Swamp Thing 1982 is okay, sort of
Not exactly great, not exactly awful.
Said up front, I know absolutely nothing about the original Swamp Thing from DC Comics in the 1970s. All I know is the movie. Just want to point that out.
I found out above this movie because I was looking up info on actress Adrienne Barbeau, saw that she was the lead in Swamp Thing from 1982 and said yeah, I'll watch this.
Can you believe this is a Wes Craven film, the same guy that wrote and directed A Nightmare on Elm Street released two years later? Yep, same dude.
That being said, this isn't a horror film. This is a monster movie with action-adventure in it. Sort of. I honestly really don't know how to classify it.
I really like the overall look of this movie. Color, shot composition and overall cinematography is great. The pacing is actually decent too.
Concerning the story, it's really simple, but I liked the fact that at no point did I have to guess what was going on. Swamp Thing is not one of those movies you have to watch 5 times just to figure out what actually happened. You get it all on the first watch, and that's good. I know who are the good guys, who are the bad guys, what everybody's intentions are, and understood the story of the movie clearly. No problems there.
However, there's one thing that such a sore thumb.
The main villain character in his "animal" form.
I'm not going to describe that any further in case you've not seen the movie. But when I saw this, ick... major cringe going on. This is when I thought, "I'm watching a movie and that's a guy in a terrible costume." Yeah. That character, more than anything else, is what breaks Swamp Thing.
The swamp creature itself? Decent. Yeah, it's a guy in a suit, but done so in a way where it didn't bother me. But that wolf-whatever thing? Awful.
Did the wolf-whatever thing completely ruin the movie? Almost. What saved it is that the movie has a bit of heart to it. The story actually saved it. The scenes where Adrienne Barbeau and the swamp creature get to know each other, and the great bad guy characters (the human ones, that is) is what kept this movie from being a total train wreck.
So, again, not exactly great, not exactly awful.
On an end note, I'm surprised I didn't see this as a kid. Not in the theaters but as a home movie rental. Nobody ever talked about this movie and I wonder why, because I had friends who were into comics. Maybe they just weren't into Swamp Thing? Who knows.
Rock songs from 2002 have not aged well
2002 was twenty years ago, and these were the top rock songs of the day.
In '02, I was in my late twenties. Dial-up internet was in the process of being replaced by broadband, widescreen television at home was just starting to become common, and Microsoft Windows XP was still brand new as it was just 1 year old.
I looked up the top 10 rock songs from '02, and I honestly could not remember a single one of them by title alone.
This is the list from 10 to 1:
10: Queens of the Stone Age - No One KnowsI remember hearing this song a lot back then but I never knew the name of the band, never mind the song title. About 35 seconds in, I had to stop and couldn't listen to the rest. The song just sounds weird.
9: Saliva - AlwaysI didn't remember this song at all because it sounds really generic for the era. Production quality is good but the vocals are all over the place. Singing, scream-singing, q-u-i-e-t, repeat. It's annoying.
8: Foo Fighters - All My LifeI do like some Foo Fighters songs, but not this one. Well, most of it. The chorus is great but the rest of the song is terrible. It's like the band had two different unfinished songs and just slapped this one together. Doesn't work.
7: Chad Kroeger featuring Josey Scott - HeroYes, I remember this one. Very well. I also remember it being overplayed to death mainly due to the Spider-Man thing. But I like it. A lot. This is a great song, and I know why. It's a '90s-style song that slipped its way into 2002. This is a rock power ballad done right.
6: Nickelback - Too BadSame singer as #7, different tune. Too bad, indeed. Too bad it's not a better song. Again, generic for the era and forgettable.
5: Jimmy Eat World - The MiddleThis song is somewhat catchy, but the only reason it ever got popular is because of the music video showing pretty people in their underwear. Otherwise, it's a trying-to-be-punk Green Day sound, and just... no.
4: Trapt - HeadstrongUgh, hate this song. Hero was overplayed to death, but this song was overplayed to a level I can't even describe. It was everywhere, and after the first two seconds I just say NOPE. NOPE NOPE NOPE. It has the same crap going on that Saliva does. Singing to scream-singing, rinse and repeat. Awful.
3: Red Hot Chili Peppers - By The WayRHCP fans will like this just because it's RHCP. I do remember it back from when it was popular, but I can't get into it. There are other RHCP songs far better than this one. This is RHCP phoning it in just to get a paycheck.
