I saw a neat little sci-fi film last night called Moon, starring Sam Rockwell and directed by David Bowie's son (Duncan Jones, formerly Zowie Bowie). It had an awesome retro production design - the sets looked like they'd been borrowed from 2001 and Silent Running - and was just generally a really solid piece of old fashioned sci-fi storytelling. No shocking twists, no big climactic set pieces. Just good. Very satisfying.

That's very cool. One of my favorite Bowie songs is "Kooks" which he wrote shortly after Duncan/Zowie was born. And Bowie was still with Angela and the song is very warm and loving. But it's bittersweet to hear it knowing that there was a very acrimonious divorce, and that Zowie didn't grow up kookie but was sent to a Swiss military school.

So. I'm glad he got to do a movie.

Bowie named the kid Zowie Bowie and packed him off to military school? I suspect a subconscious death wish is at work somewhere in there...

I suspect a subconscious death wish is at work somewhere in there...

Considering how much drugs David and Angela were doing back then, and how unstable their lives were, it was probably the sanest thing he could do under the circumstances.

Still: Swiss military school must've SUCKED ASS. Particularly in the libertine 70s.

I absolutely loved the 3D, but goggles makers need to consider the needs of glasses wearers. The 3D worked great with just the goggles on--there were all these 3D...blobs, and squiggles. With both glasses and goggles the 3D worked, most of the time. The rest, just out of range enough to make things look crazy, but not 3D--and the bridge of my nose nearly crushed under the weight.

Still, I can't wait to see it again, in 2D this time, without the pain. Won't be as glorious, but I'm curious to note differences.

but goggles makers need to consider the needs of glasses wearers.

I didn't have the visual problems you describe, but my temples were throbbing with pain by about halfway through. If they just made them a wee bit bigger, I'd have been fine.

Yeah, I saw okay but spent the whole movie fussing and fidgeting at the damned things. As did the guy next to me, and the woman in front of me, and (I would guess) every other four-eyes in the theater. With all the 3D stuff coming up, my prediction is that someone will be selling more comfortable non-disposable 3D specs for people who want their own pair, and the biggest sellers will be clip-ons.

non-disposable 3D specs for people who want their own pair

The tricky part is getting the studios to agree on one 3D spec.

Shoot - I didn't realize there were still multiple ones out there. There goes another get-rich-quick scheme!

I can think of 2 off the top of my head (Real-D and IMAX 3-D) and since 3D is so hot right now I'm sure it won't be long until Real-D is replaced by something even newer and shinier.

And then at some point some brilliant person will invent a 3D technology that doesn't need glasses at all, and the four-eyed world will rejoice.

and the biggest sellers will be clip-ons.

Ooh! Want!

The weight problem was due to the shape of my face, and the thickness of goggles over glasses sticking out so far. Clip-ons would fix that. Each studio could do clip-ons for their own brand of 3D--but then you'd have to standardize size and shape, somehow.