Greg Smith at Serial Consign has a great review – “Open World, Locked City” – of a video game entitled Prototype:

I had the opportunity to spend a few hours playing the game earlier this week and the experience left me a combination of numb and puzzled. The plot revolves around Alex Mercer, a young amnesiac infected with a weapons-grade genetic enhancements that ties him to the outbreak of a related lethal virus. The tone is dire and the game is set in a faithful reproduction of Manhattan, albeit post-quarantine, overrun with mutants and military contractors and rendered in a style that speaks to the cinematography of Children of Men and 28 Days Later. As is the case with most open world games, while the plot is not worth speaking of, the level design and gameplay are.

Greg asks”Does Prototype bring anything novel to the table in terms of playable urban space?” His answer: “Yes, there are some wild opportunities for movement and battle within this game.”

Go read the full article.

Only if your politicians are less intelligent than South Park characters, that is. Thanks to Tom Ricks for pointing out the silliness for what it really is. On Tom’s condescension? I’m reminded of this little episode Canadians are fond of mentioning any time the issue of northern timidity comes up.

I’ve been giving some more thought recently to framing and the problem of militant sanctuary. It’s the end of a long day right now, so I’ll save the longer version for another time. The short version: the angle I want to pursue is that political views of sanctuary may have been, in part, symptomatic of an evangelical trend in foreign policy and military conduct. Recent coverage of intelligence reports embossed with biblical quotes, proselytizing at Baghram air base, troops dressing up their actions in crusader-rap symbolism  all suggest as much. So does this book. As it turns out, some of what Harper’s covered in its last issue was reported way back in the dark ages of 2005. It’s an angle I hadn’t previously considered, except insofar as it may have shaped the sort of narrow worldview we’ve come to associate with the Rumsfeld/Wolfowitz era. But the language of sanctuary, I would think, might have a particular resonance for those whose inclinations tend toward this sort of thing. Something to think about; at least, it’s part of the story yet to be told.

This, from Annalee Neewitz at io9, on the work in which Czech playwright Karel Chapek coined the term robot:

Rumor has it that production has begun on a film version of R.U. R., the Czech play where the word “robot” was invented. It’s about genetic engineering and robot rebellion, and it could be the best robot movie ever.

R.U.R. stands for “Rossum’s Universal Robots,” and it’s about a company that figures out how to manufacture synthetic humans. They’re called robots, but in fact they’re more like synthetic biological beings – and eventually they revolt against their masters.

This isn’t the first time that R. U. R. has been made into a film – there is also a 1930s version – but it’s the first modern version. Director James Kerwin is said to be aiming for release of the movie in 2011. Kerwin’s previous film, Yesterday Was A Lie, played at both Sundance Film Festival and San Diego Comic Con – how’s that for a mix of inde cred and scifi cred?

My hope is that Kerwin will bring back the idea of synthetic biology in this adaptation, which seems far more futuristic than mere metal men.

See the official movie site here.

Between this and Purefold (see official site), looks like a return of the empathy/what-you-see-isn’t-what-you-get theme.