Friday, February 17, 2006

No Mohammad Doodles: Never Had Them, Never Will

The end has to be near, right? I mean, world diplomacy has always been kind of sophomoric, but I don't know that the international dialogue between nations has ever been so much like junior high school as it has been the last few weeks.

"Hey, they drew a photo of our prophet with a bomb on his head! I'm telling!"

I haven't seen people this upset over a cartoon since the unfortunate introduction of Poochie.

I saw those cartoons. I'm not going to republish them here, mainly because I'm too lazy to go find them and they're not funny. Not for fear of angry jihadists, because I'm already an American Jewish guy, right? How could I make them want to kill me any more than they already do? I could be drinking a fifth of Cuervo while eating a pork sandwich and dunking a copy of the Koran in a vat of menstrual blood as I make obscene phone calls to their 12 year old sister in Riyadh, and fundamentalist Muslims wouldn't want to kill me more than they already do.

Some of them are kind of offensive, in a generally racist way. (Like, images of Arab's as scimitar-wielding, moustachioed goons straight out of Walt Disney's Aladdin.) But none of them are so offensive that you should start a-sploding embassies and Kentucky Fried Chickens! Okay, people! Because, man, dude, burning down a KFC...That's going to release toxins into your environment that ain't never going away. Get used to the stench of 800 types of processed, chemically-treated animal fat as it slowly seeps its way into your thoroughfares and fresh drinking water, geniuses!

And now there's this whole "if a newspaper doesn't publish the racist Mohammad cartoons, the terrorists win" nonsense. Look, that's just playing into the fundamentalist's dream of a Clash of Cultures. It's choosing a side - "I'm publishing these cartoons, so fuck Muslims!" Those cartoons aren't newsworthy, they aren't worthwhile social criticism. I don't think you should cave in to pressure and not run something in a newspaper that people need to see (like, oh, say, photos of people being tortured by U.S. Soldiers or the bodies of dead Americans coming in from overseas). But I do think exercizing restrain in not provoking violence by running dumb, racist cartoons makes practical sense.

And as I said, publishing racist cartoons that have sparked riots plays right into the hands of the stupid evil terrorists! They want to provoke moderate Muslims into a war for control of the entire planet, okay? They're crazy delusional fucks. Everybody got that?

Just like those idiots in our country who want to make it illegal for gays to marry and women to wear pants, okay? Imagine if those guys had total control of U.S. policy. It shouldn't be that hard to imagine...They'd be doing stupid crap like this, too. If Sean Hannity, today, were given the choice on whether or not the United States should just invade all the countries with presidents who have ever said anything bad about us, he'd probably think for a minute, then give the go-ahead.

Anyway, the best way to respond to people who can't take a joke is to keep telling more jokes, right? Either they'll come around or they'll give up and start just ignoring you. Either way, you win! Some very clever Jews came up with the notion of starting a contest for...the most anti-Semetic cartoon imaginable. Brilliant!

Eyal Zusman (30, back from anonymity) and Amitai Sandy (29), graphic artist and publisher of Dimona Comix Publishing, from Tel-Aviv, Israel, have followed the unfolding of the “Muhammad cartoon-gate” events in amazement, until finally they came up with the right answer to all this insanity - and so they announced today the launch of a new anti-Semitic cartoons contest - this time drawn by Jews themselves!

“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!”

YES! This is how you convince people that you're right. Not by continuing to offend them pointlessly, just to prove that you can. But by turning the situation around on them, making them appear foolish and silly. It's called "taking the high ground."

So far, there aren't really any fabulous submissions, but the contest just started and I'm willing to give them some time. I wish I was a better artist.

A Poem About Dick Cheney, With Apologies to Shel Silverstein

Harry and Katherine and Dick Cheney, too
Went hunting for quails
One late afternoon
"Be vewy quiet
We'll hear when they coo!"
Said Harry and Katherine and Dick Cheney, too

Harry and Katherine and Dick Cheney, too
Noticed the sky change
To orange from blue
"It's late," complained Harry
Dick said, "Stay a few
"And since we are staying, please toss me a brew!"

