Say whatever you want about this guy, but he sure doesn't get rattled. I still say he'll have his own talk show somewhere down the line. His week long media blitz has been one long audition, and he has a Larry King interview coming up tonight. I don't know who his agent and PR rep is, but they're pretty good.
Honestly: is this the face of a man about to lose his job as Governor? He was taping this while his impeachment trial was in progress back in Illinois.
Saturday, January 31, 2009
That Makes 10
I haven't watched women's tennis since Graf retired and the women began grunting and screaming with every backhand delivery. Still, a 10th Grand Slam title deserves a mention.
Serena Williams beat Dinara Safina in straight sets for her 4th Aussie Open title, and 10th Grand Slam overall.
Photo: AP
Serena Williams beat Dinara Safina in straight sets for her 4th Aussie Open title, and 10th Grand Slam overall.
Photo: AP
Congratulations, Iraq
Shhh. Hear that? That would be the sound of Iraqi men and women putting their votes in a ballot box. Alas, because it is going well, no one wants to talk about it.Today was Iraq's nationwide election for provincial councils. 14,000 people are running for office, including roughly 4000 women. The polls were kept open an extra hour because of turnout.
What I admire about the Iraqis is that they've always shown off their purple fingers, even a few years ago when times were bad. The ink takes days to wash off. That's bravery, to literally paint yourself as someone seeking democracy in a land where people could kill you for it.
The BBC report tries desperately to find something, anything, to show that things are exploding. Instead, they come up with a shooting where one man may have been killed or two injured (and they don't mention the motive behind the shooting; could have been hold-up for all we know), and a few mortar rounds going off in Tikrit. Other than that, one of the correspondents says that the polling stations have a "holiday atmosphere."
This bit caught my eye:
The head of the Iraqi electoral commission in Anbar province - a centre of the Sunni resistance to the US occupation - said he was expecting a 60% turnout.
Fewer than 2% voted in the 2005 election, with the result that Shia and Kurdish parties took control of parliament.
Some Sunnis, like Khaled al-Azemi, said the boycott last time had been a mistake.
"We lost a lot because we didn't vote and we saw the result - sectarian violence" he told the BBC.
"That's why we want to vote now to avoid the mistakes of the past."
That is huge. Huge: "We lost a lot because we didn't vote."
As you can see in this clip, Iraqis have taken to democracy so much that they've managed to make the election ballots too complicated for a Florida voter:
Photos: Getty
Short Cuts
I was glancing through Rotten Tomatoes and saw a bunch of movies which I forgot to review. I love writing movie reviews, even for dreadful flicks, but sometimes a movie is so banal and stupid that it isn't worth the time.
A few of these movies are good ones, most of them are bad. Looking back, I can't believe what a horrible crop of movies came out of the studios last year.
My Bloody Valentine (3D): 3D effects aren't bad and the story's okay, but it's nothing you haven't seen before in a slasher flick.
Defiance: Better than people are saying. Daniel Craig is all right, except for a hiccup at the end which makes you wonder if your hero's that heroic.
The Reader: Another movie that looks at the Holocaust. It's up for Best Picture, but only because 2008 didn't have better movies to offer. This one's okay, but not memorable. Kate Winslet is getting a Best Actress nod for this, I'm assuming because she had the guts to play the first half of the movie naked.
Valkyrie: Pretty slow and boring for a Bryan Singer/Tom Cruise flick. It tries to make the plot to kill Hitler seem at lot more intriguing than it really was. The real plotters were pretty disorganized and muffed the thing from the get-go. Unfortunately, the movie can't avoid showing that. In other words, the plotters sucked, and people who suck don't make great heroes.
Doubt: If there's a priest in a movie, then you know that someone will either need an exorcism, or get accused of feeling up an altar boy. This movie's about the latter. Good performances by all of the leads. It won't blow you away, but it's worth watching. Page me when someone makes a story about a priest who doesn't banish a demon, but is still a good guy nonetheless.
Seven Pounds: Not a bad Will Smith touchy-feely vehicle. It got hammered unfairly by the critics for being awful, but I thought it was just regular fare. Your girlfriend will like it if she's home on a Saturday afternoon while you're out fishing.
Bangkok Dangerous: Perhaps the worst film of the decade. I left it halfway through. A good toilet seat would be worth more than this. How does Nicholas Cage end up in these stinkers every other year?
Tropic Thunder: A fun romp as Hollywood pokes fun at itself without being sanctimonious. Robert Downey Jr. is great. As with all comedies, the only test is laughter. I laughed.
Ghost Town: A British dude acts like a jerk, meets a ghost, acts like a jerk, meets a girl, and becomes Mr. Nice Guy. Just okay.
Pineapple Express: Funny in parts, but not a lot of parts.
Incredible Hulk: Who cares?
Hamlet 2: Fairly lame. Once again, filmmakers pat themselves on the back for being brave enough to make fun of Jesus Christ. Uh-huh. But not so brave to stand up for cartoonists that receive death threats for drawing pictures of Mohammed, hmmm?
Traitor: Not bad. Don Cheadle is fine. Ending is a dead giveaway.
Burn After Reading: Funnier than I thought it would be, and it helped me forgive the Coen brothers a little for the backstab of No Country For Old Men.
Step Brothers: Funny, but not hilarious.
Death Race: Good rental if you want to see things blow up and people get run over. The original was better. This is one of those strange movies where good actors like Joan Allen and Ian McShane show up and you go, "Why the hell are Joan Allen and Ian McShane in this movie?" And, because they're good actors, they actually make the thing semi-decent.
Swing Vote: Hollywood again tackles politics and makes running a country seem as simple as getting in touch with yourself and listening to your smartass 12-year-old daughter.
Righteous Kill: Al Pacino. Robert DeNiro. How can you miss? Easy. Put them in a movie called Righteous Kill. They should have left it at Heat.
Max Payne: Utterly awful. Effects are okay.
Eagle Eye: Hollywood still thinks the US government uses computers to control every streetlight, and yes, we're all going to die when the computers take over.
The Boy in the Striped Pajamas: A fictional tale about a German boy who befriends a Jewish prisoner through the barbed wire of a concentration camp. Very good, simple movie. I'm stunned that it only took $9 million at the box office. It deserved to be seen, but missed an audience.
Duchess: Quite good. The set design and costumes are great, the acting's okay.
Wanted: Regular action stuff with lots of CGI. Angelina Jolie's in it, so it's worth a look.
A few of these movies are good ones, most of them are bad. Looking back, I can't believe what a horrible crop of movies came out of the studios last year.
My Bloody Valentine (3D): 3D effects aren't bad and the story's okay, but it's nothing you haven't seen before in a slasher flick.
Defiance: Better than people are saying. Daniel Craig is all right, except for a hiccup at the end which makes you wonder if your hero's that heroic.
The Reader: Another movie that looks at the Holocaust. It's up for Best Picture, but only because 2008 didn't have better movies to offer. This one's okay, but not memorable. Kate Winslet is getting a Best Actress nod for this, I'm assuming because she had the guts to play the first half of the movie naked.
Valkyrie: Pretty slow and boring for a Bryan Singer/Tom Cruise flick. It tries to make the plot to kill Hitler seem at lot more intriguing than it really was. The real plotters were pretty disorganized and muffed the thing from the get-go. Unfortunately, the movie can't avoid showing that. In other words, the plotters sucked, and people who suck don't make great heroes.
Doubt: If there's a priest in a movie, then you know that someone will either need an exorcism, or get accused of feeling up an altar boy. This movie's about the latter. Good performances by all of the leads. It won't blow you away, but it's worth watching. Page me when someone makes a story about a priest who doesn't banish a demon, but is still a good guy nonetheless.
Seven Pounds: Not a bad Will Smith touchy-feely vehicle. It got hammered unfairly by the critics for being awful, but I thought it was just regular fare. Your girlfriend will like it if she's home on a Saturday afternoon while you're out fishing.
Bangkok Dangerous: Perhaps the worst film of the decade. I left it halfway through. A good toilet seat would be worth more than this. How does Nicholas Cage end up in these stinkers every other year?
Tropic Thunder: A fun romp as Hollywood pokes fun at itself without being sanctimonious. Robert Downey Jr. is great. As with all comedies, the only test is laughter. I laughed.
Ghost Town: A British dude acts like a jerk, meets a ghost, acts like a jerk, meets a girl, and becomes Mr. Nice Guy. Just okay.
Pineapple Express: Funny in parts, but not a lot of parts.
Incredible Hulk: Who cares?
Hamlet 2: Fairly lame. Once again, filmmakers pat themselves on the back for being brave enough to make fun of Jesus Christ. Uh-huh. But not so brave to stand up for cartoonists that receive death threats for drawing pictures of Mohammed, hmmm?
Traitor: Not bad. Don Cheadle is fine. Ending is a dead giveaway.
Burn After Reading: Funnier than I thought it would be, and it helped me forgive the Coen brothers a little for the backstab of No Country For Old Men.
Step Brothers: Funny, but not hilarious.
Death Race: Good rental if you want to see things blow up and people get run over. The original was better. This is one of those strange movies where good actors like Joan Allen and Ian McShane show up and you go, "Why the hell are Joan Allen and Ian McShane in this movie?" And, because they're good actors, they actually make the thing semi-decent.
Swing Vote: Hollywood again tackles politics and makes running a country seem as simple as getting in touch with yourself and listening to your smartass 12-year-old daughter.
Righteous Kill: Al Pacino. Robert DeNiro. How can you miss? Easy. Put them in a movie called Righteous Kill. They should have left it at Heat.
Max Payne: Utterly awful. Effects are okay.
Eagle Eye: Hollywood still thinks the US government uses computers to control every streetlight, and yes, we're all going to die when the computers take over.
The Boy in the Striped Pajamas: A fictional tale about a German boy who befriends a Jewish prisoner through the barbed wire of a concentration camp. Very good, simple movie. I'm stunned that it only took $9 million at the box office. It deserved to be seen, but missed an audience.
Duchess: Quite good. The set design and costumes are great, the acting's okay.
Wanted: Regular action stuff with lots of CGI. Angelina Jolie's in it, so it's worth a look.
Friday, January 30, 2009
How Do You Like Me Now?
Ahead of his trip to Canada, Barack Obama has some news for Canadian steel workers: the shop is closing.
From the CBC:
There is unsettling news for Canada in U.S. President Barack Obama's economic stimulus bill, or at least in the version approved Wednesday night by the House of Representatives.
It says that steel used in public projects under the $819-billion US plan must be made in the United States, an idea likely to cause trade disputes and block sales by Canadian mills.
The piece goes on to say that Canada and the EU are getting leery of the "buy American" portion of the bill, which could lead to a trade war, sending prices up and costing jobs.
