Nutty Chickiness

QuarterToThree Message Boards: Free for all: Nutty Chickiness
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By wumpus on Monday, May 14, 2001 - 11:26 am:

http://www.cdmag.com/articles/032/133/010514-c1.html

What is the point of this "interview"?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Mark Asher on Monday, May 14, 2001 - 11:39 am:

Well, it appeared in the April issue, so I assume it's part of an April Fool's Day thing.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Michael Murphy (Murph) on Monday, May 14, 2001 - 11:54 am:

I don't know, but I thought it was a pretty freakin' hilarious piece of work!!

I enjoyed it thoroughly.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Bub (Bub) on Monday, May 14, 2001 - 12:51 pm:

Subversive stuff - in an amusing way. Though it doesn't work as well online as it did in print I'm really surprised you don't "get it" Jeff.

Still, I'm positive Tom had fun playing dress up.

-Andrew


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By TomChick on Monday, May 14, 2001 - 01:45 pm:

I *love* this Actual Letter we got in response to the column:

"I would like to express my dissatisfaction with the article "Three Finger Salute - Our exclusive interview with the ISDMA gunman".

Tom Chick's questions and responses were not up to the level of Yossarian Wortzik, and his attitude and behaviour was thoroughly unprofessional (journalist who lost half the interview because he doesn't know how to use a
tape recorder????). He screwed up what could be a very interesting interview.

I like your magazine very much and I hate to see articles like this."

Woo-hoo!

-Tom


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Jason Levine on Monday, May 14, 2001 - 01:55 pm:

Tom, I'm surprised you haven't received any letters complaining about giving people like that the pubicity they seek.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Jason Levine on Monday, May 14, 2001 - 01:57 pm:

Err, make that "publicity." :)


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Xaroc on Monday, May 14, 2001 - 03:39 pm:

Good one Tom. I am glad I can be of some help with your work. I wasn't paying attention to who wrote it until I noticed fun and Deus Ex in there. :)

-- Xaroc


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Tim Elhajj on Monday, May 14, 2001 - 04:17 pm:

So, Bub, you're saying that's the real life Tom Chick in that orange jumpsuit? humm... Somehow I thought he would be taller in real life.

wumpus: what was it about the column you didn't understand? No, on second thought, forget it. You were probably waiting for Yossarian to go into reviewers, who are obviously out of touch with the FPS genre. My understanding was Tom lost that part when he messed up the tape recorder...

Shame on you Chick!


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By wumpus on Monday, May 14, 2001 - 04:47 pm:

I got it, I just thought it was "not fun" as in "not funny". Your mileage may vary, of course, and it should go without saying that I've seen much worse.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Bernie on Monday, May 14, 2001 - 06:05 pm:

That picture scared the hell out of me. It should be a promotional shot for the newest character on Oz.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Bub (Bub) on Monday, May 14, 2001 - 06:59 pm:

"I got it, I just thought it was "not fun" as in "not funny". Your mileage may vary, of course, and it should go without saying that I've seen much worse."

Fine Wumpus, that's certainly your right. But, why on Earth would YOU create a thread about it then? I tend to ignore things I feel ambivalent toward. Generally I just comment on things I either like or dislike.

-Andrew

PS: Tom wouldn't last very long on Oz. But then, none of us game guys would.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Bruce on Monday, May 14, 2001 - 07:23 pm:


Quote:

I *love* this Actual Letter we got in response to the column




Was it signed, "Anonymous?"
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By TomChick on Monday, May 14, 2001 - 10:27 pm:

"Was it signed, "Anonymous?""

No, it wasn't. It had an actual name on it. I suppose it therefore had no credibility! :)

Ah, for the unimpeacable reputation of the anonymous...

-Tom


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Anonymous on Monday, May 14, 2001 - 11:42 pm:

Do you mean "unimpeccable"?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By tim on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 01:07 am:

Omigod, Tom has been impeached in public opinions!


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By mtkafka (Mtkafka) on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 03:39 am:

hehe, the picture and article have The Onion feel to them. The picture itself looked like something the Onion would include!

Great interview with in-depth analysis!

reminds me of this Onion article... I picture alot of gamers like this sometimes hehe, me included?

http://www.theonion.com/onion3633/creepy_internet_friend.html


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By mtkafka (Mtkafka) on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 03:45 am:

btwm the name of yossarian is that an "homage" to Catch - 22?

etc


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Aszurom on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 04:56 am:

http://www.coregamer.com/screens/tom.jpg
http://www.coregamer.com/screens/bruce.jpg

Note, Tom's picture also includes a gratuitous Wolpaw mug as well.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Anonymous on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 09:24 am:

Hey, in Azurom's picture of Tom, Erik is wearing orange too...