Dickie was Captain, and Harry was Crew
And Katherine stood way back
To keep a clear view
"Got one," said Harry
Dick said, "Good for you!
"I'll get one myself if you let me pass through!"


Harry and Katherine and Dick Cheney, too
Heard a shotgun go off
With fiery BOOM!
"I've shot him," yelled Dick
"Now what will we do?
You'd better go lie about this on the news!"

Harry and Katherine and Dick Cheney, too
Dodged the world for 4 days
And gave no interviews
"They'd never believe
What I'm saying is true!"
Dick explained later to Fox's Brit Hume

Harry and Katherine and Dick Cheney, too
Never revealed all the things they knew
And nobody
Really knows what
Happened with
Harry and Katherine and Dick Cheney, too

[For more Dick Cheney-themed poetry, check out Tbogg and Firedoglake.]

Thursday, February 16, 2006

Quite Possibly Untrue Rumors Tastefully Seasoned With Good Old Fashioned Slander

Can this rumor be true? I'm skeptical. Sometimes, I hear stuff floating around the video store, which is after all located right down the street from both the Fox and Sony studios, and I think it's just customers rattling off about Internet BS, only to discover months later that it's 100% true. (One example is Gwen Stacy appearing as a major character in Spider-Man 3. They'd been scouring New Releases for hot young actresses for months...)

Anyway, today, an unnamed customer passed along a peculiar behind-the-scenes story from Fox. Apparently (and bear in mind, this is an unfounded rumor, for which I can find absolutely no corroborative evidence on any movie blogs or websites), a copy of Brett Ratner's upcoming FINAL installment in the X-Men trilogy has been stolen from the studios, and is headed for certain Internet piracy. As a result, this man assured me, a totally new ending will be shot for the film and kept locked away under heavy security.

Ain't It Cool has posted an update on X3 just today, about Brett Ratner apologizing to the online community for...well, for existing, basically. See, the thing is, the dork community and Brett Ratner and Fox...they're all doing this silly little dance right now. Brett's pretending that his movie doesn't suck, Fox and Marvel are pretending they gave a shit whether or not the movie sucks and the fans are pretending that they might not go see a big-budget X-Men movie in theaters even though they absolutely will. Hardcore X-Men fans will go see any big-budget movie with "X-Men" in the title. They would go see X3 even if it consisted solely of Brett Ratner reading comics in front of a blue screen for 90 minutes.

Why even bother? Why not just release a standard form in the mail alerting comic book nerds and fanboys to the existence of an upcoming film, X-Men 3, and just issue them official times to report to the theater to get it over with? Like Jury Duty.

"Please allow yourself a few moments after the screening to get over your crushing disappointment, and to finish off any last Sour Patch Kids your chubby fingers may have missed in the bottom of the carton during this shitty, barely sensible, yet oddly colorful Brett Ratner Production. We apologize for any sudden nausea or discomfort this film may have caused you, and thank you again for your enthusiastic, if mandatory, patronage. Now, hurry back to your basements and studio apartments...you're upsetting the normals."

Ratner himself, in case you were wondering, remains a clueless jackass. I guess Brett can always take comfort in the fact that, should the directorial career fall through, he could always by the understudy for that Turtle idiot on "Entourage."

"Well, it seems to be the last of the series," Ratner said of the eyebrow-raising title for the third film, "X-Men: The Last Stand," due May 26. "We wanted to make sure the audiences knew that this was a trilogy. Even though they weren't made together like 'Lord of the Rings,' this is really closure for the X-Men series. ... This is the last stand for sure."

That's usually not a good sign, when you have to let audiences know they're watching a trilogy once the third one comes out. Usually indicates the entire production has run out of steam.