Specifics are a funny thing. Nobody wanted to rain on the Hope and Change parade because it all sounded so good.
Hope and Change are words. They're fantasy. They don't cost a nickle. Now, ten days after the man became president, maybe the reality is starting to sink in. Honestly, did you ever stop to ask yourself what the junior senator really meant by change, or did you just take it for granted that it meant, "Nicer than George W. Bush?"
From the CBC:
There is unsettling news for Canada in U.S. President Barack Obama's economic stimulus bill, or at least in the version approved Wednesday night by the House of Representatives.
It says that steel used in public projects under the $819-billion US plan must be made in the United States, an idea likely to cause trade disputes and block sales by Canadian mills.
The piece goes on to say that Canada and the EU are getting leery of the "buy American" portion of the bill, which could lead to a trade war, sending prices up and costing jobs.
Specifics are a funny thing. Nobody wanted to rain on the Hope and Change parade because it all sounded so good.
Hope and Change are words. They're fantasy. They don't cost a nickle. Now, ten days after the man became president, maybe the reality is starting to sink in. Honestly, did you ever stop to ask yourself what the junior senator really meant by change, or did you just take it for granted that it meant, "Nicer than George W. Bush?"
Hollywood Hurting
The movie business is feeling the heat:
Jan. 30 (Bloomberg) -- Plunging DVD sales threaten to reduce profit for studio owners Time Warner Inc.,Walt Disney Co.,Viacom Inc. and News Corp., and may force them to write down the value of movies, analysts said.
Fourth-quarter shipments fell 32 percent in the U.S. and Canada to 453.6 million DVDs, according to Los Angeles-based Digital Entertainment Group. The drop is the biggest since the industry-funded researcher started keeping track in 1997.
The decline is being fueled by viewer shifts toward rental services such as Netflix Inc., the U.S. recession and technology that makes it easier to stream Web videos to televisions.
It doesn't take a genius to see what's happening. If it's in print, on video, or on CD, it's on the web in a flash, sometimes even before the media is released to stores. The three big media industries of film, music, and print are taking it on the chin because people can find it faster and cheaper on their computers.
As for film, we have to take off our blinders when it comes to theatre owners. Whenever movie grosses are posted online, people cry foul about overpriced movie stars and greedy producers. That may be true, but it shouldn't be forgotten that theatres take half of all ticket money. The $6.00 bag of popcorn and $5.25 cup of Coke are pure gravy.
When you go to the movies and spend an arm and a leg, remember that it's the theatre taking the majority of your cash, not the movie studios. Half-price Tuesday and cheap matinees are a thing of the past. When a movie is presented in 3D, the theatre charges an extra three dollars for the funny glasses. Even more insipid are the new "VIP" theatres, where the cost of a single ticket reaches $17 and more. The studio has no say whether a movie goes in that "VIP" theatre or not. It's purely the theatre owner's decision, where he decides which new release he's going to gouge you on from week to week.
Movies used to be fairly inexpensive fun. Now they're a critical spending decision. Not one theatre in my area has held a discount special during these supposed hard times. If you're a 16-year-old high school student and want to take someone on a date, you stand to spend $40.00 for a flick and some popcorn. In the "VIP," it's more like $60.00. That's approaching live-theatre-with-an-English-accent prices.
Whenever I hear theatre owners whining about online rentals and bootlegs, one thought comes to mind: "Get bent."
Jan. 30 (Bloomberg) -- Plunging DVD sales threaten to reduce profit for studio owners Time Warner Inc.,Walt Disney Co.,Viacom Inc. and News Corp., and may force them to write down the value of movies, analysts said.
Fourth-quarter shipments fell 32 percent in the U.S. and Canada to 453.6 million DVDs, according to Los Angeles-based Digital Entertainment Group. The drop is the biggest since the industry-funded researcher started keeping track in 1997.
The decline is being fueled by viewer shifts toward rental services such as Netflix Inc., the U.S. recession and technology that makes it easier to stream Web videos to televisions.
It doesn't take a genius to see what's happening. If it's in print, on video, or on CD, it's on the web in a flash, sometimes even before the media is released to stores. The three big media industries of film, music, and print are taking it on the chin because people can find it faster and cheaper on their computers.
As for film, we have to take off our blinders when it comes to theatre owners. Whenever movie grosses are posted online, people cry foul about overpriced movie stars and greedy producers. That may be true, but it shouldn't be forgotten that theatres take half of all ticket money. The $6.00 bag of popcorn and $5.25 cup of Coke are pure gravy.
When you go to the movies and spend an arm and a leg, remember that it's the theatre taking the majority of your cash, not the movie studios. Half-price Tuesday and cheap matinees are a thing of the past. When a movie is presented in 3D, the theatre charges an extra three dollars for the funny glasses. Even more insipid are the new "VIP" theatres, where the cost of a single ticket reaches $17 and more. The studio has no say whether a movie goes in that "VIP" theatre or not. It's purely the theatre owner's decision, where he decides which new release he's going to gouge you on from week to week.
Movies used to be fairly inexpensive fun. Now they're a critical spending decision. Not one theatre in my area has held a discount special during these supposed hard times. If you're a 16-year-old high school student and want to take someone on a date, you stand to spend $40.00 for a flick and some popcorn. In the "VIP," it's more like $60.00. That's approaching live-theatre-with-an-English-accent prices.
Whenever I hear theatre owners whining about online rentals and bootlegs, one thought comes to mind: "Get bent."
Maybe A Leader
House Republicans voted unanimously against the $825 billion (and counting) stimulus package. That was the only way they could go. If any of them had voted for it, their conservative credentials would have been shot. 11 Democrats also voted against it.
I was interested to see this paragraph in The Daily Beast. Maybe, just maybe, there is a Republican in Washington that has some backbone and some philosophical integrity. It will take more rants like this to overcome the debacle of last year's "rescue package," but it's a start.
The day before the crucial vote in the House, Minority Leader John Boehner told his troops that the Republican Party is no longer a bureaucracy. "He took us by the throat and told us, ‘You're no longer the majority, stop acting like it,’" a senior Republican told me about the run up to the vote. “‘If you've got an idea, get it on MSNBC. This is an entrepreneurial insurgency.’ He was kicking the ball around. He wants everyone involved. If there's an amendment, he told us to offer it. If you have 48 seconds for YouTube, get it up there. Get busy and resist in every instance.”
I was interested to see this paragraph in The Daily Beast. Maybe, just maybe, there is a Republican in Washington that has some backbone and some philosophical integrity. It will take more rants like this to overcome the debacle of last year's "rescue package," but it's a start.
The day before the crucial vote in the House, Minority Leader John Boehner told his troops that the Republican Party is no longer a bureaucracy. "He took us by the throat and told us, ‘You're no longer the majority, stop acting like it,’" a senior Republican told me about the run up to the vote. “‘If you've got an idea, get it on MSNBC. This is an entrepreneurial insurgency.’ He was kicking the ball around. He wants everyone involved. If there's an amendment, he told us to offer it. If you have 48 seconds for YouTube, get it up there. Get busy and resist in every instance.”
Taken - Review
Director: Pierre MorelWriters: Luc Besson/Robert Kamen
Starring: Liam Neeson
Runtime: 91 minutes
I've been keeping my eye on this movie for a while. It was released overseas a long time ago. Unusually, it is now being released in North America after its run in the rest of the world is already over.
Since February is the dumping ground of lame films, I have to figure that this flick was being saved by the studio to get them through the winter blahs. I hope that was their strategy and they weren't trying to bury this movie, because it's very good.
I managed to catch it a couple of months back, and two thoughts struck me: "US and Canadian critics will hate this movie. Audiences, on the other hand, will love it."
This ties in with a conversation I had with a friend a few weeks ago. We were chatting about Charlie Chaplin for some reason and he said, "What's with this year's awful, depressing movies?"
I asked him what he meant and he gave a small rant about the Great Depression, and pointed out all of the hilarious comedies and spectacle movies from the '30s. I got his point. In tough times, studios shouldn't be releasing movies that make you feel even worse than the nightly news. People want to go to movies that will do what movies were always intended to do: entertain.
Taken is an entertaining picture. It's great. It is the best action movie I have seen since The Bourne Identity, and it easily trumps the last Bond picture, Quantum of Solace.I think the critics will hate Taken because it is what it is: an action movie. Being critics, they will judge it for what it is but miss the point completely: "mindless" will probably appear in a dozen of their reviews. Yes...and? It's an action movie.
The plot is linear and stripped down. There's no fascinating sub-plot, no mystery, no breathless fade-to-blacks that leave you pondering the meaning of life. Critics hate that. Nothing to talk about. The guy who designed the poster for Taken gives the whole game away. He writes a paragraph over Liam Neeson's gun-toting body: "I don't know who you are, but if you don't let my daughter go, I will find you. I will kill you."
When you read that on a movie poster, what are you expecting, Schindler's List II?
Liam Neeson plays Bryan. He's an ex-CIA guy who has a lovely daughter that wants to go to Paris. Reluctantly, he agrees to let her go, as long as she stays in touch the whole time. She lies and says no problem, then doesn't call, causing him a sleepless night. When she finally calls, it's to tell him that she's fine and...wait...there's someone in the apartment...they just grabbed Amanda...there's three or four of them...dad, what do I do?
Bryan knows the drill. He tells her very calmly that they are going to take her.
That phone call scene is very good. Neeson and Maggie Grace (as his daughter Kim) play it perfectly. It's got better drama than any of the big dramas out this year.I've always thought Neeson was an excellent actor, but he's now proven that he can be a believable middle-aged action hero, reminiscent of Harrison Ford. Sure, the movie has the usual fare of bad guys with bad aim, and one car chase, but Neeson kicks ass in this movie. I mean no-holds-barred ass. If you're feeling bad about your job, or your wife's giving you a hassle, or you think the politicians are jerks, or your mortgage is crap, or whatever the hell, then this movie is right up your alley. It is a revenge flick with a capital R.
The direction is good. You can even focus on Neeson's face for more than two seconds during a fight scene. Director Pierre Morel and screenwriters Luc Besson and Robert Kamen move it from A to Z in 90 minutes, but it feels more like five.
This is the first movie in a year that I made a point of seeing twice. In fact, given the choice between all of the Oscar nominees for "Best Picture" and Taken, I would see Taken a third time at the drop of a hat. If you're in the mood to see a good actor kick the hell out of the bad guys, you should at least see this movie once. Don't think, just enjoy.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
One Dollar Is a Tragedy, 900 Billion is a Statistic
$70 million for smoking cessation.
$335 million for prevention of STDs.
Why? Well, health care, of course!