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By wumpus on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 09:34 am:

"Fine Wumpus, that's certainly your right. But, why on Earth would YOU create a thread about it then? I tend to ignore things I feel ambivalent toward. Generally I just comment on things I either like or dislike."

I didn't think it was totally devoid of merit; I thought others here might enjoy it-- and they did. That's why I posted it.

As far as I'm concerned, Tom and Tom's cleverness need to get a freakin' room.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By wumpus on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 09:40 am:

"btwm the name of yossarian is that an "homage" to Catch - 22?"

One of the many "let's repeatedly smack people in the face with a mackerel" features of that article. Oooh, it's so SUBTLE! And so gosh-darned CLEVER! Is there a nobel prize for cleverness? Because I think Tom deserves it. I really do.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Michael Murphy (Murph) on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 10:00 am:

You got issues, man. Major issues.

Have you seen a shrink, Wumpus?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By wumpus on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 10:41 am:

I'm just really, really, REALLY sick of cleverness for cleverness' sake. I am the anti-Eggers.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com

p.s. Look how clever I am!


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Michael Murphy (Murph) on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 11:16 am:

What's wrong with being clever for no reason other than being clever?

Is there something wrong with being funny, just to make people laugh?

Is there anything wrong with singing, just because you like to sing?

Then I say there is nothing wrong with being clever, because you enjoy being clever, and because someone, somewhere, might enjoy your cleverness.

Though, it clearly won't be Wumpus.

I, for one, enjoy Tom's "cleverness."


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By TomChick on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 11:53 am:

Yossarian is, of course, a Catch 22 reference. Wortzik is the last name of Al Pacino's character, Sonny, in Dog Day Afternoon.

-Tom and his cleverness, who can be found in room 237 of the Overlook Hotel, as per wumpus' suggestion


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Steve on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 12:14 pm:

>>I'm just really, really, REALLY sick of cleverness for cleverness' sake.

Um, then why do you post clever messages? Why the wonderful cleverness of saying your music tastes are cheesy? Why use a sentence like, "As far as I'm concerned, Tom and Tom's cleverness need to get a freakin' room." That's pretty clever.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Michael Murphy (Murph) on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 12:23 pm:

Is that clever, Steve?

Huh. I didn't notice. ;-)

Wumpus is just one walking contradiction, isn't he?

(Wait -- was that clever?)


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Jason Levine on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 12:28 pm:

Wumpus is sure one hell of a clever troll. He starts off the thread with an "I don't get it" post. Then later posts that he did, in fact, get it, but it's just too clever for his tastes. Now look at the size of this thread. And I'm adding to it. Fucking brilliant, Wumpus.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Robert Mayer on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 12:35 pm:

Can I be clever too? I've always wanted to be clever, but the best I can usually muster is a sort of mildly interesting non sequitor.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By wumpus on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 01:11 pm:

ALL YOUR CLEVERNESS ARE BELONG TO US!

Ah, I dunno. I probably do need some lithium. I'm not against the article. All Tom's stuff is well-written, obviously.

First of all, yes, I got it. When I asked "what's the point of this 'interview'"-- please note use of quotes around the word 'interview'-- what I meant was, why would one choose to present an opinion piece in such an annoying, precious format?

A straightforward editorial with logical points raised and examples given to support those points would have been much more effective. Tom has interesting and valid points with plenty of real-world experience and writing chops to back those points up.. but instead he throws it all away by packaging it as this trifle-- a one-way ticket on Tom's flight of fancy. HAR! HAR! HAR!

Which is a goddamn shame, because a well-written editorial would have gotten through to a lot more people than this.. thing. Half the audience won't even "get" this. The other half will see it as straightforward humor. Tom is clearly playing to a sophisticated audience, which is flattering and all, but who freakin' cares? At some point, the clever devices you use get in the way of the point you're trying to communicate to the average reader.

This article is the precise moment that being "subversive" and "cool" became more important than communicating effectively. It is subversive. It is cool. It is pointless.

I. Am. The. Anti. Eggers.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Michael Murphy (Murph) on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 01:17 pm:


Quote:

Can I be clever too?




No, Robert. Sorry. But, either you're born clever, or you're not. Those who aren't never will be. Those who are, well -- are Wumpus and Tom!

Wumpus - now you're at least saying something that makes sense. But I disagree whole-heartedly. I think Tom made his point very well. I thought it was a great idea. He used a gimmick to draw the reader in. That's always a good plan. He used humor. He was clever -- there's no crime in that. I don't think it would have come across better had he been more serious and written a "real editorial."