2: Puddle of Mudd - BlurryGreat guitar work and tone in this one, but the song is ruined by whiny vocals. And once again, we've got the singing to scream-singing and back thing going on. Pass.
1: 3 Doors Down - When I'm GoneIn all honesty, I remember absolutely nothing about this song at all, and this is #1 for 2002. I think my reason for not remembering anything about it is because it is ridiculously generic. My brain just tunes the generic stuff right out.
2002 rock music can truly be defined as generic rock. Or to be more specific, it was that whole "Alternative Rock" crapola. It's not glam, not grunge, not metal, ever-so slightly edgy, and totally forgettable.
This list is a glimpse into the last gasp of the dying rock scene of the early 2000s. It's an era before smartphones, before YouTube, and even before social media existed. At this time, a lot of what was out there was "old '90s", meaning '90s rock music and fashions but with none of the bite, almost as if everything just went through a make-it-generic filter.
And yes, I know, 9/11 was still fresh in everybody's mind - including mine at the time - but that's absolutely not the sole reason for the generic feel of the music. A new decade started, and it seemed like the music industry just didn't know what to do with rock, so they just kept on with the '90s stuff but in a way that was about as exciting as chicken noodle soup.
2002, you will not be missed.
It is nice that a "normal" Charvel Pro-Mod guitar exists
All the "speedy" stuff in a classy package.
Previously I've mentioned the Charvel Pro-Mod DK24, which is the ultimate "24 fret Stratocaster". It looks nice but doesn't really have a color option that's not in-your-face.
Then there is the Charvel Pro-Mod So-Cal Style 1 HH FR M. I have no idea why Charvel uses such long and confusing names, but whatever, that's what it's called.
If you like "fast" (i.e. shredding) guitars using the Stratocaster shape with a more traditional look to it, that's this guitar.
This Pro-Mod just looks good. Simple gloss black with tortoiseshell guard, a satin urethane finished neck for super-smooth play with 12"-16" compound radius fingerboard outfitted with jumbo frets, "loud" Seymour Duncan Distortion pickups, Floyd-Rose 1000 double-locking tremolo system, heel-mounted truss rod adjustment, and the control knobs are flat-top with knurled sides.
In addition, it has a 5-way pickup selector with push-pull coil split on the volume control, meaning yes, you can get those Strat "quack" clean tones out of it whenever you want.
The guitar pretty much needs nothing. It is a plug-in-and-go "fast" guitar.
I applaud Charvel for making this type of Pro-Mod. Some guys want all the fast stuff without the look-at-me appearance. Charvel certainly delivered here. They made a classy shredder axe. I approve.
My experience with no-smartphone Garmin traffic reporting
In early 2022 as I write this, I now have decent experience with the best non-smartphone traffic reporting for Garmin GPSes. I have used both the regular RDS traffic reporting using the TA20 and GTM35 (which is the same as the GTM36), and the HD reporting using the GTM60.
When using an older Garmin nuvi or DriveSmart model in the United States, traffic coverage only exists in major metro areas. At the time I write this, I happen to live in an area that has full RDS and HD coverage.
The Garmin models I've used with traffic support: nuvi 265T (RDS w/GTM35), nuvi 2250 (RDS w/GTM35), nuvi 2455LMT (HD w/GTM60), nuvi 2555LMT (HD w/GTM60), nuvi 2457LMT (HD w/GTM60), nuvi 56LMT (RDS w/TA20), nuvi 2599LMTHD (HD w/GTM60), DriveSmart 50LMTHD (HD w/GTM60), Drive 52 ("fallback" RDS w/GTM60).
Does it even work?
Yes. The RDS-TMC signal at best starts receiving in a few seconds, and at worst takes 2 minutes to receive if I'm parked in a place where the signal is blocked by something (garage, carport, etc.)
Ordinarily, I'm either using the Drive 52 or nuvi 2599, either of which can be set to automatically reroute around traffic during navigation (as in the "Optimize Route" option is set to "Automatic") when it knows about it. I have both set this way, and yes, it works.
Is it accurate?
This literally depends on where I'm traveling.
On major highways and interstates where traffic coverage exists, yes, accurate. Major highways and interstates are patrolled routinely and have cameras in many places, hence why the traffic reporting is so good on those roads.