I love the HC stuff. You can plug anything into it: "$20 billion for food stamps. You know, so people won't starve. $70 million to quit the butts, because people don't yet know smoking's bad for them. $335 million for sex ed, because people don't know that sex without a rubber is dangerous and they could end up at the doctor's office. $400 million for global warming research, because people could die in a drought next February. What's that? Oh, the $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts? Well, the way we see it, if people are looking at a sculpture made out of Coca-Cola cans and empty Snickers wrappers, at least they won't be outside getting run over by one of our new cars, which will cost you $600 million (which itself is on top of the $3 billion we already spend on cars every year, just don't tell anybody)."
I wonder if anyone knows had badly they're being taken? This is the biggest robbery in world history. $900,000,000,000.
I don't ever want to hear the argument that Bush's war cost too much dough. This "stimulus package" from the US government spends more than Iraq and Afghanistan combined, and it's supposed to be shelled out in just a couple of years. Obama's excuse: the $900 billion will create 3 million jobs over "the next few years." The next few years? Some stimulus plan. A real kick start.
I also don't want to hear about Palin being a dope ever again, while the Speaker of the House gets a pass. In this clip, the woman who wants 900 billion dollars makes Palin look like Socrates. Let's be real. If this person asked you for 10 cents and gave this as her excuse, would you give it her?
$335 million for prevention of STDs.
Why? Well, health care, of course!
I love the HC stuff. You can plug anything into it: "$20 billion for food stamps. You know, so people won't starve. $70 million to quit the butts, because people don't yet know smoking's bad for them. $335 million for sex ed, because people don't know that sex without a rubber is dangerous and they could end up at the doctor's office. $400 million for global warming research, because people could die in a drought next February. What's that? Oh, the $50 million for the National Endowment for the Arts? Well, the way we see it, if people are looking at a sculpture made out of Coca-Cola cans and empty Snickers wrappers, at least they won't be outside getting run over by one of our new cars, which will cost you $600 million (which itself is on top of the $3 billion we already spend on cars every year, just don't tell anybody)."
I wonder if anyone knows had badly they're being taken? This is the biggest robbery in world history. $900,000,000,000.
I don't ever want to hear the argument that Bush's war cost too much dough. This "stimulus package" from the US government spends more than Iraq and Afghanistan combined, and it's supposed to be shelled out in just a couple of years. Obama's excuse: the $900 billion will create 3 million jobs over "the next few years." The next few years? Some stimulus plan. A real kick start.
I also don't want to hear about Palin being a dope ever again, while the Speaker of the House gets a pass. In this clip, the woman who wants 900 billion dollars makes Palin look like Socrates. Let's be real. If this person asked you for 10 cents and gave this as her excuse, would you give it her?
Authors Of Their Own Demise
I saw this clip on Hot Air. It's a news story from 1981, where editors are punching stories into a computer, and a guy is receiving it over his phone line. This was long before email, internet, and website became part of the language. But it was the beginning of what would be known as online content.
Most comments on YouTube are pointing out the quaint hilarity of the story: the "Owns Home Computer" lower-third under the man's name is quite good. It's funny to think that owning a home computer was so unique that it was your sole reason for being on TV.
As for me, I like this line from an editor: "This is an experiment. We're trying to figure out what it's going to mean to us as editors and reporters, and what it means to the home user. And we're not in it to make money. We're probably not going to lose a lot..."
Ouch.
Talk about irony. Newspaper editors creating the first online content, only to find that 28 years later, online content is forcing massive layoffs in the newspaper business. Further to that, the editor's questions have been answered. What did it mean to the home user? An incredible amount of power and opinion in the form of blogging, giving them the ability to report on their own and vet the newspaper people. What did it mean for editors and reporters? Pink slips.
Here's another clip that's pretty good. This is Peter Mansbridge from the CBC: "...passing on cooking tips and gossip, night and day, through a computer network called 'Internet.'"
Sounds spooky, huh? Note that throughout the clip, there is no "the internet." It's all, "Internet." New and creepy.
Another interesting part is where the guy being interviewed (2:30) says that there's not a lot of personal attacks and cursing on "Internet." Man, are those days long gone. The way he describes the innocence and politeness of Internet's infancy is almost sad.
All this stuff looks funny now, but Lord knows what they'll be saying about us in twenty years. (Random aside: I don't know what's more interesting, looking back at the history of the net, or wondering if Mansbridge ever had hair).
Most comments on YouTube are pointing out the quaint hilarity of the story: the "Owns Home Computer" lower-third under the man's name is quite good. It's funny to think that owning a home computer was so unique that it was your sole reason for being on TV.
As for me, I like this line from an editor: "This is an experiment. We're trying to figure out what it's going to mean to us as editors and reporters, and what it means to the home user. And we're not in it to make money. We're probably not going to lose a lot..."
Ouch.
Talk about irony. Newspaper editors creating the first online content, only to find that 28 years later, online content is forcing massive layoffs in the newspaper business. Further to that, the editor's questions have been answered. What did it mean to the home user? An incredible amount of power and opinion in the form of blogging, giving them the ability to report on their own and vet the newspaper people. What did it mean for editors and reporters? Pink slips.
Here's another clip that's pretty good. This is Peter Mansbridge from the CBC: "...passing on cooking tips and gossip, night and day, through a computer network called 'Internet.'"
Sounds spooky, huh? Note that throughout the clip, there is no "the internet." It's all, "Internet." New and creepy.
Another interesting part is where the guy being interviewed (2:30) says that there's not a lot of personal attacks and cursing on "Internet." Man, are those days long gone. The way he describes the innocence and politeness of Internet's infancy is almost sad.
All this stuff looks funny now, but Lord knows what they'll be saying about us in twenty years. (Random aside: I don't know what's more interesting, looking back at the history of the net, or wondering if Mansbridge ever had hair).
The George and Bill Show
A couple of good ones from George Bush Sr. and Bill Clinton.
They've had an interesting relationship since Dubya asked them to work together on various humanitarian causes. One story I liked was when they were on plane that had only one bed. Clinton deferred to the elder statesman and slept on the floor, while Bush Sr. sacked out.
Here's the BBC, quoting Bush Sr. back in 2005. Dubya also made mention of it later.
"He decided ahead of time that we want President Bush to have the front room, which was heaven for me, because if I don't stretch out, lie flat, I really hurt my body these days ... [and] he was going to have the other room," he said.
Mr Clinton could have switched places with him and spent half the night on the bed but did not, he said, adding that the next morning he found the 58-year-old sound asleep on the floor.
"That was a very courteous thing," Mr Bush said, "very thoughtful, and that meant a great deal to me."
They've had an interesting relationship since Dubya asked them to work together on various humanitarian causes. One story I liked was when they were on plane that had only one bed. Clinton deferred to the elder statesman and slept on the floor, while Bush Sr. sacked out.
Here's the BBC, quoting Bush Sr. back in 2005. Dubya also made mention of it later.
"He decided ahead of time that we want President Bush to have the front room, which was heaven for me, because if I don't stretch out, lie flat, I really hurt my body these days ... [and] he was going to have the other room," he said.
Mr Clinton could have switched places with him and spent half the night on the bed but did not, he said, adding that the next morning he found the 58-year-old sound asleep on the floor.
"That was a very courteous thing," Mr Bush said, "very thoughtful, and that meant a great deal to me."
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
Worrisome Warming Watch
In case the Warm-mongering doesn't seem ridiculous enough, here's an interesting piece from Reuters. (The picture, from an unrelated incident, is a look at yesterday's balmy conditions in Kentucky).
A cruise ship carrying nearly 400 people has been stuck in thick ice in the St. Lawrence River in Eastern Canada for over a day, but passengers are nonetheless having a "festive" time, the company that owns the vessel said Tuesday.
The ship, CTMA-Vacancier, chartered by a group traveling from Montreal to the Gaspe Peninsula for a cross-country skiing trip to celebrate the 475th anniversary of the region's settlement, is now inching through the heavy ice, said Leonard Arsenault, a spokesman for MTMA Group.
A Canadian Coast Guard icebreaker that was already in the area tried to assist the ship, but was also having difficulty getting through the thick ice, Arsenault said.
AP Photo/Ed Reinke
Oscar Flashback - Lars and The Real Girl
Here's a look back at what I thought of Lars and the Real Girl. By any standard, I think it was the best picture of 2007. That only shows how out of touch I am, because the Academy didn't even nominate it (it got a Best Screenplay nod, but lost to Juno. Criminal).This is what I thought after seeing the film:
...This was the set-up that scared me away from the movie. I thought it was going to be a dumb retread of Weekend at Bernie's or some such, and that I would have to sit through an hour and a half of lame sex gags.
I could never have been so wrong.
The film is incredibly good, and I think it probably should have been up for the Best Picture Oscar last year, and that it should have won.
More...
Pick Youself Up, Dust Yourself Off...And Do Something
I took a spin around the horn and listened to the latest doom and gloom coming over the airwaves. In the US, they're getting ready to blow $850 billion, while in Canada the minority "conservative" government is itself set to throw a few dozen billion into the stratosphere (otherwise knows as "the economy").
The storyline in the US says that this money is needed now. Right now. Immediately, or we're finished! In Canada, the storyline is the same, except now they're highlighting how big the deficit is going to get.
News flash: when you beg for billions, then receive it, the guy that gave it to you just might run a deficit. Strange, I know, but that's the way it works.
Random aside: with all of the layoffs we're hearing about, why don't we ever hear about widescale government layoffs?
Anyway, I listened to a guy from the NDP say the Canadian government isn't spending enough on the unemployed, whom he calls "innocent victims." He says more money should be thrown at the problem, and didn't bother to compliment the government for extending unemployment benefits to 50 weeks. (Another random aside: remember when unemployment insurance was called UI because it was for unemployed citizens? Now it's called EI: Employment Insurance. A nice, sneaky little euphemism, right up there with changing the War Department to the Department of Defense).
Using the advice I've learned from Berry's Common Sense Economics degree, I decided to check out the wasteland that is the Canadian economy. To hear the government big spenders tell it, there's no jobs, nowhere.
Here's what I found in five minutes on craigslist. It's a pretty good smattering of job markets, and I only chose jobs that had a dollar figure instead of "depends on experience," as most job ads have (hint: salaries are negotiable).
When I hear that people have been out of work for months, or have "no hope" of getting a job without government intervention, I automatically think three things:
1) You're stubborn. You don't want to work in a different industry from the one that let you go.
2) You have an ego. You think you're worth big bucks, and don't want to do something that's "beneath" you, not realizing that starting at the bottom is sometimes the way to get to the big bucks.
3) You're lazy. You don't want to learn how to do something else.
You can scratch #3 if you're using unemployment benefits to learn a new craft, otherwise, forget it. My degree was in anthropology and I haven't dug up a sarcophagus in my life. In other words, you can learn through experience if you pick up the phone and try. Honestly.
Those are the only three answers for someone who is unemployed for months, unless they have a physical or mental disability, which is a different matter entirely.
