The Dark Knight (2008)
Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope (1977)
Shrek 2 (2004)
E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial (1982)
Star Wars: Episode I - The Phantom Menace (1999)
Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest (2006)
Star Wars: Episode III - Revenge of the Sith (2005)
The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King (2003)
Spiderman 2 (2004)
The Passion of the Christ (2004)
Jurassic Park (1993)
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002)
Finding Nemo (2003)
Spiderman III (2007)
Forrest Gump (1994)
The Lion King (1994)
Shrek the Third (2007)
Iron Man (2008)
Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (2001)
Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull (2008)
The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001)
Pirates of the Caribbean: At World's End (2007)
Star Wars: Episode VI - Return of the Jedi (1983)
Independence Day (1996)
The Sixth Sense (1999)
Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2007)
The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, the Witch, and the Wardrobe (2005) (have it sitting on the DVR, but haven't got round to watching yet)
Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back (1980)
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005)
Home Alone (1990)
The Matrix Reloaded (2003)
Meet The Fockers (2004)
Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002)
The Incredibles (2004)
Dr Seuss' How The Grinch Stole Christmas (2000)
I Am Legend (2007)
Monsters, Inc. (2001)
Night at the Museum (2006)
Men in Black (1997)
Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004)
Toy Story 2 (1999)
Bruce Almighty (2003) pretty sure I was on an airplane at the time
Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)
My Big Fat Greek Wedding (2002)
Beverley Hills Cop (1984)
War of the Worlds (2005)
Cast Away (2000)
The Lost World: Jurassic Park (1997)
The Bourne Ultimatum (2007) the second one was all shaky-cam all the time. Fine as an accent, but nauseating for hours at a stretch. Dunno if this was different, not interested in finding out.
X-Men: The Last Stand (2006)
Rush Hour 2 (2001)
National Treasure: Book of Secrets (2007)
Mrs Doubtfire (1993)
King Kong (2005)
The Da Vinci Code (2006)
Saving Private Ryan (1998)
Mission: Impossible 2 (2000)
Kung Fu Panda (2008) Alvin and the Chipmunks (2007)
Austin Powers in Goldmember (2002)
Back to the Future (1985)
Wedding Crashers (2005)
Charlie and the Chocolate Factory (2005) wasn't even aware they'd remade this.
Austin Powers 2: The Spy Who Shagged Me (1999)
Batman Begins (2005)
Terminator 2: Judgment Day (1991)
The Exorcist (1973)
The Mummy Returns (2001)
Superman Returns (2006)
Gone With The Wind (1939)
Pearl Harbor (2001)
Happy Feet (2006)
Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade (1989)
Ice Age: The Meltdown (2006)
Toy Story (1995)
X2: X-Men United (2006)
Men in Black II (2002)
The Day After Tomorrow (2004)
Mr and Mrs Smith (2005)
edited because for some reason I hadn't bolded Star Wars IV
In other news, I won't be be passing anyone anytime soon:
When I said I hoped the weather droids were wrong, I should have been specific.
Unfortunately I do not have pictures of the seven stuck buses seen within 1 mile of my house.
We do not generally get much snow here, and this is the largest snowfall in 40 years. It's 15 inches deep in undisturbed, un-drifted snow. That would be 7.5 inches snow, 1/2 inch ice, and another 7 inches snow, with more on the way tomorrow. The nature of more being described roughly as 'probably snow, but it could be freezing rain or sleet or a mix, or it might warm up and be rain'. The weather folk have pretty much given up on precision in forecasting. They've been saying it's going to warm up in two or three days for about the last five days. They're sure to be right sometime.
You've left your cold front wandering around our state unattended for a week now. We believe we have been very patient waiting for you to remove it. Our patience is at an end. Please remove both it and its excreta from our state immediately.
Thank you for your prompt attention in this matter.
(I'm sure you'll be hearing from Washington soon, if you haven't already.)
Yes, its only a few inches of snow, but this is western Oregon. It is wet snow that pretty much instantly melds into ice when pressure is applied. Makes for vicious snowballs, and turns the roads into a sheet of ice by the time about three cars go by. This is then compounded by overconfident morons in Excursions who take the hills sideways. Its not like the granular stuff you get in colder and drier climates that doesn't bond to itself and can actually be moved out of the way.
