Korean Clock

Probably not safe for work.

(Requires mp3 software.)

News Coverage of Recent Protests

In Dallas, as in many other US cities, there have been protests this week reacting to new measures being debated by Congress to curb illegal immigration. Basically, the House of Representatives passed a bill back in December that would make being an illegal immigrant a felony, and erect a wall along 700 miles of the US-Mexico border. The Senate is now debating two different proposals, one of which (the so-called McCain-Kennedy bill) provides for a "guest worker" program, and another put forth by Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist that focuses more law enforcement efforts to stop immigration, and does not provide any way for current undocumented residents to stay.

Anyway, the Dallas protests seem to have mostly taken the form of student walkouts. This morning, while getting ready for work, I saw a local news broadcast (FOX 4) covering the protests, and was appalled at the slant of the coverage.

One of the primary angles of the news report was that most students had no idea what the issues were, and were simply using the protests as a way to skip school. By way of evidence for this, there was video of a two kids providing only vague explanations of what they were protesting, and video of kids swimming in the reflecting pool in front of City Hall. The clear message: nothing to worry about folks, just kids acting up.

It should be noted that if the kids aren't up on the issues, it may be because they watch FOX 4. At no point during the broadcast were any of the "issues" explained in any detail. The one reference to the dueling Senate proposals was that the "tougher" one focused more on "security issues." The clear message: who could possibly be against national security?

The only student who was protrayed as knowing the issues was shown saying that it was time to end the protests. The clear message: See, the responsible kids aren't on board with these protests.

Then we got a special segement of "Tell It to Tim", in which recorded viewer responses are put on the air. Four viewer comments were played; all four were stridently opposed to the protests. Afterwards, the anchor (Tim) said, only a very, very small percentage of calls supported the protests. The clear message: you must be crazy if you support the students.

All in all, every effort was made to marginalize both the protestors and the issues at hand. I know it was a Fox broadcast, but it is a local affiliate and thus doesn't have much to do with national Fox news. And immigration is a local issue here in Dallas, so a local affiliate doesn't get off the hook for failing to cover it adequately like they do with most national news.

Regardless of where one stands on the immigration issue, I think stuff like this really does a disservice to our democracy. It is impossible to make an informed choice if our media doesn't provide necessary information and instead lapses into demagoguery and demonization.

It's Strictly Business

I don't play video games. I don't own a PS2 or an Xbox. I do have a Super Nintendo in the back of my closet. But if I were to go out and get a video game system, the Godfather game is what would tempt me. The whole notion of this tickles me tremendously, and that they got some of the original cast, including Brando! is delicious. Are any of you gamers interested in this game? If you end up getting it, let me know how it plays.

Columbia Pictures: Why Do They Hate Us So?

Hustle and Flow

Who has seen Hustle and Flow? I Netflixed it last night. As a middle-aged white guy from the suburbs, I know diddly about hip-hop, and don't listen to it. Just by the sheer force of its absorption into mainstream culture, though, I have heard it and am familiar with some of the traits, but I don't seek it out. Therefore, I had no interest in seeing this film when it was in theaters. But because of the Oscars I decided to take a look, and was very pleasantly surprised.

This film has a very standard structure, and is the descendant of films from Hollywood's golden age about star-struck youngsters who want to make it big. Granted, DJay is older and is a pimp, but other than that, most of this story has been seen before in many different forms. What made it work for me was Howard's performance, and the wit of the screenplay, by Craig Brewer. There's a scene where Howard and his producer, Anthony Anderson, are having a bitter argument and they are interrupted by Shug, one of DJay's ho's, who is quite pregnant. She's bought them a lava lamp, and merrily hooks it up in their makeshift studio. The argument is quickly forgotten as the absurdity of the situation makes itself known. I also thought Ludacris' performance as the star rapper that DJay wants to give his tape to was inspired. Based on this and his work in Crash, Ludacris is one of the better rappers turned actors (Mos Def is probably the best).

And damn if "It's Hard Out Here For a Pimp" isn't catchy.

Ask the Dust

Robert Towne, in his adaptation of John Fante's Ask the Dust, seems to be more interested in taking us to a place than telling us a story. This film doesn't flow from point to point, it herks and jerks and turns on dimes, bewildering and boring this viewer. Instead, I was left with the real taste of what it would have been like to live in Los Angeles in the 30s. A downtown boarding house, a beach house in Laguna, a shack in the desert, all of these are vividly rendered, but the tale, about a young writer who comes to L.A. to seek his fortune, I found frustrating.

And it's not Colin Farrell's fault! I actually found him to engaging and interesting, and marveled how he eliminated all aspects of his Irish brogue. Less successful is Salma Hayek, as the Mexican waitress he becomes involved with. I think Hayek is not entirely to blame, as the script requires to change moods and attitudes constantly. The two characters bicker and insult each other, and though I know there are relationships built on mutual contempt, this one I couldn't buy. There are generous shots of Hayek frolicking stark naked in the surf, which is a good thing.

There is also a strange sequence involving another woman in Farrell's life, played annoyingly by Idina Menzel.

I have not read the source material, so it could be that the book was as shapeless as the script.

Observations on the film career of Albert Brooks

( warning: spoilers will follow)

I watched the remake of the ‘In-Laws’ the other night and while watching Albert Brooks play his part it got me thinking of his directorial efforts from 1985 to 2000 and the trajectory and development (or lack of) of his films.

Looking back over his 1985-2000 directorial efforts, there seems to be a slow and steady decline in his work. I’ve always loved ‘Lost in America’, one of the best comedies of its time. It has at least 4 great scenes (Brooks gets fired, Brooks trying to convince the casino owner to give them their money back, Brooks talking about not using ‘nest egg’, Brooks at the unemployment office). While the ending of Brooks going back to his old job somewhat anti-climatic, it’s probably an appropriate ending in the context of Brooks’ character – going straight back into the rat race. Probably one of the strengths of the film was that Brooks’ whiny, yuppie character felt quite cutting edge when first explored in 1985.

I remember really enjoying ‘Defending Your Life’ when I watched it on video around a decade ago. I watched it on DVD a few months back and to be honest, it was less impressive and funny then I recalled. It had the usual pleasures one expects from a Brooks film and had a nice performance from Meryl Streep but in the end, it wasn’t as memorable as it could’ve been.

I think the problem with it was demonstrated by a scene where we’re shown how nervous Brooks’ character is before he has to do public speaking. The scene falls down because, instead of Brooks acting out his character’s fear and nervousness, we see him tell another character how nervous he is. It just doesn’t convince and therefore the comic potential of the scene is lost.

‘Mother’ is probably about the same standard as ‘DYL’ – reasonably amusing but lacking the inspiration and great scenes that defined ‘LIA’. It benefits from a good revelation at the end about Brook’s mother (well-played by Debbie Reynolds) which brings the film to a satisfying conclusion.

‘The Muse’ (which I saw at the cinema) was a disappointment as Brooks seemed to be just going through the motions and the dilemma of his character wasn’t particularly interesting. After all, Brooks inspiration from ‘the muse’ (well played by Sharon Stone) inspires him to write what sounds like a ho-hum Jim Carrey comedy. Perhaps Brooks was putting in some subtle criticism of the lowly aspirations of Hollywood types but it didn’t make the film any more enjoyable. The ending like ‘Mother was well done, with the revelation as to who the ‘muse’ actually was (a complete fraud) being a nice comment on Hollywood and giving the film extra context and meaning. But overall, this was a limp, even dreary effort where Brooks seemed to have little new to observe or say.

And then we come to the ‘In-Laws’ – while Brooks didn’t write or direct it it’s one of his rare acting performances so it is notable. I think Jeffrey Wells was pretty spot on with his review on this film – it’s no classic but is pretty enjoyable throwaway thanks to a jaunty attitude, the occasional inspired comic bit and a entertaining performance from Douglas.

But one of the things that stood out to me was Brooks performance doing his familiar whiny comic persona – it was fairly amusing but there was a tiredness about it that suggested, not only that we’ve been here before, but that Brooks perhaps should’ve moved on from this.

And that’s perhaps why Brooks’ directorial efforts have fallen away from 1985 to 2000 – he hasn’t really evolved or taken risks with new territory – instead relying on the ‘same old, same old’ and as a result his persona and films have felt increasingly tired. I haven’t seen his latest film ‘Looking for Humour in the Muslim World’ (hasn’t been released in Australia as yet, if ever), but I hope Brooks has in it him to direct one more film that reaches the heights of ‘LIA’.