There is no such thing as a "jobless economy." If a person has been laid off, their innocent victim status deteriorates with each day that goes by. After two months, they're not an innocent victim. They're just a person who's out of work. As Hero Obama would say, "Pick yourself up, dust yourself off, and begin the work of getting your ass in gear." Okay, so I paraphrased. In any case, I am tired of hearing that there are "no jobs," unless the person is saying, "There are no jobs I want to do."
To the want ads we go. There's hundreds of more jobs like these from a dozen different industries, on a dozen different websites.
Customer Service Representative- Full-time Permanent. Compensation: $33,000 to $35,000
Full Time Reception/Admin Needed ASAP. Compensation: $25k to $29K
RECEPTIONIST NEEDED. Compensation: Based on experience. Starting salary: $10/H
Support Clerk. $11 / hour + benefits.
Junior Accounting Associate/Customer Service FT Perm. Compensation: $30,000 - $32,000
Financial Analyst. Compensation: Pays up to $55K
Laboratory Supervisor. Compensation: Min 55,000
Junior Lab Analyst. Compensation: $30K annually
R & D Lab Tech. Compensation: 30-35k
cafe staff. Compensation: $9.00 + tips.
Face Painter/ Party Facilitator. Compensation: starting at $10/hour + tips
Security Officers. Compensation: $12 To $15.
Line / Prep Cook. Compensation: $11.00 - $12.00 per hour
Lawyer needed. Compensation: $200,00hr
Experienced Law Clerk. Compensation: based on experience $12 - $18/hr
Purchasing Coordinator. Compensation: $35-$40,000
Bilingual Health Records. Compensation: $50,000
Pharmacist. Compensation: $45/hr
Hair Salon Assistant. Compensation: $10.00/hr
Real Estate Professional Admin Assistant. Compensation: $15.00/hr (contract)
Customer service. Compensation: $9 - $15/hr
Director, Project Management. Compensation: 100-120K
Business Centre- Part Time support associate. Compensation: $13.00/hr
The storyline in the US says that this money is needed now. Right now. Immediately, or we're finished! In Canada, the storyline is the same, except now they're highlighting how big the deficit is going to get.
News flash: when you beg for billions, then receive it, the guy that gave it to you just might run a deficit. Strange, I know, but that's the way it works.
Random aside: with all of the layoffs we're hearing about, why don't we ever hear about widescale government layoffs?
Anyway, I listened to a guy from the NDP say the Canadian government isn't spending enough on the unemployed, whom he calls "innocent victims." He says more money should be thrown at the problem, and didn't bother to compliment the government for extending unemployment benefits to 50 weeks. (Another random aside: remember when unemployment insurance was called UI because it was for unemployed citizens? Now it's called EI: Employment Insurance. A nice, sneaky little euphemism, right up there with changing the War Department to the Department of Defense).
Using the advice I've learned from Berry's Common Sense Economics degree, I decided to check out the wasteland that is the Canadian economy. To hear the government big spenders tell it, there's no jobs, nowhere.
Here's what I found in five minutes on craigslist. It's a pretty good smattering of job markets, and I only chose jobs that had a dollar figure instead of "depends on experience," as most job ads have (hint: salaries are negotiable).
When I hear that people have been out of work for months, or have "no hope" of getting a job without government intervention, I automatically think three things:
1) You're stubborn. You don't want to work in a different industry from the one that let you go.
2) You have an ego. You think you're worth big bucks, and don't want to do something that's "beneath" you, not realizing that starting at the bottom is sometimes the way to get to the big bucks.
3) You're lazy. You don't want to learn how to do something else.
You can scratch #3 if you're using unemployment benefits to learn a new craft, otherwise, forget it. My degree was in anthropology and I haven't dug up a sarcophagus in my life. In other words, you can learn through experience if you pick up the phone and try. Honestly.
Those are the only three answers for someone who is unemployed for months, unless they have a physical or mental disability, which is a different matter entirely.
There is no such thing as a "jobless economy." If a person has been laid off, their innocent victim status deteriorates with each day that goes by. After two months, they're not an innocent victim. They're just a person who's out of work. As Hero Obama would say, "Pick yourself up, dust yourself off, and begin the work of getting your ass in gear." Okay, so I paraphrased. In any case, I am tired of hearing that there are "no jobs," unless the person is saying, "There are no jobs I want to do."
To the want ads we go. There's hundreds of more jobs like these from a dozen different industries, on a dozen different websites.
Customer Service Representative- Full-time Permanent. Compensation: $33,000 to $35,000
Full Time Reception/Admin Needed ASAP. Compensation: $25k to $29K
RECEPTIONIST NEEDED. Compensation: Based on experience. Starting salary: $10/H
Support Clerk. $11 / hour + benefits.
Junior Accounting Associate/Customer Service FT Perm. Compensation: $30,000 - $32,000
Financial Analyst. Compensation: Pays up to $55K
Laboratory Supervisor. Compensation: Min 55,000
Junior Lab Analyst. Compensation: $30K annually
R & D Lab Tech. Compensation: 30-35k
cafe staff. Compensation: $9.00 + tips.
Face Painter/ Party Facilitator. Compensation: starting at $10/hour + tips
Security Officers. Compensation: $12 To $15.
Line / Prep Cook. Compensation: $11.00 - $12.00 per hour
Lawyer needed. Compensation: $200,00hr
Experienced Law Clerk. Compensation: based on experience $12 - $18/hr
Purchasing Coordinator. Compensation: $35-$40,000
Bilingual Health Records. Compensation: $50,000
Pharmacist. Compensation: $45/hr
Hair Salon Assistant. Compensation: $10.00/hr
Real Estate Professional Admin Assistant. Compensation: $15.00/hr (contract)
Customer service. Compensation: $9 - $15/hr
Director, Project Management. Compensation: 100-120K
Business Centre- Part Time support associate. Compensation: $13.00/hr
Monday, January 26, 2009
The D Hits Keep Coming
I finished that Blago post below, then wandered over to Hot Air to see what they're yapping about. Lo and behold, there's another Democrat under suspicion of corruption. He'll be resigning tomorrow. Hot Air quotes the Boston Globe, where the usual rules apply: never mention the word Democrat in a story about corrupt Democrats. You know, because they're the party of the people.
House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi plans to resign from his powerful post tomorrow and depart the North End legislative seat he has held for three decades, saying yesterday that he is proud of his record and is departing with his "head high" despite ongoing ethics controversies swirling around him.
DiMasi - the third consecutive [the other two were Democrats, in case you were curious] Massachusetts speaker to leave under a cloud - was reinstalled as speaker three weeks ago. But he has remained under public scrutiny, an Ethics Commission investigation, and a pair of grand juries looking at the influence-peddling allegations involving his close friends.
Oh, and in other Democrat-but-not-mentioned-in-the-article news, Racine, Wisconsin mayor Gary Becker (D) missed the Obama inauguration because he was busted at a mall trying to meet up with a 14-year-old girl. Turns out, the girl didn't exist, and he was met by law enforcement instead. He faces a six count felony rap, and was released on bond. It's a shame, because he had quite the weekend planned: city officials say Becker chose the most expensive option for his Obama inauguration celebration in Washington DC, at $550/night.
House Speaker Salvatore F. DiMasi plans to resign from his powerful post tomorrow and depart the North End legislative seat he has held for three decades, saying yesterday that he is proud of his record and is departing with his "head high" despite ongoing ethics controversies swirling around him.
DiMasi - the third consecutive [the other two were Democrats, in case you were curious] Massachusetts speaker to leave under a cloud - was reinstalled as speaker three weeks ago. But he has remained under public scrutiny, an Ethics Commission investigation, and a pair of grand juries looking at the influence-peddling allegations involving his close friends.
Oh, and in other Democrat-but-not-mentioned-in-the-article news, Racine, Wisconsin mayor Gary Becker (D) missed the Obama inauguration because he was busted at a mall trying to meet up with a 14-year-old girl. Turns out, the girl didn't exist, and he was met by law enforcement instead. He faces a six count felony rap, and was released on bond. It's a shame, because he had quite the weekend planned: city officials say Becker chose the most expensive option for his Obama inauguration celebration in Washington DC, at $550/night.
Hot Rod
Remember this guy? It's Hot Rod, whose future is looking brighter every day.A while back, disgraced Governor Rod Blagojevich (D) was being told to resign by every headline in the country. He said forget it. Then he appointed Roland Burris as the replacement for Barack Obama's senate seat. Democrats said they wouldn't let Burris onto the senate floor.
A few days went by, and the senate caved, giving Burris his seat.
Today, I saw Blagojevich on Good Morning America, answering softball questions like, "How has this been on your kids?"
Where's all of the calls for impeachment? Where's the - as the media likes to put it - outrage? It dried up weeks ago.
You have to hand it to him. He's as dirty as last Tuesday's shirt, but damned if he's going to resign. As time goes on, his story becomes just another Democratic mess that needs to be cleaned up and forgotten. Good Morning America and Diane Sawyer are only too willing to help.
Rod's teaching a valuable lesson to Democrat crooks everywhere: if you can stand the heat of the first media firestorm, like all fires it will die out eventually. Just hang in there. His last hurdle will be getting past the criminal complaint. If he can do that, he'll probably win re-election.
There's no reason to think Obama wouldn't want to see this story continue, either, as a couple of the president's top aides' records are now being sought by the Feds. Not that you'll hear about it.
I wonder if Eliot Spitzer is regretting his resignation now? Then again, Spitzer wasn't from the president's town.
Update: Looks like Rod got booted. Next up: I'm betting on a TV talk show.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Gloves Coming Off Already
From the NY Post:
"You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done," [Obama] told top GOP leaders, whom he had invited to the White House to discuss his nearly $1 trillion stimulus package...
In an exchange with Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) about the proposal, the president shot back: "I won," according to aides briefed on the meeting.
"I will trump you on that."
Not that Obama was gloating. He was just explaining that he aims to get his way on stimulus package and all other legislation, sources said, noting his unrivaled one-party control of both congressional chambers.
I like the phrasing: "explaining." As in, "Using my middle finger, I explained to the man in the next lane that I would like to pull over."
So it's fighting words already, and childish ones, too. What was it Obama said about bipartisanship at the inauguration? "It's time to put away childish things." Uh-huh. Nice try. "I won," is right up there with, "They're my toys, nyah-nyah-nyah."
Should be interesting. Mr. Obama had better pray that all of his plans go off without a hitch. Words like "I won," and "I will trump you," are great campaign fodder if things don't work out. Mr. Obama has essentially placed all of his eggs in his own basket. No wiggle room. Not to mention that a so-called bi-partisan guy shouldn't toss around words like "trump." People remember words like that. He may not need those people now, but four years is a long time.
