivial Tuesday

With Star Trek coming out this week, I figure why not make it three questions in a row that have to do with Star Trek. As you have probably heard by now thanks to the non-stop media blitz leading up to the movie's release, Eric Bana plays Nero, a Romulan who travels through time. In an interesting coincidence, Bana also refuses to be temporally bound in his next film. What novel-adaptation is his next role?

Answer quickly to earn a fleeting sense of superiority over your friends.

Also, did I make this one way too easy? It feels like it to me.

X-Men Origins: Wolverine - Pro and Con

Con: The title.

Pro: Stuff blows up.

Con: Computer graphics when Sabretooth runs on all fours.

Pro: Fight scenes.

Con: Attempt at a plot failed miserably.

Pro: Attempt at a plot is just a way to justify action sequences.

Pro: Deadpool*

Con: Deadpool*

Pro: Introduced to new mutants

Con: Most new mutants are basically cameos and are often very different than comic versions.

Pro: I've always liked Gambit's power.

Con: Why doesn't Gambit have an accent?

Pro: Did I mention stuff blew up?

Con: Holding arms out while looking up at the sky and screaming. (Did Wolverine just find out Padme was dead?)

Pro: Jackman and Schreiber seem to have put a lot of effort into getting into shape for the movie.

Con: What did they do to [actor's name held back for spoiler] in the escape scene with the kids? That scared me.

Pro: Most of the action was over-the-top and unrealistic. (In a movie where a guy pops metal claws out of his hands, that's allowed to be a pro)

Con: Wolverine butt

Verdict: Bad, but not so bad that it wasn't still fun.

Random note: I realized after writing this that X3 also got a pro/con list instead of a real review, but even that was more thought out than this one.


*I can't really explain that one without a lot of spoilers and an attempt at explaining the plot and it's really not worth it.

Trivial Tuesday

Back in the late 80's ('87 or so), a group had their first, and biggest, hit with a song called "Heart and Soul." This band took its name from a minor Star Trek character from the original series first season episode, Amok Time (later parodied in many places, including the Futurama episode "Why Must I Be a Crustacean in Love?"). Name the musical group or the character. It's your choice, since the answer is the same either way.

The Way Back Machine: You Have Died of Dysentery

I was playing The Oregon Trail recently on [device redacted]¹, and, as I was informed that one of my children had contracted cholera, I was reminded of playing the game in a school computer lab when I was younger. Specifically, I was reminded of the problems that arise when people playing the game don't understand what the game is trying to tell them.²

[scrippet]
INT. COMPUTER LAB - DAY

CRAIG and FRIEND are sitting in front of what appears to be the world's oldest COMPUTER, playing Oregon Trail.

COMPUTER
George has cholera.

CRAIG
Great, we're already behind schedule and don't have money to spare for medicine.

FRIEND
It's not that bad. I had it once.

Craig turns from the computer to look at his friend.

CRAIG
What?

FRIEND
Cholera. I had it. It's really no big deal.

Craig stares blankly, trying to find some way to respond. He BLINKS slowly.

CRAIG
No.

FRIEND
Yep. I did.

Craig sighs.

CRAIG
(Resigned)
Ok.

FRIEND
My mom told me. I had it when I was a baby. I was crying all the time.

CRAIG
That's colic, not cholera.

FRIEND
Oh. Well, what's cholera then?

CRAIG
(Turning back to the computer)
We're just going to keep going. If he dies, he dies.
[/scrippet]

¹Not putting the name of it here, so that I'm not the guy who talks about this device non-stop, despite the fact that many of you have already heard me talking about this device non-stop.

²This conversation section is written in a scrippet. Yes, I did that just because I can. No, I cannot claim any responsibility for it; scrippets are the brainchild of John August. If isn't working for you, try viewing in Chrome, Safari or FF. For more info on them, check out scrippets.org

Trivial Tuesday

Last week's question had a Kal Penn connection. This week we're moving on to John Cho, who you probably know is starring as Sulu in the new Star Trek film this summer. One of the most impressive pieces of casting information (No, not that Cameron from House is going to be Captain Kirk's mom.) was that Leonard Nimoy is going to appear in the film.