I'm starting to think you have a personal vendetta against Tom...
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Bruce Geryk on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 01:54 pm:

"Tom is clearly playing to a sophisticated audience, which is flattering and all, but who freakin' cares?"

Apparently Tom does, since he cared enough to do it. You seem to assume that good writing is something you just sit down and do, like eating breakfast. A lot of it has to do with the writer being able to explore different modes of expression. If you just sit around and write the same thing over and over, eventually you start sounding bad. Good writing requires continual challenge. Tom has written plenty of "serious" gaming editorials and I'm sure he will continue to do so. To criticize him for writing something you feel is too "sophisticated" is beyond ridiculous.

The gulf between the gaming media and most other media is enormous. The gaming media seems to aggressively EXclude sophisticated readers as a matter of principle. This often makes finding out current information about games a painful exercise. The fact that someone with Tom's writing skills is out there providing more interesting, sophisticated material than the general gaming media currently provides is one of the things that keeps me interested in reading about games.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Bruce Geryk on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 02:01 pm:

"I. Am. The. Anti. Eggers."

You're AN anti-Eggers until you publish a book. ;)


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By tim on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 02:42 pm:

"I. Am. The. Anti. Eggers."

Now, see, for me this is an example of cleverness gone bad. What does this mean? I have no idea. Not even going to get into Bruce's retort.

Can somebody please clarify? Don't make me call room 237 of the Overlook hotel!


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Bub (Bub) on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 03:00 pm:

Dan Eggers wrote a book called "A Heartbreaking Work of Staggering Genius" that is a must read for cool people everywhere.

The Overlook Hotel is the star of Stephen King's The Shining, whereas Jack Nicholson is the star of Stanley Kubrick's The Shining... no comment on that TV mini-series The Shining.

Sisyphus is... oh nevermind.
-Andrew


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Robert Mayer on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 03:05 pm:

Was there a miniseries of The Shining? There was a miniseries of The Stand, I know. I must have missed the other one. The Stand wasn't half bad, with Gary Sinise ("Lt. Dan!") and a bunch of other people I should know but can't remember.

As I was not born clever, I will leave it to others to be so. I'll concentrate on being hungry.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Bub (Bub) on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 03:13 pm:

Yes. It had one of the two guys from Wings I think. It also featured the attacking topiary animals, which is why I remember it.

-Andrew


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Michael Murphy (Murph) on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 03:20 pm:


Quote:

As I was not born clever, I will leave it to others to be so. I'll concentrate on being hungry.




Don't sweat it, Rob. Being clever is highly overrated. I prefer non-sequitor anyday.
Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By wumpus on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 03:21 pm:

". I don't think it would have come across better had he been more serious and written a 'real editorial.'"

Then you and I disagree. I feel the format spoiled the implicit message. It's too easy to laugh it off now. Heck, we don't even know how Tom really feels about any of this stuff, because it comes in the guise of third-person humor. Does he really feel strongly about this stuff? Does he really think it's important? We simply don't know.

"To criticize him for writing something you feel is too 'sophisticated' is beyond ridiculous."

I'm not criticizing it for being too sophisticated-- I'm criticizing it for being too self-indulgent, at the expense of the content. The first goal of any writer should be to communicate effectively. I mean, good God, you've got Tom coming in here actually _bragging_ about the misguided letters he's getting on the article. That's just insane-- what does that accomplish?

"The gulf between the gaming media and most other media is enormous. The gaming media seems to aggressively EXclude sophisticated readers as a matter of principle. This often makes finding out current information about games a painful exercise. The fact that someone with Tom's writing skills is out there providing more interesting, sophisticated material than the general gaming media currently provides is one of the things that keeps me interested in reading about games."

I completely agree. Which makes it all the more painful when people read Tom's article and miss all of that incredibly important stuff-- because they got lost in the presentation. So, if Tom's goal was to confuse people, then you go boy-- mission accomplished.

The 10% of people who did "get" that article, didn't _need_ to read it. We already know all that stuff. It's the unwashed masses who need to hear what was implicitly said there, NOT US.

"Now, see, for me this is an example of cleverness gone bad. What does this mean? I have no idea. Not even going to get into Bruce's retort."

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0375725784/o/qid=989953095/sr=8-1/ref=aps_sr_b_1_1/103-9052304-3008616

Read the user reviews. Or read the book. It's a poster child for writing style over content. And it's a truly great style, by an obviously talented writer-- individual chapters are brilliant. The exact same "fake interview" conceit is used in this book. And it was just as annoying and counter-productive there.

wumpus http://www.gamebasement.com


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By BobM on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 03:49 pm:

Wow. I'm beginning to agree with Wumpus more and more these days... is there some kind of pill I I can take before it's too late?