As for the Limbaugh line, I remember hearing about an advisor who warned a Limbaugh-hating Bill Clinton, "Rush isn't running for anything." In other words, don't call out a non-politician. You can't hurt him, and can only make him stronger. Imagine if Bush had called out Letterman or Olbermann and you'll get the idea. Best to leave the hacks alone and stay aloof.
Obama should have followed this advice. Too late now. Rush will make this his theme of the week and stir up his listeners.
Incidentally, the USA has reached a very steep precipice in the space of four months. A one trillion dollar spending package - let me repeat that with zeros: $1000000000000.00 - is something you should just take the president's word for? Back in September, the $750 billion bailout package was savaged in the press, and rightly so. Now, it's chump change.
Dangerous.
"You can't just listen to Rush Limbaugh and get things done," [Obama] told top GOP leaders, whom he had invited to the White House to discuss his nearly $1 trillion stimulus package...
In an exchange with Rep. Eric Cantor (R-Va.) about the proposal, the president shot back: "I won," according to aides briefed on the meeting.
"I will trump you on that."
Not that Obama was gloating. He was just explaining that he aims to get his way on stimulus package and all other legislation, sources said, noting his unrivaled one-party control of both congressional chambers.
I like the phrasing: "explaining." As in, "Using my middle finger, I explained to the man in the next lane that I would like to pull over."
So it's fighting words already, and childish ones, too. What was it Obama said about bipartisanship at the inauguration? "It's time to put away childish things." Uh-huh. Nice try. "I won," is right up there with, "They're my toys, nyah-nyah-nyah."
Should be interesting. Mr. Obama had better pray that all of his plans go off without a hitch. Words like "I won," and "I will trump you," are great campaign fodder if things don't work out. Mr. Obama has essentially placed all of his eggs in his own basket. No wiggle room. Not to mention that a so-called bi-partisan guy shouldn't toss around words like "trump." People remember words like that. He may not need those people now, but four years is a long time.
As for the Limbaugh line, I remember hearing about an advisor who warned a Limbaugh-hating Bill Clinton, "Rush isn't running for anything." In other words, don't call out a non-politician. You can't hurt him, and can only make him stronger. Imagine if Bush had called out Letterman or Olbermann and you'll get the idea. Best to leave the hacks alone and stay aloof.
Obama should have followed this advice. Too late now. Rush will make this his theme of the week and stir up his listeners.
Incidentally, the USA has reached a very steep precipice in the space of four months. A one trillion dollar spending package - let me repeat that with zeros: $1000000000000.00 - is something you should just take the president's word for? Back in September, the $750 billion bailout package was savaged in the press, and rightly so. Now, it's chump change.
Dangerous.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Oscar Flashback - No Country For Old Men
Here's a look back at 2007's "Best Picture." I thought it was the best film I'd seen in years, until it stabbed me in the back. I can't believe I saw it over a year ago, because I'm still getting over it.No Country For Old Men - Review - November 20, 2007
No Country for Old Men was without question the best film of the year. It had everything going for it, from a great cast to a superb script. And then it entered act three and completely fell apart. It turned into a shell game played by two great writer/directors, and it is a transparent insult. More...
Photo: Yahoo Movies
Remember: Everyone Can See You
I've heard of Facebook causing marriage break-ups, and YouTube causing people's houses to get trashed when party invites get out of hand.
This, however, takes it to another level:
A British man who murdered his wife after becoming enraged when she changed her relationship status on Facebook to "single" was jailed for at least 18 years late Thursday.
Edward Richardson, 41, stabbed wife Sarah, 26, to death in a "frenzied and brutal" attack at her parents' home in Biddulph, central England, last May after she altered her profile on the Internet social networking site.
This, however, takes it to another level:
A British man who murdered his wife after becoming enraged when she changed her relationship status on Facebook to "single" was jailed for at least 18 years late Thursday.
Edward Richardson, 41, stabbed wife Sarah, 26, to death in a "frenzied and brutal" attack at her parents' home in Biddulph, central England, last May after she altered her profile on the Internet social networking site.
Slumdog Millionaire - Review
Director: Danny BoyleCo-Director (India): Loveleen Tandan
Starring: Dev Patal/Ayush Mahesh Khedekar/Tanay Chheda
Written by: Simon Beaufoy/Vikas Swarup
Runtime: 2 hours
Let me ask you a question: who was the first president of the United States?
In your mind, you instantly drew the picture of George Washington. Now, what if we could go back and remember the exact moment that you learned George Washington was the first president of the United States? What would that tell us about your life?
Now let me ask you another question. And another. And every time you give me the answer, we go back and visit your life at the exact moment you learned those answers. If I ask enough questions, I will eventually have the entire story of your life.
This is Slumdog Millionaire's premise, and it's a beauty.
The movie is about Jamal Malik, an orphan in the slums of Mumbai. As a child, Malik is played by Ayush Mahesh Khedekar, as a teen by Tanay Chheda, and as an adult by Dev Patel. At the start of the film we learn that the adult Jamal is a contestant on the Indian version of Who Wants to be a Millionaire? Problem: it is the night before the final million dollar round, and he is being tortured by the police. No one can believe that a poor boy (slumdog) has made it all the way to the million dollar question. It's impossible, because Jamal is supposed to be stupid. He's supposed to lose. Therefore he must be cheating.
The movie is told in flashbacks, as Jamal tells the cop how he knows the answers to all of the questions. For instance, he knows that Benjamin Franklin is on the American $100 bill because he once gave one to a blind boy, who didn't believe the bill was real until he asked Jamal which face was on it. Naturally, Jamal had to look at the bill, read the name, say it, and remember it: "Benjamin Franklin."This is a very good movie. It does not pull any punches, and it isn't afraid of being labelled "racist," or "insensitive," or any of the other stupid labels that ignorant people apply to things they don't want to know.
The film shows you that life is cheap in the slums of Mumbai. Children are purposefully maimed to increase their value as beggars. The majority of people live in squalor and poverty. There is nothing a slumdog won't do for a buck, and the only way to get ahead is to break the law, attach yourself to a criminal bigshot, and do his bidding. The rest is misery.
I remember travelling in Greece and seeing the incredibly large number of beggars there. The Greeks said it was because of the Albanians and Gypsies, but no matter. Point is, Europe is rife with begging children. It's terrible. Nobody wants to talk about it, but there it is. Anyway, I remember Greece was particularly bad because most of their beggars were wounded. Faces burnt, arms and legs missing, eyes poked out.
I remember thinking, "It is impossible that all of the beggars were born as cripples." Besides, you aren't born a burn victim. Something has to burn you to turn your face into a hideous mass of flesh. So how many children can possibly be caught in accidental house fires, then turn around and begin begging?The answer, of course, is that their wounds aren't accidental at all. They are inflicted by monstrous human beings that lop off limbs to increase the sympathy factor of their slaves. When the children return "home" after a day's begging, they give their loot to their masters, go to sleep, then get up and do it all over again. The only children that avoid disfigurement are children that are used in the sex trade, though their fate is of course no better and maybe worse.
During my time in Europe and Asia, I saw many disfigured adults, too. But their disfigurement was old. The burns had lost any trace of pink, and the arm stumps looked rough and calloused. They were children once, and their lives had always been pain and misery. I distinctly remember one man, in the middle of a well-to-do road, begging. He had no legs and only one arm. His face was positively hideous to behold. He just sat there staring into space, with his one hand outstretched, Sphinx-like. A half-hour later I walked by, and as far as I could tell he hadn't moved an inch.
Sounds awful, doesn't it? It is. And I haven't seen a film show this side of Europe/Asia's slums before, at least not in this much detail. Usually it's sex trade stuff, and the hero saves the day. Not here.
In many ways, my travels have taught me that the US and Canada have nothing on many other countries when it comes to troubles. Economic crisis? Please. While we suffer through our current economic crisis by avoiding Starbucks, there's tens of thousands of children in so-called "developed countries" that suffer an economic crisis whenever their missing face only draws a couple of Euro per day.I have a feeling that Slumdog Millionaire will be remembered as a feel-good story about a slumdog that makes good. For me, the first half-hour of the film that shows what is happening to these children is what really matters. The film deserves credit for this.
You should see this movie. It has its moment of feel-good fancy, but it is also a very real, very disturbing, and very uplifting film. The love story is a bit BS, but what love story isn't? When it comes to the life of a slumdog, the movie doesn't lie to you.
One final note: I wrote a while back that it was refreshing to see Fincher, an "action director," pull off Benjamin Button. Same thing goes for Danny Boyle, who made his name directing sci-fi and gory horror flicks. Now that Slumdog Millionaire and Benjamin Button are both up for Oscars, it looks like the "action directors" have decided to beat the artsy crowd at their own game. More power to them.
Thursday, January 22, 2009
Smiley's People
Before John le Carre went off the tracks and became a boring writer and started yakking like a political activist, he was good. Really good. Then the Berlin Wall got torn down and, like most other Cold War writers, le Carre's writing collapsed, too. But there was a time when he was the best.
Guinness as Smiley
I managed to get my hands on a copy of the Smiley's People mini-series starring Alec Guinness. It's a six-part series that came out in 1982 and it's based on the book by the same name. I planned to watch a couple of episodes last night and ended up watching the whole thing, wrapping up at 3:30am.
I heard a story once that le Carre couldn't see George Smiley as his character anymore, because Alec Guinness nailed it. He was right. Guinness was George Smiley, in look, gesture, and delivery. He was perfect.
You should read the book but, if you have a chance, get hold of the mini-series and watch it. Be warned: George Smiley is not James Bond, and most of the scenes are ultra-long on dialogue. There is no chance that this type of movie or mini-series gets made today, especially for TV. All the more reason to go back and take a look at people at the top of their game, giving you something that you probably will never see again: quality writing, top notch acting, and an intricate plot that doesn't treat you like a moron.
To give you a chance at following the plot, you should read Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (still my favorite spy story of all time), which takes place prior to Smiley's People. The backstory will help. There's also a great mini-series of this starring Alec Guinness.
Guinness as Smiley
I managed to get my hands on a copy of the Smiley's People mini-series starring Alec Guinness. It's a six-part series that came out in 1982 and it's based on the book by the same name. I planned to watch a couple of episodes last night and ended up watching the whole thing, wrapping up at 3:30am.I heard a story once that le Carre couldn't see George Smiley as his character anymore, because Alec Guinness nailed it. He was right. Guinness was George Smiley, in look, gesture, and delivery. He was perfect.
You should read the book but, if you have a chance, get hold of the mini-series and watch it. Be warned: George Smiley is not James Bond, and most of the scenes are ultra-long on dialogue. There is no chance that this type of movie or mini-series gets made today, especially for TV. All the more reason to go back and take a look at people at the top of their game, giving you something that you probably will never see again: quality writing, top notch acting, and an intricate plot that doesn't treat you like a moron.