Nimoy has done television work and cartoon voice-over work more recently, but he hasn't been in a live action feature since what 1991 movie?

Comment with your answer and win a prize*.



*First Prize is a feeling of accomplishment. Prize has no cash value and is not tangible.

Trivial Tuesday

You know, it would be nice if I took the time to actually do this every week instead of randomly like this is some sort of pop quiz.

Before I begin, let me issue a warning, this question is going to have spoilers for the April 6th episode of House, so please if you watch the show, but are a bit behind on your DVR watching, step away now.

Ready?

Good.

It's been a little over a week since the demise of my almost-namesake on House. Coincidentally, around ten years ago, one of the other people in the episode also played a doctor who took his own life. Who is the actor and on what TV drama did this occur?

Answer, as always, in the comment section.

Geek Apologetics: "My Scott and Jean"

What's that? You don't know what it means when someone says "that's my Scott and Jean"? Well, first of all there's the great blog crossover event going on right now, which you can read about here. As for the phrase itself, it refers to "...my geek sacred cow, the one topic I cannot discuss rationally..."

I am a little late to the party, so instead of getting this all down ahead of time, I'm rushing to get it out on the right day. I had a few ideas, but it came down to two and I decided to take this in a slightly different direction that everyone else. For most people it has been comics or television, but I'm going to go with books. You see, my Scott and Jean, my one thing for which I will brook no argument is The Wheel of Time¹.

For those of you who don't know The Wheel of Time is a fantasy series written by Robert Jordan. It has been part of my life for a very long time. I first began reading the series when I was a sophomore in high school and there were already four books in the series published. (For the record, that means that since I first started reading this series I have graduated three times, moved six times-I think, gotten married, had a 10 year anniversary, started a career and worked for countless iterations of the same company as we bought and sold and were bought and sold.) The characters in these books, and the richly detailed world they inhabit were with me through my teenage years. As I grew up, so did these characters, and even now I am anxiously awaiting the final book(s)² in the series.

As the wait between books grew longer and the amount of detail given to minor characters began to take word count away from the main characters, readers grew restless and began to fall away (in the way most fans fall away: They still read the book or watch the show, but complain about it). While I understand some of the frustration³, I refuse to simply turn my back on the amazing work and have no time to listen to anyone who thinks that I should.

¹ The other finalist for this was Lost, but that apologia will have to wait for another time.

² I say "book(s)" because the final book, written by Brandon Sanderson, who was chosen to complete the series after Robert Jordan's death in 2007, has now been broken up into three books, the first of which is being released in November. I guess the publisher decided that waiting until 2011 and releasing one 800-thousand word novel wasn't a good idea.

³ I really could go on for much longer and get into more detail, but if I intend to post this on the same day as all of the other My Scott and Jean posts, I need to shut up.

Watchmen

Alan Moore's celebrated graphic novel, Watchmen, has often been referred to as "unfilmable", and for years it had seemed as if that might be true. There had been several unsuccessful attempts to get an adaptation started over the years, but now Zack Snyder has brought it to the big screen. Is it completely faithful to the comic? Not completely faithful, but about as faithful as can be expected. 

I really enjoyed the film. The flashbacks to the early years of the Minutemen, Osterman's accident and Vietnam were handled very well. Snyder wove info from "Under the Hood" and other sections of the comic into the movie deftly and was able to provide the backstory and bring to life the alternate 1985 that Moore and Gibbons first created. The casting was excellent and the acting is quite good, but the real stand-out, in my opinion, was Jeffrey Dean Morgan as The Comedian. (With the minor exception of the fact that he is supposedly 22 in the 1940 flashbacks and who are they kidding, he fit the part perfectly.) 

It's not all perfect, however. There were some things that did bother me. While the look of all of the times and settings was excellent, President Nixon just looked absurd. The obvious prosthetic nose and massive amounts of makeup were distracting every time he was on screen. I don't mind changes from the source material, but changing the name of the second group of costumed heroes from Crimebusters to Watchmen. The change made it seem as if they didn't believe that the audience could comprehend that the title of the film came not from the name of a group of crime fighters, but from the question that it asks. The thing that bothered me the most was Snyder's (over)use of slow motion. Just as he did in 300, Snyder uses slow motion and freeze frames in every action sequence. the technique can be used both to emphasize the action and to replicate the panes of the comic source material, but when it is used so often it becomes distracting. I'd had enough of it before the end of the first scene of the movie and by the end I felt like it was the only move he knew for action scenes and that asking him to do anything else would be like asking Zoolander to turn left.