"Hey, just so you guys don't get too excited, I just want to make sure you all understand that I have killed the franchise forever. Okay? Everyone got that? It's done, dead, exterminated. I fucked it up beyond all repair. Maybe, in ten or twenty years, some hot new director will come along and figure out some mystical, seemingly-impossible way to actually reinvent these characters, some innovative way to overcome the horrific, disgraceful failure of imagination I will unleash on the world this summer. I don't know. All I know is, X-Men 3 will devour your soul. I just want that to be perfectly clear. This May, I will drop my pants and squeeze out a chunky one all over your beloved childhood fantasies...Ratner Out."

Why Do You Think They Call It 'Liberal Arts'?

As Glenn Greenwald has rightly pointed out this week, to much fanfare from other bloggers, Republicanism in America has oddly morphed into Bushism, a fanatical devotion to the President that deems any criticism of our nation's leader to be the treasonous, crazed chatter of a liberal. Anyone who speaks ill of Bush or any of his policies isn't worth listening to at all, and would be better off silenced.

I've written at some length already here and here about some particularly noxious Bushists attempting to intimidate college professors who speak out about current events and politics. Because, as everybody knows, college students shouldn't have to listen to opinions with which they might, potentially, disagree. That's not what getting an education is all about!

Now, according to an e-mail passed along by World O' Crap (one of my favorite sites keeping an eye on the batshit insane righty blogs), it seems David Horowitz is hopping on this exciting (and not at all fascist!) bandwagon with his new book: Evil Nazi Professors From Mars Want to Devour Your Children's Brains.

Oh, no, wait, it's called The Professors - The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America.

Sigh...

An Urgent Message
From the Desk of David Horowitz

Dear Newsmax Reader,

Because I know that you are as concerned as I am the radical left's stranglehold on our colleges and universities, I have set aside for you a copy of my new book, The Professors -- The 101 Most Dangerous Academics in America.

What, exactly, makes these professors so "dangerous," you might wonder? Do they have crazy, unpredictable mutant powers like Professor Xavier, perhaps? Have they discovered how to manipulate space-time, like Dr. Who, or how to time-travel, like Doctor Emmett Brown? Perhaps, like Dr. Frankenstein, they're doing morally questionable work in the reanimation of dead tissue, or bizarre brain surgeries like Dr. Hfuhruhurr.

Oh, no, they're just starting student clubs and inventing holidays.

At Cal State-Long Beach: Ron Karenga is a Professor and Chairman of the Black Studies Department. He's also a convicted torturer and inventor of Kwanzaa.

But...wait...doesn't David Horowitz think torture is neat-o, and perfectly acceptable under some, extreme circumstances? Maybe Ron Karenga needed to beat two women with electrical cord (the torture for which he served a lengthy prison sentence back in the early 70's) for reasons of national security! (Bear in mind, I'm not trying to excuse Karenga's crimes...They're pretty horrible, and he strikes me as a pretty nutty individual...But still, he's one professor out of thousands. Singling him out is fairly meaningless, not to mention hypocritical.)

At the University of Texas-Arlington: Jose Angel Gutierrez is a Political Science Professor. He's also the founder of La Raza Unida, a racist Hispanic organization that calls on Hispanics and Mexican immigrants to seize U.S. land. Among his more notable racists rants is his repeated pronouncement that calls for the elimination of "the gringo, and what I mean by that is if the worst comes to the worst, we have to kill him."

Oh my Lord! You might almost think these men were paid to provide outlets for students and to challenge their pre-conceived notions about the world! Next thing you know, they'll use provocative or controversial statements to get a reaction out of students and open them up to new ways of thinking.

Columbia University's Nicholas De Genova, who led an anti-war demonstration by wishing for deaths of thousands of American troops; and, Texas Journalism Professor Robert Jensen, who rabidly hates the United States, and recently told his students, "The United States has lost the war in Iraq and that's a good thing."

You mean, an American citizen? Speaking his mind and telling people what he thinks? That's not what our Founding Fathers intended. Clearly, they had wanted a poorly-educated, largely impoverished, devoutly Christian nation in a constant state of war in which the twin virtues of intense fear and hatred of brown people was drilled into the brains of everyone, all day, from birth to death. Clearly.