I had a piece all ready about how this format spoiled the message because the people who understand it and think its hilarious, are the people who already agree with the opinion being stated there. On that level Tom's psuedo-interview works quite well. Taken as an opinion piece/editoral it has no power to sway a reader that doesn't already agree with the views expressed in it. It was a clever way to avoid backing up his statements with examples. The very examples that would have made this a useful piece as opposed to simply an entertaining one. Then again, maybe that was the point.

Bob Mayer


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By TomChick on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 04:05 pm:

Just to clarify the column...

I wrote it to push the boundaries of bad writing in the game industry. It's there to test how much people will accept before red flags go up and they think, 'Wait a minute'...

Why on earth would a writer include the part where his tape recorder screws up? If someone really held a crowd hostage, wouldn't a writer ask more about what's in the guy's head rather than droning on about the graphics in Giants or how cool Red Alert 2 is? A TRIBES 2 *screenshot* preview?

None of the places are real. Santa Mateo? The Atari Pavilion? The ISDMA? The Gaming God award going to Stevie Case? How idiotic does an interviewer have to be before reader doesn't believe what he's reading?

The interviewer is a complete idiot. But to the average reader's eyes, could he pass muster in this business? Amusingly enough, he can.

However, most people won't believe it. Hopefully, they'll see a little humor in it. Those people who do believe it are far too tolerant.

It's *not* an editorial, so of course there's no clear point of view or argument. It's a *column*. It's entertainment. Humor. Irreverence. Something a little different. With maybe a little message about how bad game writers are.

-Tom


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Steve on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 04:06 pm:

So wumpus, why didn't you post that message initially, since it was actually lucid and clear, and you make some relevant points.

Instead, you posted a link with little information, which is a remarkably "clever" way to start a discussion...


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Michael Murphy (Murph) on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 04:16 pm:

Personally, I thought it was hilarious where the interviewer started talking about his inability to work a tape recorder...


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By tim on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 04:29 pm:

"I'm starting to think you have a personal vendetta against Tom..."

I think wump is just Tom's greatest fan.

"a must read for cool people everywhere."

Thanks Bub! This explains it. Not only am I completely un-cool, I've pretty much given up novels for short stories since the kids were born. I dont' know if I'll ever have the tanacity for an entire novel again. :(

"The Overlook Hotel is the star of Stephen King's The Shining"

Wow, I didn't realize. heh--now that's pretty clever. Bet that just chaps wumpus' tush.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Bub (Bub) on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 04:36 pm:

"Thanks Bub! This explains it. Not only am I completely un-cool, I've pretty much given up novels for short stories since the kids were born."

No problem Tim.
I haven't read it either. But all the cool people I know have read it. See? I was being ironic! Which is actually better than being clever in a few states.

Re: The Kids.
Don't you miss movies? I don't mean videos or DVDs I mean movie theaters? My problem isn't the baby keeping me from novels, though she does, its that I haven't had a decent fistfull of popcorn in 13 months!

See, tonight we have a babysitter.
We were going to see a movie. In the theaters there is:
Blow
The Mummy
Bridget Jones
A Knight's Tale
Town & Country

I'm lobbying to cancel the babysitter and rent Best of Show instead.
Dammit!

-Andrew


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Dave Long on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 04:47 pm:

Go see "The Mummy Returns". You can turn off your brain and enjoy a trip to the theatre. My wife and I did just that two weeks ago. It was the first movie we'd been to since... uh... X-Men. It was worth my time and my money. It also won't have the same appeal at home.

I agree with wumpus that the article was kinda fruity. When I read it in the magazine, I didn't quite get it. I guess because Tom writes what I would consider a "column" in CGM and it just didn't fit. Kinda like Bruce's comments on Gamespot... know your audience and all that... Serious Fun if you will. :)

Compare with Steve's April Fool's bit last year with the fake magazines. That was funny and much easier to get the joke. Once again, I said it when talking about Bruce's Gamespot stuff... I guess I'm just dense?

--Dave


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By BobM on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 04:58 pm:

I actually enjoyed A Knight's Tale despite it's cliched story, blatant disregard for historical accuracy, obvious product placement, etc.

It was quite enjoyable.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Jason Levine on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 05:08 pm:

Bub,

Best in Show is wonderful. Hope your persuasive. Oddly, that's the only movie my wife and I have seen in a theater without the kids, since... oh since they added talking to movies I think. Everything else has been Toy Story 2, Rugrats in Paris, etc., as I'm sure you know all too well.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Bub (Bub) on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 05:28 pm:

"as I'm sure you know all too well"

She's only one years old!
It's been Sesame Street only for her thus far.

