2004 releases

Pokémon Company Interested in Full Scale Remakes of Previous Games


Pokemon series producer Junichi Masuda says the Pokemon Company is interested in more remakes of older Pokemon games.


“I think the remakes, like Pokemon FireRed and LeafGreen, is still an approach we’re interested in,” Masuda told IGN. “With the Virtual Console releases of the original games, specifically there had never been a way to bring those Pokemon over to the latest generation. It had always been that you couldn’t get those Pokemon out.”

Masuda explained that services like Pokemon Bank and the Poke Transporter finally gave the developers an option to release the original versions on Virtual Console, essentially letting people upload first generation into the new game.
The Pokemon Company started releasing remakes as part of the third generation of Pokemon, with Pokemon FireRed and LeafGreen for the Game Boy Advance released in 2004. Pokemon remakes established how the developers would use Nintendo’s newer handhelds to showcase improved graphics and introduce features not included in the original games.

Keep reading

3

A real life treasure hunt.

In 2004, Nintendo released a gold colored Game Boy SP to coincide with their latest Zelda release: Minish Cap. Gold Zelda themed editions are pretty common for Nintendo but here’s where it gets interesting.

Nintendo decided to play Willy Wonka and hide a total of 6 golden tickets inside random Zelda SP boxes. If you found a golden ticket, they would send you an actual 24 karat gold plated Game Boy SP!

To this day, no one has ever found any of the tickets and claimed the prize.

With special editions like these, a lot of people tend to buy them and keep them sealed in the box as a collectors piece so someone out there may have a ticket and not even know it.

youtube

In 2004*, Powerhouse animation produced this test footage using scenes cut from Kevin Smith’s live action films. It was meant to showcase what they could achieve in flash for a potential ‘Clerks: the Animated Series’ film.

*EDIT: Released in 2004, not produced.

It will never not be terrifyingly portentous to me that Terry Pratchett’s Going Postal featured a greedy, evil conman antagonist who operated out of a building called the ‘Tump Tower’, bankrupting businesses on his way to cheat and buy his way into overthrowing the local power. Because that sounds uncomfortably familiar now.

youtube

(via https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=weR2BN7y1To)

Soundway ‎– SNDWLPD003 - Released in 2004.
Ghana Soundz Volume 2 ‎– Compilation.

i had a dream i time traveled back to 2004 to a friends house and they were playing what i envisioned was the first gta game and was released in 2004 and their mom had a face on the back of her head and their dad was an abusive stuntman who was always dressed in stuntman clothes

Ousmane Sembene is an Senegalese director who is considered the godfather of African cinema, and is responsible for bringing it into international light. His films are staunch criticisms of society and government, and often explore the effects of colonialism (Camp de Thiaroye), political incompetence (Xala), deep problems within humanity and identity (Black Girl) and, above all, feminism and women’s issues in the sub-Saharan. In 2004, Sembene released his feminist masterwork Moolaade to overwhelming international appraise. The film deals with female circumcision; a group of women rise up against the patriarchal structure of their village to end the mutilation of their girls. This is one of the only movies in the world to cover such a topic.

So why am I telling you all this?

A while back, I came in contact with a man selling a bunch of film cannisters. Most of what he was offering was trash - old 70s educational films, TV movies, home videos. Gross. As I’m picking through I’m quickly losing interest, but then come across something interesting. A listing with the blunt description “‘Tauw’ Short Film from Africa. Dir. O. Sembene”. !!!!!!!!!! I can’t believe I’m holding this!! A super obscure early short film from one of the most important people EVER in film!! I have no way of watching it cause I don’t have a projector but OMG!!!!!!

Lemony Snicket’s A Series Of Unfortunate Events - Movie blog

(SPOILER WARNING: The following is an in-depth critical analysis. if you haven’t seen this movie yet, you may want to before reading this review)

With the A Series Of Unfortunate Events TV series debuting on Netflix tomorrow (on my birthday!), I thought it would be interesting to look back on the industry’s first attempt to adapt the books. Lemony Snicket’s A Series Of Unfortunate Events, made by Paramount, Dreamworks and Nickelodeon, directed by Brad Silberling and released in 2004.

Lemony Snicket’s A Series Of Unfortunate Events combines the first three books of the series together in order to form one story. It follows the same basic plot. Violet, Klaus and Sunny Baudelaire lose their parents in a fire and are adopted by Count Olaf, a treacherous villain and even worse actor who wants to get his hands on the Baudelaire fortune. Outwitting him and escaping from his clutches, the Baudelaires move from guardian to guardian with Count Olaf in hot pursuit using various disguises to fool the guardians and the authorities.

