It wasn’t long after I opened my original Xbox that I had it softmodded, bent to my every whim. Things like EvolutionX and UnleashX, replacement dashboards for Microsoft’s own implementation, made the world of homebrew gaming and software incredibly easy, and yet was still powerful enough to satisfy users like myself. It was only a matter of time until XBMC was released.

Xbox Media Center, or XBMC for short, was the swiss army knife for media on the Xbox. It grew from a jack of all trades player, to a fully fledged dashboard, capable of launching apps, games, FTP capabilites, and streaming. It was a completely robust solution, and is of the best TV-capable media centers out there to this day.

Of course, it’s no wonder that people would want to replicate the software’s success on home PCs. XBMC was actually ported to both OS X and Windows a few years ago. Yet, it lacked many of the features and stabilty that made the Xbox version so succesful. But now, there’s Boxee.

While I just started playing with it last week, Boxee essentially takes the PC port of XBMC, and turns it into what they claim is the first “social network” capable media player. Think a media center with the (arguably) best parts of social network platforms like Facebook. It’s a system where, as you and your friends build a catalog of music, movies and TV, Boxee will make reccomendations to you, based on what your friends may be watching or listening. It’s a slick system, and one that has the potential to turn the personal enjoyment of media into a much more social experience.

Expect a nice big review near week’s end, one I have a chance to hook it up to my HDTV, in all Boxee’s 1080p glory!

Canadians always seem to get the short end of the stick when it comes to streaming video. It’s a frustrating situation the US networks put us in, wherein, Canadians have access to US stations over television, but are then blocked for any content streamed over the internet. The peculiar thing is that the content in question isn’t anything different than what is already displayed on TV – in fact, networks have mainly used streaming as a way to provide viewers with on-demand viewing of their television content. Of course, if we’re to believe the networks, the way in which we access this content apparently makes a big difference.

Enough of a difference, in fact, that the world of internet streaming has essentially become a geographically defined walled garden. If we don’t live in the U.S, we don’t get access. It’s as simple as that.

Hulu: Watch your favourites, anytime. For free.

Streaming has never been terribly important to me, which is probably why geo-blocking doesn’t bug me all that much. If I want to watch some sort of television content on my laptop or xbox, I’d much rather torrent a higher quality version, with the added bonus, of not only being able to access it anytime, but anywhere. Or better yet, I’ll buy the DVD releases. Then again, part of my streaming aversion is probably because, until now, it has simply been too inaccessible for Canadian users to stream meaningful, good quality content.

In the US, you have Hulu, ABC, NBC, FOX, and even Joost for a while, who provide high-quality streaming content of nearly all their shows. Then there’s UK, which does much of the same for the BBC. It’s only recently that Canada networks, like Global and CTV, have started streaming what US networks have long provided.

Getting past the network imposed blocks isn’t impossible, but not terribly easy, either. It usually relies on fiddling with obscure proxies, many of which either don’t work, or painfully slow for streaming purposes. Frankly, I’m surprised I hadn’t heard of the latest method sooner. I could blame that, in part, upon my nonchalant attitude towards streaming, but I still feel as if a little of my geek credibility has died inside.

AnchorFree is essentially a glorified VPN network, which not only provides private, but anonymous browsing, making it extremely difficult to identify where exactly a user is truly accessing from. While the intention is to protect and obfuscate your internet usage, particularly when browsing from a public place, this anonymity means that Hulu is only a click away for Canadian users. This certainly isn’t the first sort of service to allow unfettered access to blocked content; a similar service has existed for Chinese internet users for years, allowing them to subvert the so-called Great Firewall of China. Yet, while these methods required a host PC to be set up in a country specifically with unrestricted access, AnchorFree takes removes the troubles of finding a willing host. Install the software, connect through your favourite browser, and watch as geo-blocks crumble beneath your virtual feet.

At the very least, it means I can enjoy the latest in British television – without being anywhere near my TV.