If you could only choose one and asked me whether it would be better to go see the movie or read the comic, I would tell you without hesitation to pick up a copy of the graphic novel and start reading now. Fortunately, the world doesn't work that way, and we get to have the comic in its original form and the movie counterpart we were told we could never see.

The Graveyard Book: Less a Review Than a Declaration of Love

The Graveyard Book has gotten a lot of press recently. After all, it was named the winner of the Newbery Award. Feeling a little behind the times, I started reading the book myself. Less than 24 hours later, eyes moist, heart full of joy, pain, loss and love, I sat holding the book I had just finished reading. While the book is reasonably short and simple to read, the real reason I finished it so quickly was that I never wanted to put it down.  

The title plays off of Kipling's The Jungle Book, as does much of the story, but where there were wolves and a jungle, there are now ghosts and a graveyard. Nobody Owens is a boy who has lost his family, but by wandering into the graveyard finds a new, somewhat nontraditional one. The inhabitants of the graveyard act as family, teachers and protectors, keeping him safe until the time comes to return to the world of men. (I'll stop the plot description here for the sake of any of you who haven't read it yet.)

I tend to consider myself a fan of Neil Gaiman. I read pretty much as many of his works as I can get my hands on. I think that, to date, The Graveyard Book may just be my favorite thing he has written, and really, I don't know that I can think of much higher praise than that.

Pathetic Humans, Prepare to Write Down the Recipe!!!

There are going to be quite a few pictures in this post, so when you come to one that is awkwardly placed in the middle of a section, please imagine that as I am telling the story to you, I am turning the book toward you so that you can see the pictures.¹ (and since I'm still here in the intro section. Apologies to anyone who got notified of this post twice. I had to go back and fix some HTML because I'm that obsessive.)

Recently, I purchased a new stainless steel pan and since it wasn't a non-stick surface like the rest of our pans, I figured it would be a good time to work on my pan sauces.






Now, one could make a pan sauce from all sorts of things, but to be quite honest I hankered for a hunk of, a slice, a slab or chunk of, I hankered for a hunk of beef.² Since I watch Good Eats fairly often, regardless of whether I have seen the episode before or not, I happened to have recently watched Alton Brown make steak au poivre in Tender is the Loin, Part I. I decided that with a few minor adjustments, including using New York strip rather than tenderloin steaks, I'd give the recipe a try.

First up was a little butter an olive oil in the pan. Once that was hot, it was time to add the steaks which were coated in coarsely crack black pepper. I do mean coarsely; I used the mortar and pestle rather than a pepper grinder.






Once the steaks were done, they were taken off to rest while I made the sauce. The first step was to deglaze the pan with cognac.

Ok, I'm going to go on a tangent for a minute, so bear with me. Cooking with something that I would never keep around, like cognac, is a pain. As many of you know, I believe that pretty much anything containing alcohol tastes exactly like everything else containing alcohol, which is to say like cough syrup. Needless to say, this makes my need for cognac or any other alcohol pretty limited even for cooking. When I decided to make this, I went looking for cognac with the intent of buying something inexpensive and preferably only a small amount, after all, I needed only about 1/3 of a cup. Once I got to the grocery store, my idea went straight out the window as I saw that the smallest bottles to be had were around a liter. (I guess it's good that I hadn't gone to Sam's Club.) On my way home, I figured I'd give the local convenience store a try. As it turned out, they did have smaller bottles, as long as a half pint of Hennessy was ok. So, now I look less like I'm planning to cook and more like I'm trying to reenact any one of a million different rap songs. Ok, back to the main post.


I added the cognac to the pan, and then brought a lit match (a very long one) to the pan to light the vapor.






Note that in this picture, there is very little flame. That gave me a confidence that would come back to haunt me later.