Inside Man

Inside Man is a surprising film, most notably for it being a plot-driven tight little caper thriller from, ta-dah, Spike Lee. Coming on the heels of Woody Allen's Match Point, this seems like an interesting time for New York-centric independent auteurs. Lee hasn't sold out, but maybe he is taking a page from some others in creating a stylish hit that will then fund his more personal films.

Anyway, I had a good time (mostly), with the only minus being that I figured out a good chunk of what was going on just a little bit too early in the film for it to be completely satisfying. Oh, and I think I am getting a little tired of the good twenty-five year run that a certain stock all-purpose movie villain category has had, but it didn't really detract much here.

I'm not sure if I liked or disliked the music: many scenes in the bank were laden with melodramatic John Barry-type Bond-esque cues that had me half expecting Blofeld to unveil his latest destroyer of worlds contraption, but they held back just a bit from being too over the top. And I also thought I heard a quote from a Jerry Goldsmith score that I was surprised to see got an actual credit (so perhaps I missed John Barry's credit?).

This is the first digitally-projected film I have seen since The Phantom Menace in New Jersey in 1999. That presentation used an earlier version of the Texas Instruments DLP system used for Inside Man, and at the time it took my breath away. It was even more interesting to make a direct comparison by walking across the hall after the movie and looking at the same movie film-projected in an identical auditorium--the months-old print looked pretty muddy in comparison. Later I was astonished to find some pointed criticism of the system from sources such as The Perfect Vision and others, but I don't get it. Sure, if you have a brand new print running through a perfectly maintained projector with the proper brightness, you might see something that looks better than digital projection. But my two experiences with digital have been about as perfect as I can imagine a theater experience: razor-sharp focus, no framing problems, bright projection, and about as pristine an image as one could ever expect to see. The one other key quality where digital absolutely stomps all over film projection for me is the complete lack of image jitter. I have yet to notice a film presentation outside of IMAX where I could detect no slight movement in the image, and digital delivers rock-solid jitterlessness. In that area the digital trailers with all their titles are sometimes more impressive than the movie itself.

So kudos to Carmike for plunging ahead with digital projection. After being the dominant chain here through the '90's, they fell behind when the stadium-seating craze hit just after they had completed building several new non-stadium cinemas. They debuted digital projection locally last week at the Park Place 16 with She's the Man--that was a big disappointment when I was hoping for V for Vendetta. This week it expanded to three screens at that theater and more will follow. With their THX-certified screens and digital projection, Park Place is my new favorite theater.

What Going to the Movies is All About

It's really great when you can go to movie on opening weekend at a theater that just installed their digital projection equipment in a THX-certified auditiorium (though the assistant manager hasn't a clue what THX is, unfortunately, nor does the theater bother to advertise it anymore or even run the THX trailer), only to have it almost ruined by you pondering during the last third of the movie what exactly you're going to say to the stupid middle-aged middle-upper-class white fat cow in the row behind you who didn't silence her cellphone, didn't think you'd mind her talking on it, then didn't think you'd mind hearing her and her golf-playing balding hubby discussing whatever was so fucking important that they had to talk about it and yet still wanted to sit there and watch the goddamn movie. I know the black guys sitting behind me were pissed, but what were they going to do? I'm thinking, what can I say that will make her never want to go to a movie again, because there's no point in pointing out her rudeness or the error of her ways, since she obviously has enough sense to figure that out so she must think that she's above all that shit. But then they leave when the credits start and before the lights come up, and you never get a chance. Damn.

But anyway, Inside Man was pretty good. Review to come.

What I Care About

The Boys of Baraka

Directed by Heidi Ewing and Rachel Grady, The Boys of Baraka focuses on three "at risk" seventh grade young men from Baltimore who are accepted as students to a remote boarding school in Kenya. The Baraka School, we are told, annually accepts about 20 boys from inner city neighborhoods and attempts to prepare them for high school. It is plainly apparent that this is an opportunity they would never otherwise have, and the boys' parents are only too happy to give them a chance when the alternatives, put bluntly by a school recruiter, are most likely jail or an early death.

The film introduces one fact at the very beginning that I kept turning over and over in my head, that 76% of African-American males fail to graduate high school. Think about what a complete disaster our public schools must be for that to be true. The only possible explanations for it is that we as a society, consciously or otherwise, must be accepting that those kids can't really do any better. If that belief of inferiority is not the very definition of racism, I don't know what is.

And it's this belief that the film confronts head-on. It may sound like a predictable outline for a film; freed from their oppressive home life, the boys flourish. Meanwhile, of course, because we're dealing with kids, and Kids Say The Darnedest Things, everyone has a good laugh (as in last year's simple-minded Mad Hot Ballroom, which is similarly themed but is put to shame by this film's complexity).

But not so fast. The insight we get from these kids is nothing short of stunning. Most of them are somehow seriously deficient in reading; a counselor wonders how one boy could have gotten as far as seventh grade "without anyone noticing that he's not learning anything." Another boy, after a tantrum, talks about how he struggles with whether he should be listening to the side of him that tells him to be good and the side of him that tells him to be bad. The videos they send home are heartbreaking, because they show us just how hard the boys are struggling to accept real, genuine hope into their lives after their rough upbringing.

And the upshot is that the image of inner-city youth that we're so often shown, that of the gang-banging, drug-dealing thugs, is directly challenged. The film shows us before our very eyes how good kids, with parents (and/or other guardians) that desperately want the best for them, give up hope and are completely written off by our society.

This film was released in 2005, and it's yet another case of a magnificent documentary that is slighted by the Academy. If The Boys of Baraka doesn't challenge the conventions of the documentary form like last year's other major slight, Werner Herzog's Grizzly Man, it shares with it a story that is as gripping and urgent as any fictional tale.

Click "Link" to read the full review...

World's Oldest Tortoise Dies At 250 Years of Age

Rest in peace, Addwaita.

The Notorious Bettie Page

What's the level of interest for The Notorious Bettie Page? As someone who used to work in skin magazines, Bettie Page is close to goddess status and her story is pretty interesting. Director Mary Harron's track record doesn't thrill me. I hated American Psycho, thought I Shot Andy Warhol was so-so. But I'll probably see this. Also nice to see Gretchen Mol come back after being anointed a superstar, then slipping into complete obscurity.

The Stars Our Destination

Above all, let us pray that they do this one right.

One of my favorite sci-fi stories ever, considered one of the best of all time, The Stars My Destination (aka Tiger! Tiger!) is once again being attempted to be brought to the big screen.

Quickest way to describe this amazing book is "Oldboy in space." Empire has a good synopsis.

It tells the story of Gully Foyle, the last survivor of the battle-wrecked ship The Nomad, drifting in deep space. When a passing spacecraft ignores his distress call, he swears a terrible revenge on the crew and society in general. But his plan of vengeance ends up uncovering a massive secret within his future world.

Bester’s book is widely considered to tackle the themes seen in cyberpunk fiction and other sci-fi stories years before the likes of William Gibson. This will be one tough book to adapt, considering that our “hero” is a raging, animalistic psycho who (spoiler)develops the ability to teleport through space.(spoiler end)

The bad news? It's been bought by Lorenzo di Bonaventura, who last year brought us Doom, Derailed, Constantine and Four Brothers. So, jitters.

But the man may have developed some taste in property. He's also adapting Neil Gaiman's Stardust with Matthew Vaughn (Layer Cake) and Guy Gavriel Kay's The Lions of Al-Rassan with Edward Zwick. And, eh.. Transformers: The Movie with the Bay. All right, so it looks bad.

One can dream that a guy like Fincher or Nolan takes this on, and not some idiot video director whose previous experience extends to Black Eyed Peas videos. But who to play Gully Foyle? For a long time there was really only one face. James Gandolfini. But now he might have finally gotten too old. A friend made a good case for Russell Crowe and Mel Gibson.

Anyone else read the book, or have any thoughts?

Damn Jewish Anti-Semites

"Eyal Zusman and Amitai Sandy from Israel followed the unfolding of the 'Muhammad Cartoon-Gate' events in amusement. But when they read that an Iranian newspaper had announced a contest for the best anti-semitic cartoon, they felt insulted.

'We'll show the world we can do the best, sharpest, most offensive Jew hating cartoons ever published!' said Sandy 'No Iranian will beat us on our home turf!'

