BobDylan

QUOTE (False Alarm @ May 18, 2009 -> 10:12 AM) dunno what you've read but knowing that your background's probably in lit fic i'd recommend writers who are at least servicable stylists. i don't recommend ender's game. the book's decent, if a little overrated, but the prose is fairly juvenile and i think that'd turn you off if you've read mostly lit fic and are a newcomer to SF. i'd also be hesitant to recommend dick for the same reason, though his ideas tend to be so strong and cool that any deficiencies in his prose are easy to ignore. he's definitely required reading for peeps interested in SF, but maybe someone you should save for later, when you're more used to SF. some writers i think might work for you: neal stephenson, gene wolfe (who is a complete badass), ursula le guin, william gibson (though he's gotten away from SF as he aged), vernor vinge (who's very good but maybe more in the dick category cuz his writing ain't always the prettiest). right now i'm reading kim stanley robinson for the first time and it's too early for me to rec him, but it's looking real promising and his prose is heads and shoulders above that of most hard SF writers i've read, so you might wanna take a look at him. david mitchell (in cloud atlas, anyway) and jonathan lethem are two more contemporary writers i consider mainstream rather than SF, but their writing's much more polished than most SF writers and they've both done work in the SF field. finally, covers: you've pretty much gotta ignore them when you get into genre fiction. it's just a sad fact that SF and fantasy publishers pander in their cover art. Thanks, I'll take a look at these writers. As far as being dubbed a big Cormac McCarthy fan, it's actually not true. While I love The Road, outside of Blood Meridian, I don't think he is anything special. The Border trilogy is fun, but far from outstanding or memorable. You mention I'm probably into stylists, and this is true. McCarthy is not a good stylist, and at times, his prose is worse than Bukowski (who I oddly love.) Some of my favorite writers include: Nabokov, Salinger, F. Scott Fitzgerald, Henry Miller, Capote, Beckett, Kafka, Camus. EDIT: I should mention style is not my only prerogative. I also love Bukowski (already mentioned), Ray Carver, Hemingway, Chekov, etc. (I could even lump Kafka into this category.) I guess, some might consider these writers to have beautiful stylistic prose, and I do to a certain extant, but their writing style is like an ugly bastard child compared to some like Melville, Joyce.

QUOTE (T R U @ May 18, 2009 -> 02:52 AM) Thank you. Fallout 3 is trash. If the actual fighting in the game was better, then it would be great. However, its not. And its not great. Sure, the story is cool and it looks cool. The fighting engine sucks hefty wang though and angered me. I was a fan of the game (despite the fact that it failed on many different levels), but Japanese RPG's are so, so much better.

QUOTE (kyyle23 @ May 17, 2009 -> 09:26 PM) Sounds like Galactus.....sorta Do you read SciFi? I need some book recommendations. I was at the book store the other day looking to pick one up, but I had very little idea what was good (outside of what I've already read) and most of the covers look too queer to be good literature.

The Black Saint & The Sinner Lady (Charles Mingus), so f***ing good.

QUOTE (Flash Tizzle @ May 17, 2009 -> 01:28 PM) Well, first off I was fairly drunk when writing that. But in my mind I was thinking of biologically based aliens as big as mountains; something far outside of what we'd consider. Aliens the size of Jupiter would be cool - the humpback whales of the Universe, traversing around and swallowing Earth-like planets like they're brunch.

QUOTE (Flash Tizzle @ May 17, 2009 -> 03:21 AM) Has anyone ever thought of the idea of proportion in the universe? I don't know, but I've never heard anyone even humor the idea that aliens visiting from far reaches of the universe are hundreds of times larger than we are. Do we just assume that because laws of physics are consistent across the universe that extraterrestrial beings would be similarly portioned to us? Couldn't they be far larger, or maybe smaller? Huh? This idea is all over film, literature, and of course, video games - especially larger ones. Take a look at the game "Spore." The most powerful empire in the game is a race of tiny, pussy looking things that had to have mated with gremlins at one point in time.

http://sports.espn.go.com/mlb/news/story?id=4171706 What a f***ing joke.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 16, 2009 -> 07:32 PM) Because we've had the ability to do this sort of communication for less than 100 of our Earth years. If there is another civilization out there that has developed to the level of using radio, by the time the signal gets to us it will have taken thousands, tens of thousands, or hundreds of thousands, or hell, 10^9 years. And if we're the first ones to get to this point, then the universe is a very boring place. All of it might be subjective. What if the laws of physics differ thousands/millions/billions/trillions of light years away? Maybe it is impossible for them to fly, for instance, but possible to send radio waves across galaxies in a matter of minutes. Who is more technologically advanced in that case?

This stuff never ceases to amaze. Whatever is out there, I am sure it is beyond my imagination.

QUOTE (onedude @ May 15, 2009 -> 09:07 PM) pic of the cart WITH the mirror. also i read about the grass....they've went through the movie and edited the grass coloring, effects probably weren't added for the trailer. YAY!