The fifth season of Lost premiered not even half an hour ago, and it was an interesting episode. Not entirely what I was hoping for, an a little lackluster, to be honest. Alas, a couple observations regarding the first episode…

This has been happening for a while now, but it’s beginning to reach a maddening point. As viewers become more desperate for answers, J.J Abrams seems to have developed this tendency to place some sort of strange revelation near the beginning of the episode, while not really providing anything else of value for the rest of the hour. Case in point, the episode started off with what appeared to be an early look at the Dharma initiative, featuring none other than Dr. Hallowax filming a station orientation video. But the intriguing bit was who else we got to see in passing – Dr. Daniel Faraday, the scientist who seemingly understands a great deal regarding the effect time has upon the island, was seen during the construction of one of DHARMA’s stations. It’s an interesting revelation, but one that only serves to introduce more questions into the island’s already convoluted timeline.

Of particular annoyance was that the episode really failed to answer much more than we already learned at the end of last season. We’ve already established that everyone needs to go back to the island. We’ve already established no one trusts Ben. We’ve already established that something’s fishy with their attempts to return, and that John Locke’s seemingly dead body is of particular importance. Really, the entire episode simply felt like more of a refresher, which, as usual, introduced far more questions than answers.

What I did find interesting was a breif scene involving a woman we’ve encountered before. When Desmond first experienced his strange, time-based flashbacks, he met an older, white-haired woman who warned him of the futility of trying to change the past. This time, we’re introduced to her in Ben’s company. Interestingly enough, it’s not Ben who’s calling the shots, but her in this situation, perhaps providing some indication as to who’s clearly in charge. Also peculiar is the location in which she’s found; while Ben lights candles in a church hall, the white haired woman appears to be toiling away at calculations, in a technologically laden room very similar to one of the island’s hatches. It’s another example of DHARMA technology and influence existing outside of the island, but raises the ever-present question of how exactly it came to be in the first place.

Overall, it was a premiere that seemed to recognize the dire need to set things up more than anything. There was no jarring opening or relevation, like previous seasons, and the pacing was near-schizophrenic, as the episode’s plot not only jumped between the two groups of survivors, but a multitude of timelines as well. While not impressed for the time being, here’s hoping the ever-approaching end of the series gives viewers the answers they want sooner, rather than later.

Four-toed statue, anyone?

While LCD TV’s have grown hugely popular over the past couple years, their one major flaw is with regards to motion blur. You see, unlike a conventional TV, or plasma display, the refresh rate of an LCD screen depends on how fast the liquid crystals can be convinced to change colours. While the technology has gotten better in recent years, it’s still necessary for consumers to pay close attention to the refresh rate listed on any potential TV; numbers can range from as low as 2ms, to 15ms and higher. In this case, the lower number is definitely better.

Regardless, most people will notice that, when compared to more conventional TVs, this issue with refresh rates creates a bit of an annoying side effect, seen as motion blur. Sports, as a good example, usually look fine on conventional CRTs, or even plasma technology. But subject an LCD screen to a fast moving puck or ball, and you can easily see the problem in question.

In the interests of developing a solution, a number of TV manufacturers have introduced their own sets of motion-smart televisions, usually reliant on a feature dubbed 120hz displays. Sony, in particular, has an implementation known as MotionFlow, which is present in my current 47″ model. What the technology does is essentially double the frame rate of conventional film or television content, using interpolation to add extra frames to create what is supposed to be a smoother image. According to Sony’s own site…

“Not one, but two new images are added to the action, creating powerfully sharp images displayed at an astonishing 120 frames per second. You won’t miss a single detail of sporting action.

And now films and cartoons shot at 24 frames per second are made better too as Motionflow 120 inserts five new images, getting rid of any annoying judder or blur. What you’re left with is a superior reproduction of the original. You simply won’t be able to tear yourself away.”

You can even adjust the level of MotionFlow control, which is changes the extent of which images are added and processed in the creation of the final product. Yet, there’s a very large and glaring problem in this sort of fix.

When studies were conducted by a number of large TV manufacturers, the results indicated that viewers were extremely impressed by the way in which content filmed with an HD camera was displayed. Of course, this would mean convincing Hollywood to abandon their traditional 35mm lenses in favour of HD-specific cameras – a daunting and unlikely scenario. By incorporating technology like Sony’s MotionFlow, manufacturers could work to achieve the same sort of effect with current material, with the hopes of providing viewers a similar picture to that of HD-filmed content.