"Today they announced the launch of the Israeli Anti-Semitic Cartoons Contest - this time drawn by Jews themselves."

The winner, judged by a panel consisting of amongst others Art Spiegelmann, should be announced shortly.

A trailer for Little Miss Sunshine

Just came out on the Apple website.

Trailer doesn't spoil much, a few jokes mostly. Looks very good. Can see why this was the big winner at Sundance. Can't really say if it will earn back all the money it cost (what was it, like $15 million?). Think it depends a lot on circumstance.

Release date is apparently July 28th, and from seeing what little there's available here, looks as if that if 40 Year Old Virgin didn't make Steve Carell a household name, then this just might.

Yay or nay, anyone?

Weinstein Co, You're on Notice

All right, Weinsteins. You did a great deal of damage to your image in my eyes when you dumped a bunch of crap on the market right before you left Miramax. Proof was respectable, but An Unfinished Life, The Brothers Grimm, and, especially, Secuestro Express pretty much sucked. And that's not even to mention Underclassman and Venom, which I wisely skipped.

Since then, you've not helped yourselves by releasing a bunch of crap under your own names. Granted, I didn't see Derailed or Doogal or Wolf Creek or Hoodwinked, so they may be high art for all I know. You'll permit me to remain skeptical, however.

On the other hand, I did see The Matador, as well as Transamerica, The Libertine, and Mrs. Henderson Presents, and they were all crap. Oh sure, a few of them got decent reviews but I saw right through them. You can't hide from me.

Which brings us to what may be the final straw: Lucky Number Slevin. No, of course I haven't seen it yet, since it's not out for two more weeks. And no, I'm not complaining about the dumb-ass faux-clever use of "Slevin" in the title, although I do find plays on words in titles annoying. And even though I think you guys are really pushing it with the upside-down "7" in the title on the poster, I won't make a big deal out of it.

No, no, the big problem is something I noticed when I came across the film's website. That's right, I'm calling you out on the "#" in the title - "Lucky # Slevin".

I think I speak for the entire sane world when I say that this, quite simply, cannot stand. It makes no sense, and even if it does make sense, it's just not right. Slevin is not a number! It cheapens your movie, like it tries too hard to look clever and cool and instead becomes tedious and gimmicky. As if the world needs another dumb Elmore Leonard/Tarantino ripoff.

So here's the deal. By the time the movie opens, the title on the film better be "Lucky Number Slevin". Or else you're cowards.

Redemption Song

Old pirates yes they rob I
Sold I to the merchant ships
Minutes after they took I from the
Bottom less pit
But my hand was made strong
By the hand of the almighty
We forward in this generation triumphantly

Won't you help to sing these songs of freedom
Cause all I ever had, redemption songs

Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery
None but ourselves can free our minds
Have no fear for atomic energy
Cause none of them can stop the time
How long shall they kill our prophets
While we stand aside and look
Some say it's just a part of it
We've got to fulfill the book

Won't you help to sing, these songs of freedom
Cause all I ever had, redemption songs

All I ever had, redemption songs
Songs of freedom

-Bob Marley

The Other Gay Cowboy Movie: Super Collector's Edition DVD

Hmm...



Kudos to Fox for basing their entire marketing plan on something that seems like the premise for an ill-conceived Trailer Mash-Up.

Radiohead Do Dick

Twitchfilm is reporting that Radiohead will be doing the soundtrack and score to Richard Linklaters upcoming A Scanner Darkly. There were rumours (denied) before. Seems definite now. Good news.

And The Bends is their best album.

V for Vendetta

NOTE: I'm not really all that good at knowing what constitutes a spoiler, and I'm not prone to worry about it all that much. You might see the movie before reading this review if such things concern you.

So, first things first. I don't know if it's an omen or not regarding the movie's box office, but at the 10pm screening last night, there were maybe 15 people or so in attendance. I was shocked, really, at the sparse corwd, because I think the marketing campaign has been pretty strong. Perhaps it's simply a case of me projecting my own anticipation onto others.

With that out of the way, I'm afraid that I'm fairly disappointed with the film on the whole. There are ideas here that lead me to think that this could have been a great film, and there are moments here and there that almost deliver on that promise. But ultimately, it falls short of the mark.

The biggest problem is the character of V. I'm sure that sounds hard to believe, since his character is what appealed to me in the first place. But as played by Hugo Weaving, he's a bit of a clown. He starts on the completely wrong foot, delivering a silly alliterative monologue (all the words start with V, ha ha!) in his very first scene, and flipping eggs for Natalie Portman in the next. It's a terribly misguided introduction to the character. While things get better later in the movie, the first impression stuck with me, making it hard to really take this character seriously.

V's motivations were also problematic for me. The idea of a citizen uprising against their government is a provocative one in the times we're in, but I felt that the movie was frequently distracted from this theme. There are a lot of murky flashback scenes that kinda, sorta explain V's origins, which I found unnecessary. They make V's vendetta seem more personal and less social-minded, and at times it seems that it's not fascism and oppression that bothers V so much as the individual fascists and oppressors. It begs the question, would he have a problem had he not been so terribly mistreated? I think it's a bit of a philosophical copout to ask that question and not deal with it, but it's not hard to assume that the guys who thought "knife time" would be really cool didn't even realize they were asking it. There's a big difference between "freedom fighter" and "avenging angel"; the movie is never able to reconcile those roles for V, and doesn't really even try.

It also doesn't help matters that the government "party members" are so often cartoonish. John Hurt's High Chancellor is all sneering and ranting, even in the flashback scenes when he's still running for office. I just didn't find it convincing that he could have won the trust of the people, especially in the hard times during which he came to power. Roger Allam's broadcaster and John Standing's pedophile priest are also way over the top. Again, it's kind of a copout to give people like this such transparently evil traits, as if a top role in an oppressive fascist government is no big deal by itself.

All that said, there are some great moments. Natalie Portman's head-shaving torture scenes are completely frightening without being overly graphic and misogynist, and the letter she finds during these scenes comes as close as this movie ever does to making the fundamental case against fascism. V's scene with Sinead Cusack, who plays a doctor from the old days, is quite powerful, and shows that the "avenging angel" storyline could have worked fine on its own. And Stephen Rea's chief inspector has a compelling storyline all by himself, as a man who's just starting to wake up to the evil around him.

As a final note, I take it that it's widely assumed that the Wachowski Brothers were the ones that really made this movie, despite James McTeigue's name in the credits as director. I would doubt that very much. The action scenes here are very choppy, and at times downright amateurish. There's none of the slick elegance found in the Matrix movies.

Click "Link" to read the actual review....

"Enough is enough, I’ve had it with these snakes."

Those are the immortal words that signal the beginning of New Line Cinema's sure-to-be-massive marketing campaign for "Snakes on a Plane".

Not since the "Episode 1" teaser was released back in November 1998 has the world been so amped up for a movie trailer. That movie featured a wooden child actor, a jailbait Natalie Portman and Jar Jar Binks. This movie features Sam Jackson, hot flight attendants and snakes hiding in fat women's dresses.

Gentlemen, the wait is finally over. You will never be the same once you click here.

Inside Man

What is everyone's anticipation of Inside Man? The trailer intrigues me. I've only heard one person's opinion, and that was when Wells linked to Emmanuel Levy, who raves. And, of course, it's directed by Spike Lee, which also intrigues me.

Lee's career has been interesting, to say the least. I loved Do Right the Thing, and I also admired Malcolm X. Since then his record has been spotty, to say the least. Looking at his filmography, I've seen more of his work than I had realized: Jungle Fever, Girl 6, Clockers, and The 25th Hour. Each had something going for them, but were seriously flawed. I also admired his documentary, Four Little Girls. I missed Crooklyn, He Got Game, Get on the Bus, Bamboozled and She Hate Me, which was roundly panned.

Inside Man certainly has a good cast. I'm interested to see Clive Owen as a villain, and Jodie Foster playing against type. Denzel Washington seems to be playing a character he's played before, but we'll see.

The one false note in 'About Schmidt'

One of the best films I’ve seen at the cinema in recent years is ‘About Schmidt’. Warren Schmidt’s monologue at the very end of the film is very moving and a superb culmination of what the film is about.

But ‘About Schmidt’ always had one flaw that bothered me – it’s not a particularly glaring one but it was an irritating one as it was so jarring compared with the rest of the film and was easily avoidable.

