My latest round of articles here have been spawned as retorts, replies and general questions to the comments of others in the web community. I quote these folks so that they get the proper credit for what they said, but I fear that my latest posts could be construed in a manner in which I do not intend — as antagonizing. So, please allow me to state that I am not attempting to call out these brilliant minds to defend their declarations, per se. I’m seeking answers to the questions I have as a result of the things they have said regarding browser version targeting.
So, I’ve talked to a few colleagues and had an additional 24 hours to mull this meta declaration proposition over — the browser version targeting idea. Did it help to change my mind? Am I convinced that version targeting is a good idea now? If you care about my surface level observations today as they compare to yesterday, you’ll have to click the link to read more.
Hollywood doesn’t offer much in the way of movies that wow me anymore — at least, not in a positive way. I still love watching movies. I just find it few and far between that I watch a movie I love.
Tonight’s installment, a movie we borrowed from a friend, was 3:10 to Yuma, starring Russell Crowe (Ben Wade) and Christian Bale (Dan Evans). My husband and best vitamins for dogs
I were watching it without our usual banter in which we mock stupid plot points or complain that the background music is drowning out the dialogue. That was until the movie comes to its climax. This movie wasn't great, but it didn't actually suck up until the end. Then, it fell apart and fell apart fast. I'm not going to go into spoilers or anything, but suffice it to say it became preposterous that events would have unfolded as they did.
Before seeing this film, I didn't realize that it was remake of a movie from 50 years ago starring Glenn Ford (Ben Wade) and Van Heflin (Dan Evans). I discovered that fact when I went to IMDB to find out why I recognized the actor who played Charlie (Ben Foster) in the current version. Upon learning that this movie was a remake I had to ask myself -- WHY?
Admittedly, I didn't see the 1957 version and sometimes creative liberties are taken when remaking a film. I can only hope that this is what happened and that it went horribly awry. Otherwise, I would like an explanation as to what prompts filmmakers to go with a story in which the plot crumbles a second time. Why go to that well? Moreover, what were Russell Crowe and Christian Bale thinking when they read the script?! Did they really get to the part where the climax begins (and sucks) and think, "Oh yeah! I gotta make this film." It's not like these two guys are hard up for work or anything.
Really, what is Hollywood thinking?