“Who Are You” Buffy vs Faith 2-pack

Figure:
“Who Are You” Buffy & Faith

Series:
Buffy

Recipe:
These figures are kitbashed customs to the max. The Buffy is a Deluxe DST “Graduation Day” Buffy head on an “End of Days” Faith upper torso with the arms from “Bad Girls” Faith, combined to the lower torso and legs of “Once More With Feeling” Buffy. The upper body is painted to match Buffy’s shirt in the episode. Faith is a simple repaint of DST’s Deluxe “Grad Day” Faith.

Accessories:
No accessories were included beyond a three-piece Church base.

Reasoning Behind The Effort:
I really have no excuse here. I had excess parts, and I had to use them to make space. I made this as a result.

Additional Thoughts
Despite my love of the church base I had constructed, I didn’t hold onto these figures. Yeah, they were cool, especailly since you can pose them in sweet fighting stances; but I didn’t love the episode enough to warrant keeping them. So, I let them go on Ebay prior to movie to California. (Figures originally completed in Late 2005)

Jurassic Park was one of the most anticipate movies of my life. Because of the toys. When I first discovered the Young T-Rex Dino with battle damage removable flesh in the aisle of Toys R’ Us back in 1993, I knew JP was a place I would want to go, and when I went for the first time in 1993, I was terrified and awed. I thought Dinosaurs were real, and I loved it.

Needless to say, Dino’s aren’t living today, and this was later made abundantly clear to me, which is sad. But I still have an affinity for the movie that was, to me, the greatest special effects summer blockbuster to date. Even now, re-visiting the film as an adult, I am awed and amazed—not at the idea that dinosaurs are real and living today but at the marvel of technology to create them. The dinosaurs in this movie are unlike any type of onscreen beast I have ever seen. They could very well still be real, and the government is forcing the filmmakers to say they’re CG. Yes, I think the Dino’s are that good in this movie.

And surprisingly, they are not the best part. The story, the concept, is the best part. It’s fascinating, moving, and truly engaging from start to finish. The idea of cloning dinosaurs is great. The capitalistic result of that, making them attractions, is fascinating; and the resulting horror is terrifying. Taking these elements and uniting them cohesively could have resulted in B-moive cheese, but Jurassic Park unites them perfectly. Frankly, this may be one of the greatest screenplays I’ve seen on-the-screen. What I mean by that is that I, as a pseudo-writer wannabe, believe the structure, timing cues, and development of the plot and characters is about as perfect as a script gets. Even very minor characters get us emotionally vested, either for or against them.

All that being said, Jurassic Park gets an easy 7 from me. It’s one of my all-time favorite films, plain and simple.

“Fool For Love” vampire Spike

Figure:
“Fool For Love” vampire Spike

Series:
Buffy

Recipe:
This Spike was one of my most ambitious figures. I did some crazy surgery to make this figure happen. I had to slice the face from a “Fool For Love” Spike so that I could glue on “Just Rewards” Spike face to it and make a vampire with that curly “Fool For Lvoe” hair.The Frankensteined head was then put on “Fool For Love” body. Ta-Da!!!

Accessories:
This Spike included a base, a bottle of Vodka, a removable jacket, and a pipe.

Reasoning Behind The Effort:
Well, I love “Fool For Love”. It’s a great episode, and DST’s Spike figure from it was EXCELLENT, maybe one of their best. I wanted a vampire Spike in teh threads from teh episode, but didn’t think just putting the vamp head on a “Fool For Love” Spike body. So, I went the distance and made it happen.

Additional Thoughts
This is arguably my most ambitious custom, and I am very happy with him. He looks great despite the major surgery I performed on him, adn I think he is a passable variant. I sold him on Ebay, but I am still proud of him. (FIGURE COMPLETED IN SPRING 2005)

Grace, Peace, and Thanks to you all,

My relationship with the folks at Figures.com continues to blossom as more figure reviews go up. Here are reviews for Rocky Figures: Drago, Thunderlips, Clubber Lang, Ludmilla Drago, and More. Pretty cool stuff, especially for all the Rocky fans out there. Check ‘em out below.