It’s the concept of Warren’s letters to his foster child Ndugu. I just couldn’t accept that a character like Warren would not be aware of the absurdity of writing such sophisticated, complex letters about such adult aspects of his life to a 6 year-old African child.

Not only that, but it’s the bizarre tone of the letters where he treats Ndgku as if he were writing to an American teenager about to head out to college ( Schmidt writes "I highly recommend that you pledge a fraternity when you go to college") almost seem like they belong in a low-brow comedy where the bizarre absurdity of the letters is supposedly funny (wouldn't he have worked out before the Nun wrote to him at the end that Ndgku couldn't speak English?). I guess that’s what Payne/Taylor were aiming for was to illustrate Schmidt’s self-absorption and condescenion ("You probably can't wait to run and cash this check and get yourself something to eat") but it isn’t convincing at all – he may be a bland, complacent character he’s not a village idiot.

It always been a jarring note on what was otherwise a first-class film - it would've worked better if Warren had written a diary. I really seen any critics point out this issue so maybe I've missing something. What do others think?

On The Trouble of Anthropomorphical Casting

Or You Can Cross All Your T's But... (from a quick read of yesterday's Empire Online)

Casting Benicio del Toro as a werewolf is one of those things that just seem so inevitable that you wonder what the point is. You can already picture the performance in the back of your mind, maybe because it's like he's already done it before - The Pledge comes to mind. Having Andrew Kevin Walker script is also a really natural fit, and he'll know exactly how to get in the right amount of gothic horror feel. And they'll probably get the perfect semi-hip director to make it.

Basically it's about as safe a property as Cinderella Man. You know exactly how it's going to turn out and there's no excitement whatsoever. Next they'll cast Robin Williams as a man who gets the properties of a monkey, Tom Cruise as hyena-man and Dakota Fanning as a smurf.
The premise of a girl being "cursed with a pig-face", as Christina Ricci is in the film Penelope, inherently implies a painful predicament for the character, likely being the whole world thinks she's ugly. Problem with this though is that, uh... she looks pretty cute. Cute, close to beautiful, to be honest. Thereby ruining the entire premise, and creating something of a credibility problem.

I'll still see it though, if only cause she looks great.
For those fans of Harry Potter who haven't read Philip Pullman's Northern Lights trilogy, all I can say is you're missing out. Fantastic set of books. Very much regret missing it's run on the West End stage in London (I'm poor, alas). Even the Arch-Bishop of Canterbury praised it to the heavens (if you'll excuse my wording).

With the casting of the main character of Lyra underway in the UK, the film looks like it might actually be happening. Fingers crossed they'll keep the adult tone without losing the atmosphere of the books. Or vice versa.

The most important casting ain't Lyra, though. What will be most indicative of where they're going with this will be the casting of the Iorek Byrnison, an armored polar-bear. Much as the casting of Liam Neeson as Aslan said about how the Narnia films would be, or Andy Serkis as Gollum and King Kong, the casting and treatment of this guy will show where they're going with this series of films. Here's hoping they make some brave choices.

The Death of bicycle bob

This happened like a week ago, but it's still worth mentioning.

How many of us read The Hot Blog? As I've no doubt mentioned before, I really respect Poland, even though from time to time his role as holier-than-thou ombudsman of film journalism gets a bit rich, none the less, the man can dredge through a lot bullshit that would be impossible to comprehend otherwise.

I was happy when Poland decided to start blogging - even if it seemed to be in response to Wells' newly formed Hollywood Elsewhere - since maybe that'd give him some more freedom and leeway to his opinions, like in the good old days of Roughcut. The Hot Button sometimes got a bit long-winded for my tastes. After a while some commenters started to show up, and after some initial missteps it looked like this could actually become the hub of serious online discussion of movie politics that Wells failed to build up on our own former forum.

One of those commenters was bicycle bob. Now, there was something that I initially found quite endearing about bicycle bob. Not just the username (genius), but the fact that he made ignorance a point of pride. bob would throw out short little platitudes, always written without caps, and whenever these were confronted, he would counter with unfounded ad hominem attacks. bicycle bob was the ultimate caricature of the hillbilly Republican.

But even though bob was amusing, The Hot Blog was still supposed to be about the serious discussion, and there were guys there who had some interesting opinions - people like Stella's Boy (critic Paul Doro), Joe Leydon (sometime film professor), Lota and Poland himself. Sometimes guys like Drew McWeeny dropped by, usually to defend themselves. Problem was that bicycle bob kept dropping in, and most sane people found it impossible to let his outrageous statements go unquestioned. And what I initially took as caricature, was in fact honest-to-god opinion. An even bigger problem was that bob was gaining supporters.

Even before blustealer, Bruce and joefitz84 came into the picture, there were suspicions - or just outright belief - that Mark (Ziegler) was another of bicycle bobs aliases. Rare was the time they disagreed, especially with Poland, and frequent the similarity in opinion, and spelling mistakes. This came to be one the 'tells'; the shared spelling mistakes. But the shit really hit the fan when the user named Chester began a personal campaign to oust bob and his (supposed) aliases. It could also be, perhaps rightfully, claimed that Chester was out to ridicule Poland.

I won't go into the twists and turns of the Chester debacle, or whether or not he really was Jeff Wells, but it all culminated around mid-august. Shortly after that, Chester went away. Don't know whether it was his own volition or not.

But bicycle bob and his ilk still hung around, and after a while people started giving up. Stella's Boy started posting less frequently, and even Joe Leydon went away after that. bicycle bob found new targets, such as jeffmcm and whenever I would drop by I'd feel a bit sad. I even tried to help out, appealing to Poland directly, even though that wasn't much appreciated by him. He told me to e-mail him, and I felt a bit dumbfounded. If he didn't read the comments we wrote on his site, what chance was there of him taking an e-mail seriously? So I gave up.

Then suddenly this week I dropped by, after having left it alone for weeks, and saw a post called Internal Blog Business. I don't know what finally got Poland to do what he should have done a long time ago, but whatever it was, god bless. bicycle bob was outed. Towards the end there he was using over 15 aliases (although the real figure was probably closer to 20).

Was Poland as ignorant of the identity abuse as he wants to give off? I doubt it. And why did he condone it? Anyone's guess. The more important question though is - what does this mean for The Hot Blog? Who knows. But maybe now some great discussions can start taking place. There are some pretty intelligent, or at least opinionated, people there. I look forward to reading what they have to say.

Quick Vote

Sidebar on the right, or the left?

The Bounty

Went and rented these yesterday. Video store has a good deal where you can rent four films for four days for forty-four crowns (around $5.50). That's what them yellow stickers say, anyway.

Haven't seen Meet the Feebles, despite repeated rentals and several opportunities, so that's fucking first. Only seen parts of Seabiscuit and Wrath of Khan, or I just remember them pretty badly, so that might be some well earned restitution. On theirs or my part, don't know. And though the word on Intolerable Cruelty was mixed and mostly negative, it's a Coen brothers I ain't seen.

All in all, with this and V for Vendetta booked tomorrow, might be a good movie weekend.

How bad will this suck?

Lucas plans Star Wars TV spin-off

From the Guardian:


George Lucas... still not done with Star Wars.

And you thought the Star Wars saga finished with Episode III: Revenge of the Sith. Wrong you were, my youngling friend.
George Lucas and his team are currently hard at work on a Star Wars live-action TV series. It will be set between the end of Revenge of the Sith and the beginning of Episode IV: A New Hope. The plot would centre on Luke Skywalker's early years growing up on Tatooine.


Yesterday, producer Rick McCallum announced the tale would be spun over at least 100 hours. "Hopefully if we can make it work and everybody's excited and watches it, we will keep on going," McCallum told BBC Radio 1. A writing team will start sweating on a script soon, with filming scheduled to begin in 2008 for transmission later the same year.
McCallum said there would be "a whole bunch of new characters" and the series would be "much more dramatic and darker". The actors from the films are not expected to take up their roles again.

The live-action TV series is not the only spin-off in the offing. Last year, at a Star Wars fans' convention in Indianapolis, Lucas also said he was preparing a 3D animated TV series called Clone Wars, about the battle led by Yoda, Obi-Wan Kenobi and other Jedi knights against the army of the Republic at the end of Episode II: Attack of the Clones. Clone Wars is based on an existing animated series, made up of five-minute episodes, broadcast on the Cartoon Network TV channel. It is set to be ready next year.

