Everything Old is New Again

The video game industry is taking a cue from movie studios and remaking its most memorable classics. It used to be that merely rereleasing old games was enough. Indeed, they did exactly that during the last three generations of consoles. However, the well there has essentially gone dry. With some exceptions, every memorable title that came out before 1995 is available for download on either the Wii, Xbox 360, PS3, or all three. So now they've taken on a new tactic -- revamping old arcade classics for the age of high definition TVs and broadband Internet.


Although remakes have been going on since 1993's Super Mario All-Stars, I'd say the current trend really took off with the announcement of Super Puzzle Fighter II Turbo HD Remix and Super Street Fighter II Turbo HD Remix. Fortunately the ridiculously-long-name trend didn't catch on. Both games updated the graphics for HD displays and incorporated online play, with little lag time to boot. SSF2T HD even went the extra mile with remixed music and more balanced fighters. Capcom had us all drooling at the mouth with Mega Man 9, which used the NES graphics for a whole new adventure.


Even before those, Namco surprised everyone with Pac-Man Championship Edition. The addictive update felt refreshing thanks to a morphing play screen and a demanding time limit. I've wasted many a night trying to best my high score. The company failed to recapture the same feeling in Space Invaders Extreme, which just felt bland and looked kind of ugly. There's also last year's Galaga Legions, which plays completely different from the original. It feels more like Gradius than the bug-fighting arcade classic.

Speaking of Gradius, Konami has jumped on the bandwagon, but not like you might hope. Instead of new graphics and gameplay, Konami's given us Gradius: Rebirth and Contra: Rebirth, essentially remixed levels taken from the SNES games. No HD graphics, gameplay tweaks, just a lot of recycled sprites. Weak. But Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles makeover at the end of the month is shaping up nicely.



Nintendo's gotten in on the action too, with Dr Mario Rx, an online-capable version of the old puzzle game. One could argue that New Super Mario Bros. and the Wii edition of Punch-Out are remakes, although I'd say there's enough new content and gameplay tweaks to be distinguishable from their older versions.

What's my take on all this? Well I don't mind a good remake as long as it brings something new and refreshing to the table, or at least some good visuals and online functionality. It's impressive that a few gameplay tweaks managed to make Pac-Man: CE feel both new and nostalgic at the same time. Online play alone justified the rerelease of Puzzle Fighter and SSF2T, the HD visuals was icing on the cake.

What I do not like is using old assets (game engines, art, and the like) and repackaging it. It smacks of laziness and easy money. As much as I enjoyed Mega Man 9, it'd be exciting to see the series revived in 2D with HD visuals and hand-drawn sprites. Of course, if the extra cash means more original and riskier games, it's worth the tradeoff.

Is being gay a "white thing"?

About a month ago, the Secret Service carried a woman away from Air Force One. This religious nutcase wanted to hand the President a letter objecting to gay marriage. Kind of humorous, but pretty run-of-the-mill looniness. But a quote from her blog caught my eye:

"For the most part [gays] are white males who have sexed themselves out on perverted sex and they are never satisfied."

Now for the most part this misguided quote isn't noteworthy. The tired "gays are perverted hedonists" thing has been done to death . The fact lesbians don't appear on her radar also shows how distorted her view is.

But white males? ~Groan~ This reflects a sentiment I've heard occasionally: being gay is a "white" thing. (Other "white" things: reading, not liking sports, not liking soul food, being generally interested in other cultures, talking "proper", getting good grades, playing video games without "Madden" in the title, camping, skydiving, surfing, all music outside hip hop, rap, R&B, and gospel, and skiing)

(I could also go into how black people's experiences, like everyone's, are too diverse to fit within someone's narrow scope of who we should or shouldn't be, and how it's damaging to mock youngsters for pursuing interests they're passionate about, and maybe, just maybe, embracing an African American male who doesn't fit the hypermasculine image perpetuated in the media would a positive step forward, but I digress.)

Not only is the idea stupid it's lazy. When people say it's a "white" thing, what they really mean is a "white, urban, liberal" thing because they're basing this off images seen on television and in movies. Anyone who puts even a smidgen of thought into it would realize there are many predominantly white communities hostile to gays. This is true not only in America but many parts of Europe.



The movement has gained traction in non-white countries all over the world. Activists in Singapore recently held their first gay rights demonstration. South Africa, that mecca of whiteness, beat the US and most of the rest of the world to legalizing gay marriage.

In the US, DC's black gay community is large enough to hold a separate pride event. And gays are growing up in churches and homes throughout the black community, the community just likes to pretend we don't exist. But we do, and we're becoming more visible by the day.