Imagine just for a moment being a conservative student and having to sit in a class taught by any one of the professors I've mentioned. Difficult? Stressful? All of that and more, and that's simply not what a college education is about.

Yes, encountering new ideas can sometimes be stressful, Dave. But it's also the only way that our own ideas grow and change over time. In other words, encountering other people's ideas is how we learn things, which is the entire purpose of going to college. It's quit simply "what a college education is about." Well, that and random sex with strangers and drinking incredibly terrible domestic keg beer.

I'd love it if David Horowitz read this blog, because I'd love to ask him some follow-up questions on this topic. First and foremost, if encountering new ideas that might clash with your own views isn't what college is about, then what is a college education about, Dave? Hearing a bunch of sycophants afraid to say what they really think, telling you that everything your Pappy taught you about the world was true, even if he was a dumb racist old fuck? Or maybe he thinks a college education is overrated in the first place. People are much more docile and easy to manipulate when you keep 'em really really dumb.

Yet the 101 professors highlighted in my book are representative of thousands of radical leftists who spew a violent anti-Americanism, preach anti-Semitism, and cheer on the killing of American soldiers and civilians! And they're living off taxpayer dollars and tuition fees as they indoctrinate our future leaders.

Okay, I went to UCLA for four years and USC for two. I took many, many, many, many classes about History, Communication, Political Science, Government, Journalism and Media. I had a whole lot of very outspoken, liberal professors who openly discussed the evils of American foreign policy and the previlence of intense anti-Americanism and anti-Westernism in the Middle East and around the world. As I said in a previous post, one of my professors - an English professor named Robert Watson - was highlighted by a reprehensible group of former UCLA students as representing an unsatisfactorily liberal sensibility.

But never once did I have a professor who called for violence against Americans (or anyone else, for that matter). I never heard a professor say something anti-Semetic, unless, of course, referring to something anti-Semetic that was said by someone else that pertained to the subject of the course. If you take enough classes about the modern situation in the Middle East, you neccessarily encounter some form of anti-Semitism. Finally, I never once heard a professor cheer the deaths of any Americans, military or otherwise.

This is an outright falsehood. To claim that this is the present situation on America's campuses is a blatant lie. But the fact of the matter is, David Horowitz isn't really even attempting to shut these professors up. He knows he has no power or authority on this issue, that this is pointless posturing and a way to sell books. The effect it will have is not to get these teachers fired, but rather a chilling effect on anyone who might think about speaking aloud their anti-Bush personal views.

It's the dream of Horowitz and his ilk to sufficiently terrorize anyone who speaks the truth to power, in public, so that others will shut the hell up and let George Bush do whatever he wnats. Selling millions of dollars worth of books to idiots...well, that's just icing on the cake.

Wednesday, February 15, 2006

Belated DVD Reviews

I wanted to post these reviews last night, but Blogger was misbehaving, as usual. I saw something last night on the page about "maintenance" from 9 pm to 11 on the 14th, but I think they added this little note after the outage initially occured. Bastards. How dare they provide me with a free forum from which to broadcast my thoughts to strangers the world over?

So, anyway, you've had to wait for today, a full 24 hours after the three discs have hit shelves. Oh, the shame of it all...

Zathura



I can't tell, based only on his IMDB biography, if director/comedian/screenwriter Jon Favreau had a happy or troubled childhood. It says that his father gifted him with the screenwriting software he used to craft Swingers, so that would imply that he has a good relationship with his folks.

But judging from the guy's films as a director, he's got some abandonment issues. This is Johnny Favs third film as a director, after the hilarious improv comedy Made, featuring Vince Vaughn's single best comic performance to date, and the surprisingly enjoyable Will Ferrell kiddie favorite Elf. It's also his third movie about neglectful parents potentially scarring their offspring for life.

In Made, Favs plays a mediocre boxer named Bobby, who's involved with a cruel single mother (Famke Janssen) who ignores and mistreats her cherubic daughter. In Elf, Will Ferrell travels from the North Pole to modern-day New York City to find his absent father (James Caan), who wants nothing to do with him once he arrives.