Before work on the live-action TV series can begin, Lucas needs to work on his long-cherished project Red Tails, a drama about African-American pilots in the second world war. He has also just approved the script to Indiana Jones 4, which will see the return of Harrison Ford at the whip and Steven Spielberg in the director's chair.

Frankenstein

I recently purchased the Frankenstein Universal Legacy collection, which consists of five Frankenstein films from Universal's Golden Age of horror. It is impressively packaged, and contains lots of good extras (although there is a feature with hack director Stephen Sommer, who made the god-awful Van Helsing). Film historian Rudy Behlmer provides excellent commentary, and there's also a commentary (which I haven't listened to yet) for Bride of Frankenstein.




Frankenstein, now a cultural icon, is an interesting to film to watch these days. At the time of its release, it was a sensation, and scared the bejeesus out of people, particulary the first appearance of the creature. The film wouldn't spook a six-year old today, I expect. It's difficult to not think of scenes from Young Frankenstein. There is also an incredible gap of logic when the monster, on the loose, manages to find Frankenstein's home to menace his fiancee. Apparently, Frankie can read a phone book.

Still, though, the direction by James Whale is fascinating to watch (note how he uses several close-ups to introduce characters in an early scene, rather than using an establishing long-shot). The makeup and sets, which we automatically associate with the character and story, were original to the film, and still hold up as terrific innovations. And the performance by Boris Karloff is quite moving.

Bride of Frankenstein is considered by many to be the better of the two Whale Frankenstein films, while the other three trail off in quality. Karloff, after Bride of, only made one more film as the creature, Son of Frankenstein. Bela Lagosi, who initially turned down the role because he didn't want a non-speaking role, finally played the monster in the last film.

This collection is a worthy purchase for those who are interested in old horror films.

A Random List of Good Songs

Blues From a Gun - The Jesus and Mary Chain
Mystery Girl - Roy Orbison
Portland Oregon - Loretta Lynn
Land - Patti Smith
History Repeating - Propellerheads
Bird on a Wire - Leonard Cohen
Something I Can Never Have - Nine Inch Nails

Hollywood continues to be bereft of ideas

News comes today that two more films based on bad television shows are in the works: Welcome Back, Kotter, this time starring Ice Cube (this time, will the Sweathogs be packing heat?) and Dallas, starring John Travolta as J.R., also starring Owen Wilson, Shirley MacLaine, and Jennifer Lopez. Those are two movies I'll never see.

What is wrong with this picture?

Ron Mwangaguhunga seems to have noticed it first.

Reviewing

I feel somewhat afraid of being guilty of overpraise in regards to the films I've reviewed so far. Tsotsi is a better film than Strings, but my review of Strings reads more positive. I don't know if one gets across the correct opinion in one's reviews.

Still, I'm very sure history will prove me right (ohey, did that sound desperate) on Fly's social class trilogy.

The difficulty with reviewing films without the benefit of knowing other people's views is that you don't know if anyone else will agree with you, or if you're just plain wrong. I mean, I kinda liked Wild Wild West first time I saw it. Then I found out how bad it was. And I still like watching Forrest Gump, even if I know what its perspective on what the hippies achieved is, and even sort of felt it when I first watched it. Can I then be counted on as someone who should even be reviewing films? It's one thing, after all, to have a different taste in film. It's another to have none.

Drabet

In my review of Storm I wrote about a journalist who claimed the Danes were continuing to beat the Swedish film industry. It's true. Pathetic, of the Swedes, but painfully obvious.

To go somewhat back in history; I don't know how many of you read, or even remember, the last Viking Gangbang column. But anyway, in it I mentioned Per Fly's trilogy on the social classes, at that point comprising of The Bench and The Inheritance, dealing with the under- (some would rather say working-) and upper class, respectively. Like I said then, "these are dark, pitiless films" well worth checking out.

Now with the release of the concluding part of the trilogy, Drabet, Per Fly sets his focus on the middle class. Drabet basically translates into 'The Manslaughter', but something tells me that won't be the English title.
Carsten (Jesper Christensen), a former radical leftist, is a midddle-aged high school social sciences teacher, married to a Swedish woman (Pernilla August) with whom he has a nice villa and an adult son. And on the side he is having an affair with former student Pil (Beate Bille), a leftist activist with who - it is assumed - he relives his youthful days fighting American imperialism, discussing politics.

Pil though, it is made clear in the beginning, is not satisfied with simply talking, but believes in action. But something goes very awry, when she and her fellow activists are arrested for the manslaughter of a police officer, after having thrashed the offices of a missile manufacturer. Carsten leaves his family to be with Pil, and from there on things go more and more complex.

Jesper Christensen, magnificent in The Bench, is once again in the lead role, but now plays a very different man, with a very different set of values. It has to be said that the man has one of those exquisitely weathered faces that instantly evoke a sense of pathos.

(I've had professors like Carsten, and always found them to be hypocrites, so there was a certain not-entirely-guilty satisfaction in watching him, bit by bit, abandon his righteous values.)
The question of whether there even is such a thing as social class is of course a discussion worth having. In the context of Drabet, and Fly's two other films, seeing them out of that perspective gives these already great dramas even greater depth; Drabet becoming a reflection on not only individual but collective self-deception, guilt and lies.

But now, with the trilogy concluded, what seems to be a main theme and message Per Fly tries to get across is one of self-honesty and responsibility. And he really strikes it home.

If there ever were some contemporary films that deserved the epithet 'Modern Classics', and an immediate treatment for the Criterion Collection, these are it. Together they form a body of work on the level of The Celebration and Lars von Triers trilogy of suffering women. They are simply that great.

A film Craig Schwartz would've been proud of?

Strings might be the greatest string-puppet film ever made. Whether you find this statement to be great or dubious praise pretty much decides if this is for you or not.

Of course, it's the Danes who are responsible. Again. (sigh) It's getting kind of sad.

Using Epic Fantasy Plot A1, Strings is the story of a prince who must journey to an enemy kingdom to avenge his fathers death. Yet back home treason is afoot as the King's brother makes ready to assassinate his nephew, marry away his sister and take the throne for himself.
And it's all done with string-puppets, and the occasional well-chosen cgi.

The film's stereotypical plot may be its greatest weakness, and its almost total lack of humor might not be to everyones taste. It ain't Team America, exactly.

But Strings is a film that is very much aware that it is a string-puppet movie, if that makes any sense, making its obvious weaknesses a strength. The clichéd plot allows it to focus on other aspects of the world itself. For the people in this world their strings are apparent and cherished, a tie to life, to destiny. And how do you kill a string-puppet? You cut off its strings, naturally!

At one point of the film I found myself grinning. There truly are new things to be seen in film.
Because most of all, Strings is just gorgeous to look at. Great care has gone into not only the puppets but their surroundings. A frozen battlefield riddled with wooden-soldiers and strings covered in snow is certainly one of the more unforgettable images I've seen in a film lately.

Anyway, Strings is a strange little film, but it has its charms. Fans of films like The Dark Crystal should take note. I actually prefer it to Dark Crystal. Hell, I prefer it to Team America. At least this film has a point.

Anders Rønnow (pronounced 'ruh-nov') Klarlund's upcoming film is a total 180 from this film, the very anticipated (even before I saw this one) How To Get Rid Of The Others. It's to be released 2007. Can't get done soon enough.

Tsotsi

Not as excellent as I'd anticipated but still pretty damn good.

Those with high expectations of this being the South African City of God should perhaps lower them a bit. This is a much smaller story, taking place over a much shorter span timespan. It doesn't have the frenzied pace of that Brazilian film, and elects to tread a more mainstream path.
The film starts, and mostly takes place, in the shantytown of Johannesburg (a slum with a population of over one million people), where a young man calling himself 'delinquent' ('Tsotsi') is the leader of a small gang of thugs. After a robbery gone wrong, the gang begins to dissolve and Tsotsi, through a series of mistakes and mishaps, lands himself the caretaker of a wealthy suburban couples' baby.

As I said before, though it shares many outward similarities to Meirelles' film, this is a much more internalized story, though no less ambitious for that. Like the poster of the film says this is a story about redemption, but not just if it's possible for the main character, but South Africa itself, a country still torn apart by social injustice, with one of the highest crime rates in the world, only beaten by Rio de Janeiro.

Presley Chweneyagae is convincing in the title role - 'tsotsi' may look like he's posing, but he's got quite the killer instinct, even if he may not be as cruel as his actions suggest. I was initially a bit annoyed with Chweneyagae's 'cold stare', but you get it later on.