This film has gained a significant cult following in recent years and I can sort of see why. This film offers a very dark, quirky surrealism that you don’t often get in family movies, but while I don’t exactly out and out hate the film, I can’t say I’m very fond of it personally. Having read the books and being a massive fan of the series as a whole, I really wasn’t impressed with how the filmmakers chose to adapt the story.

But let’s start with the positives. The first thing that really jumped out at me was the set design. There’s no denial that this film is able to capture the spirit of the books through the visuals. A perfect mix of goth, steampunk and 1920s. Count Olaf’s house is an absolute treat for the eyes with loads of little details scattered here and there. Uncle Monty’s house, especially the Reptile Room, is incredibly imaginative, and Aunt Josephine’s house overlooking Damocles Dock and Lake Lachrymose is brought to life perfectly. Costumes too are spot on. I particularly like Violet and Count Olaf’s wardrobe.

The film also boasts a lot of great talent. Both Timothy Spall and Meryl Streep I thought were perfect as Mr. Poe and Aunt Josephine respectively. They were exactly how I had imagined them in my head. I also thought that Billy Connolly did a great job as Uncle Monty. While not quite as manic or eccentric as the book version, movie Uncle Monty is an extremely likeable, fatherly figure. I particularly like the inclusion of him losing his own family to a fire just like the Baudelaires did, as opposed to the book version where he always intended to find a wife and have kids but kept forgetting to do so. I thought that was a welcome change that made him a more sympathetic figure. But the standout performance for me has to be Emily Browning as Violet. I’ve often said that Violet is my favourite Baudelaire due to the burden of responsibility she carries for her siblings, and Browning conveys that perfectly. She’s mature, calm under pressure and highly resourceful. It’s just a pity the film never fully utilises her character.

Yes, this is where we talk about the negatives and sadly there is a lot I don’t like about this film.

As I said, this film consists of the first three books of the series, which results in all three stories becoming squashed and fighting for space. As much as I like Uncle Monty and Aunt Josephine, we never really get to spend any significant time with them before they meet their respective demises. It also feels incredibly rushed, the film having to quickly jump from one book to the next, which means we never get the chance to become accustomed to any new environments or characters, the plots never get a chance to establish any credible threat or build any sort of tension and the Baudelaires never get the chance to display their inventiveness and resourcefulness in getting out of the situations they find themselves trapped in. In fact most of the plots are resolved through blind chance or random happenstance. One scene in particular is when they’re attacked by the Lachrymose Leeches. This could and should be an extremely tense scene, but the film very quickly resolves it when it only barely just got started.

By far the character that suffers the most is Violet, whose contribution is significantly reduced. She doesn’t really get to invent a lot of stuff. She makes a sanctuary, a rudimentary pulley system during the train sequence and lobs an anchor at a wooden support to tip Aunt Josephine’s house back onto land, and that’s really about it. We don’t get to see Klaus and Sunny distract the adults in the Reptile Room while Violet builds a lockpick to break into Stephano’s bag and uncover his plan. Nor do we see Violet build the distress signal during the leech sequence using a bucket and the refraction and convergence of light. What’s worse is that one of her most prominent inventions, the grappling hook from The Bad Beginning used to rescue Sunny from the tower, is actually made by Klaus.

Ah yes. Let’s talk about Klaus. For starters I really don’t like Liam Aiken’s portrayal of the character at all, coming across as more stroppy teenager than bookworm and bearing almost little to no resemblance to the book version (he doesn’t even wear glasses), but what really annoys me is how the film ostensibly favours him, effectively making him the lead character. The Baudelaires ideally should be joint protagonists, but if you must favour one of them as the lead, it really should be Violet. She’s the eldest and carries the most weight due to the promise she made to her parents to always look after her siblings. But God forbid we should make a girl the lead, right? With all of her… girlieness! Out of the three, it’s Klaus that gets the most screen time. Investigating the mystery of VFD, foiling Olaf’s plans and there’s one scene at the end that really pissed me off. During The Marvellous Marriage, Klaus uses the grappling hook to rescue Sunny and is ultimately the one who unravels the mystery of the Baudelaire fire and saves the day, but at the cost of reducing Violet to a damsel in distress. In the original book, it was Violet who invented the grappling hook to rescue Sunny and it was ultimately her who foiled Olaf’s plan, signing the marriage certificate with her left hand as opposed to her right and thus making the marriage null and void. In the film, they actually reference this, having Violet beginning to sign the certificate with her left hand only for Olaf to correct her. The film effectively depowers Violet so that Klaus, the male lead, can do all the hero work. It’s simply infuriating.