And now Zathura, a far-superior follow-up to the detestable 1995 Robin Williams disaster Jumanji, in which two brothers must work out their anger at one another and their divorcing parents while flying through space on a magical adventure. Walter (Josh Hutcherson) just wants to watch "Sportscenter" in peace when his busy dad (Tim Robbins) leaves him alone with his clingy younger brother Danny (Jonah Bobo...really...) and angsty teen sister (Kristen Stewart from Panic Room, looking much more...um...feminine).

Unfortunately, Danny pulls out an old 50's outer-space board game from the basement, and their house is magically transported into the outer reaches of the galaxy. The only way home is to finish the game, by reaching the planet Zathura, at which point the pieces reset back on Earth.

Whereas Jumanji focused on excessive CG effects (still relatively new back in '95), Favreau wisely keeps the movie a little smaller and more intimate. The family rarely leaves the house at all, and though a few new characters are introduced (including Punk'd veteran Dax Shepard as a stranded astronaut and a lot of fearsome-looking lizard aliens named Zorgons), the focus stays on Danny and Walter. And though the film's a bit too focused on whiz-bang action to ever really work as a comedy, there are a few moments where Favreau manages to get some pretty charming work out of these kids.

(For an example of the easy give-and-take between the young actors, take one scene, where a meteor has just taken out a chunk of the roof, and Walter and Danny see a field of stars above. "Look, outer space," says Danny. "No, that's just nighttime," replies Walter.)

Also, as the movie builds to its big finish, in which aliens are vanquished, games are won and brothers rediscover filial love, the proceedings get surprisingly intense. Not violent or morally troubling, mind you, but a bit more exciting and dangerous than the climax of most children's films. Both Zathura and Jumanji are based on storybooks by Chris Van Allsburg, and neither manages to capture his deft combination of terror and whimsy. Of course, neither film is as bad as Robert Zemeckis' Polar Express, another Van Allsburg adaptation.

Young Mr. Lincoln



Here's my theory...When most people, who rarely if ever watch old movies, think about black and white Hollywood films of the past, they conjure up films like Young Mr. Lincoln. Staid. Proper. Unrealistic. A bit dry.

I'm not trying to knock John Ford's 1939 classic, which comes to Criterion DVD this week. It's a great film. It's just that, even in 1939 when Ford made the film, it was a bit old-fashioned. There had already been a sound film chronicling the life of Abraham Lincoln, in fact (Walter Huston played the part in that film). And the notion of using Lincoln as the embodiment of all that is noble in the American soul. And the forthright, earnest lead performance by Henry Fonda.

This film is a timeless piece of Americana. Unfortunately, Americans on the whole have little use for their own history or films that celebrate this heritage. Which is too bad, because Young Mr. Lincoln speaks to our own time in some surprising and important ways.

Rather than focusing on the better-known eras of Lincoln's life, such as his impoverished log-cabin-dwelling childhood or his Civil War Presidency, Ford and screenwriter Lamar Trotti center their film on Lincoln's years as an attorney in private practice, after spending a few years in the State Legislature but before attaining anything beyond local fame. They can't resist, however, including a lot of little references to Lincoln's later accomplishments: shots of Fonda in the top hat, Abe's introduction to Mary Todd (Marjorie Weaver) and even a mini-rivalry with his future debate opponent, Stephen Douglas (Milburn Stone). The finale, as well, metaphorically finds Lincoln trudging up a hill as the "storm" of the Civil War is brewing. It's heavy-handed, of course, but the movie's from 1939...I can cut it some slack.

The story finds Lincoln drawn into the case of two brothers accused of shooting a deputy sheriff. Everyone in town just assumes that the boys are guilty and deserve a hanging, but Lincoln (of course) is more thoughtful, trusting and insistant on the rule of law. It's that last point I'd like to linger on...Much is made in this film not only of Lincoln's virtue and strict adherence to law and order, but of his love of the law. This is one of the least-cynical portrayals of a lawyer in American film history.