The cinematography's also managed to catch the, pretty dangerous, charm and allure ofmodern Africa, its shantytowns and slums more specifically, even if it's beaten by - there he goes again - Meirelles' Constant Gardener.
Some of the supporting characters feel a little etchily sketched, but this is a story that is almost fable-like in its simplicity.

The film's complemented by a pretty good, bombastic, soundtrack.

I have a hard time imagining anyone not liking the film, except perhaps someone actively involved in African politics. Found it a worthy winner of Best Foreign Picture, at least among the alternatives.

Meet Famed Japanese Director Kurosawa (the other one)

Some fairly cool news for any Asian film fans who live in the Northeastern US: Kiyoshi Kurosawa will be participating in a three day lecture / screening series at Yale University from March 24-26.

Anyone who has followed Japanese film in the past decade knows Kurosawa as the genius behind behind "Kairo" (Pulse), "Cure" and "Bright Future".

Yale will also be hosting the North American premiere of the director's new film "Loft" on Saturday with a Q&A immediately thereafter. All screenings / workshops are open to the general public free of charge. Pre-registration information and a schedule of events can be found on Yale's website here.

What can I say? Three days with one of my favorite directors ten minutes from my house. Sweet.

This says it all

This was John Lydon's reponse when the Sex Pistols were inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. They won't be attending. Can't say as I blame him. Gotta love them!

Maureen Stapleton, R.I.P.

Maureen Stapleton passed away at the age of 80 today. She was a terrific character actress, probably because, as someone once said of her, (it might have been herself) that she looked like a cleaning lady that you might see riding the bus.

Probably her most famous film role is the one she won the Oscar for, Emma Goldman in Reds. I haven't seen Reds since it first came out back in '81, and I was underwhelmed. I'd love to get another look at it. Here's hoping the long-awaited DVD version comes out soon.

The Mad Prophet of the Airwaves

I don't have to tell you things are bad. Everybody knows things are bad. It's a depression. Everybody's out of work or scared of losing their job. The dollar buys a nickel's worth, banks are going bust, shopkeepers keep a gun under the counter. Punks are running wild in the street and there's nobody anywhere who seems to know what to do, and there's no end to it. We know the air is unfit to breathe and our food is unfit to eat, and we sit watching our TV's while some local newscaster tells us that today we had fifteen homicides and sixty-three violent crimes, as if that's the way it's supposed to be. We know things are bad - worse than bad. They're crazy. It's like everything everywhere is going crazy, so we don't go out anymore. We sit in the house, and slowly the world we are living in is getting smaller, and all we say is, 'Please, at least leave us alone in our living rooms. Let me have my toaster and my TV and my steel-belted radials and I won't say anything. Just leave us alone.'

Well, I'm not gonna leave you alone. I want you to get mad! I don't want you to protest. I don't want you to riot. I don't want you to write to your congressman because I wouldn't know what to tell you to write. I don't know what to do about the depression and the inflation and the Russians and the crime in the street.

All I know is that first you've got to get mad. You've got to say, 'I'm a HUMAN BEING, Goddamnit! My life has VALUE!' So I want you to get up now. I want all of you to get up out of your chairs. I want you to get up right now and go to the window, open it, and stick your head out and yell, 'I'M AS MAD AS HELL, AND I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE THIS ANYMORE!'

I've seen Network several times before, but I came away with something different after watching the new special edition of the film this morning. It's been endlessly discussed how prescient the film is in its indictment of the TV news culture, and that's obviously true. What really struck me today, though, was the cynical view of the public in the film.

Take the reaction to that iconic speech by Howard Beale (Peter Finch). When William Holden's daughter sticks her head out of the window, we hear a few isolated I'm-as-mad-as-hells, which grow into a chorus as the entire block takes part. It's a comical scene, hardly the release of pent-up frustration and anger that Beale envisions. Rather, it's more of a fun group activity: chic anger. By the time Beale gets his own show, "I'm as mad as hell, and I'm not going to take this anymore!" becomes a catchphrase, the whole studio audience repeating it with big grins on their faces. Being mad as hell is a fad, a game for the whole nation to join in on. And when Beale becomes "depressing", his audience slides dramatically, and again it doesn't seem that it's so much the substance of his rants so much as the tone that people react to.

The great joke of the movie, of course, is that Howard Beale is probably the most sane person in the movie, at least when he's on the air. He's a tragic figure, in a way, going from respected newsman to village idiot simply by raising his voice; no one even pays attention to the substance of his rants. He's marginalized at every turn, not least of all by his friend Max (Holden), who, as Faye Dunaway's Diana icily points out, is more concerned with "sex, scandal, brutal crime, sports, children with incurable diseases, and lost puppies" than the human reality that he pretends to care so much about. He (and implicitly the rest of his colleagues) prefers to think of Beale as an undignified old man and fret about damage done to his sacred profession rather than listen to anything Beale's actually saying.

Most of all, though, he's marginalized by his audience as "entertainment" - the truth becomes just another means for the masses to distract themselves. We see a lot of the same kinds of things happening today. Our economy is on an unsustainable path, we're in the thick of a dubious war, our image in the world is shot to hell, and yes, our air is still unfit to breathe and our food unfit to eat. But we need to look no further than the 2004 campaign of Howard Dean to see how easily "anger" is mocked and delegitimized. I'm not saying that Dean was a good candidate or a bad one, but how often was the question seriously addressed? How often did you hear serious analyses of his campaign platform, versus how often you heard "The Scream" replayed? It was a ceritifiable pop culture moment, and the nation had a good laugh.

The most piercing insight of Network isn't that TV news is corrupt, or that networks will do anything for ratings. It's that the audience enables the sensationalism and debasement of the public discourse that TV is seemingly responsible for. And in that way, I think that Network is most prescient of all.

One Week to Vendetta

Premieres worldwide on March 17th (here too).

I'll probably be there opening night. Anyone else?

When Conan came to Finland

For those of you who watch Conan O'Brien, tonight's show is a must-see. It covers, and I'm guessing effectively ends, that bizarre episode in Finlandic history when Conan found out about Finnish president Tarja Halonen, and decided to help her in the Finnish national elections. Mostly because they looked alike.
Apparently the whole hour will be dedicated to Conan's visit to Finland after Tarja's victory. He was greeted like a head of state.

Looks like great stuff.

By the way, Tarja is a woman.

A Word on Commenting

Two things have come to my attention regarding the comments.

First, the "Recent Comments" on the sidebar only pull from posts on the front page. In response, I've changed the settings so that the posts stay on the front for 14 days instead of seven. If you want to respond to something older, start a new post.

Second, jaydro has helpfully discovered that if you start a comment with quotation marks, it messes up the "Recent Comments" somehow. As such, it'd be appreciated if, when you quote someone in comments, you use italics instead. This is really accepted commenting protocol around the web anyway, so no big deal, I hope.

I'll try to fix both of these things, but no promises.

Night Watch (Nochnoi Dozor)

WARNING: This post contains a lot of plot points. Ordinarily, I'd say that they were "spoilers," but that would imply that revealing them would compromise the viewing experience. In this case, everything's too arbitrary for the revelation of plot points to matter one way or the other, but consider yourself warned nonetheless.

Despite the warnings from Nick, I ventured forth into the darkness to see Night Watch last night. I actually didn't think it was as bad as I anticipated, but I'd have to agree that it's not very good.

Mostly, I'd say that my problem was that it didn't make a lick of sense. Characters are introduced and abandoned (whatever happened to Olga the owl lady during the second half?), character traits are introduced and then discarded (a woman can turn into a tiger, but can't scurry up a ladder any quicker than a 12-year-old kid?), and a bunch of stuff happens that seems important when it happens but happens for no reason (what was the point of the power plant blowing up, exactly?)

Actually, that last problem applies to entire story threads. What was the deal with the virgin's curse? So much time is spent trying to undo it, and then it's undone and ... nothing. Events transpire exactly as they would have had nothing been done. Oh, I guess the plane lands safely and the lights come back on, for reasons I don't understand, but given the supposed importance of the Great Other turning to darkness, that hardly seems to matter, am I right?

Maybe I should just be patient. After all, it is the first film of a trilogy, so maybe all these things will be explained and/or turn out to matter in the end. And I have to concede that the film is made with the kind of passion for filmmaking and lack of cynicism that makes Robert Rodriguez's lesser movies still watchable. But this movie's an incoherent mess, and there's just no way around that.