To give you a chance at following the plot, you should read Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (still my favorite spy story of all time), which takes place prior to Smiley's People. The backstory will help. There's also a great mini-series of this starring Alec Guinness.
Writers? Who Are They?
It's an old but true axiom that if you're a screenwriter, the first thing a producer wants to do is fire you. Producers like writers because they give them movies to make, but once they have the script in their hand, they can't wait to bump the writer off. That's why you see so many "Written By" credits at the movies, and why directors get a bogus "A Film By" credit.
Here's how it goes: a writer turns in a script. The producer likes it. He fires the writer and hires another one to "polish" it. After polishing, the producer passes it to another writer to help clean up the dialogue. Then the script is passed to another writer to clean up character development. Then another writer is hired to clean up the mess that all the other writers made.
After the script is bent and twisted out of all relation to the original draft (not including the stars and their script consultants, who also have a say), everyone argues with the Writer's Guild about which writer deserves more credit. After a long fight, the original writer is given a "Story By" credit. Joining him is the guy who polished the characters. The other two or three writers are then given a "Written By" or "Screenplay" credit. They are the ones who will receive an Academy Award. The original writer is left to suck on his "Story By" credit.
When you see two, three, and sometimes four or five writing credits on the screen, don't fool yourself into thinking that these writers worked together. That happens, but it's extremely rare. Whenever you see two or more writing and story credits, you're basically looking at the history or who got fired and when (it's also a general rule that the more writing credits you see, the worse the movie is going to suck; more writers means more "fixing," which means the story was probably in big trouble from the start).
Writers always get short shrift. Sidney Lumet used to say that the only person treated worse than a Hollywood writer is a Hollywood music composer. In Hollywood, writers don't exist, no matter how many words they stuff into Kate Winslet's adorable mouth. The last person an actor will mention when receiving an award is the writer that gave them such memorable dialogue to say.
There's one upside: when a film tanks, the directors and stars usually take the blame, while the writer moves on in blessed anonymity.
Anyway, if you go to the Academy website, you will find the writers at the very, very, very bottom of the screen, located under sound mixing and sound editing. Also proving once again that Hollywood sucks at creating fresh material, note that all but one of the Best Picture nominees come from adapted screenplays. Without Oprah's book club, Hollywood wouldn't know what to do with itself.
Here's how it goes: a writer turns in a script. The producer likes it. He fires the writer and hires another one to "polish" it. After polishing, the producer passes it to another writer to help clean up the dialogue. Then the script is passed to another writer to clean up character development. Then another writer is hired to clean up the mess that all the other writers made.
After the script is bent and twisted out of all relation to the original draft (not including the stars and their script consultants, who also have a say), everyone argues with the Writer's Guild about which writer deserves more credit. After a long fight, the original writer is given a "Story By" credit. Joining him is the guy who polished the characters. The other two or three writers are then given a "Written By" or "Screenplay" credit. They are the ones who will receive an Academy Award. The original writer is left to suck on his "Story By" credit.
When you see two, three, and sometimes four or five writing credits on the screen, don't fool yourself into thinking that these writers worked together. That happens, but it's extremely rare. Whenever you see two or more writing and story credits, you're basically looking at the history or who got fired and when (it's also a general rule that the more writing credits you see, the worse the movie is going to suck; more writers means more "fixing," which means the story was probably in big trouble from the start).
Writers always get short shrift. Sidney Lumet used to say that the only person treated worse than a Hollywood writer is a Hollywood music composer. In Hollywood, writers don't exist, no matter how many words they stuff into Kate Winslet's adorable mouth. The last person an actor will mention when receiving an award is the writer that gave them such memorable dialogue to say.
There's one upside: when a film tanks, the directors and stars usually take the blame, while the writer moves on in blessed anonymity.
Anyway, if you go to the Academy website, you will find the writers at the very, very, very bottom of the screen, located under sound mixing and sound editing. Also proving once again that Hollywood sucks at creating fresh material, note that all but one of the Best Picture nominees come from adapted screenplays. Without Oprah's book club, Hollywood wouldn't know what to do with itself.
Oscar Hype Heats Up
Oscar hype is heating up. Here's the list for Best Picture contenders:Slumdog Millionaire
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
Milk
The Reader
Frost/Nixon
That's the best Hollywood could do last year? 2008 will have to go down as the Year of the Lame Flicks.
My instant-pick out of this list would be Slumdog Millionaire. It's head and shoulders above Button (which is good but not grande), and Frost/Nixon (which is garbage). Both Milk and Frost/Nixon are obvious political picks, but that's Hollywood.
Heath Ledger's also been nominated as Best Supporting Actor in Dark Knight. Hands up if you didn't see that one coming. I figure Ledger's going to win the award, though I didn't think his Joker performance was memorable.
Which reminds me, I never did write a review of Slumdog Millionaire. Check back soon.
Here's what I had to say about the Oscars last year:
Hollywood Bust - February 27, 2008
The numbers have come in, and the Oscars tanked, having scored the smallest number of viewers since Nielsen started the whole Oscar-ratings biz back in 1974.
Myway.com reports that one night of Oscars is worth about 10 million views less than three nights of American Idol. Idol's Thursday special last week scored over 23 million viewers on its own (83 million for the week), while the Oscars brought in a paltry 32 million viewers. In other words, 24 no-name kids singing karaoke songs are drawing more attention than all of the movie stars combined.
No surprise to me. If Hollywood thinks the average American viewer is going to watch movie stars pat themselves on the back, they've got another thing coming. The latest slew of American-bashing flicks did nothing to make America proud of its movie factory, and neither did the endless stories of stars' excesses with booze and drugs.
One minute the audience is hearing about drunk driving charges (Mel Gibson, Kiefer Sutherland, et al), the next they're hearing Michael Moore say, "Please forgive us," to the "international audience" while he walks the red carpet. Then they're supposed to watch these people stage-cry while picking up a statue? Right.
Just once I'd like to hear an honest movie star accept an award:
"All right, here's the deal. I have to thank my agent, the director, the producers, and my publicist. The list of names we all rattle off when accepting an award are not people we care about, only people that can help our careers. I don't really have time to thank mom and dad, because I have to be a sycophant and kiss some A-list ass, otherwise I'm screwed. Besides, I went into rehab and found out that my dad used to beat me and my mom dressed me as Heidi until the age of six. You can see it on the next Oprah.
"If I don't thank the director, he won't want to work with me again, which wouldn't be so bad because I think I'd be a better director than him. Still, I should thank him because he let it pass the day I wouldn't come out of my trailer after taking too many Quaaludes. Not like it mattered. After three weeks of shooting at fifty grand a day, what could he do, fire me? In my defence, if they hadn't run out of Diet Coke, I wouldn't have been so upset. But no Diet Coke? Give me a break. That's like an invitation from Mr. Quaalude himself.
"I have to thank the producers, too. They're the ones that give you the job and hand you a check for 20 million and all the rest of it. Anyway, they phoned me up while I was lounging by the pool. My agent (who's an even bigger prick than me, if you can believe it) had them get me the script. I thought it was great. After the fifth re-write and my script consultants were done with it (that's the Harry Jones and John Crenshaw that I just mentioned, in case you thought they were friends or something), I decided to do the picture.
"This film was a tough spiritual journey. It was a real pain in the ass shooting during basketball season. I had to give my Laker tickets to my hair stylist and he stiffed me for half the money. My trailer was the eighteen wheel Winnebago, which is a little better than the mini-Winnie, but not by much. It sucked, but I accepted it because I thought the film was so personal. I really felt a connection with it. Sure, it was about a serial rapist that lives in Des Moines, but hey, I've been to Kentucky.
"Next I have to thank my co-stars. I'd rip their heads off for a movie role, but there's no need to tell them that. Though they're all no-talent hacks compared to me, and I'd sell their daughters into slavery to get the part in the next Spielberg movie, I love them all very much. By the way, I banged the blonde, and screwing in a Winnebago is not easy, take it from me.
"Finally, I have to thank the fans. I'd like to thank the kids that go on double dates and drop a hundred bucks a night so I can stand here in a tux, pretend like I give a shit, and then go get drunk at a party and crash my car afterwards. All of the courtroom judges in this town are star struck anyway, so who cares? Barbara Walters will have the camera guys shoot me in soft light during the interview, and you'll forgive me. Don't eat meat, drive a Prius, and end the war. Good night."
Photo: NY Post
Monday, January 19, 2009
Cards and Steelers In
Warner's back in the Super Bowl and the Cardinals are flying high after they beat the Eagles 32-25 on Sunday.
Pittsburgh and the Cardinals in the Super Bowl? Nobody would have called that at the beginning of the season. For old man Warner's sake, I'll take the Cardinals by 7.
Photo: Yahoo Sports
Sunday, January 18, 2009
My Bloody Valentine - Preview
All right, enough Oscar talk, let's get back to what matters: mindless entertainment.
Here's a clip from My Bloody Valentine, a new 3D horror pic that is getting some surprisingly good early buzz. I have a feeling that seeing it in 3D will make the movie worth watching. If not, not. But good buzz on a slasher flick usually means the story might be good enough to hold water. We'll see.
(Note that the dude in the clip gets hit with a pick ax. But he's hit in the shoulder, where movie stars never get hurt, so he's probably the hero. That would be rare, since the heroes of slasher flicks are almost always female).
Here's a clip from My Bloody Valentine, a new 3D horror pic that is getting some surprisingly good early buzz. I have a feeling that seeing it in 3D will make the movie worth watching. If not, not. But good buzz on a slasher flick usually means the story might be good enough to hold water. We'll see.
(Note that the dude in the clip gets hit with a pick ax. But he's hit in the shoulder, where movie stars never get hurt, so he's probably the hero. That would be rare, since the heroes of slasher flicks are almost always female).
Move Along, Nothing To See Here
A while back I posted a video that showed outright anti-Semitism and political muscle in Toronto. This time, here's a dose from London, with a good look into the crytal ball of England, too.
This video is a pretty good look at what the future holds. "Protesters" driving back the police while calling the cops "pussies." To judge by the lame efforts of the police to control the crowd, it's hard to argue with the thugs on that point. The video seems to roll endlessly, as the cops give more and more ground, literally pulling a Monty Python and "running away," when the thugs decide to go their own way and start throwing things down the street. When that happens, a cop says, "Keep back," to his fellow officers. When a thug orders the police to "Keep back, you swine," they oblige. Quickly.
So, who do you think owns the streets of England?
Ask yourself: if the crowd decided to flip over cars, smash windows, and beat people up in the street, could the police have done anything other than continue to make a run for it?
Towards the end of the clip, one of the thugs yells, "Let's have a fucking war," while another tells a cop, "I'm watching you."
