Home » Archive » 2002 » June » 12

Archive: June 12, 2002

star wars: attack of the clones [ **1/2-- ] strictly for the sets and costumes (which are 5-star--but sets and costumes do not a movie make). could they have picked a worse actor to play anakin skywalker? unfortunately, natalie portman is only marginally better. since the story centers around their love story, this is bad news. though the plot is a little byzantine and hard to follow, with a nuanced anakin, this film would have worked. as it was, it is a film of gorgeous visuals, interesting special effects, lots and lots of action scenes...and no emotional center whatever.

Natalie Portman really wasn't that good (sorry Justin), Anakin has been pretty bad in both episodes so far. So sad. Star Wars has an amazing story - too bad the movie isn't as good as the story itself is. Finally, I must point out that it's Jar Jar who puts the federation in the hands of Darth Sidius/Senator Palpatine/The Emperor. How angering! And wouldn't they have some kind of vote to give the rest of the senators an opportunity to oppose the imbuing of dictatorial power into the hands of one man?

I have to quote her review of Spider-Man too:

spider man [ ***** ] look, I'm a naif, I'm not a comic guy. but I loved this film. a good script that is true to its origins. I completely believed that these were high-school kids, and that peter parker was the geekiest kid in school, even after he became infected with his super-powers. no one has ever been more in love than peter parker is in this movie--in fact every aspect of tobey maguire's performance is touching and believable--and kirstin dunst isn't far behind.

Spider-Man was so good. SO GOOD!

Permalink | Comments? | id 2194

19:43 (utc-4)

A good review

Cool, Dean Peters likes my site. And I have "easy-to-follow navigation" and a good color scheme. Awesome! He's right though. My Christian links is only "quasi-comprehensive". Compare that to my programming page.

I really should do some work on it.

However, it's easy to know whether a programming page is useful. It takes a lot more work to look into whether a religious site is good. It takes a lot more effort to delve into a site to find out their theological biases, etc.

Permalink | Comments? | Tags: This website | id 2193

19:32 (utc-4)

Good question

A good question about why the "Dirty Bomber" was arrested from Rafe Colburn, via Rebecca's Pocket:

Call me crazy, but it seems to me that it's easy for al-Qaeda to find thugs willing to build a bomb and set it off, but it's hard for them to come up with the radioactive material needed to construct such a bomb. So why did we arrest al Mujahir (with no actual criminal charges to press against him) when we could have followed him around and seen who he was working with and perhaps where he was planning on obtaining the material he needed to build the bomb? I don't know the answer to the question, but I'd sure like to.

Me too.

Permalink | Comments? | id 2192

19:25 (utc-4)

Apache headers

Was anyone else aware that some HTTP headers can't be rewritten under Apache? The Server: header in particular can't be overridden.

I've been trying to find documentation on this everywhere, but the only place I was able to find it was on the errata page for Apache Unleashed:
http://apacheunleashed.com/errata.html

I've been trying to send header("Server: server name") to change the value of the Server header, but it won't let me. I was about to report this as a PHP bug, but then I found that page on apacheunleashed.com.

Permalink | Comments? | id 2191

18:37 (utc-4)

XML-RPC Library version 2

I just did a pretty major overhaul on my XML-RPC library, even though it's only a few days old

Much easier to use now (and more correct and bug-free ). If you want, you can compare the current version with the old version.

Grr... ran through the validator and found a weird case in which it's broken. I'll fix it later.

Yeah, that weird case is for the nestedStructTest case. The request from the validator includes empty structs (structs with no members). That doesn't seem like it should be valid. I sent Dave an e-mail.

Permalink | Comments? | id 2190

09:19 (utc-4)
edited: 20:26 (utc-4)