Origami for me

Ever since I spilled coffee all over my faithful old Dell laptop (how does a computer sound when it dies? *pssssssss... rum-rum BEEP! Plop* blackness), I've been looking for something to replace it.

In my haste to complete some schoolwork I bought my current desktop for $350 on an auction site from some suspicious looking Iranian, and it's worked fine so far. But I still miss the manageability of the old guy, and so on and off I've been looking at the latest laptops.

The biggest reason for me to get a laptop is because I can bring it to the library, or just plain with me, and do my work away from home, where my internet connection just lures me away to other exploits (like now...).

While the old one was good, it was still a nine pound baby, not including the bag and wires, making noise and getting warmed up. All I wanted this time was something that was easy to handle and could do the basics. Front-runner up till now had been the Sony Vaio laptops (not an Apple bitch, so forget the iBooks). But even they felt like a bit too much.

I don't need the big screen. I don't need a dvd-player. I hate those little mousepads for your index finger. I don't need high performance. As long as I can use Word, Firefox, Winamp and the VLC media player, and see what's onscreen, I'm happy. If I can download some films and play some SNES emulations or old Lucasarts point-and-click adventures, that's a bonus and I'm even happier. Just something small, practical and easy.

Now I'm hesitant, cause it looks like someone heard my prayer. This Microsoft thing seriously has everything I'm looking for.It was unveiled at the CeBit in Hannover some days ago, and is supposed to be released over the second quarter. Microsoft is letting companies like Samsung, Asus and Dell do their own versions. Touch-screen with applicable keyboard, 512 ram, 30-40 gig, around 1 ghz, wi-fi, weighs two pounds. They're aiming for a price of around $1200.

It's always been a question of price vs manageability, and this thing looks like it passes the grade in both areas.

But I'm wondering if it's too good to be true. Microsoft's evil, right? Anyone else have any tips? I'd probably afford and buy one this summer, so there's still time to see how the whole thing pans out.

Video commercial here.

Neil Young on "The Daily Show"

jaydro says: Wow, Jon Stewart did the best celebrity interview (as opposed to author or politico) I've seen him do in like forever on The Daily Show (though he used to be really good when filling in for Tom Snyder on The Late, Late Show) when he interviewed Neil Young on Wednesday's show. Neil seemed more relaxed and full of conversation than I remember seeing him in an interview in a while, too. Heart of Gold opens here today.

Netflixin' Robert Altman

Previously on Hollywood Elsewhere I wrote about my self-created Robert Altman film festival on Netflix, and got some response about McCabe and Mrs. Miller. Now I have seen The Long Goodbye. It's an interesting, somewhat entertaining film that updates Raymond Chandler into the druggy, hedonistic seventies. Elliot Gould, who perhaps more than any other actor typifies the swingin' seventies, is perfect in the role of Philip Marlowe, who now lives in an L.A. apartment across the way from a gaggle of nudist, yoga-practicing hippies. Altman was clearly setting about redefining genres, as he did with the war film (M*A*S*H) and the western (McCabe). The noir private-eye film was an interesting genre for him to tackle, as he has repeatedly said he is not interested in story, and noir films, though atmospheric, usually have a strong story as a basis. Altman also uses a technique he would later use in Gosford Park--the camera is always moving. Also, typical of Altman, there is a lot of improvisation. The screenplay is by Leigh Brackett, who also wrote The Big Sleep (and wrote an orginal draft of The Empire Strikes Back (!) before dying.





Altman does not provide commentary on this disc but there is a good featurette with him discussing the film. Gould appears as well, talking about how at one time he was on the cover of Time magazine, but by the time The Long Goodbye came his way he had been unemployed for a year and a half.

The Proposition

The best film I have seen this year so far.

Having not seen more than a plot synopsis and no trailer, I came into this one pretty unprepared. Not that there is anything to prepare yourself for, save some pretty brutal action. This is just a plain excellent Western.

Guy Pearce plays one of two brothers captured by Captain Stanley (Ray Winstone), the local military/police chief, who is given the proposition of the title. Find and kill the older brother (Danny Huston) or the younger one will hang.
It's an excellent premise and setting the film in Australia proves to be a greater bonus than having it take place in the Old West would have been. After a while I started to wonder why they hadn't done this before and more often.

It succeeds on all the fronts I thought The Missing failed. Getting under your skin, managing to tell the history of an era and an area, with an honest depiction of the brutalisation of an indigenous people, with biblical and lyrical elements that don't go overboard (except almost once with John Hurt popping in). That and some well rendered and shaded characters.

The film turns out to be more of an ensemble drama, with great performances all around. Have to say that Danny Huston is becoming something of a favorite. His particular brand of the smiling bastard has gotten pretty appealing. It's good seeing him get some much needed exposure here.

Whoever hired Nick Cave as a screenwriter deserves some kind of finders fee. A long time fan of the artist, but I really hope to see more screenplays from this guy in the future.

Great film.

Highly recommended to all lovers of a good Western.

Quick Takes, February 16 - March 7

Why We Fight - I thought this could have been a very strong, nonpartisan documentary on US military spending; it was for the first half or so. But it veered off into a very standard critique on the Iraq war in the second half. Not that I disagree with the very standard critique of the Iraq war, of course, but it's ground that's been covered often enough that people have long since made up their minds about what they think of it.

The World's Fastest Indian - A strong performance by Anthony Hopkins in a movie that is otherwise painfully dull. Was Burt Munro's trip from New Zealand to the Bonneville Salt Flats really interesting enough to deserve a movie? I have no doubt that Munro was a fascinating dude, but I'm not sure it's a story that lends itself to movies. He tinkers with his bike, and then he rides it real fast. That's about it. To solve that problem, the filmmakers have to pretend that meeting a transvestite on Sunset Boulevard is an important chapter in his life. But I wonder.

Eight Below - Surprisingly decent. The work with the dogs was amazing, really. The work with human actors less so; don't tell me it's 30 below and then have actors outside in a light jacket that isn't even zipped up all the way in the next scene. But very well shot and interesting enough.

16 Blocks - Very creaky plot but well acted and competently directed. A lot of folks have criticized Mos Def's performance, especially his high-pitched voice, but I thought it was far better work than the very by-the-numbers script deserved. It's rare to see someone build a character from scratch like this.

Firewall - Even more creaky plot, and not as well acted and directed. Harrison Ford really phoned this one in. It's astonishing to see him have so little impact. And I really, really hated Paul Bettany's performance; I'm so sick of smooth-talking, coldly psychopathic bad guys. Die Hard was almost 20 years ago, and it's time to find a different way to play these guys already.

For those of us who missed it

Or want to see it again.

A few of the highlights from the 78th Academy Awards.

Looks like a pretty fun show, even if I'm not unhappy I missed it.

Dave Chappelle's Block Party

Man, did this ever die at the box office this weekend. There weren't too many people in the theater when I went the other day, but that was at 11:45 AM on Saturday morning. So I didn't think much of it.

But it's a very good film. It's billed as a concert film but it's really a lot more than that. It's fascinating as a character study of Dave Chappelle, and his ambivalence towards fame and fortune. As it goes on, it also becomes a sociological document about the Bed-Stuy neighborhood in which the concert takes place.

In fact, the concert elements are really the weakest of the film, due to the decisions throughout to cut away from the music in mid-performance. It was like Live8 all over again. But I also think we get enough to have a reasonable idea what went down. It's more confirmation that Kanye West and Mos Def are ridiculously talented individuals, that The Roots can pretty much do anything, and that Jill Scott is not afraid to follow Erykah Badu.

THE Zodiac

"Oh boy, David Fincher's new film! Trailer out already! Gotta see.

Man, this site sure takes a long time to load. Bandwidth must be straining with everyone going to see the Finch's latest opus. Here goes!

Big blue eye. Hello. Tick-tick-tick text.

Very red. Where does it say Trailer? Gotta be Scenes. Yay! There it is!! Oboyoboyoboy...

All right, so it's not Quicktime.

Green!

Youngsters steaming up the car in the night. Haha. Foolish kids. Should've stayed away from being in a Fincher movie.

Hey, it's PTA's main man what's-his-name, old dude. Love him!

Wow, never seen that guy before. Bold move going with someone unknown in a lead role. Go Fincher!

Where's Oldman?

Hey, it's the chick from Prison Break! And that kid from Signs. Must be a huge cast, if they can squeeze those guys in, as well.