QUOTE (Flash Tizzle @ May 15, 2009 -> 02:05 AM) I'm sure there are going to be many people faithful to the novel very upset with this trailer. It's obvious they're attempting to appeal to the general public . First off, if the movie is going to be at all close to be book the whole intro with global warming and a tornado is deceiving. Cormac McCarthy himself said in an interview that when writing of the destruction he had envisioned an asteroid hitting the planet. That would explain devastation on a scale that covers large amounts of land, blocks out the sun, and turns the Atlantic ocean grey from fallen ash. On that note, it's EXTREMELY disappointing not to observe any ash in this trailer. The book mentioned it frequently, and it added to the dreary vision in your mind of McCarthy's post apocalyptic world. I had my doubts about this film when it was delayed last fall. I believe the essential problem here is trying to faithfully adapt the book, which has sparse dialogue and numerous moments of boredom. These moments, while appealing in the book, don't translate well into film if you're putting millions into post production (ie, Special FX of cities). You figure at the end of the world it isn't going to be adventure, as much as boredom and a fight for survival outside of battling cannibals. I wonder from this trailer if the cannibal angle is going to be pushed heavily. I think, as far as translating it on film, the ash isn't a big deal. It is an apocalypse of some sort, and I think as long as it looks bleak and grim and hopeless, it'll work. It is concerning to see green grass in the trailer while the two are huddled out before an abandoned building. Your point about the novel having little dialogue means that the director has to make the landscape the star of the film. It has to be consistent, as it is in the book. Every page that is turned in the book, the end gets closer, and their future looks no brighter. Every triumph they have is only a means to walk twenty more miles. This is because McCarthy keeps reminding us what it looks and feels like around them. Then, the trailer leads us to believe that the movie has taken liberties (tornadoes, wild oceans, the wife) and they're going to concentrate on "the bad guys," and turn it into a s***ty thriller. f*** that. And I just noticed, in the trailer, they don't have a shopping cart anywhere.

QUOTE (Jordan4life @ May 14, 2009 -> 11:46 PM) He did the same thing (although in less than 400 at-bats) in 2007. But I believe the mandatory reply to that was, "Well, that was in the woeful NL. He could never do that in the AL." Yep. Pretty much had one down year (last year). His 2005, 2006 numbers are good as well. About the only downside I can find in his numbers are lack of extra base hits, but he's good to turn at least 30-40 of those singles into doubles anyway.

QUOTE (Wanne @ May 14, 2009 -> 11:54 PM) You mean the leadoff guy with the .322 avg....382 OBP and 10 stolen bases?...that Willy Traveras? Small sample size this year, but I'd stroke it if we had a CFer with those numbers.

http://www.sharpbrains.com/blog/2009/05/14...-what-you-read/ The article is somewhat lengthy, so I won't paste it on here. I wasn't taught any of this in grade school and didn't truly learn how to read effectively until college. They didn't teach me how to read there, either, but they did teach me how to read aloud to an audience properly, which brought some of this advice to me naturally. Anyway, it's a good article and I recommend it to everyone... great and poor readers alike.

QUOTE (Buehrle>Wood @ May 14, 2009 -> 09:48 PM) ????? Anyway, that trailer has to be one of the worst I have ever seen, and this is one of my most looked to movies as well. Luckily they've said the trailer has little to do with the movie. I think he's referring to the cheesy WWII zombie movie I posted as a joke. But I wouldn't be surprised if he were talking about The Road, because, yes, the trailer looks like s***. I have faith in the director, though. He did The Proposition, which I loved. Plus Nick Cave did the soundtrack, and I can't think of any other musician more appropriate for this story. I did read an early review, and the guy basically jerked off and said it is an incredible movie.

QUOTE (T R U @ May 14, 2009 -> 10:22 PM) Man that looks awesome, I gotta find out when it comes out October 16th.

QUOTE (Nixon @ May 14, 2009 -> 02:40 PM) I wish someone would pay me $52.99 to finish that garbage. What a mediocre shooter. For some reason I read Fallout 3. Disregard this post.

QUOTE (GoSox05 @ May 14, 2009 -> 03:20 PM) I made the spining disk move and than went cross eyed. Yeah, I saw this on Reddit last night. Took my eyes about an hour to adjust back to normal after I was done f***ing around with it.

I hope they f***ing get this movie right. The book might be the best one out of this century so far and I'll be pissed if they f*** with it.

Dreamweaver IS the best, as long as you know how to use it. For simple web pages, you should be fine, should you choose to go with it. Anything more complex, I recommend picking up a tutorial book.

QUOTE (kyyle23 @ May 14, 2009 -> 12:13 PM) there are so many names on soxtalk that I would infringe upon with some of those suggestions, maybe its best to keep it the way it is...... kyylethecommie23sellout

QUOTE (Kalapse @ May 13, 2009 -> 09:25 PM) 3 for 23 w/ 11 K, 1 BB and 1 RBI since he changed his f***ing number. He's seen his OPS drop .086 points since that day. That's right, I'm blaming Podsednik! Not to mention he is wearing #7..............................................................................

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ May 13, 2009 -> 10:21 PM) It's all one injury though! Here, I can play the same game. 2006: 121 IP 2007: 0 IP 2008: 76 IP. Now, can I automatically assume this pitcher can't give me 150 innings this year? He's already thrown 40. Those are the #'s for Liriano. All 3 of those years were down years in IP because he had Tommy John Surgery. He's pitched 40 innings already this year...because he's recovered from the surgery. It was one injury. He's had surgery. Hopefully it's corrected. There's no logical reason to assume that because he had surgery on something he can never recover. Notice my use of the word "suggest" in the initial post, please. Thanks.