|
Screenshot Weblogged by Amanda Portal |
![]() |
Get notified when I post;
My
other sites:
comments by YACCS |
|
8.20.2002 |
Two more book reviews are up on my review site. The first
is for
Jane Fairfax
by Joan Aiken, a retelling of the events of Emma by Jane Austen, from the
perspective of the "other" heroine, Jane Fairfax. It was very fun, and I would
definitely recommend it to Austen fans. The other is for
A
Century of Science Fiction, 1950-1959 edited by Robert Silverberg, a
collection of science fiction short stories from, you guessed it, the 1950's. It's
a pretty good collection - the review has short comments on all of the stories.
A bunch of little links, which I don't have many comments
for...
I would normally avoid any "news" related URL containing the word 'heartwarmers',
but this picture
is the absolutely cutest thing I've seen on the internet all month.
[via Eclectica]
While it appears to take a fussier approach to cooking than I prefer in real life,
the food weblog Saute Wednesday
is very fun fantasy reading.
[via Eatonweb]
If you thought NPR's ludicrous linking policy was an abberation, go check out
Don't Link to Us!, a log of websites with
stupid linking policies.
[via RRE]
And while I'm not sure intellectually why this is any more disturbing than
visiting a cemetary plot or having an urn of ashes, I'm creeped out by this
company which sells
LifeGems, artificial diamonds "created
from the carbon of your loved one".
[via Strange Brew]
|
reading: |
||
|
8.12.2002 |
On the one hand, I disapprove of Windows
configurations which try to conflate the content on my desktop
with internet content. I don't want my web favorites listed in the
titlebar of all my windows. I would prefer to doubleclick my icons
to open them. Blurring those boundaries is a bad thing. On the
other hand, I've quickly fallen in love with
Dave's Quick Search Deskbar,
which puts a search textbox on your Windows taskbar and
automatically pulls up a browser window with the results of your
search. It defaults to Google search, but has many nifty tags
and is open for adding your own functionality as well. It's unobtrusive
(so long as you don't mind giving up the taskbar real estate) and
actually makes it easier to use my computer.
[via the highly recommended
Mackenab.com]
Everything on TV may be in reruns but
if that means you haven't been bothering to stop by
Television
Without Pity, you've been missing out on recaps of
"classic" episodes of many of their shows. And, in the case
of Enterprise, this has included recaps of The Original
Series and, just this week, of Star Trek: The Motion
Picture.
|
reading: |
||
|
8.7.2002 |
I love sites which try to draw in the knowledge of
experts from around the web and present it in a useful way. It makes me
feel warm and fuzzy about the internet.
Canonical Tomes is trying
to compile a list of canonical books in any topic. Users can submit book
titles and vote on currently listed titles. If this flourishes, it could be a very
nice resource, though it will need many more entries and voting experts
than it currently has to beat out checking out the reviews, sales rank, and
other information Amazon has on their site.
[via Larkfarm Weblog]
I always feel as if I am betraying my sensible feminist
roots when I read wedding-related websites, but horror-stories (a la
Etiquette Hell) and
dress-sewing and centerpiece making plans both entertain me. My latest
guilty pleasure is Going Bridal,
a wedding journal complete with sewing project updates and a "Cavalcade
of Bad Bridal Fashion" section.
[via not martha]
A fun usability article from the IBM developerWorks site: "Everything I need to know about usability, I learned at the arcade". By necessity, repetitive tasks are streamlined in games. This isn't always true for productivity software; with the latter, it's anyone's guess as to whether a particular common task will be convenient at all. Game designers try to avoid designs that will result in players complaining of pain after a couple hours of play; designers of productivity software don't seem to consider this at all.It's a good point - people are more willing to walk away from games which are hard to use, so there's more pressure to get it right. [via RRE]
|
reading: |
||
|
8.6.2002 |
I missed the actual anniversary, but Screenshot is now
four years old, my first entry having been July 24, 1998. On the list of "one of
these days" projects is to go through my archives and post at least a selection
of my old pre-site relocation entries. My weblogging style has certainly changed
over the years - something I think reflects both an evolution of my purposes in
weblogging, and changes in myself and my "real life". To give you a taste,
I dredged up my first Screenshot entry, with
odd grey background and lack of awareness of other weblogs and all. Once I
found the weblogging, as compared to web journalling, community, I stopped
having to invent the wheel on my own quite so much.
While it's been a slow period here in Screenshot land, I'm still enjoying
weblogging and don't plan to stop any time soon. As I said way back then,
"This could be fun. I can't wait to see how it all turns out."
Remember kids: always check Rotten Tomatoes before plunking down your perfectly good money for a movie. It was ignoring this advice which led me to see Full Frontal this evening. I at least enjoyed it more than the person I saw it with, but both of us left the theater shaking our heads. It was a self-aware film about film making, and tried to be all cute and clever about being not just about film making but also about making films about film making, and so on. It's all very meta. With the tag line "Everybody needs a release" on the posters, I suppose the quest for meaningful relationships, and the randomness of finding "The One", even for a while, also runs through the movie as a major theme, but it wasn't treated particularly interestingly. I'm sorry, but it's not "modern" or "edgy" to throw an internet-based romance into your story anymore. I still can't figure out what the point of the Hilter-monologue play was, except as a model of how bizarre actors and directors can become. The bad film quality was as annoying as most reviewers thought. I understand why it was done, but the quality was so bad, I sometimes couldn't tell which character was on screen. As a single positive, David Hyde Pierce did an amazing job and was the only interesting character in the movie, no thanks to the script. He actually acted, and left all of the meta layers of meaning alone. He has one scene where he's on the phone with the vet because he's afraid his dog is dying, and it was utterly realistic and touching. He even managed to pull off a somewhat overly symbolic scene in which he goes to get himself a beer after having been fired - his boss having asked him whether he drinks his beer out of the bottle or a glass, and then telling him the company is looking for bottle-drinkers. It's a contrived set-up, but he doesn't over-act the moment when he has to decide if he'll pour this beer into a glass as well. I wanted to know more about this guy, and the rest of the characters were just a distraction. Unfortunately, most of the movie was about the other characters, so I really can't recommend bothering to go see this mess. My clever friend (who should say hi in the comments if they'd like to be publically credited) was observant enough to spot a small note of interest to X-Files fans, though. Remember in Clyde Bruckman's Final Repose where Scully and Mulder use a psychic (Clyde) who can see how people are going to die to solve a case? And the following bit of dialogue takes place: Clyde: "You know, there are worse ways to go, but I can't think of a more undignified one that autoerotic asphyxiation."Well, let's just say that the character played by David Duchovney dies a very undignified death in this movie. That just can't be a coincidence....
|
reading: Mysticism & Logic; Bertrand Russell A Century of Science Fiction, 1950-1959; Robert Silverberg ed. Emma; Jane Austen
Look at the stars,
I came along,
So then I took my turn, |
||
| Previous Entries |
|
These pages are Copyright 1999 -2002. Do not copy or redistribute any of the content on these pages without express permission. Direct any questions to maxsroom@gmail.com.