Once the alcohol had burned⁴, I added heavy cream and mixed, scraping the bottom of the pan to get the fond off, then let it simmer for around 5 minutes to thicken.






After that, it was just a matter of adding the steaks back to the pan to get them nice and coated in the sauce and then serving.⁵






It turned out pretty well. It was a little hot because of all the black pepper, but it tasted great.


Steaks were still cheap at the grocery store, so I tried it out again. This time, I was working without a recipe, but still following the basic method from the steak au poivre. I minced one shallot clove⁶, then set about cooking the steaks as I had before. Once the steaks were done, I deglazed with cognac and flamed, then added the shallot and some beef stock. Once the sauce had thickened, I brought the steaks back to the pan and covered them in sauce. This one turned out pretty well, too. I wasn't sure about the amount of shallot to use, and I probably would have increased it a little if I were to do it all again.









Now, remember how I said that confidence would come back to haunt me? The second time, we captured the lighting of the cognac on video. If you have sound on you will hear the whoosh of the flames followed by the dogs barking and then, at the very end, Melissa saying that we shouldn't try that again. What you don't see is that the flames reached all the way to the ceiling and that while I was moving the pan back and forth I was also looking around to see if anything was on fire. It wasn't. After the flames had died down and the video was over, I did check in the mirror to make sure I still had both eyebrows. (I do.)







So, what did we learn? If you let me cook, I may or may not burn down your kitchen. But if I don't burn the place down, I can produce some tasty food.<sup>7



1</sup>You did know that I picture you all as a bunch of kindergartners sitting cross-legged in a circle around me as I tell stories, right? Ok, good.
²Apparently, I was so hungry I could eat a wagon wheel.³ Also, I'm sorry.
³Those of you who either are too young or too old or didn't waste your youth watching cartoons and therefore don't know what "Time for Timer" means can go here to check it out.
⁴Note that I'm not telling you that it had completely burned off. No matter what you have been told over the years, all of the alcohol in a recipe does not evaporate during cooking. You're never going to get drunk off of what is left, but if you do not for health or other reasons want any alcohol in what you eat, don't use it at all. Even in a case like this where you burn it, I wouldn't trust that it is all gone.
⁵This is my other big deviation from Alton Brown's recipe. He added more cognac at the end. I didn't add any extra due to my very limited tolerance of the flavor.
⁶Is that even the right term for one section of a shallot? It is now.
⁷More pictures can be found on Flickr by clicking on any of the ones in this post and viewing the entire set, which Laziest Girl has helpfully decided should be called "The Idiot's Guide to Setting the Kitchen on Fire."

Trivial Tuesday

Slumdog Millionaire won the Best Picture Oscar on Sunday night. (Letting you know in case you haven't had any exposure to television, radio, the internet or a newspaper since then.) As you probably heard during the Oscar telecast, the film was based on a book called Q & A by Vikas Swarup. This was not the first time Danny Boyle has directed a movie based on a book. In fact, it was the third. The first time was the movie Trainspotting. What film starring Leonardo DiCaprio was the other adaptation of a novel directed by Boyle?

Bragging rights are at stake. Impress me and impress your friends by commenting with the correct answer.

It's Not Ironic; It's Just Coincidental

We've had a lot of snow this winter. Seriously, a lot. Back in mid to late January I saw on the news that our snowfall total for the year was already 9 or 10 inches above average. When the city decides that there has been enough snow (usually >4 or 6 inches in a 24 hour period), they send out the snow plows. As anyone who has lived in an area with lots of snow can tell you, the plows don't care much where the snow goes as long as they push it off the road. A giant wall of snow at the end of your driveway? That's your problem. The road's clear now. As annoying as being plowed in (our out, as has happened to me at least twice this year) is, the bigger problem is that since we have no curbs, the snow also gets pushed up against where people's mailboxes are. As the snow piles higher and higher, and the plows push more and more snow in the general direction of the mailbox, ours could no longer take the strain and, as we discovered when some of the giant snow pile surrounding it melted, was only being held upright by the snow. It now lists to one side and back*, threatening to topple completely at any moment.