Even in the most homophobic places in the world the hatred gays endure also serves as a reminder we exist. In Jamaica and parts of Africa gay citizens face physical violence Americans like to think we've moved past, even thoough beatings and killings remain a problem in even supposedly-tolerant places like New York City. In Iraq, killing squads hunt down gay Iraqis (the courageous few who live openly), and yet there are still activists working towards liberation there.

So can we put the "white" bullshit to rest already? LGBT people exist in all walks of life, at every category of class, race, ethnicity, and religion. Those who deny this just have their heads in the sand.

Who's under that veil?

I watched the Desperate Housewives season finale. I watched the creepy-ass Dave as he was thwarted by his own insanity. Watched Katherine stand at the airport like the lonely girl at the school ball. Watched Gabby seethe over the new resident in her home. (Would it be too gay to admit I thought her bedroom looked awesome?) Laughed at Karl's jokes and smugness in the face of Bree's objections. And then the obligatory cliffhanger: Who's Mike Delfino's bride?

More importantly, why should I care?

If it's Susan, we get more Susan-Mike screen time, which will be entertai--- ZZZZZzzzzz. These two couldn't be anymore boring. I mean, I can barely stand Susan when she's breaking into people's homes, meddling in their affairs, and generally being a dumbass. The "root-for" couple can't get back together when there's four more seasons to go. Except for maybe Chandler and Monica, who were second fiddle to but much more interesting than Ross and Rachel, no series has resolved sexual tension midway into its run and kept it interesting. And where does this leave Jackson?

If Katherine is the bride, they merely delay the inevitable for a few more years. Susan and Mike get to share pleasantries when Mike picks up M.J. but never admit their true feelings until another crazed psycho comes knocking (seriously, how many people can have a vendetta against one family?) Meanwhile Katherine... tries to become interesting and relevant. Eventually the writers find a way to get the two back together and remove Katherine from the picture just in time for the series finale. I suppose they can throw everyone off and kill off Mike ala Billy on Ally McBeal (I'd prefer Susan bite it, but whatever), but I'm not betting on it.

Of course, they could always throw us a curveball and put a completely new woman in there. Maybe an old ex or a new woman who swept Mike off his feet or someone else off Wisteria Lane, like Karen McClesky. Uh, never mind.

Whoever it is, I hope it's more interesting than last season was. As for the other loose ends,

Usurper! Usurper!

Gabby has a new target to trade barbs with: a younger version of herself. What's the new girl's angle? My guess is she's not really related to Carlos, sent to seduce him and push Gabby out of the picture. Cheap insults and self-absorption. Yawn.

Lady and the Tramp

Karl's easily my favorite reoccurring character. He knows how to push Susan's buttons and handles Bree pretty well. Plus he's kinda sexy in a rugged, middle-aged sort of way. His sleazeball vibe works well with the wholesome Bree. Well, that is if you consider an alcoholic who tried to poison her husband and let her boyfriend die next to her without calling an ambulance wholesome. Republicans. But since Orson has become more annoying, this new direction could be fun.

Preggers

Besides Bree, Lynette is consistently the strongest character on the show, but the pregnancy is just so... played out. And twins? Oh my, that's twice as much trouble! Not looking forward to this at all.

Vacancy

With Dave in the looney bin, there's a vacant spot for another family. What dysfunctional wackos will it be this time? Militia men? PETA members? Scientologists? Witches? Will they be lesbians? Black? Asian? Transgender? Hicks?

I just hope it's better than the last 20 something episodes. There's little hope of matching the quality of season one, but I won't stick around four more years of mysteries we can guess on the first episode.

So are you guys even trying? pt. 1 (Wolverine review)

*SLIGHT SPOILERS*

I didn't have high expectations for X-Men Origins: Wolverine. For one thing, as much as I love the character, he isn't terribly deep. Even with all the pages of backstory he's still just a bad-ass with a mysterious past and the occasional soft spot for a woman willing to fuck him. An anti-hero works great for ensemble casts, not so much when he's front and center. On top of that, this film is a spinoff, which usually means less budget and a weaker director. So the bar is pretty low. And the film still slinks beneath it.

X2 turned out so great due to smart-writtenly moments of dialogue that allowed the characters to be people, filled with ideas, dreams, and anxieties. The superheroes were brought down to earth and the audience felt for them. Consequently, when the action kicked up, we were invested in the outcome.