Rocky Villains featuring Thunderlips, Clubber Lang, and Ivan Drago.

Rocky IV Training Montage Set featuring Ludmilla Drago, Ivan Drago, and Rocky Balboa WITH BEARD!!!!!!

Quigley Down Under is an interesting little western. It’s not bad, but it’s not my bag, either. The movie showcases the standard western motifs of the lone warrior traveling to a new locale, getting into trouble, and fighting a localized tyrant or bully. It’s a very standard picture, with some fun moments; but that’s not enough for me to fully embrace it.

I enjoy some westerns, but it takes something unique or interesting to really get me vested in them, and I didn’t feel Quigley had it. Yes, it has a unique spin, for it’s technically not a “Western”, in that it doesn’t take place in “the west”. Rather, it takes place in the outback of Australia, an environment ripe for this kind of story (and a place where several Westerns have taken place, apparently); a story which follows the misadventures of Matthew Quigley, a talented marksman offered a job in Australia—as a local land baron’s aid in the genocide of Australia’s indigenous people. I won’t go into anything else plotwise, because there are some surprises. I will, however, say that Quigley’s misadventures span a variety of episodic instances and events, some of which work and some of which don’t. Those that don’t, like the element of a crazy woman, will either charm a viewer or ostracize him/her. It did the latter to me, but someone else might love it.

One aspect that I think everyone will be entertained by, however, are the two leads, Quigley, played by Tom Selleck, and his Nemesis, played by the always-wonderful Alan Rickman. Something about Selleck is charming, and Rickman is always good at bringing a character to life. These two carry the picture, but they fail to lift it out of mediocrity.

I’m giving Quigley Down Under a 3. This is outing into the western genre that is fine, but it didn’t do that much for me personally.

Doc Holiday Statuette

Figure:
Doc Holiday

Series:
Statuettes

Recipe:
This is a simple repaint of the Dusty Trail “Outlaw” figure, made to match Doc Holiday from the film TOMBSTONE .

Accessories:
This Doc Holiday figure included a pistol and a base.

Reasoning Behind The Effort:
This figure was made to use up cheap parts I picked up a Kay-bee toy store. The Facial features and outfit matched Holiday’s look in the movie perfectly, so I figured he’d be a good unique addition to my portfolio.

Additional Thoughts
I love this figure. I parted with it to a fan of my customs in France, and I think she was really happy with it. I know I was. I specifically liked the action pose, which makes the figure look like he is coming straight out of the shoot-out at the O.K. Corral. (FIGURE COMPLETED IN LATE 2006)

Identity is one of those thrillers that’s high on concept and adequate on execution, making for a frightening, interesting, and surprising first-time viewing, with subsequent views being desirable to help fill in the blanks. For me, this good stuff. I am all about re-watching films with surprise endings or change-over, trying to find the visual and audio clues given by the filmmakers.

Identity follows the intersecting and interconnected lives of 10 individuals who get trapped at a motel during a rainstorm. John Cusack, Ray Liotta, Amanda Peet, Jake Busey, and John C. McGinley, are a few of the players; and each of them turn in fantastic performances. Meanwhile, a midnight case review is taking place for a murderer, and he is somehow tied to the events taking place at the motel. The connection is a unique one, and the story unfolds to resolve all the stories in question.

The movie is full of great surprises and thrills. As persons are killed at the motel, the tension cuts so thick that one could cut it with a wife, and the overall tone, presentation, and pace of the movie is great. I’m sure it has weaknesses, but I can’t think of any off the top of my head; and that being said, I really enjoy this movie. Each time I watch it I find something new to enjoy, and this last viewing, I really paid close attention to the editing, and it was really solid. I learned from it. Good stuff.

I am giving Identity a 5 on my meview scale. I really enjoy. It’s not one of the best thrillers of all time, nor is it one of my favorite movies ever, but it’s excellent. It’s thought-provoking, original and interesting.

em>Grace and Peace, all. I was originally planning for the second “BIG QUESTION” to be “Even if you establish that a higher being or creator could exist, why choose the God of Christianity?” But my study of other religous systems has become much more cumbersome than originally anticipated, and I’ll be unable to honestly answer that question for some time. Instead, I am going to jump to some ancillary “BIG QUESTIONS”, not relating directly to Christianity but SPIRITUALITY as a WHOLE.