Something else I’m really not happy with is the amount of attention the VFD mystery gets. I can understand why the filmmakers would choose to put so much focus on it. It is one of the more compelling mysteries of the series, but the way they do it shows a lack of basic understanding as to what the mystery, and ultimately the series as a whole, is actually about. 

While the secret of VFD is intriguing, in the books it’s kept mostly in the background, focusing instead on the Baudelaires’ survival and development. VFD also serves an important purpose in the books, demonstrating the paradoxical nature of secrets. How they can be both valuable and meaningless at the same time. As fascinating as the secret codes, the hidden bases and the sugar bowl are, they ultimately mean nothing in the end, which is kind of the point. The books teach children that in life tragedy and failure are inevitable, that good and evil aren’t so clearly defined, that the reason for evil in the world is because it’s often severely tempting to just do the easy thing as opposed to the right thing, and that there are some questions we will ask in our lifetimes that we will never learn the answers to. These are important things to teach children I believe, and I’m fully aware that there are some fans who weren’t happy with how the books ultimately finished, which is why it pains me to tell you that if you’re one of those people who was disappointed that we never found out exactly what VFD is, what’s inside the sugar bowl, what the Great Unknown is or who caused the Baudelaire fire, you’ve completely missed the point. And by putting so much emphasis on VFD, the filmmakers demonstrate they’ve missed the point too. Stuff about the schism and the fires, which are subtly seeded throughout the series, are just flat out told to us by Aunt Josephine in the movie, and I hate, hate, HATE the fact that we now know Count Olaf was behind the Baudelaire fire when it was deliberately kept ambiguous in the books. (I personally always thought that it was Esme Squalor who was behind the Baudelaire fire considering she has more motive to do it plus the tunnel to the mansion is directly under her penthouse).

I’m very disappointed by Lemony Snicket. Or I should say the severe lack of Lemony Snicket. Jude Law I thought was a perfect choice for the role, but he never actually gets to do anything other than narrate the story. If you were going to expand on VFD, you’d think the film would expand on Snicket too by proxy. But no. There’s no mention of Beatrice or his ties to VFD or even that he’s on the run from Count Olaf and the authorities. He’s just the narrator, which is a crying shame considering what a significant role he plays in the books (in fact you could even make the argument that he’s the true protagonist of the story, researching the Baudelaires in an effort to recapture his lost youth, get over his lost love and hopefully begin to move on with his life).

But my biggest disappointment is with Count Olaf.

I’ve always had a bit of a love/hate thing going with Jim Carrey. I loved him in stuff like The Truman Show and Bruce Almighty, but absolutely hated him in things like The Grinch and Batman Forever. While his style of comedy can be funny occasionally in small doses and in the right context, it can lead to some frankly appalling performances when utilised incorrectly and this is definitely the case.

Carrey plays Count Olaf far too over the top. And before you say it, yes I know A Series Of Unfortunate Events is absurdist fiction and that Count Olaf does occasionally act goofy and weird, but he’s also a very dark and sinister character too. As funny as he can be, you do buy that he’s a significant threat in the lives of the Baudelaire children. The Bad Beginning in particular has almost little to no comedy in it whatsoever. Daniel Handler (the author) treats the character and the setting with the utmost seriousness, which is appropriate considering that this is basically child abuse that’s being depicted here. With the movie, that’s not the case. Carrey goes into full clown mode resulting in a character that’s not in the least bit threatening nor even funny, instead coming across as obnoxious. Trying far too hard to get a laugh when the story really doesn’t call for it. The same also goes for his alter egos. While Captain Sham is admittedly quite amusing, Stephano has got to be one of the most annoying performances I’ve ever seen Carrey give. I just wanted to reach through the screen and throttle him. What’s worse is that when there are scenes where Count Olaf does have to behave treacherously and out of pure malevolence, such as when he slaps Klaus across the face, it comes across as extremely jarring because it stands at odds with the overly goofy Count Olaf we’ve just been watching. Not to mention the internal logic behind some of his schemes doesn’t make any sense. What made him believe that killing the children with a train would get him the fortune? That’s not how inheritance law works. Olaf may not be educated, but he’s not an idiot. And why would Mr. Poe allow Stephano to drag Violet and Klaus away when their guardian had just been killed and Stephano doesn’t fit the guidelines of their parents’ will? And after taking the children away from Count Olaf because of his bad parenting skills, why would he then give them back to Olaf after the leech sequence? He may have ‘rescued’ the children, but that doesn’t necessarily mean he’s a good parent.