As it stands now, the weather droids are saying we don't get above freezing for at least a week, with an inch or three more snow midweek, and a pattern that could bring us a foot of snow next weekend. I sincerely hope that they're very very wrong about that one. I'd just say home, but Grandma needs groceries and meds, and I'm taking care of a friend's dogs starting midweek.
( Read more... )
How many blank lines do I have to put in before the fecking LJ cut actually cuts?
seriously, what broke on the lj-cut command. I used to just be able to insert the code and voila, only the lines above the cut show in list view.
If the Wraith knew about the device such that they had a name for it, why did they not rebuild their hyperdrives to work on another frequency (such as the same frequency the Ancients use for that MAD factor), or rotate randomly through a range of frequencies to circumvent the vulnerability, in the 10,000 years since the device was last active?
Aug 18 -Patti arrives, checks in to Electra
-Nellie and Amy arrive- time depends on what time we leave, traffic, border crossing, etc.
Aug 19 -Katherin returns from Whistler, joins us at the Electra
Aug 25 -Check out of Electra
-Nellie, Amy and Patti to Victoria (plus anyone else who wants to catch a ride in Amy's van)
-Katherin returns to Toronto
-Nellie and Amy check in to Ocean Island Inn
Sep 1 -Nellie and Amy return to Oregon
having a strong feeling of opposition, antipathy, repugnance, etc.; opposed: He is not averse to having a drink now and then.
1. unfavorable or antagonistic in purpose or effect: adverse criticism.
2. opposing one's interests or desire: adverse circumstances.
3. being or acting in a contrary direction; opposed or opposing: adverse winds.
4. opposite; confronting: the adverse page.
—Usage note The adjectives adverse and averse are related both etymologically and semantically, each having “opposition” as a central sense. Adverse is seldom used of people but rather of effects or events, and it usually conveys a sense of hostility or harmfulness: adverse reviews; adverse winds; adverse trends in the economy. Related nouns are adversity and adversary: Adversities breed bitterness. His adversaries countered his every move. Averse is used of persons and means “feeling opposed or disinclined”; it often occurs idiomatically with a preceding negative to convey the opposite meaning “willing or agreeable,” and is not interchangeable with adverse in these contexts: We are not averse to holding another meeting. The related noun is aversion: She has a strong aversion to violence. Averse is usually followed by to, in older use occasionally by from.
She was averse to using public restrooms. Adverse consequences included a nasty stain on the upholstery.
Please do not waste my time posting April Fool's crap. I don't read news feeds for humor. Clicking through to something that looks legit for the first sentence or so is a waste of my time. You are not amusing.
If you must post April Fool's crap, please confine those posts to April Fool's day alone, not the surrounding days.
Works by Martin Gero, the director of Young People Fucking (which opens in theatres in Canada in April), could also get a once-over from the panel.
"It seems ill-conceived from beginning to end, and is less about censorship than destroying the economic foundation of our entire industry," said Mr. Gero, who shot his debut feature film for $1.5-million with support from Telefilm and other government agencies. "It's old people fucking with the Canadian film industry."
The Conservative government has drafted guidelines that would allow it to pull financial aid for any film or television show that it deems offensive or not in the public's best interest – even if government agencies have invested in them (emphasis mine).
The proposed changes to the Income Tax Act would allow the Heritage Minister to deny tax credits to projects deemed offensive, effectively killing the productions. Representatives from Heritage and the Department of Justice will determine which shows or films pass the test.
Game and talk shows, news, sports, reality television and pornography are already excluded from access to the tax credits. The proposed prohibition would cover a sweeping range of material, such as anything of an explicit sexual nature, that denigrates a group or is excessively violent without an educational value.
Stakeholders in productions, such as Telefilm Canada, the Canadian Television Fund and the Harold Greenberg Fund, would have to try to recoup millions of dollars in investments, and producers would have to repay banks, broadcasters and distributors.
A spokesman for the Heritage Ministry Wednesday night confirmed the change.
“Bill C-10, currently at third reading in the Senate, contains an amendment to the Income Tax Act which would allow the Minister of Canadian Heritage to deny eligibility to tax credits of productions determined to be contrary to public policy,” Charles Drouin, spokesman for Canadian Heritage said in a statement. “... Upon royal assent of C-10, the Department of Canadian Heritage plans to update the eligibility requirements for the [Canadian Film or Video Production Tax Credit] program.”