Though I've got Fantasia, Toy Story 1 & 2, Chicken Run, Iron Giant and few others on deck for her soon as she's a bit older. (That's how I talked my wife into letting me buy those DVDs anyway).

My wife and I loved Waiting for Guffman, so Best of Show is a must rent.

Back to Chick's column... how come no one has asked what "Three Fingered Salute" means?

-Andrew


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Bub (Bub) on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 05:29 pm:

"as I'm sure you know all too well"

She's only one year old!
It's been Sesame Street only for her thus far.

Though I've got Fantasia, Toy Story 1 & 2, Chicken Run, Iron Giant and few others on deck for her soon as she's a bit older. (That's how I talked my wife into letting me buy those DVDs anyway).

My wife and I loved Waiting for Guffman, so Best of Show is a must rent.

Back to Chick's column... how come no one has asked what "Three Fingered Salute" means?

-Andrew


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Bernie Dy on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 05:33 pm:

"blatant disregard for historical accuracy, obvious product placement, etc. "

What, they've got a crate of Coke or Pepsi somewhere in the background?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Steve on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 05:44 pm:

>>Back to Chick's column... how come no one has asked what "Three Fingered Salute" means?

Probably because everyone here is old enough to know. I was hoping people would write in thinking it was obscene.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Bub (Bub) on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 05:45 pm:

Steve,
I'm pretty old. But "three fingered salute" only makes me think of Benny Hill.

-Andrew


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By tim on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 06:41 pm:

"Don't you miss movies?"

Good, God, yes!

Itís always like that trying to synchronize a good movie with an available babysitter. Worse yet is when something like Pearl Harbor comes out and the wife votes for a chick flick. These days I just cut out of the office for a few hours and go get my fix. Upside: matinee prices. Downside: early afternoon movies seem to be a hang out for junkies and other nefarious looking folks.

You know in my part of the world they have these soundproof baby rooms in the backs of theatersÖ Maybe these are all over the country and I only just noticed them now that Iíve moved to the PNW and started a family. At any rate, we hustled the kids in there for movies when they were just little blobs. With a one year-old youíre probably past this stage. I think it works best for the under six-month crowd. Sort of a little room for mom and dadís last movie hurrah.

Speaking of DVDs and the likeÖ At the end of the day, my wife retreats to her corner and I mine. Neither of us has the energy to watch a movie. Sheíll maybe watch the M's and I'll labor at my GPL rank (~250, lol) or have a go at Daytona. We tried valiantly to keep up with the one or two TV shows we watched regularly pre-children, but failed miserably. Thereís still a stack of unwatched NYPD Blue episodes we tapped, but havenít watched. Now we donít even bother to tape it anymore.

okay, I'm feeling depressed now so I'll stop. ;)


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Steve on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 11:09 pm:

>>I'm pretty old. But "three fingered salute" only makes me think of Benny Hill.

Ah jeez, you're kidding? You really don't get it?

It's a euphamism for Ctrl-Alt-Del... you know, give your machine the three finger salute to reboot?


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Dave Long on Tuesday, May 15, 2001 - 11:44 pm:

I think Bub mentioned in another thread that he's rather new to this game thing.

--Dave


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Bub (Bub) on Wednesday, May 16, 2001 - 12:16 am:

Yes, yes of course.
very, very new to this "game" thing as you call it.

Werdna to your mother.

-Andrew


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By XtienMurawski on Wednesday, May 16, 2001 - 04:24 am:

It would be so great if Wumpus was another alter-ego of Tom's.

Whenever I see the word "miniseries" my brain first thinks the word is "misery" before I realize what the actual word is. This happens every time I see the word. Hmph.

I thought "three fingered salute" was a reference to the Boy Scouts.

Amanpour


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Brad Grenz on Wednesday, May 16, 2001 - 04:55 am:

No, you've just got the thought of the nubile flesh of young boys in uniform on the mind.


Top of pagePrevious messageNext messageBottom of pageLink to this message  By Bernie on Wednesday, May 16, 2001 - 10:32 am:

"I'm pretty old. But "three fingered salute" only makes me think of Benny Hill. "

LOL! Oh man, that triggers some memories. Only I think Benny Hill is older than computing.


Add a Message


This is a public posting area. If you do not have an account, enter your full name into the "Username" box and leave the "Password" box empty. Your e-mail address is optional.
Username:  
Password:
E-mail:
Post as "Anonymous"