Naginata

Magneto kills Dumbledore

Went to see X-Men 3 over the weekend.

At first, I was very unimpressed, but as I talked it over, my opinion of the movie improved. Which means it was probably relatively unimpressive.

I wonder how reviews would change if every reviewer would talk the movie over before they start writing their review. I'd love to see some data on how ratings vary depending on that sort of thing... but now I'm digressing.

They changed directors, and it shows. This movie is very, very different. Still dark, still action packed, still full of neat special effects and political drama... but different. There's somewhat less twisting and turning in this one. In X2, for example, there's a few interesting reveals. In this movie, you can pretty much put the whole thing together after about a half hour.

That being said, it's entertaining. Just don't expect another X2 in the plot department.

Spoilers follow.

Here's the major issues I have with this movie, mostly involving Magneto:

• Magneto is supposed to be smart, right? What the hell is wrong with him? The enemy has a weapon which has a 100% kill rate against you, where any hit on any part of your body is a confirmed kill. The weapon can also be stopped by a common flak vest. Hell, one of those thick coveralls from the Tractor Supply Store would probably do the trick. I guess if he wanted to go for zang, he could have gotten some sort of crazy magneto breastplate or something? I don't know, but it seems like a bad way to go, and easily preventable. On the flip flop, Magneto abandoning Mystique? Awesome.
• Is it just me, or was the look on Magneto's face approximately the same no matter what he was moving? No amount of concentration and dramatic hand gestures can compete with the awesome prison escape scene from X2.
• What's the deal with Phoenix? What's her motivation, just to dust everything? (Side note: I know I just verbed dust... I'll flog myself for that later). She seemed completely random. I know that's the point, but I could have used a little more meat. As it is, based on the way she acts, Magneto's choice to use her seems pretty retarded. Why use a weapon that you can't control?

Anyway, when Scott died, I was all a-tingle, because most movies aren't willing to cross that line. I mean, you can't imagine crazy Superman killing Lois, surely something would happen to stop him at the last minute, right?

Then she killed Xavier, and... come on, he's Charles F'ing Xavier! Highest body count ever.

I'm a little sad that Rogue isn't Rogue anymore... but I guess if Magneto can get his powers back, she can too. Hopefully she enjoys it while it lasts, and gets back Bobby so she can kill him by accident in the next movie.

... I think that's about it. No direct spoilers in the comments, please.

Sex Offenders

First, sorry for the post gap... I wish I could say it won't happen again, but that's not me.

Anyhoo, Marion County Indiana is considering a new law which would bar sex offenders from entering public parks. I know, it's for the children, which makes it impossible to argue against, but I have some problems with it anyway.

First, is this enforcable? There's something like 200 parks in Marion County, and 12 park police. And 2000 sex offenders. The only idea that I've heard that's even close to possible is tagging all of them with GPS devices... and that's going to be pricey. Plus, why not just brand them all with a big ol "NOT FOR KIDS", right on their forehead? If you're saying "you know, a brand's not a bad idea" right now, I really don't need you as a reader any more. After you finish this, you're free to go.

Second, is this legal? Signs point to yes. In fact, the report I heard pointed out how they wrote the law specifically to get around that troublesome double jeopardy clause in the Constitution. I wasn't aware that getting around that was an accomplishment. The law is structured so that it provides real criminal penalties for anyone who couldn't plead autrefois convict, and "merely" fines for people who could. Doesn't that set off a red flag? When your law is written specifically to hug various constitutional nooks and crannies, does that suggest that you might be in the danger zone?

Thirdly, how long until this applies to acquited or suspected sex offenders? Let's say someone is acquited; I guess they can get the real criminal penalties, unless they have a really good lawyer. What about people merely accused? It's just a matter of time until this applies to them, too. And in a world where being suspected of DUI can get your picture in an internet registry, it's not much of a stretch.

So now some of you parents, or those of you who believe government is the elixir, you're probably wondering why an otherwise pro-punishment guy like me is going out on a limb here. Two reasons. First, if the judge in your case thinks you're too much of a risk to be allowed near children, give him the power to make you persona non grata at all city parks, playgrounds, and Toys-r-us stores. I'm ok with that, much moreso than I am with a mandatory sentance law that's prone to abuse and all but impossible to enforce.

And lastly, there's a sex offender who's a friend of the family. Turns out that it is almost impossible to defend yourself from charges of abuse. I'm not alone in my belief that he's innocent - but he's on the registry. I won't drag the case out here, but he was a school principal when he was accused, and his life is forever altered in ways I can't imagine. I know that some of you are shaking your heads, saying that either he must be guilty, or that a little collateral damage is OK, because we're protecting the children. To you I say this: before we need a law barring sex offenders from parks, we need a law barring you from the courthouse.

I moved

Again. I am so tired right now. I'd make a longer post but... so tired.