For everywhere else, traffic reporting is usually slower or nonexistent. I have encountered traffic instances (mainly due to road construction) where it wasn't reported at all to the RDS-TMC system, and therefore never appeared in the Garmin. I have also encountered traffic reports the Garmin said were there but were already cleared when I passed through. Neither happens due to a fault of the Garmin but rather those who are supposed to make timely traffic reports and didn't.
Is it annoying to use?
No. On most Garmin models you can change the frequency of how often you are notified of traffic reports. You also have the option of just shutting off traffic reporting at any time when you don't need it (but you do have to remember to turn it back on).
Is the traffic coverage decent?
As noted above, traffic reporting coverage is only for major metro areas, which is arguably the only place where I would ever need it.
Is traffic reporting even necessary?
In all honesty, no, but it's still better to have it than not.
Where the traffic reporting works best for me is in unfamiliar areas or areas I infrequently drive in. The last thing I want to worry about whenever going somewhere unfamiliar is how to get around traffic on roads I don't know.
RDS or HD traffic reporting on a Garmin does work, and I hope it continues to work for a good long while.
Squier Affinity Stratocaster is a "cheap '69"?
This guitar is arguably the cheapest way to get a "Modern '69 Fender Stratocaster".
The Squier Affinity Stratocaster model has been around since the '90s and always had the big headstock. It took a very long time before they finally got it right with the current version.
With the big headstock there are basically three style choices to go with for logo treatment. Mid '60s, late '60s and '70s.
The one Squier used and stuck with for the longest time was the worst of the three, the mid-'60s. If you look up a '66 Fender Stratocaster and look at the headstock, you quickly understand why most Strat fans hate that design. That's the one Squier chose to use.
Squier used a flat black logo and it just looked terrible. The logo then had a minor refresh where it changed to gold with black outline, but still looked stupid.
In the late '60s however (and technically very-early '70s also), Fender had a much better design going on, and in fact is my favorite Fender logo treatment of all time, the 1969 Fender Stratocaster.
The reason this design works so well is because of the larger logo, much larger STRATOCASTER "swoop", and there are wider, flatter mounts at the base of each tuner instead of skinny rounded edges. The combination of large logo and larger bases for the tuners suit the large chunk of wood nicely.
Squier, after all these years, finally redesigned their logo the right way for the Affinity model and copied the '69.
Obviously, it's not an exact copy of what Fender used, but for the large headstock, it's a genuinely a good looking design and far better than anything the Affinity had before this.
What I mean by "Modern '69 Fender Stratocaster" is that the Affinity has what most players want. There is tone control wired to the bridge side pickup, it does have medium jumbo frets, the back of the neck is satin urethane finished and the front is glossed, the bridge is a modern 2-post, and color choices are good.
There are two things about this guitar players don't like, but I'm totally fine with. First is the slim body, meaning it won't fit a full sized tremolo block replacement. Second is the ceramic magnet pickups. I actually prefer ceramic, but Strat purists like the alnico.
Is there such a thing as a "Modern '69" in a Fender flavor? No, but you can get one that's very close to it, the Fender American Performer Stratocaster. You'll see SSS and HSS versions available from that link.
The reason I don't call the American Performer a Modern '69 is because that guitar takes styling cues from '70s models. On the headstock, you see two string trees and fully rounded oval tuner buttons. The late '60s has a single string tree and tuner buttons with rounded top but with flat sides - which is what the Affinity has now.
Yes, Squier does have the Classic Vibe '70s Stratocaster, but that is a much different guitar compared to the Affinity. The CV '70s headstock treatment is "very '70s", has the fully rounded oval tuner buttons, the entire neck is finished in tinted gloss urethane, the frets are narrow-tall style, the bridge is the older 6-screw style, and the pickups do have alnico magnets in them.
My preference is the Affinity over the Classic Vibe, even though the CV is technically the "better" guitar, specification-wise.
I played an FMT (Flame Maple Top) HSS version of the Affinity, and I liked it.
The Affinity, at least in my hands, just felt better compared to the CV. But I will admit on the HSS that the volume punch when using humbucker-alone is just too loud for me. This doesn't mean the guitar is wired incorrectly, because it's not. Unless there are some fancy electronics inside to compensate for the greater output of a humbucker in an HSS guitar (like on the Fender American Ultra Stratocaster HSS), that humbucker will always be louder as that is the nature of how HSS guitars work...
...but don't let that stop you from trying one out. Most players of HSS guitars get used to the volume punch that happens when humbucker-alone is selected and come to appreciate it.