This of course, is also our problem and has resulted in multiple trips to Home Depot, first for the post kit, then a new "if we're doing this we might as well replace that too" mailbox, then for the mounting board, which is for some strange reason not included with either the post or mailbox. On one of these trips through the store, we came across this display.




At first, it simply added to frustration and anger on my part, but finally I realized that there isn't much that I can change about it, so I might as well laugh.

The sad part about this is that once we finally got all the pieces we need to replace it, it has started snowing again, so we are stuck having to wait.


*Do you have any idea how hard it was to resist a "back, and to the left" joke?

A Superpowers Drug You Can Just Rub Into Your Skin? You'd Think It'd Be Something You Have to Freebase.

Because I can never resist a chance to see what I'd be like if I were a superhero or to do what all the cool kids are doing, I give you my alter-ego:

I'm not exactly thrilled with the name, but it's automatically assigned when you use the hero factory. And to be quite honest, I can't think of a better one. Suggestions?

When faced with the "abilities" section, which would more accurately be called "accessories", I considered the lightsaber, katana and pistol, but figured that even my superpowered self would be more likely to wield a spork than any of the other options. With my trusty spork by my side, I would definitely have powers matching those of the legendary Matter Eater Lad. No, I'm probably not the most useful superhero, but at least you'll never have to worry about those pesky leftovers at the superhero banquet.

It's reasonably accurate, at least from the neck up. From the neck down, it looks like I not only found motivation to work out but might find my name in the Mitchell Report as well.

Something about the uniform with the blue/gold makes me think of Invincible or The Immortal, but I'm probably the only one who will see that or even know what I'm babbling about. Now if you'll excuse me, I have some crime to fight. Tasty, delicious crime.

But I Don't Think Either of Us Barks in Our Sleep

You hear about how people look like their dogs all the time, but fortunately that isn't the case with us. We discovered, however, that rather than looking like our pets, our pets have adopted our sleeping habits. 

Chewie is a light sleeper who will wake up if he is even slightly disturbed, but if he's been sleeping for a while, he is very grumpy when he wakes up. If we leave the house, he naps in his crate until we come home and let him out. Then he goes stomping across the house, head down, until he gets to the door and goes outside. You can talk to him, but he won't even acknowledge anyone. 

Booker, on the other hand, sleeps very soundly, but once he's up, he's up. When he goes to sleep, nothing disturbs him. In fact, he sleeps so soundly that I sometimes touch his ear to make it twitch just to make sure he's responding at all. (Yes, it irritates him, but it makes me feel better.) Of course, if I wait long enough, he'll let us know he's just fine with a nice loud snore.

No, our dogs may not look like us, but one sleeps like me and one sleeps like Melissa. I'll leave the sorting out which one is which to you.

Trivial Tuesday: The Triumphant Return

It's been far too long since I've done this. I don't even know who's still out there that will bother to comment or try to answer, but here we go anyway.

We're rapidly approaching the mercy killing that is the ER series finale. ER was responsible for giving a boost to the careers of several actors, including George Clooney. It's pretty well known that Clooney also starred on the short-lived sitcom E/R earlier in his career; however, he is not the only person to have appeared on both shows. What Battlestar Galactica actress also appeared on both E/R and ER?^*

First person to comment with the correct answer wins bragging rights, but nothing of actual value.

^*How many hints did I give you in that one sentence? Not doing this in such a long time has apparently made me go easy on you.

There Will Be Posts

I don't have anything to say right this minute, but I will have something up here tomorrow. So, look for a brand new post tomorrow night. I promise.

In fact, it will be something that hasn't been seen around here in a long time. And no, it's not my toes.<sup>*



*</sup>Did I really just make a fat joke? I haven't posted in forever and that's all I've got? I really should hang it up. I'm getting to old for this.

I'm Not Dead and Other Bits of Useless Information

Since you aren't all privy to all of the email, IM or other conversations I've had with some, but not all, of you, I figure I should post an update answering some of these questions.

Q: Yo, you dead?
A: No, despite my eating habits, I am still alive. The inactivity on this site is not the result of my departure from this life, but thank you for your concern.

Q: Have you given up your blog completely?
A: Are you kidding? I just forked over ten bucks to keep this snazzy URL. That would be like spending money on Netflix and never watching or returning your DVDs...You know what; let's move on.