This "protest" had nothing to do with Palestine. It was a show of force, and it worked.
It's a new world, all right. But not a brave one.
This video is a pretty good look at what the future holds. "Protesters" driving back the police while calling the cops "pussies." To judge by the lame efforts of the police to control the crowd, it's hard to argue with the thugs on that point. The video seems to roll endlessly, as the cops give more and more ground, literally pulling a Monty Python and "running away," when the thugs decide to go their own way and start throwing things down the street. When that happens, a cop says, "Keep back," to his fellow officers. When a thug orders the police to "Keep back, you swine," they oblige. Quickly.
So, who do you think owns the streets of England?
Ask yourself: if the crowd decided to flip over cars, smash windows, and beat people up in the street, could the police have done anything other than continue to make a run for it?
Towards the end of the clip, one of the thugs yells, "Let's have a fucking war," while another tells a cop, "I'm watching you."
This "protest" had nothing to do with Palestine. It was a show of force, and it worked.
It's a new world, all right. But not a brave one.
Saturday, January 17, 2009
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button - Review
Director: David FincherWriter: Eric Roth
Starring: Brad Pitt/Cate Blanchett
Runtime: 2 hours 47 minutes
I would love to have been on the set during the shooting of this movie. A lot of the film takes place in an old folks' home, where a backward-aging Brad Pitt learns about life from various charismatic geriatrics. I wonder how David Fincher directed them, or more to the point, how the elderly actors enjoyed being directed by David Fincher.
If you go back and watch Se7en and listen to the director's commentary, you will discover that David Fincher knows how to swear with the best of them. Longshoremen and 18th century British soldiers don't hold a candle to Fincher when it comes to the F-word. Hearing him rattle off "the f-ing shot" this and "the f-ing scene" that during the commentary becomes almost comic. You can tell that he loves the word.
Fast forward 13 years and you have David Fincher directing a room full of old timers in Benjamin Button. I wonder if he reined in the gutter talk while filming the movie, or if the elderly actors simply put up with it because they were in a Brad Pitt movie? (This reminds me of William Friedkin and The Exorcist. Before shooting the climactic bedroom scene with Max von Sydow, Friedkin rewrote the dialogue for the Devil, played by pre-teen Linda Blair. Von Sydow had to say "cut" while shooting because he couldn't believe the foul language coming out of the child's mouth. It wasn't in any script he'd read. Friedkin told him tough luck, deal with it. With everything and anything coming out of child actors' mouths today, it's hard to believe any actor would say "cut" these days).
When I saw that Fincher was slated to direct Benjamin Button, I was perplexed and curious. Actors and directors sometimes go against type and the results can be disastrous. For the most part, directors stick to what they're good at, or they're forced to stick to what they're good at by the producers that hire them.
Here's Fincher's resume, not including his music videos:
Alien 3 - creatures rip people to shreds, until the people blow the aliens to pieces.
Se7en - a psycho mutilates people.
The Game - a man is psychologically terrorized.
Fight Club - a man is initiated into a club where people smash each other's faces to pulp until the world descends into chaos.
Panic Room - a woman is trapped in her own home while people try to kill her.
Zodiac - a psycho in San Francisco goes on a killing spree.
Those are Fincher's flicks from the last two decades. They all have one thing in common: violence. They almost all have another thing in common: they're pretty good. Only Panic Room was a dud for everybody (including Jodie Foster, who somehow starred in it), and The Game, which some people thought was brilliant and I thought was silly at best.
Fincher
Looking at that resume, you might understand my curiosity when I heard that Fincher was going to direct an epic about aging, love, and life. Say what? No killer? No bloodbath? Nobody getting tossed off buildings or machinegunned in the street?Nope. Just Brad Pitt, born old and "aging" in reverse. The film follows him from his "infancy" as a baby with cataracts and wrinkles, until "grows" into a "child" again.
It's an interesting concept, based on an F. Scott Fitzgerald short story. It's my guess that Fitzgerald's story found inspiration from Shakespeare. It's worth reading in full:
All the world's a stage,
And all the men and women merely players;
They have their exits and their entrances,
And one man in his time plays many parts,
His acts being seven ages. At first, the infant,
Mewling and puking in the nurse's arms.
Then the whining schoolboy, with his satchel
And shining morning face, creeping like snail
Unwillingly to school. And then the lover,
Sighing like furnace, with a woeful ballad
Made to his mistress' eyebrow. Then a soldier,
Full of strange oaths and bearded like the pard,
Jealous in honor, sudden and quick in quarrel,
Seeking the bubble reputation
Even in the cannon's mouth. And then the justice,
In fair round belly with good capon lined,
With eyes severe and beard of formal cut,
Full of wise saws and modern instances;
And so he plays his part. The sixth age shifts
Into the lean and slippered pantaloon,
With spectacles on nose and pouch on side;
His youthful hose, well saved, a world too wide
For his shrunk shank, and his big manly voice,
Turning again toward childish treble, pipes
And whistles in his sound. Last scene of all,
That ends this strange eventful history,
Is second childishness and mere oblivion,
Sans teeth, sans eyes, sans taste, sans everything.
It's the "second childishness" line that drives the story of Benjamin Button. Another inspiration for the writer of the film could have come from Shaw: "Youth is a wonderful thing. What a crime to waste it on children." Or perhaps Twain: "Youth is wasted on the young."
It's pretty obvious that a good many writers spent time lamenting the fact that once they were old enough to know better, they were too old to do anything about it. (Note that Shakespeare doesn't make the mistake of remembering youth as being mystically fantastic; re-read his lines above about infancy and being a schoolboy).
Benjamin Button is not a terribly moving film. It is a simple story, told well, and it ends well. It's satisfying. I didn't find any surprises in it, save one: growing young wouldn't be as great as Twain and Shaw thought it would be. When Benjamin Button grows young, he shows you that you grow young alone. What woman wants to date a man that will regress to puberty when she is joining a bridge club? What relationships will you be able to keep when you go rockclimbing while your friends want to take a nap? This made the film worthwhile; it isn't a romp.The cast is good. Brad Pitt is the same Brad Pitt. I've never been convinced of his acting chops, but he drives a movie and brings in the crowds, so what difference does it make? The effects in the movie are very well done. When Button is an old, stooped "child," he looks it. When he's a youthful "old man," he's a handsome Brad Pitt from the old days and the ladies will swoon.
When you know Fincher's history, you're impressed that he was able to turn on a dime and tell this story. The man doesn't need blood, violence, and profanity after all. He's a director and he's a good one. If anything, this movie is a very good career move: doors will open for him into any genre he wants to explore. As an audience, we're lucky to have him.
Photos: Yahoo Movies
Thursday, January 08, 2009
I Wonder What He Means By That?
I often get dark enjoyment from listening to the media wags on CNN. Immediately after a politician's speech, or a warning from a warmonger, or a gunshot from a lunatic, the anchors turns to a "panel of experts" and ask, "What do you think he meant by that?"
I'm sure the following will have several anchors twisting in their chairs, trying to find some way of spinning this report (if they even cover it, of course):
The exchange between Mumbai terrorists Fahadullah and Abdul Rehman operating at the Trident Hotel and their Pakistani handlers provides a terrifying look at the minds of the masterminds behind the attack. The exchange shows they planned and executed the attack for maximum media coverage, ordered the murder of hostages, and cheered after the murders were carried out.
“Brother Abdul. The media is comparing your action to 9/11,” one unidentified handler said. “One senior police official has been killed,” referring to the chief of the Anti-Terrorism Squad killed in an earlier gunfight.
“We are on the 10th/11th floor,” Abdul Rehman responded. “We have five hostages.”
“Everything is being recorded by the media,” the handler identified as Kafa told Rehman. “Inflict the maximum damage. Keep fighting. Don’t be taken alive.”
“Kill all hostages, except the two Muslims,” the other handler told Rehman and Fahadullah. “Keep your phone switched on so that we can hear the gunfire.”
“We have three foreigners, including women,” Fahadullah said. “From Singapore and China.”
“Kill them,” the handler said.
Hmmm. I wonder what he meant by that? I'm sure David Gergen could give us some fascinating incite into what this means for Pakistani/Indian/US/Israeli relations. Or perhaps Anderson Cooper could ask a panel of experts what the terrorists "really want." None of the experts will ponder that women and children are being shot precisely so the panel of experts will advertise the bogus desires of these killers. They'll just do it for free, providing a useful smokescreen. In their way, the media aids and abets evil people on a daily basis.
Whenever I hear the phony talk of what terrorists "want," I am reminded of Goldfinger:
"You expect me to talk?"
"Noooo, Mr. Bond. I expect you to die."
I'm sure the following will have several anchors twisting in their chairs, trying to find some way of spinning this report (if they even cover it, of course):
The exchange between Mumbai terrorists Fahadullah and Abdul Rehman operating at the Trident Hotel and their Pakistani handlers provides a terrifying look at the minds of the masterminds behind the attack. The exchange shows they planned and executed the attack for maximum media coverage, ordered the murder of hostages, and cheered after the murders were carried out.
“Brother Abdul. The media is comparing your action to 9/11,” one unidentified handler said. “One senior police official has been killed,” referring to the chief of the Anti-Terrorism Squad killed in an earlier gunfight.
“We are on the 10th/11th floor,” Abdul Rehman responded. “We have five hostages.”
“Everything is being recorded by the media,” the handler identified as Kafa told Rehman. “Inflict the maximum damage. Keep fighting. Don’t be taken alive.”
“Kill all hostages, except the two Muslims,” the other handler told Rehman and Fahadullah. “Keep your phone switched on so that we can hear the gunfire.”
“We have three foreigners, including women,” Fahadullah said. “From Singapore and China.”
“Kill them,” the handler said.
Hmmm. I wonder what he meant by that? I'm sure David Gergen could give us some fascinating incite into what this means for Pakistani/Indian/US/Israeli relations. Or perhaps Anderson Cooper could ask a panel of experts what the terrorists "really want." None of the experts will ponder that women and children are being shot precisely so the panel of experts will advertise the bogus desires of these killers. They'll just do it for free, providing a useful smokescreen. In their way, the media aids and abets evil people on a daily basis.
Whenever I hear the phony talk of what terrorists "want," I am reminded of Goldfinger:
"You expect me to talk?"
"Noooo, Mr. Bond. I expect you to die."
Wednesday, January 07, 2009
The Bear's Muscle
The dude in the Karate Kid bathrobe is up to some more antics:From The Independent:
Gazprom stopped pumping gas to Ukraine for domestic consumption on 1 January after the two countries failed to agree on a fixed price for 2009. The pipelines that cross Ukraine also carry gas to Europe but that continued to flow, until Moscow accused Ukraine of siphoning off Europe's fuel and Prime Minister Vladimir Putin retaliated by ordering Gazprom to cut EU-bound exports by the amount being stolen.