He said the department “has recently standardized and updated the list of illegal and other ineligible content.”
Toronto lawyer David Zitzerman of Goodmans LLP says the government's plans smack of “closet censorship.”
“The proposed new initiative, if not properly crafted, could potentially violate the Charter [of Rights and Freedoms] and lead to possible legal challenges against the Minister of Canadian Heritage,” Mr. Zitzerman said Wednesday. “Such a provision could potentially lead to the government acting as ‘morality police.' The existing definitions of pornography and obscenity in the Criminal Code should be sufficient for the government's purposes.
“Would this committee put money into Juno? It might not want to encourage teen pregnancy. Would the government put money into a film with a dirty title, like Young People Fucking? Would they invest in something like Brokeback Mountain? They might not want to encourage gay cowboys to have sex together in Alberta.”
Robert Soucy, director of the Canadian Audio-Visual Certification Office, the branch of Heritage that determines certification for productions, said last fall that Ottawa wants to be more selective about the cultural products it helps to fund.
The government provides refundable tax credits to productions that are certified as having Canadian content. Producers shoot the film or TV show, finish post-production, pay their bills and then file a corporate tax return. The tax credit is included in the production company's tax refund.
Mr. Soucy said that a panel set up by CAVCO and the Department of Justice would review content. CAVCO would have the final say based on the panel's recommendations.
He hinted then that the government was considering a “public policy” criterion for tax credit certification and a definition of what would be “contrary to public policy” that would make a production ineligible for film and TV tax incentives, as well as funds directed to sound recording and book publishing (emphasis mine).
Mark Musselman, vice-president of business affairs at Toronto's Serendipity Point Films and Maximum Film Distribution, said Wednesday that the implications are huge, “both from the perspective of freedom of speech and for the Pandora's box of uncertainty this will open up from a business perspective.”
If certification is denied, the producer would be on the hook to repay organizations such as Telefilm, which invests only in Canadian-certified productions, Mr. Musselman added. “This review panel totally fetters the discretion of Telefilm. What will it do, send the panel scripts it is worried might be too racy or offensive?”
He called a review procedure that determines eligibility for Canadian content certification after the completion of a film or TV show production “unworkable in terms of the cold, hard reality of financing these types of things,” adding that “it's entirely possible the whole financing structure could crumble.”
Toronto lawyer Mr. Zitzerman said the government feels it must invest public funds wisely. “The government – and Heritage – are of the view that they should have prerogative to assess whether a particular film, TV production or book meets their public policy criteria,” he said. “And if it doesn't, they should have the right to decline to invest in it. They don't view this as censorship because they say anyone is free to make the film or show or book, but not with their money.”
The lawyer wrote Mr. Soucy of CAVCO a letter last month asking for public consultation. He has not yet heard from Heritage.
Seems to me this would pretty effectively kill foreign production interest in Canada. The exchange rate advantage has already evaporated. If this goes through, and the tax breaks and subsidies become unreliable and subject to revocation after the fact, it seems productions would be better off staying in Hollywood, or otherwise avoiding Canada. Way to kill an industry,guys.
Data transferred from powerbook
Firefox reinstalled (and seems to be working normally, yay!)
A bunch of old apps deleted
7x secure erase of powerbook hard drive in progress. Will then partition and set up test spaces for Panther and Tiger, since I still have clients on both of those.
Ever so painless transition, with the exception of FileMaker's execrable activation routine.
As instructed, I deactivated FileMaker 9 Advanced on the powerbook, but when I tried to activate on the macbook, I got "General Activation Error" this happened repeatedly, so I called in for the phone activation option. After 25 minutes on the phone with their tech support, I finally had the one application that is absolutely key to my business working. From what I've seen on various lists, this happens to pretty much everybody who moves an installation of FileMaker 9 to a new machine. Way to piss off your user base, guys. Congrats!
Have not yet checked what other apps don't work, but it looks like Office 04 (or whatever version it was) doesn't like Leopard.
Firefox runs fine for a varying length of time, but then upon switching from any of several applications to Firefox, Firefox closes its frontmost window. Firefox does not perceive this as a crash, and so does not see it as a session that needs to be restored if I quit and restart. If I only have one Firefox window open, and that one closes on app switch, I have to open a new window anywhere from 3 to 9 times before I get one that "sticks". Firefox opens a new window and the immediately closes it several times before I get a window that stays open.