All of that is missing from Wolverine. His relationship with Kayla feels weak and forced. He expresses grief by yelling at the sky, even as a kid (in one of the most cringe-worthy scenes ever filmed). The backstory with Victor is so shallow you couldn't drown an ant in it. It's essentially a prepubescent sibling rivalry. Why is Victor so much more bloodthirsty? Does he ever really intend to kill Logan? Did Logan ever care enough to try to change Victor? Such relevant ideas are left behind for a weak revenge plot.

OK, so the acting, plot, and character development are sub-par, a good action film can make up for these shortcomings with good visual effects, action, and some witty dialogue. And we get some of that. Wolverine's escape on a motorcycle was an exciting set-piece. I got a few chuckles with Deadpool and Agent Zero, but both characters are out of the picture halfway in. Why deprive us of the certifiable hotness that is Ryan Reynolds?

I mean, damn.

*Ahem*

The rest of the film is an uneven mess that comes to a boil with the laziest final battle imaginable. Without giving too much away, let's just say Wolverine fights an enemy more fit for a video game (very similar to Seth from Street Fighter IV actually) than a movie. I guess the writers couldn't be bothered to set up something with trivialities like emotional weight and dialogue.

Oh and there are other little issues that bring the whole thing down even further:

*Cheesiness: The played-out shot of someone walking away from an explosion

*Even more cheesiness: Gambit (who could've been left out and spared us a lot of fanboy bitching) shows up out of nowhere and predictably quips "Miss me?"

*Incredibly cheap-looking claws. What intern was in charge of this?

*They just wouldn't stop with the cheesiness: At one point Wolverine offers his hand to help a former enemy get up off the ground and said enemy pauses (for dramatic effect) before taking his hand.

Wait for the DVD, guys. Not worth the price of matinee.

It's "die" with a "t" on the end

Diet is a frequent topic of conversation around my friends because, well, I bring it up a lot. Anytime we eat out I do all kinds of culinary acrobatics killing an otherwise good day of eating. It's a tricky thing to pull off, but it works, mostly. My dietary practices are extremely ad hoc, a collection of rules, red flags, and workarounds to keep a spare tire at bay. I've never attempted to list them all until now.

Labels

The most informed way to make choices. I pay attention to these fields, in order of importance: calories, fats, and sodium. I also make sure to check out serving sizes to avoid getting hustled and downing 13 servings of a "50-calorie" snack. Sodium is a big issue for prepackaged foods and can cause your body to retain water, so I pay (some) attention to that whenever possible.

Off-limits

I rarely have the following: pizza, beef, non-diet soda, breaded food (i.e. chicken tenders/nuggets), foods loaded with cheese (ESPECIALLY quesadillas), fried rice, fried chicken, potato chips (except occasionally Sun Chips), and pasta. Sweets don't tempt me often, so I don't usually have cake, ice cream, or much any dessert.

Damage Control

When I'm "bad", I'll reduce portions to minimize damage. Throwing away half the fries from a fast food place lops off 200-300 calories easily and they're never missed. Leaving whipped cream off a dessert takes off a 100-something calories. I like to split desserts at restaurants, although not everyone is agreeable to that.

Snacks

Snacks are an easy way to fuck up an otherwise good diet. Working in an office only complicates things, I've cursed many a donut-toting 'teammate'. If hunger pangs start working their way through my body, I have a big-ass box of Nut 'n' Honey bars in the cabinet at my desk. At 180 calories and $8 for a box of 60, these things are a godsend. I eat healthy (these things don't even have high fructose corn syrup, everything has high fructose corn syrup) and don't waste money at the vending machine.

Cooking

I'm your typical bachelor, which essentially means my cooking is passable at best. I bake boneless, skinless chicken breast, throw it on a plate with some rice and a vegetable and chow down. Throwing some basil on the chicken and boiling the rice in chicken broth adds some flavor, but I won't be inviting friends over unless there's takeout involved.

My Weaknesses

Alcohol is the biggest issue for me. I like to have a few after a long hard day and then crash for the night. All those calories right before bed just invite my body to pile some fat on. The next issue is eating out. I have no desire to consume a 'healthy' salad and have to guess what's tasty and not artery-clogging. Sometimes it doesn't work out too well. I once ordered a 2300 calorie plate at On the Border and didn't realize how much crap I wolfed down until I got home.

So there's the entirely unsolicited window into my head when my belly is empty. This unstructured system works well for me, which is about all you can expect. Successful dieting is all about figuring out what works for you and doing it. It's worth noting I didn't develop all these practices at once, they were slowly accumulated over the years. Most are based off tips I've read in WebMD articles and on nutrition message board discussions.