Q: Are you going to post again?
A: What do you think you're reading now? Ok, maybe I shouldn't berate the few readers I have left. Will I post other things again? Yes. Will I post on a regular basis? Well, don't hold your breath for the 3-5 days a week stuff anymore.

Q: You haven't posted 3-5 days a week in a couple years, if ever.
A: That's not a question. Now shut up.

Q: Why aren't you posting anything?
A: Multiple reasons. First, I've had this blog for over 4 years now. I've only got so much to say, and there's only so much I am willing to discuss in a place like this that is quasi-anonymous and not remotely private. Second, my job has been getting more demanding as time goes on, and recently, I changed positions (sort of) making things even more demanding. This all means that I don't have much in the way of mental capacity to think of things to say. Rest assured, when I think of something to post about, you'll see it...assuming I have time to write and can write coherently.

Q: So, anything exciting going on in your life?
A: Not really, no. Unless you want to discuss lot release and need by dates, I'm a boring conversationalist.

Q: Have you at least seen any good movies recently?
A: Actually, yes. We went to see Coraline last weekend. If you haven't seen it, please do. It's great.

Q: What about TV?
A: The usual. Lost, BSG, Good Eats, etc. I did give up on Heroes part way through the first half of this season. It was so bad that I've cancelled the TiVo season pass for it. It could suddenly turn into the best show ever, and I'd never know. We did get an HD TiVo for ourselves for Christmas and have discovered that the ability to watch movies and old TV shows instantly using Netflix and TiVo is a great thing. We've watched lots of Alfred Hitchcock Presents that way.

Q: Read any good books?
A: Yes, I have. I have a soft spot for fantasy and I started reading Brandon Sanderson after hearing that he was going to be finishing The Wheel of Time. I've read Elantris and all three of the Mistborn books and recommend that fantasy lovers do the same. Now, in preparation for this fall's (scheduled) release of the last WoT novel, I'm rereading all of the Wheel of Time books. Of course, that's around 9000-10000 pages (or around 3 million words) of the same author, so we'll see how that goes.

Q: Some of these don't really sound like questions people have asked you.
A: Again, please put your submission in the form of a question.

Q: People didn't really ask you all this stuff, did they?
A: No, it was mostly the things about if I had quit or if I was ever posting again. It did give me a chance to have a conversation with myself and give updates on several things, though.

There you have it. You're now all up to date with my life. If you actually read this far, you have my thanks and my apologies. As a reward, feel free to throw out a topic for discussion. I'll probably ignore it, but you never know; you just might end up with a long-winded diatribe on it. I may be busy, but I'm still opinionated and wordy.

Said The Joker to The Thief

Warning: If you aren't all caught up on your BSG watching, you may want to skip this post until you are.

Battlestar Galactica is starting up again this Friday, and we know who 4 of the final five Cylons are (and have for nearly two years now). It seems that the suspense over the final Cylon has been built up to the point where no matter how well it's done, it will be considered a let down. That said, I figure why not add a thought of my own^* on the subject.

If we know who eleven of the twelve are, but we also know that Tigh and a 6 are going to have a baby, do we perhaps know who the last model is? After all, unless things work out very differently when a mommy Cylon and a daddy Cylon love each other very much, the child should be completely Cylon, but different than either parent. Of course, this is just a thought and far from being any actually answer. I honestly don't have any clue what's going to actually happen. Really, I think most of us have already had how we thought the show would end pulled right out from under us, so predictions seem kind of futile.

I guess we'll find out soon.

^*Another thought that I did find interesting but that is not originally my own: Forget asking "Who is Number One?" or even "Who does Number 2 work for?", we should be more concerned with the identity of number 7. We know who 1, 2 3, 4, 5, 6 and 8 are, but supposedly there are no model numbers for Tigh, Anders, Tyrol and Tory. If they don't have numbers, why did the original seven skip the number 7 and have the Sharons as number 8? Ok, I'm not convinced that this means anything other than that the writers decided not to have model numbers for the final five until after they assigned the first seven, but it could mean something. And if nothing else, it gave me a way to work in references to The Prisoner and Austin Powers.