So, here’s the Question, “So, you’re religious. What if you’re wrong?”

Well, here’s the thing. This is not a “Religious Question.”. This is a personhood question. I find it fascinating that this is often posed by the non-religious to the religious as if the relglious are the only ones who have anything to lose. Bottom line, we all have something to lose, here for certain, and possibly in the afterlife. None of us have 100% “testable evidence” of what happens to an individual’s “self” or “awareness of existence” following death. Just because we declare a person dead does not definitively affirm that the person’s “awareness”, their “self” so to speak, ceases to exist as well. The religious or non-religous are ALL gambling on some belief system. Yes, Atheism is a belief system, and those who adhere to it are doing so on faith, for they cannot definitely prove what happnes to a person’s soul, if one even exists, after death, just as the Christian cannot prove 100% that the soul lives, that is, if it even exists. So, that said, this is a question for all of us, not just the religious. I think all of us need to ask ourselves. “What if I’m wrong about my beliefs?” Well, for me, as a Christian, I have the following thoughts:

First, what if there is no soul and you die and that’s it. Well, if that’s the case, then I’ve not lost anything but those things I have rejected or sacrificed while on earth. Maybe that means I “wasted” time praying, but prayer kept me going, so I maybe I didn’t. Maybe I didn’t get to watch all the porn I wanted or experiement with drugs in the way I would have like, but maybe that’s a good thing. Maybe I “wasted” money by tithing to a church for a mythical religion, but maybe that money was used so someone else could eat. REGARDLESS, it won’t matter to me. If I’m dead, and that’s that, I’ll never know that I wasted anything. I would have died peacefully, believing I tried to live the best life I could within the boundaries I had chosen for myself. If death was it, however, and heaven is not real; and I wasted all these things, or missed it on this-or-that, well, I would never know about it. So, no big loss harm or foul to me.

Second, What if another religion turns out to be true? Well, as far as Islam or religions that are exlcusive from Christina faith and opposed to it, that’d be a problem for me. Damnation to be sure. Fire, maybe. Lots of Pain. For all “regenerative” religious systems, my life of attempting to do good to others and love them despite myself will warrant me good kharma and reward me with good life. For religions that speak of post-material life on an etheral plain, I will simply begin the journey with new understanding. Sure, I may or may not regret this or that choice I made in faith, but I’d have knowledge to move froward from that choice. If scientology is real, then we’re all in trouble…But all that to say, living in a “Christian” lifestyle, if other religions are true, then it could possibly warrant positive rewards, less in the instance of a relgiion that Christianity directly opposes. In those instances, I gambled wrongly, and I made the wrong choice, and I am paying for it. Well, that’s too bad.

I think that covers all the major, broad bases. If I’m wrong and there’s nothing after the consciousness of the mind and the beating of the heart, I’d never know about it, but I would have met that death with peace of mind, believing that I’d go to heaven. Overall, from looking on my life from the outside, Others may believe tha maybe I missed out on this experimental behavior or sin, and some may think that’s bad; but I wouldn’t know so what’s the big deal for me. If another relgiion is true, I could meet one of a thousand fates, but they can be summed up in two major types of ends. First, if a religion directly opposed to Christianity is true, then I would have failed, and I am damned. Second, A religion based in “kharma” or universal justice would look at my life and judge me according. Due to the sacrificial lifestyle demanded by Christianity, , to a point, based on my understanding of these types of systems. So, what if I, C.J. Stunkard, am wrong. Well, I’m fine with the odds that, in the end, I’ll be okay. My being WRONG is straight 50/50 chance. Either Christianity is true and I’m, going to heaven OR I’m wrong and I’m meeting another fate. Within the 50% of my being wrong, I’ve found 3 basic ends: (a) Nothing and I wouldn’t know (b) Universal justice, in which I am confident of the lifestyle I’ve chosen or (c) Damnation. Well, looking at the math, I only really have a 16.67% chance of having a definitive poor result in this scenario. Here’s the math.