The Devil is in the Details

I can't believe March is almost over. It really feels like the month just began. I thought it'd been a long time since I'd written anything only to discover I put a post last week. For some reason I thought it had been much longer than that. Memories feel like that to me sometimes, like they just happened the other day and at the same time feel distant.

Over the last few months I've been in the process of buying a home. The whole thing has been exciting in the sense that owning property is a huge step (oh and that sweeeet $8k tax credit) and tedious in the "what the hell is that fee, and i don't care about these options, just give me the damn thing already" sense. But with the subprime crisis I have to stay alert. A lot of intelligent people got screwed by bad mortgages because they didn't understand them. Gotta stay on top of that stuff. The house has to be built and I can't close until it's finished, so this gives me time to research and make sure I know my stuff.

Around the same time the house closes I'll be taking another trip to Disney World with MacBoy. I hadn't planned on going again, given the many other, non-corporate parts of the world I haven't seen, but MacBoy scored a pretty good deal. MacBoy is crazy obssessed with Disney World, to the point of actually listening to podcasts about the place. I kinda feel like I'm enabling a drug addict.

At least MacBoy is happy to handle all the arrangements of the trip. He's planned reservations for dinner, flight tickets, transportation, and has set up a tentative schedule for all 7 days of the trip. I just pay my half and enjoy the ride.

The Problem with Tyler Perry

To those that ask me, I'm pretty vocal about my dislike of Tyler Perry films. I've seen Diary of a Mad Black Woman and Madea's Family Reunion and hated both films. Some blogs have pointed out the thinly-veiled sexism in his movies while others have taken issue with the stereotyping. My take is a lot more simple: they're fucking terrible.

A little backstory: In a movie about everyday people I hate characters who 'break' the rules and destroy my suspension of belief. For instance, in every Adam Sandler film I've ever seen he plays a fuckup who doesn't know his ass from a hole in the ground. Despite all this, he somehow manages to pull the hot chick who inexplicably sees through his udder mediocrity to the pitiable loser underneath. This issue arises with Jay in Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back, the losers in Saving Silverman, and even Kramer on Seinfeld, although George at least calls attention to absurdness of Kramer's fortunes.

So that's my problem with Madea: it makes no sense for anyone to seek advice from her (or even respect her). In Mad Black Woman, Helen, rejected by her husband and at her worst, seeks out Madea for consolation. Her solution? Crash through the gate of his property, take a chainsaw to the furniture, and rip his mistress' clothes. Are these the actions of a wise matriarch or a raving lunatic? Wild, reckless behavior is intrinsic to the character, which might be fine if she were some crazy cat lady down the street, but instead she's sought for her counsel. Why? She totes a gun and inevitably finds herself facing down a judge. Madea's rare moments of wisdom rarely rise above homespun platitudes fit for an episode of Dr. Phil.

The storylines that weakly intertwine with Madea's are just as bad. The villains are cartoonish caricatures pushed beyond the point of redemption (another problem I have with Adam Sandler movies). It's not enough that Steve Harris and Blair Underwood are philandering and abusive assholes, they must be involved in illegal business practices. Lynn Whitfield puts down her daugher at every opportunity in Family Reunion, but then, just in case we were starting to like her, one daughter reveals that Whitfield allowed her ex-husband to rape her at the tender age of 13. Just to push the point home, the low-rent Wilhemina says to her estranged daughter "You know I love [your sister] more than you", as if we haven't figured that out. The lines between 'good' and 'evil' are clearly drawn. Why can't relationships be about two imperfect people with problems that try to sort through them? Does he think we can't understand that?

Discussing the 'message' of his films is never a necessity, the characters will spell it out for you explicitly, stopping short of looking directly at the camera. Diary of a Mad Black Woman is sprinkled with painful 'diary monologues', where Helen tells us straight-out why her newfound celibacy is making her new man so spiritual and awesome ("He gave me emotional intimacy"). Madea's Family Reunion tortures us with several, lengthy lectures during the actual reunion, functioning as an overblown therapy session for every hot-button black issue for the last ten years. Damn, just let us figure it out on our own already.

This only scratches the surface, I haven't covered any of the questions that distract me during the films. Why are people riding a bus trying to convince a girl they hardly know to date the driver? Is an old man filming a young girl bent over at a family reunion supposed to be funny? Who the HELL has people hanging from the ceiling at their wedding? Or ripped musclemen playing trumpets? Why are most blue collar workers good guys (or gals) squeaking by and most professionals evil, money-grubbing sickos?

I'd like to give him another shot, but every critique of his new films find the same problems I've echoed here. At least he's using his influence to promote Precious, which looks promising.