An early scene finds Lincoln, after receiving some law books for free, reading by a riverbed. "Yes, of course, the law! It really is that simple!," he says. Yes, it's a bit corny and obvious, but Ford and Fonda play the moment as well as it could be played, and it has some impact. And I guess, considering that our present President feels that he and his administration are above the law, it's not all that obvious.

Metropolitan

Whit Stillman's 1990 romantic comedy may have kickstarted cinema's recent fixation on updating Jane Austen. Stillman's film doesn't actually adapt an Austen book so much as it merges the social world of her books with present-day New York. We have the same attention to the nuances of class differences, the same pithy "comedy of manners" style, the same verbal wit and dexterity with language and the same fascination with peering beneath the facades put up by supposedly extroverted, confident people.

So, you may have Stillman to blame for the sudden abundance of Austen adaptations and reinventions (including Amy Hecklering's stab at bringing Emma into the modern day, Clueless). But his original film retains all the idiosyncratic distance and sly rakishness it had on its much-lauded 1990 opening. One of the initial landmarks of the then-burgeoning American Indie scene, Metropolitan is still a pleasurable-enough romp 16 years on. Far better, at the very least, than Stillman's other two films, Barcelona and the flat Last Days of Disco.

The story begins when the once-wealthy outsider, Tom Townsend (Edward Clements) befriends a group of high society recent college grads calling themselves the Sally Fowler Rat Pack (after the girl who owns the apartment where they drink and hang out). Their rank includes the caddish Nick Smith (Chris Eigeman), nebbishy Charlie Black (Taylor Nichols) and Audrey Rouget (Carolyn Farina), who quickly develops a crush on Tom.

We follow them over the course of a single "season" in the New York Society calendar, as they follow up a series of off-screen "balls" and mixers with excessive drinking, intense conversations over their place in the world and the occasional game of strip poker. And as in Austen's slyly knowing novels, we gain insights into all of these people both by what they say and don't say.

Nick, for example, openly loathes Sally's new beau Rick Von Sloneker (Will Kempe, who returns as the character briefly in Last Days of Disco) because of his unspoken love for Sally. Tom, as well, pretends not to notice Audrey's affection for him, because he remains obsessed with his ex-girlfriend Serena (Elizabeth Thompson).

And so on. Metropolitan is the kind of movie where you know, inside of five minutes, whether or not you will appreciate its charms. I found it funny, engaging and breezy, and easily one of the most witty of the early 90's independents. Others, I suspect, might find its lack of momentum, coupled with Stillman's obvious delight in his own writing, tiresome.

Tuesday, February 14, 2006

Some Valentine's Day Top Ten Lists

Paris Hilton's Top Ten Valentine's Day Complaints

10. Already given all the good men STD's
9. Tempting boxes of chocolate make it difficult to remain on strict diet of lip skin and tanning lotion
8. In alcohol-induced haze, sometimes difficult to tell methamphetamines from little candy hearts
7. Only received Valentines from 4 of her last 200,000,000 conquests
6. That "Be My Valentine, Charlie Brown" special's a bit confusing and hard to follow...
5. Just a meaningless non-drinking-related occasion sandwiched between New Year's Eve and St. Patrick's Day
4. News stories about holiday observances briefly overshadow news stories about her vagina
3. Received a Vermont Teddy Bear, but not the Red Hot Redneck design
2. Enjoys getting a shot to the face, but not from Cupid's arrow, if you know what I mean
1. It only comes three times a year

The Top Ten Overlooked Holidays

10. Parking Enforcement Officer's Day
9. Sweathog's Day
8. All Qaida's Eve
7. Queen Latifah's Last Holiday
6. Take Your Great-Grandfather To Work Day
5. Post-Nasal Drip Awareness Day
4. Foxy Boxing Day
3. Nor Easter
2. Cinco de Yayo
1. The Day After Tomorrow