Yesterday Russia stopped gas supplies through Ukraine to Bulgaria, Hungary, Greece, Turkey, Romania, Serbia, Bosnia and Macedonia. The government of Slovakia declared a national emergency; Austria and Italy reported falls of 90 per cent; France said Russian supplies had tailed off 70 per cent, and Germany also reported a decline although did not quantify it.
Putin's message to Ukraine: playing Western democracy might seem fun, now try it without our oil.
Next lesson: the Crane Technique. "Finish him!"
Tuesday, January 06, 2009
Home Sweet Home
I thought my ex-pat friends would find this video clip interesting. Welcome back to Toronto.
A few thoughts on the video clip below. 1) As Mark Steyn points out, how can he be dragged in front of Canadian "human rights commissions" for writing about European demographics, while people that shout anti-Semitic garbage ("You are the product of pigs!") receive police protection in downtown Toronto? 2) I have the same winter hat as the violent thug at the end of the clip, who says that Hitler didn't do a good enough job. It isn't the hat's fault, but somehow I don't feel like wearing it again.
If these protests are evidence of what happens when there's strife in the Middle East, I wonder what it will look like if the gloves come off at home? Then again, Canada doesn't seem to be "home" to anyone these days. More and more, it looks like a waiting room for political and cultural gangsters. Their bodies may be here, but it's obvious their thoughts and beliefs lie somewhere else.
To talk about this stuff raises the old spectre of being called a racist, but this has nothing to do with race. It's about religion and old school heritage. And if I may be so bold, Canadians should not be slugging each other because of either.
The thug's final action in the clip reminds me of a line from 1984. It comes in the chapter where O'Brien tells a helpless Winston that the object of power is power. Simply power:
"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stomping on a human face - forever."
A few thoughts on the video clip below. 1) As Mark Steyn points out, how can he be dragged in front of Canadian "human rights commissions" for writing about European demographics, while people that shout anti-Semitic garbage ("You are the product of pigs!") receive police protection in downtown Toronto? 2) I have the same winter hat as the violent thug at the end of the clip, who says that Hitler didn't do a good enough job. It isn't the hat's fault, but somehow I don't feel like wearing it again.
If these protests are evidence of what happens when there's strife in the Middle East, I wonder what it will look like if the gloves come off at home? Then again, Canada doesn't seem to be "home" to anyone these days. More and more, it looks like a waiting room for political and cultural gangsters. Their bodies may be here, but it's obvious their thoughts and beliefs lie somewhere else.
To talk about this stuff raises the old spectre of being called a racist, but this has nothing to do with race. It's about religion and old school heritage. And if I may be so bold, Canadians should not be slugging each other because of either.
The thug's final action in the clip reminds me of a line from 1984. It comes in the chapter where O'Brien tells a helpless Winston that the object of power is power. Simply power:
"If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stomping on a human face - forever."
The Height Of Embarrassment
Via The Smoking Gun. This poor guy fell through a defective chairlift in Vail and hung upside down, sans pants, for 15 minutes until ski resort staff could rescue him. Further insult: a kid (presumably his) had to sit beside him through it all.
I hope the ski resort has a good year in order to help with their legal fees.
Click the above link for more pics.
I hope the ski resort has a good year in order to help with their legal fees.
Click the above link for more pics.
Sunday, January 04, 2009
Eagles Flying, Dolphins Sunk
A month ago McNabb was benched, and the Eagles' season looked dead in the water.
What a difference a few weeks makes. Today they beat the Vikings decisively, 26-14, and McNabb threw for 300 yards, a touchdown, and a pick. That won't be good enough to beat the Giants next week, but it was more than enough to take down the Vikings.
As for the Baltimore/Miami game, who knows? I fell asleep when the Ravens were up 10-3 at the half. By the time I woke up, Baltimore had beaten them 27-9 in a walk. Miami looked bad. Completely outplayed. Pennington threw four picks and was involved in a fumble that took the Dolphins out of field goal range. As for the Ravens, rookie QB Joe Flacco only had to complete 9 out of 23 pass attempts to seal the deal, running in a 5-yard touchdown of his own in the fourth quarter.
The Dolphins had a great year, but it was a horrible ending. We'll see what Parcells does in the off-season to try and get this team over the bubble lest they slide back into mediocrity.
Photo: Yahoo Sports
Saturday, January 03, 2009
Revolutionary Road - Review
Director: Sam MendesWriter: Justin Haythe
Starring: Leonardo DiCaprio/Kate Winslet
Runtime: 1 hr 59 minutes
This is a fantastic movie, if you're in the mood to see a self-indulgent director wax on and on about a subject he doesn't understand, using characters he doesn't like, in order to tell you that your life is a pathetic waste of time.
Oops. Sorry. That line is probably better suited for Sam Mendes' earlier film, American Beauty. This time around, Sam Mendes uses Revolutionary Road not to ridicule you, but your parents and grandparents.
When I saw American Beauty ten years ago, I laughed at the kudos it received. Audiences and critics took it as a stunning look inside the heart of the American family. Though written by an American, it was pretty obvious that the film was directed by a Brit. The absolute contempt for American suburbia rolled off the screen in waves. "Your life is a meaningless bore," the film said. Again. And again.
Time moves on and now Sam Mendes has returned to tell you that not only is your life a joke, but your parents' lives were jokes, too.
Revolutionary Road takes place sometime in the early '50s. Here's the movie: two happy people get married. After two minutes of on-screen happiness, we fast forward to see them ten years later. The husband, Frank Wheeler (Leonardo DiCaprio), works a lousy office job and wears a grey flannel suit. The wife, April Wheeler (Kate Winslet), stays at home but always wishes she'd become an actress. They have two kids and a nice house. They fight and cry, fight and cry, fight and cry. End of movie.
I wasn't bored by the film. I spent the whole two hours merely amused at a British theatre snob once again attempting to dissect a world he does not understand, but thinks he does. His contempt for Americana (and his own characters) is written on the screen in big block letters. It's so obvious that it`s hilarious.
There is nothing remotely redeeming about this film. Scene after scene, you are bludgeoned over the head with the theme that life west of the Atlantic is a pathetic charade. Everybody cheats on everybody. Your neighbours secretly hate you. All business men drink martinis at lunch and bang their secretaries. The only character who sees the reality of all this is a lunatic, who confronts the leads and says their lives are hopeless. They agree.
I was stunned to see that the movie wasn't based upon a play. It's based on book, but I thought a play had surely been made of it because the film has a lot of play-speak like, "I think we're both under a lot of strain...I think we're both under a lot of strain." Yeah. Heard you.
Mendes: studying hard
Poor Mendes. He's still directing theatre, but trying ever-so-hard to direct movies. The lighting in every scene is right out of the text book. Every single shot has a patch of complete black and a patch of complete white. Good composition, Mr. Director, excellent use of the grey card. A daub of backlight here, a soft key there, a wonderful use of the bay window for fill. Nicely done. Wake me when the director of photography is done giving you lessons on five-point lighting technique.No handheld shots for Mr. Mendes. We wouldn't want to interrupt the lovely flow of perfectly framed images. Oh, and tell the costume designer we'll need a lighter shade of green for Ms. Winslet's dress, because it isn't quite complimentary enough to go with the red curtains.
Nitpicking? Probably. But he deserves it. What an utter, feeble snob this man is, to think that people won't recognize a lame message film when they see it. As the movie rolled along, I couldn't resist talking to myself as his symbolism pummeled me in the face. A few examples: "Leo runs, runs, runs down the suburban street, but alas, there is no escape, as the same boring houses go past him, there is no escape from the evil suburban trap, so we run with no hope until...fade to black...the darkness...the nothingness...for five seconds....roll credits? Nope! Cut to another depressing scene."
And: "The bay window, with a suburban house across the road. The tail of a Cadillac. Americana. But look! Blood on the floor, damaging the rug. Hmmm. Bay window + suburban house + Cadillac = blood on rug. Hold the image for five seconds in case the audience doesn't get the point. So that's what it all means. Thank you, Mr. Director, for helping me see the futility of a life lived with mortgage rates."
Ain't that America?
I had a lot of fun with this film. I can honestly say that I've never seen a movie where a director hated each and every one of his characters with such transparency. He despises them all, and relishes their obtuseness and ignorance. One of my favorite scenes involved the lunatic and the leads. The lunatic berates them in their own home, insults their sexuality, parenting skills, their very existence. (There's some more play-speak here, as the lunatic's mother says, "He's not well...He's not well." Yeah. Heard you). He insults April Wheeler in ways that would cause me to beat the hell out of a man who ever spoke to my lady like that, in my own house or anywhere else.What does Frank Wheeler do instead? He agrees with him. "Maybe the lunatic's right. Maybe we are hopeless." This from a character who supposedly fought in WWII and felt "alive" when he made his first charge on the enemy. Right.
Mendes doesn't understand America. More, he hates the place, and delights in insulting its people, its culture, and its heritage. The man has watched so many similar films about suburban angst from his director`s chair in London's West End that he actually came to believe them. Ask yourself honestly, do you really think an English theatre director knows anything about suburban American life, or will he fall back on every tired cliche he`s ever seen and heard? "Everyone in the 'burbs wishes they were somewhere else. They're all lying. They're all pathetic."
News for the snob: the June Cleaver stuff you've been sneering at while rubbing elbows at opening night parties? Many people love that life. They're not searching for a dream, they're already living it. But you wouldn't know, because you don't know any of them. Never met one, never spoken to one, never lived with one. And don't want to.
The British snob is still trying to understand America and failing badly. It reminded me of William Goldman's story, when he saw The Great Gatsby and thought that Francis Ford Coppola had written a magnificent script based on an American classic, but the English director didn't get America and took a crap on it.
Same thing here, except this time the script was a joke, too.
I'm still giggling.
Friday, January 02, 2009
The Bus Gets Rolling
I've been waiting for some good gossip to come out of the NFL now that a few teams have had a chance to lick their wounds, look around, and decide whom they would like to blame for not getting them to the post-season.It looks like Brett Favre is the next guy to go under the bus in NY, following the firing of head coach Eric Mangini. Jets' RB Thomas Jones, as quoted by NBC:
"We're a team and we win together. ... But at the same time, you can't turn the ball over and expect to win," Jones told the radio station two days after Favre tossed three interceptions in the season-ending loss to Miami.
Jones goes on to say that Favre should have been benched.
NBC reports that another anonymous player says Favre was resented because he didn't hang out with the team or go to dinner with anybody.
The players aren't entirely wrong. Favre threw a bunch of picks down the stretch and didn't play good enough to win. But dinner? Suck it up, boys. You didn't lose because Favre failed to spring for a steak and salad.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)