It’s not a terrible film I guess. I mean I’ve seen worse. But as an adaptation of A Series Of Unfortunate Events, it’s piss poor. Let’s hope Netflix can do better.

Leyla Zana (b. 1961) is a Kurdish politician and political activist who in 1994 was arrested for her peaceful struggle for the human rights of Kurdish people in Turkey and neighbouring countries. She was released in 2004, after wide international outcry and an appeal of the European Court of Human Rights that declared her imprisonment and violation of free expression unlawful.

She was a member of the pro-Kurdish Democratic Society Party, and in 1991 became the first woman to win a seat in the Turkish Parliament. She was arrested after her party was banned and her immunity as a member of parliament taken away. Even though she was sentenced to prison again multiple times after her 2004 release, the sentences were always overturned by higher courts.

anonymous asked:

How long have you been a FMP fan? I never finished it cause its airing on TV was incomplete but now you are making me curious of how it ends xD

Oh gosh XDDD

Ok, I have a HISTORY with FMP

-2002 (?) Newtype USA included the first episode of FMP! in one of their early issues. I watched it, fell in love with it, got some bootlegs off of ebay so I could watch it, then bought it legally when it finally fully released

-2004 (?) bought the first DVD of Fumoffu when I saw it in store on a whim, but never got the chance to really watch it

-2005, heard about TSR coming out, watched it as it released with fansubs

-2008, moved across the country, husband traveling for work, no friends/family, went back to watching anime and downloaded old favs. Downloaded FMP and rewatched the whole thing. Had never finished Fumoffu before. Fell hardcore in love and started looking up everything

….So it’s been about 8~9 years of TRUE DEDICATION AND OBSESSION but I have known about and enjoyed it for nearly 15 years

But!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

THERE’S A NEW SEASON SCHEDULED TO AIR FALL THIS YEAR!!!!!!!!!!!

SO IF YOU WERE WAITING, INSTEAD OF READING THE MANGA/NOVELS, THERE IS ACTUALLY MORE COMING OUT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

2

Peter Bryan was an English Serial Killer and Cannibal who was said to have been schizophrenic.  His victims were a shop keeper, a friend, and even a fellow patient.  At one point, in 2004 he was released, but sent back to prison in 2005 with a life sentence.
I had been trying to track him down for years.  My letters were returned time and time again.  The hospital sent a letter back with my letter saying they were not sure where he was.
The mystery has finally been solved.  When reading the latest book written by Charles Bronson (now known as Charles Salvador) he wrote that Bryan had committed suicide not too long ago.  Strangely, the suicide of Peter Bryan was never reported, and on his Wikipedia and Murderpedia pages, he is still listed as alive.

Dissolve - John Frusciante

Track: Dissolve
Artist: John Frusciante
Album: DC EP
Year: 2004

John Frusciante has got to be one of the best guitarists of his era. By exploring melody and emotion in his playing rather than speed and technique, he has created a consistent catalogue of outstanding music. More than likely you’ll be aware of his work with Red Hot Chili Peppers (albums such as Blood Sugar Sex Magik, Californication, By The Way, and Stadium Arcadium I find to be some of the best records around) but much of his solo discography is overlooked. 

Some of it may be for good reason: Niandra LaDes/Usually Just A T-Shirt and Smile From The Streets You Hold are fascinating but nearly unlistenable, but his whole collection of albums and EPs released in the 00s are filled with exquisite guitar work. 

The DC EP was released in 2004, comprising four tracks, the opening of which “Dissolve” is the highlight and personally, the only one I’m still playing. The riff is contagious and crashes in instantly from the get-go. Frusciante’s signature amateur singing voice is as endearing as ever, and the lyrics are ambiguous, but seem to hint at how humans develop and inherent problems that are associated. 

Frusciante is a master on guitar, and this is a further testimony of such. The blasting and muddy guitar solo mid-way through the song is short and well-calculated, unleashing a wave of emotion. It has a feel of classic rock, melodic and riff-driven. It may not be his best work, but it’s great nonetheless. 

While trying to figure out which version of Furby I want to buy, I came across the Emoto-Tronic Furby Babies, released in 2004.

I’m not sure if it’s cute or terrifying. Either way, I have so many questions…