Neutral voice. Very HAL 9000. Where's Ruffalo? Is Ruffalo doing the HAL voice?

Okay, lots of zodiac stuff. Weird. That Signs kid must be some code-breaker.

This unknown dude is really everywhere in the film. Where's Oldman?

Wow, it's really lagging now. Wha. t A. re T. hey. S. ay. ing?

More fast cuts, going slow. Guy with glasses. Is Gyllenhaal playing the guy with glasses?

Boy, this film seems really lame. Let's see the credits.

Huuuhhh... umh... that's not Fincher. Alexander Bulikey?

Wait, what is this shit?!"

Storm (2006)

Swedish film has stranded itself in a quagmire.

After coming back from this years Berlin Film Festival a respected Swedish film journalist was reported to have told fellow journalists "The Danish... why the hell are the Danish beating us? Even Iceland is doing good. And now the Norwegians! God save us from Finland."

Of course, a Dane had to explain it.



"The only mistake Bergman ever did was not dying" - Lars von Trier, speaking in a symposium on Bergman.

I don't think you can overestimate the influence Ingmar Bergman still wields in the film industry, stranded on an island on the coast as he is. The legacy is too great, and no matter how you try, you fail. Film consul Marianne Ahrne (one of the three people who give out the very important economic film grants) said a year ago that she had read over 700 screenplays in the last 20 months, but none "in the Bergman tradition." Is it any wonder that little good comes out of here?

The recently released Storm is one of the films the Swedish Film Institute gave a grant.



Storm is the story of DD (Eric Ericson), an ego-chauvinist pig journalist working for the Swedish equivalent of Rolling Stone, who one night crosses paths with leather-clad mystery vixen Lova (Eva Röse) chased by a man in black (Jonas Karlsson) and his bald-headed goons. From this encounter DD will come into the possession of a metal cube, that will make him come to realize some deeper truths about himself and in the end force him to make a choice (yes I know, how very rental backflap-ish of me).

Both original in its own way, and enormously derivative, the easiest way to describe Storm would be as the Swedish Matrix. Here, instead of virtual reality, you have metaphysics. Instead of anime inspirations, you have seventies scif-fi comics. Instead of Yuen Woo Ping pulling wires, you have the spirit of Bergman pulling strings.

Here - instead of the main character having to look into himself so that he can go on to become extraordinary - the main character has to look into himself to find his flaws, so that he can become normal!

I'm sorry, but this last thing is just another one of those aspects of the Swedish mentality which I find so annoying and troubling. Is there any culture that glorifies its self-pity more?



Still, it might be a step forward. And perhaps it's unfair to still see Bergman's shadow when they are so obviously trying to move away from it.

It is a very pretty film (as you can see from the trailer), with some great sound work (apparently they even recommmended that the sound be turned up extra at theatres) and at least two of the best actors in Sweden (Karlsson and Röse). Ericsson, who plays the main character, might be someone worth looking out for. He does manage to make this initial asshole - who turns out to be even worse later on - somewhat sympathetic towards the end.



The story does surprise you from time to time, and it has a small Caché-like element to it, considering its title, which I'm not sure if I imagined or not.

I'm sure someone over at AICN is likely to go batshit over it, and have a good run at sci-fi fests the world over. Which it is deserving of.

Recommmended to those who want their sci-fi-fantasy with a bit more depth.

Witches Talking Ship

jaydro says: I was going to call this Yet Another Oscar Recap, late (as will become usually apparent) as I am to the game after Favorite Oscar Moments and Crash and Burn here.

I pretty much agree with all of Chris's list of moments below. I thought Jon Stewart was as good as every host should be, and the show was one of the best overall I've seen in a while. It moved along pretty briskly, only going like a half-hour over, right? Imagine if it had gone more than an hour over, ugh. I even liked the set. The cool set designs at the Academy Awards leave me wondering whatever happened to all those people who used to do stuff like that week after week on all those variety shows that are no longer on TV? And to think that they even used to have song-and-dance numbers on the Oscars (other than for the nominated songs)....

Dave Poland asks how bad the telecast was, and while I disagree with much of what he said, I did notice three glaring miscues by the director, which is pretty bad, and then there was that weird cut to closeup that kept happening at the podium, which looked almost like some kind of digital instant zoom. The effect was the same as those weird jarring cuts to closeup in early sound films, where the camera goes from a medium shot to a medium closeup from seemingly exactly the same position. I don't know if anyone else noticed or was bothered by this like I was....

And yeah, those clip montages--they were the worst. The death roll call was okay, though not as good or moving as it has been in years past, but the others seemed pointless and poorly thrown together. I used to be a big fan of the inventiveness of the clip montages on the Oscars--they were just so slick and cool and demonstrated a thorough knowledge of film history and technique. My best guess at when their recent decline started was several years ago when they did a clip montage of bad sound effects editing, starting with the opening Sound of Music shot laid over with a strafing run machine gun fire effect (actually that sounds pretty funny to me as I write it, but it seemed pretty lame at the time). Are they being farmed out to students in someone's editing class? At least Jon Stewart made fun of them, too.

And the emphasis on moviegoing, with the Academy president imploring that no one ever says after "Cut!": "Won't that look good on the DVD?" Well, you can bet they also don't say "Won't that look good when it's shown out-of-focus and poorly-framed on a shoebox screen at the megaplex?" To then have a clip montage of epic moments in movies, while pointedly having no such film nominated for best picture, just showed that there's some kind of disconnect with the powers-that-be about what's wrong with declining movie attendance.

I know there are a lot of people out there sore about how Best Picture turned out, and I can understand and sympathize. But, geez, look at what the nominees were! It's really not too hard for me to imagine a slightly different universe in which the nominees had been King Kong, The Chronicles of Narnia, Jarhead, Munich, and, oh, maybe Syriana or even Brokeback Mountain, with Munich winning or Syriana or Brokeback being the possible big upset. This was a really weird year for Best Picture nominees, and I was happy with that.

In the years I've kept filled-out Oscar ballots pinned to the fridge, I scored a personal-best record number of correct picks: ten. The big shocker, aside from getting director and picture both right, was live-action short Six Shooter. I don't know how I guessed right on that one. I also have a record number of need-to-see-this notations on the ballot, which I am embarrassed to report.

Robert Altman disappointed everyone and remained appropriately humble, though his intro was perhaps one of the best I've seen for a lifetime achievement-type Oscar.

The Oscar-winning song: who at the Academy thought that changing the line from "bitches talking shit" to "witches talking ship" would actually work, when everyone I was watching it with swore they were hearing "wenches talking shit"? I guess it made a difference to those with closed captioning....

Edit: okay, mea culpa, but just to prove I wasn't the only one who totally misheard the lyrics....

X3: The Last Stand

So I just saw the new trailer a few minutes ago while watching 24 (the best show on television, fyi) and all I can say is "Please don't screw this up Brett." The trailers are looking so good. I mean, did I actually see the Juggernaut?
The story has been co-written by a guy who helped out on X2 (awesome) and another guy who did xXx: State of the Union and Mr & Mrs Smith. Hmm. this is not giving me the warm and fuzzies I wanted. Every point of excitement is checked by another dose of reality.
"Yay, there's going to be an X-Men 3."
"Boo, it's being helmed by Brett Ratner."
"Yay, the first trailer looked amazing."
"Boo, so did the trailers for ep1, 2, & 3"
"Yay, the 2nd trailer looked phenomenal."
"So Bryan Singer really isn't involved in this at all???? Boo"
etc etc etc .......
But maybe, just maybe, Brett is a fanboy like me and wants to do everything fans always dream about. Perhaps there is still some good left in him!
Why do I always say I won't get my hopes up only to get my hopes up when the movie music and flashy images come up on screen?

Recent Comments

As you've probably noticed, I've added "Recent Comments" to the sidebar. Note, this is simply some code I found in the Blogger help guide, and what it's actually doing is listing new comments by post order, not chronological order, so be aware. It doesn't work like I want it to yet (i.e., simple chronological order with the post title shown), but it's very tough to keep up with the comments, so it's better than nothing. I'll try to refine it as time goes on.

UPDATE: Found code at BloggerHacks which greatly improves the "Recent Comments" section. Now, as you can see, you get the commenter name and the title of the post they commented on. And, if you swipe the cursor over the title, you get a preview of what the comment says. Should be much easier to keep track of now. Thanks to BloggerHacks for some very complicated code that I would have NEVER figured out on my own.