Of course, the results aren’t as good as one is led to believe. Films are shot in 24fps for a reason, and directors take notice of all the quirks of filming for such a format, including the speed at which the camera can be panned and zoomed. By taking content purposely filmed at such a speed, and increasing the frame rate by a huge degree, the result is an image that looks wholly unnatural. The one thing myself, and others, have noticed, is that many films viewed with MotionFlow technology turned on simply look too unnatural. While attempting to create a viewing experience that mimics the smoothness and quality of the natural eye, the end result is actually a film that looks almost too smooth, and far different from what the directors intended, and viewers expect.

Case in point, I tried watching Stanley Kubrick’s 2001: A Space Odyssey last night. While an excellent movie, the addition of MotionFlow technology simply turned many of the space sequences into a distraction, since all my attention was focused on determining what exactly was wrong. Once I realized my TV was playing games with my beloved 24fps, turning off what was otherwise supposed to be a useful innovation, actually made things better.

Further reading: Home Theatre Magazine has an excellent article on the topic of 120Hz which helped me understand things a little better. Check it out here.

If there was ever a man to own my soul, that man would be producer/director J.J Abrams. Ever since the release of LOST almost five years ago, his creation has acted as a televised IV drip in my life, forcing me back every week for more. It’s a strange relationship, in actuality; LOST is a show that’s often as frustrating as it is enthralling, despite its penchant for prompting more questions than it answers.

At this point, the series’ end is almost completely mapped out, or so we’re told. Somewhere amongst the confusion and disappointment of season three, the writers realised that their “write-it-as-we-go-along” approach really wasn’t going to cut it; all the plot lines had to converge somewhere. Thus, three remaining seasons were announced, giving viewers an end in sight to the madness, and more tantalizing hope for a coherent resolution.

After all, we still don’t know why a tropical island needed polar bears, anyways.

The fact that the series has effectively been put on autopilot means that Abrams can devote his attention to other side projects: last year’s Cloverfield, the soon to be released Star Trek prequel, and more recently, Fringe.

Fringe can best be described as a cross between X-Files and LOST, with a little bit of CSI thrown in for good measure. FBI agent Olivia Dunham is teamed with dubious scientist Walter Bishop, and his reluctant son Peter, tasked with exploring a number of strange occurrences, later revealed to be part of something called “the pattern”. Unsurprisingly, each one of these occurrences deals with some sort of fringe science, ranging from telepathy to levitation, and in some cases, genetic mutation.

In many ways, the show is a nice change from the oft-convoluted plot lines of LOST. While there is still an over arcing story line, which draws many of the strange occurrences encountered by Dunham and the team into a more coherent fashion, it’s ultimately not a prerequisite to enjoy the show. Each episode, for the most part, is easily enjoyable on its own, working in a standalone nature much similar to the X-Files and it’s “monster-of-the-week” approach.

Yet, in my opinion, there is one element which will truly drive the series’ success for years to come: the character of Walter Bishop. For a series that delves quite frequently into the realm of science fiction, Bishop is the perfect foil for all things fringe. Put into a mental institution decades ago, for reasons not yet entirely clear, Walter Bishop is, at the same time, endearing, forgetful, and utterly ignorant; regularly, he is shown forgetting names, dates, even basic facts regarding his task at hand. Yet, while his apparent mental illness is proves to be Bishop’s greatest weakness, it is the show’s greatest strength. The fact that the viewer is never quite sure what is locked inside Bishop’s mind means that the writers have an almost limitless arsenal of new cases and conundrums for Bishop to solve, the answers simply hidden in the recesses of his brain.

In a sense, Walter Bishop is the ultimate deus ex machina – and one that doesn’t come across as particularly unrealistic or contrived either.

With over three-quarters of the season left, I’m intrigued to see where Fringe is going – and duly hoping that it proves to be a far less frustrating experience than it’s LOST counterpart.

———————————————-

For anyone that cares, I’ll actually be interviewing Jon Lachonis, better known by his internet alias DocArzt, at some point this week. Responsible for launching one of the first LOST – and eventually, Fringe – fan sites, Lachonis has been a reliable source for LOST news, spoilers and interviews throughout the series’ existence. His website can be found here.