Log in

Apr. 24th, 2008

First 30 seconds are great.



Tonight I saw what was unequivocally the best gay-themed movie (I'm not a fan of "gay movie" because this was so much more) I've yet seen: Shelter (imdb). It was even flat-out one of the best movies I've seen in a long while. To quote the director, "Shelter is a story about people – not gay people - just people. Shelter is about the difficulties we have relating to both the families we are born with and the families we create. It shows that the burden of struggling through these experiences is something we all share."

There is no groundbreaking new territory here, most of these topics have been covered before, but I've never seen them done so flawlessly. The cinematography is beautifully done, and the movie, set in southern California, provides ample opportunity to showcase it.

The acting was convincing. Having been in several of the situations shown in the movie, I didn't at all doubt that the characters knew just what it was like, despite the two main actors both being straight. The (implied) sex scene was very tastefully done, and again, didn't seem contrived at all. Again, the director said it best: "Both of the leads are straight. Instead of trying to sum up the experience of being gay, we simply focused on intimacy. We talked about what it felt like to stay in bed with someone all day – how rare and desirable it is, how fleeting it can be, and how much it can hurt when it’s gone. I really respect that both Trevor and Brad were able to see that it didn’t need to be any more complicated than this."

SpoilersCollapse )

This film was a joy to watch. The main characters were well played, the humor was clever, and, well, the actors were hot. I even shed a few tears, which is pretty rare for me. Lately, I've been watching the trailer several times a day, and yesterday I looked up the DVD release date, May 27th. I jokingly asked myself if I would pre-order it before or after seeing the film, but decided I should wait after some of my experiences with other gay-themed movies. Well, it's pre-ordered, and now I can't wait until May. In fact, I may even go see it again.

There were several times during the movie where I couldn't help getting a huge smile across my face because I was just so happy. My only disappointment is that it's a film, and not my life, heh.


Well it's no wonder.

How it all stacks up:

ArenaYear of CompletionCost (millions)
Xcel Energy Center2000$130
TCF Bank Stadium (U of M Football)2009 (est.)$288.5
Twins Ballpark 2010 (est.)$522
Proposed Vikings Stadium 2012 (est.) $954 (est.)

Wow. I mean, it's great and all that the Vikings did okay this season (compared to what we expected, haha), and I really do wish they had spent the extra money on the Twins Ballpark for a retractable roof, but seriously, the Vikings want a near $1 billion stadium? It's no wonder no headway hasn't been made on it, especially since no official proposal explaining where the money will come from has been made. I do have to admit that the proposed sketch looks absolutely amazing (but so will TCF Bank Stadium and the Twins Ballpark, perfect downtown views and all). It would be cool to have near brand new stadiums for every major sport.

Honestly, I'd probably be all for it if I actually liked football at all, lol.

Schrödinger's Hooker

This... is hilarious.

Dunno yet, do I?


Apr. 2nd, 2007

Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.

I Voted

 I Voted

Did you?


This commercial will never get old.

I've got the song if anyone wants it.

Feb. 17th, 2006

Uhh...okay, forget about me complaining about the weather the other day.

Because this is a lot freaking worse:

Discrete Mathematics

As many would assume, my Discrete Mathematics and it's Applications textbook is home to many excellent real-world examples. The following is just one of so many real-world applications of my new-found knowledge.

A father tells his two children, a boy and a girl, to play in their backyard without getting dirty. However, while playing, both children get mud on their foreheads. When the children stop playing, the father says "At least one of you has a muddy forehead," and asks the children to answer "Yes" or "No" to the question: "Do you know whether you have a muddy forehead?" The father asks this question twice. What will the children answer each time this question is asked, assuming that a child can see whether his or her sibling has a muddy forehead, but cannot see his or her own forehead? Assume that both children are honest and that the children anseer each question simultaneously.

Solution: Let s be the statement that the son has a muddy forehead and let d be the statement that the daughter has a muddy forehead. When the father says that at least one of the two children has a muddy forehead he is stating that the disjunction s [or] d is true. Both children will answer "No" the first time the question is asked because each sees mud on the other child's forehead. That is, the son knows that d is true, but does not know whether s is true, and the daughter knows that s is true, but does not know whether d is true.
After the son has answer "No" to the first question, the daughter can determine that d must be true. This follows beacuse when the first question is asked, the son knows that s [or] d is true, but cannot determine whether s is true. Using this information, the daughter can conclude that d must be true, for if d were false, the son could have reasoned that because s [or] d is true, then s must be true, and he would have answered "Yes" to the first question. The son can reason in a similiar way to determine that s must be true. It follows that both children answer "Yes" the second time the question is asked.

Oh, it all makes sense now...

Latest Month

May 2008



RSS Atom
Powered by LiveJournal.com