Transformers : Dark of the Moon

Yesterday, I went to see “Transformers : Dark of the Moon“.  I’m not a big fan of 3D, but my wife convinced me that that’s the only right way to watch this movie, so I agreed.  And I’m glad I did so.

If you like 3D movies, or transforming robots, or action movies, or any of the previous Transformers’ films, or Michael Bay work in general, you absolutely must see this film.  And do so in 3D – even for those who don’t like 3D, it is an excellent experience.

As for the film, Michael Bay broke the measuring ruler once again.  He is off the scale.  The film is bigger, larger, and more than any other film I can think off.  It has everything previous Transformers had, and more.  And of the things that previous Transformers had, it has more.  More robots, more fights, more shooting and explosions.  More space travel.  More special effects.  More 3D. More, more, more.  It has so much of everything that I would walk away happy half time into the film.  But when the whole thing was over I really was amazed as to how much went into it.

On top of that, both of the items that somewhat annoyed me in the previous Transformers movies were corrected in this part.  First was Megan Fox.  I don’t know why everybody is so fond of her.  I don’t find her beautiful, or smart, or a particular good actress.  She’s out and Rosie Huntington-Whitley is in.  She wouldn’t be my first choice for the role, but she is definitely an improvement on Megan Fox.  Secondly, in previous Transformers, robot transformations and robot fights were too fast.  There are too many details to notice them all and they were often done and off the screen before my curiosity was satisfied.  In this part,  there are more details, more fights, and more transformations.  Also, there are a few excellent slow-downs – important moments are slowed down to a crawl with a few humorous touches added.

Actually, I have to mention humor separately.  This part is not as serious as the previous ones.  There are plenty of funny scenes, situations, and jokes all over the film.  I couple of times I was even laughing out loud, which is a rare occasion.

Overall, I think the film provides all the entertainment you could put into a movie and more.  It pushes the boundaries of sci-fi cinematography and visual effects. And for that I will of course give it a 5 out of 5.

Day in brief – 2011-07-01

  • All I wanted was a couple of travel in Modern Warfare 2. That was 6 hours ago. :-) #
  • Shared: A preview of Gmail’s new look http://bit.ly/khYRpd #
  • I love me some Friday. #
  • @jujav4ik how did you get it? do you have an invite you could send me? #
  • Shared: no. 334 – @lazerdoov http://bit.ly/k6nnt1 #
  • New note : Unichar Top 100 List of Coolest Unicode Characters http://bit.ly/mMsPQY #
  • Thanks to @jujav4ik I got my hands on Google+. #
  • @asaliev welcome :) #
  • Now I need to figure out what I need Twitter, Google Buzz and Google+ for. Okay, Twitter I know. #
  • @feios no worries :) #
  • My adventures with Microsoft Internet Explorer are few and far apart. But each and every time it causes hair loss and swearing. Ballz. #
  • Going to watch Transformers (@ K Cineplex) http://4sq.com/jJGypo #
  • I just ousted @i_s_a_k as the mayor of K Cineplex on @foursquare! http://4sq.com/ceCIYV #

On status meetings

Web Worker Daily shares an insight on status meetings:

It will probably come as no surprise to WebWorkerDaily readers that a recent survey found that 70 percent of information workers don’t believe status meetings help them accomplish work tasks. Additionally, almost 40 percent of respondents feel that such meetings are a waste of time, even though 55 percent of respondents spend one to three hours per week attending such meetings.

The survey also found that 67 percent of respondents spend between one to four hours per week just preparing for status meetings, and 59 percent said that preparing for status meetings often takes longer than the meeting itself. In addition, 57 percent of those surveyed indicated that they multitask during status meetings — so maybe there’s more work getting done than one might think!

The survey was conducted online within the United States from June 6–8, among 2,373 information workers.

Day in brief – 2011-06-30

Richat Structure

Last week I posted a couple of photographs of Cyprus from space.  While looking through the rest of the images in collection, I noticed something that I’ve never heard about before – a picture of so called Richat Structure.

If you, like me, haven’t heard about it or heard and totally forgot, here is a brief Wikipedia summary that should get you started.

The Richat Structure, also known as the Eye of the Sahara, is a prominent circular feature in the Sahara desert of Mauritania near Ouadane. It has attracted attention since the earliest space missions because it forms a conspicuous bull’s-eye in the otherwise rather featureless expanse of desert. The structure, which has a diameter of approximately 50 kilometres (31 mi) and is located 400–450 metres (1,310–1,480 ft) above sea level, has become a landmark for space shuttle crews.

Initially interpreted as a meteorite impact structure because of its high degree of circularity, it is now thought to be a symmetrical uplift (circular anticline or dome) that has been laid bare by erosion. Paleozoic quartzites form the resistant beds outlining the structure. The lack of shock metamorphism at the site further backs the latter claim.