Right or Wrong. 50% chance.
3 possible outcomes of wrong. Each 30% chance of 50% overall possibilities.
1 absolutely poor outcome of damnation. 16.67% chance overall of the 100%.

So, that’s that. “What if I’m wrong?” Well, I’m okay with that. Playing “the Odds”, I am pretty confident that I’ll come out, in the end, on top. NOW, this leads to something further which is also important: If there is nothing after life, and my Christian lifestyle doesn’t count for anything but what I doing here and now, are there still benefits to Christianity which Improve the overall quality of my life, so that even if I have the 16% damnation outcome, or one of the other non-Christian outcomes, I still had a BETTER LIFE than I would have without Christianity. Well, I am happy to say that from the way I’m looking at existence, Christainty does IMPROVE my life. Here’s a few of the reasons why,
1) Christianity and my belief in God gives my peace in turmoil, rest in uncertainty, and calm in desperation. Christianity allows for an understanding and hope in time of darkness and loss in that ALL things work together within God’s will and, ultimately, can result in his glory. It enables one to see blessing and possible posistive outcomes in the worst of circumstances and gives its believers a strong confidence in the chaos and insecurity of the world around him/her.
2) Christianity gives one a perspective from which to make choices, and it’s a very solid foundation for living. Should I make this choice? Well, I know it will hurt or anger God, so no, I shouldn’t (unless I am choosing to sin). Is this okay or acceptable? Well, it adheres to my Christian “moral code”, so yeah, I’m alright with that. It gives one a good gauge for making tough decisions. It’s much easier than riding the tide of popular social morals.
3) Christianity has led me to live a better life than I would have. What do I mean by “better”? Well, let me just say that if I knew that this was all there was, I would live this life for maximum pleasure. I wouldn’t be a good person, unless it was to suit my own ends. I’d become wholly Egoistic–acting in my best interest, for my best interest, at all times. That’s because I am not a good person by virtue. Sorry, if I am honest, really honest, than I want to do things for myself and my own purposes far more than I’d want to do things for anyone else. I’m not gonna become a pimp or a murderer, but I am gonna livefor the moment; for if i die tomorrow, that’s it. I understand that some have used Christianity as an excuse for evil. But, for me, in my honest assessment of myself–it’s only been an agent for positive change.

So, that’s my take on this question: “What if I’m wrong?” Well, there’s a 16% chance of definitive hell, a 16% chance that the universe will judge me based on my life choices (and I am confident in the choices I am making), and a 16% chance of not knowing I was wrong (so no harm). In the meantime, Christianity has given me bearings on my understanding this world and engaging it better than I would were I living for myself. I hope this answer is satisfactory. If not, post up a comment and tell what I might have missed. So, my question to you, dear readers and friends, “have you considered your fate? If you are wrong, what’s that mean for you, not just later, but now as well?”

Grace and Peace again, thanks for reading.

Song of the Post: “Runnin’” by Earth, Wind, and Fire from the album All ‘n’ All.

Grace, Peace, and Thanks to you all. I encourage each of you to pour yourself a drink, get in a comfortable chair, and listen to 10 of your favorite songs. Just invest 45 Minutes, sit and enjoy. It’s a grand experience of wonderful proportions, and I think it will benefit your ear, mind, and soul.

I am taking a stand. I know people will disagree and that’s fine. That’s what the internet is for.

I know some people hate the idea of covers or sampling, but I encourage it. Frankly, I think it is a valuable thing for culture and the individuals in it. I have no problem with reinterpreting the blueprint for a conjunction of sounds to make music; and frankly, that’s all covers and remixes are. Samples simply lift a portion of said blueprint and implement into another set of notes in order to enhance or better develop a new work. Both of these practice extend the reach of the original written music to new listeners, and I think multiplying the possible effect or impact of an original piece of music is a good thing. I fully encourage it. I know some people feel that songs are very unique to their original authors and/or performers; but I am taking a stand on the stage and welcoming covers, samples, and remixes with wide-open arms. Here are three reasons why:

1) A Cover or Sample does not taint or, even, directly effect the original in any way. A number of songs I enjoy have been sampled, covered, and remixed; and for a great deal of time, I hated that. I felt it was an abomination to alter music from one genre to another, or perform a cover with a different overall feel or tone. I loathed the practice more due to my dislike of the products from it, rather than my actual dislike of the practice itself. The thing that I failed to accept was that the cover or sample had no effect on the original. I still had the original, I could still enjoy it and just ignore the later piece which stemmed from it. No harm, no foul.
CONTENTION: “A cover can ruin an appreciation of the original song, particularly for those who have never heard the ‘real’ one but enjoy the cover”. Well, this contention holds to a PERSONAL OPINION of music’s imbued value. It is not an objective truth that the original version of a song is the “best” version. That belief is a personal assessment of music as an art form, but it is not a definitive statement of factual truth. Sorry. For all intents and purposes, a person can like a cover or a song which samples a piece of music more than the original, and that isn’t a “wrong” choice.

2) A cover/sample can lead a person back to the original, which they can then engage and possibly enjoy. For purists, this is actually a good thing. More often that not, when I have heard a song I really like, I mean REALLY like, I go on iTunes or Wikipedia and try to find if it is an original version, sample or cover, etc. Sometimes I like it more, sometimes less; but at the very least, the cover or sample led me to the original, and I think it is still a good thing in that I am being open to music I may not have found otherwise.
CONTENTION: “But if a person likes a cover more than the original, that’s a problem. A person SHOULD like the original more.” Again, this is personal opinion, one with which I disagree, and the fact that at least the original was engaged and given a chance is a positive one.
3) A cover/sample is equal in possible effect as the original, and whatever said effect is, it CAN be positive. Music affects people differently, and I love that. Some covers, particularly those that transfer the genre of the music, can really reach listeners in ways the original wouldn’t it; and in that way, the music itself, that is, the notes and lyrics, has the possibility to effect the new listener in the same way the original affected its listeners.
CONTENTION: But a cover /sample can ruin that “blueprint” as you call it. It takes the music and changes it. I disagree with this, again; because I think that music is bigger than a singular interpretation of the written formula which leads to it. The blueprint is just that, the foundation, the instructions so-to-be speak; but if one needs to alter or stray from the blueprint to best convey the ideas and emotions of the song one is creating, then I think it is acceptable. Again, this is a contention that is based in personal opinion, not objective truth.

Okay. Now, you may disagree with my stance on this, and I am fine with that outlook. It’s cool. But frankly, I can’t get to that point myself. All this to say, I am going to introduce a new feature called “Musical Multiplicity”. It’s going to be very brief, semi-regular deal wherein I recommend checking out two versions of a given song, usually the original and a cover. Sometimes, I will offer more versions, particularly if I don’t dig the original but want people to still have options. I won’t be doing this arbitrarily; I’ll only be recommending songs I like (no posing here). So, anyway, Please comment on this. I love engaging ideas about music in this way, and I’d love your opinions, agree or disagree.

I enjoyed Ocean’s 3, and I should say right now that it is a better movie than say Spider-man 3 or Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End, both of which I enjoyed more, simply because I am a fanboy. Luckily for me, I have constructed the movie write-ups as a “meviews” of my personal like or dislike for the movies, not their actual quality. Hence, I am giving Oceans 13 a little lower score than those other blockbusters; but truth be told, it was better than them on every level.

Frankly, Ocean’s 13 is more of the same. It’s arguably charismatic actors fully embracing their Hollywood personals and imbuing characters with them, resulting in some fun time. It’s not much different than the last two movies aside from its experimental, nonlinear structure. In earnest, as the movie doesn’t bring much new to the table, and it doesn’t have the effects or scope to warrant the big screeen, it’s not a necessarily theatrical experience. A rental of the flic would have been just as good, I think.

Really, I am guessing I liked this so much was that my expectations were lower than dirt. I really couldn’t get into Ocean’s 12, and I was ready for this outing to be just as mediocre. I dug Ocean’s 11, and this one was just like it. It was fun, engaging, and while imperfect, moved at a great pace and had a good deal of laughs. I am giving it a well-earned 4, and I will probably enjoy watching it again on DVD and catching some gags and stuff I missed!