The Top Ten Least Romantic Date Ideas

10. A lovely gelato followed by a rousing Skinhead rally
9. A Very Special Evening With Emo Phillips at the Orange County Performing Arts Center
8. Free taping of the "Maury Povich" show
7. Wait for the next time they need to select a new Pope; then go take a chick to check that out
6. Three words: fat resin bowls
5. That gay cowboy thing's still in theaters, right?
4. Bury your girlfriend's pet hamster, then go hang out with some rich idiot in front of a big fireplace
3. Couples therapy
2. Quail hunting
1. Take-out Chinese and a home pregnancy test

The Top Ten Worst Names for the Concept Album You're Written About Your Girlfriend

10. Gesundheit, Baby
9. The Sex is Merely OK Computer
8. More Songs About Buildings, Food and That Bitch I'm Dating
7. Toby Keith: The Greatest Hits Collection
6. Wish You Weren't Here
5. Rocket to Gonorrhea
4. Bryman College Dropout
3. Smell the Glove
2. A Bridge Over Troubled Watersports
1. Songs in the Key of Get Out of My Life

Monday, February 13, 2006

Life, the Universe and Everything

I can write fast. That's how I'm able to post so much content here on the blog. People always comment on how long my film reviews can run, but I probably get them done faster than a lot of critics can finish their paragraph-long capsule reviews. That may sound like pomposity or exaggeration, but I assure you, it's not. I'm just a fast writer. Not necccessarily the best writer, but a fast one.

I make up for this useful ability, as well as being able to read pretty quickly and an excellent typist, by being very, very bad at certain types of thinking. Namely, everything having to do with the Sciences. Back in junior high and high school, my father (who was something of a math and science whiz coming up, and like George Constanza, dreamt of one day becoming a marine biologist) used to try and tutor me in subjects like Chemistry and Biology. Oh, how I remember those lovely times...

"What's Planck's Constant?"
"It's a way of describing momentum."
"But, what's a 'constant'?"
"A property."
"What's a property?"
"I don't...A thing. A thing every scientist knows."
"Constant's not even a noun. It's an adjective. You know, like 'Why must I be irritated by these constant physics assignments?' In that sentence, 'constant' is modifying the object, the physics assignments."
"It's just a unit that's useful in equations."
"Then why isn't it 'Planck's Unit'? I mean, aside from the obvious reason."
"It' s just not. The value of Planck's Constant is [consulting physics textbook] right here, 6.626 0693(11) x 10-34 Joules per second."
"What's a joule?"
"If you'd just listen and let me finish, I'll explain it to you."
"Well, your explanations make no sense. They rely largely on nonsense words like 'joule'!"
"Are you finished? Are you ready to listen?"
"I've been listening, but you're just rattling numbers off the top of your head!"
"That's it! I'm done!"

And so forth.

So, anyway, this stuff is all French to me. No, actually, that's inaccurate. I'd probably have a decent chance at understanding at least a few words in a paragraph of Basic French. I know no French, but I know some Spanish, and they're similar enough languages, after all. Physics is like Aramaic or Sanskrit. I'd have about the same chance understanding a lecture in particle physics as I would the screeching of your basic Howler Monkey.

"So, what you're saying is, whoot whoot blarb, and then toss some feces...Interesting..."

You get the idea. I'm useless when it comes to the Sciences. I'll take The Humanities, any time.

That's why it makes little sense that I accepted a job doing research on astrophysics for a planned documentary TV show. I thought, because the show would be on the History Channel, and because my prospective employer assured me that no hard science background was neccessary, there would be little to no problem adjusting to the position. I showed up this morning relaxed, confident and ready to work.

And then they explained to me the job...

Sit down in a cubicle in an office for 9 hours and find out about the universe.

The Universe? Like...the whole thing?

Yeah, the Universe, or what Joss Whedon has colorfully renamed "The Verse."

How does one research The Universe? Where do you begin? At around 10:45 or so this morning, I realized that my new job was like a Douglas Adams novel. And, worse yet, I wasn't exactly Ford Prefect.

