Free-Fallin'
by Scott Hardie on January 7, 2007
I enjoy safe hobbies like making websites, but there's something to be said for the dangerous ones: (link)
Two Replies to Free-Fallin'
Amy Austin | January 8, 2007
That looked like hella' fun... but also some wicked wipeout potential. I'd do it.
Logical Operator
The creator of Funeratic, Scott Hardie, blogs about running this site, losing weight, and other passions including his wife Kelly, his friends, movies, gaming, and Florida. Read more »
Blog Entry Post
Pet peeve: Why do people redundantly call it "tuna fish?" You never hear "parrot bird" or "Cocker spaniel dog." Go »Day 86
The diet continues, but I haven't lost as much as I would like by now. Four pant sizes is something to be proud of, but three of them were lost in January, so you can understand my frustration. I've wound up taking a fourth meal most days, bringing me to ~1200 calories, and so far I've had a lot of trouble going back down to three. Go »Maybe It's Warwick Davis
(link) Go »Thank You Netflix
I'm in the mood for some Law, followed immediately by some Order. Go »All King and No Kubrick Make Jack a Dull Boy
I recently got to talking with friends who liked The Shining, both Stephen King's novel and Stanley Kubrick's film adaptation of it, but who were unaware that King has always loathed the movie, despite its reputation as one of the best horror films ever made. It's hard to imagine that a writer doesn't know his own work better than someone interpreting it, but I think this is one of those rare cases where the writer is just too close to the story to get it. Here are three reasons why I think Kubrick's film better understands the material, and is better overall, than King's novel: 1) In King's version, Jack Torrance is a fundamentally decent man who wouldn't hurt a fly, but who is down on his luck and desperate. Go »
Jackie Mason | January 7, 2007
[hidden by author request]