San Diego

So, what exactly have I been doing in San Diego? That’s an interesting question and one that I’ve been quite lax in answering. The reason is quite simple – by the time I get around to looking at my blog I’m too tired to do much _real_ writing :-)

So, I’ll start getting into the spirit of things. I live in the La Jolla region of San Diego (it’s towards Northen San Diego). La Jolla can safely described as highly suburban, sprawling and very driver-friendly. Literally 3 minutes away from UTC (the outdoor mall) I’m also miles away from anything that can be described as ‘interesting’, ‘to-do’ or ‘culturally stimulating’. Which should bring to mind the first point about San Diego:

You need a car to do any real exploration.

Since I don’t have a car, this limits what I can and cannot do. It also means that I’m extremely dependent on the feelings of my roommates as to when things happen. Mass transit in San Diego is sporadic and (in my mind) poorly set up. It’s scary when you realize that the transit system in Waterloo has advantages over the MTS (Metropolitan Transit System).

So here’s a list of stuff we’ve done recently [I’ll describe them in later entries]:

– Hung out at Pacific Beach
– Hung out at Coronado Beach
– Explored a very small section of Gaslamp
– Walked around La Jolla
– Watched movies
– Started interacting with the other interns
– Started taking guitar and swimming lessons

Trust me, with this just to start off, I’m hoping to get to the day when I’ll have to pick and choose exactly what I have to do on any given day… As Justin has said, the fun of life is in having so much to do that you actually get to turn down offers!

So, that being said, I hope to continue my description of San Diego tomorrow. A little information on my plans though – I intend to join a number of interns and watch “Troy” at the La Jolla Village Center. I haven’t heard anything great about this movie and am bracing myself for another mediocre, blood filled 2 hour debacle. I hope to be proven wrong, but I have a deep suspicion that I’ll enjoy Shrek 2 a lot more!

Oh yeah, and Van Helsing was a bad, bad movie

Comments

  1. The_Voice - May 20, 2004 @ 03:51

    Troy was 2.5 hours of good action, mediocre story, and great acting by Brad Pitt and Eric Bana. That’s about it.

    Shrek 2 WILL be better :)

  2. Allen George - May 20, 2004 @ 21:53

    I disagree.

    The battle scenes in Braveheart and Gladiator felt much more realistic. The story line went _way_ past mediocre. Brad Pitt was IMO quite wooden…

    All in all, I didn’t enjoy the movie. Can’t you just tell ;-)

  3. The_Voice - May 21, 2004 @ 07:43

    Oh, no doubt the action was more realistic in Gladiator (I didn’t care for the action in Braveheart), and Gladiator was overall a FAR superior film, but then, one of my qualifications for good action is SUPER action. If I wanted to see realistic action, I’d see something that wasn’t adverstised as “based on the legend; part myth, part history” cause, yeah, unrealistic as the one-on-one battles were, they KICKED @$$.

    Tsk, you probaby didn’t read any of my comments about Troy in my blog, either ;)

  4. the rebel - May 21, 2004 @ 16:33

    Some of the people who wrote the reviews for “Troy” are absolute DUMB ASS. That is probably because they are american. Odeyssey and Iliad are not the most ancient epical poems. Gilgamesh is. Not that I want to show off, but it bugs me to no end when pepole who write for USA daily and Times Do NOT DO research ahead of time.

    Anyhoo, if any of you are interested, you should go watch Michael Moore’s Farenheit 911…

    very insightfull film

  5. Allen George - May 25, 2004 @ 05:11

    Honestly though, what do we expect? After all, they’re writing for USA Today et. al. After reading through USA Today while I was here I was dismayed at the quality of the writing in general and the superficiality with which they covered events in general. It was dismaying to realize that a daily that is distributed _nationally_ did not have more in-depth/informative writing.

    I don’t know which ‘Times’ you’re talking about – I assume the New York one. That’s more troubling because I’ve always been of the opinion that they were a more ‘meaty’ newspaper.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published / Required fields are marked *