I made an unfortunate discovery right away...Any time you try to learn about something in "the universe," even something that seems really superficial and easy-to-understand, some scientist will have devised a complicated, theoretical way to talk about it involving a lot of bizarre fictional words like "leptons."

Seriously. I was really trying. Let's say I looked up "volcanoes on Mars." That sounds easy, right? I get volcanoes - they're little spouts from which the liquid-hot magma that lies under the planet's crust vents out on occasion for some reason.

But then, it turns out, no one's ever really seen a volcano on Mars, we just think there's one there because the Berriman-Hoffstadler-Schlessenhoffenfoffner Semi-Integrated Singularity Theorum demonstrates that fermions collide with blue-hot supersymmetric oolfs to create positively-charged prilotans. Duh.

Imagine pages and pages and pages of that. It was like Alice trying to catalog all the flora and fauna in Wonderland for a school report. Every time I got close to actually having a coherent idea, I just fell down another rabbit hole.

So, long story short...not gonna work there any more. It's a combination of a few things.

1. Not understanding astrophysics
2. Not liking astrophysics
3. Not liking offices
4. Not liking working in offices
5. Not liking work
6. Not liking driving to Woodland Hills
7. Not liking Woodland Hills
8. Liking not driving to Woodland Hills to read about astrophysics

It's just the latest stop on my Extremely Short-Lived Los Angeles Employment tour. The resume's not exactly getting more impressive as time goes by, but it is definitely getting more colorful. I wonder if any Fortune 500 companies take that into consideration...

Best Lefty Blog Comment on Dick Cheney Shooting a Guy

The award goes to Attaturk over at Rising Hegemon. The whole post is hilarious, but this one section is Pure Blog Gold!

I know that Mr. Other Priorities used five deferments and timely Lynne shagging to avoid going over and shooting at the Cong, but now he's making up for lost time and going after manflesh? I thought fucking Lynne should have been enough "shooting anything that moves" to satisfy Crashcart for a lifetime.

Ouch. Oh, that I were capable of such creative venom!

Sunday, February 12, 2006

Deadeye Dick

Boy, when Dick Cheney said that he favored a robust, powerful executive branch of government, I didn't realize quite what he had in mind. In addition to claiming for himself the right to leak classified information and the right to randomly torture brown people, he's now granted himself a License to Kill.

Dick Cheney accidentally shot and wounded a companion during a weekend quail hunting trip in Texas, spraying the fellow hunter in the face and chest with shotgun pellets.

Harry Whittington, a millionaire attorney from Austin, was in stable condition in the intensive care unit of a Corpus Christi hospital Sunday.

Now, I'm not the Attorney General or anything, but it is still illegal for the Vice-President to actually shoot a man, right? Or did Congress actually grant him that authority when they approved his little Iraq Adventure.

Okay, I'm just kidding...kind of. For Cheney-related hilarity, you really should check out Firedoglake, which has a hilarious Photoshop on the subject as well as the best "Cheney shoots a guy" headline imaginable. (It's "Cheney's Got a Gun.") Jane also helpfully points out that Cheney's not a real sportsman...He shoots confined animals that are raised specifically for the purpose of being shot at by fat old rich guys.

Monday's hunting trip to Pennsylvania by Vice President Dick Cheney in which he reportedly shot more than 70 stocked pheasants and an unknown number of mallard ducks at an exclusive private club places a spotlight on an increasingly popular and deplorable form of hunting, in which birds are pen-reared and released to be shot in large numbers by patrons. The ethics of these hunts are called into question by rank-and-file sportsmen, who hunt animals in their native habitat and do not shoot confined or pen-raised animals that cannot escape.

Classy.

So, I think what has happened is clear. Bored of shooting large numbers of defenseless animals enclosed in tiny spaces, yet in desperate need of satisfying his unquenchable bloodlust, Dick Cheney has turned to hunting the ultimate game...Man.

But, seeing as he's old and frail, he will be hunting, exclusively, 78 year old millionaires. One day, this may even become an annual White House tradition...

[Also, check out Bob Geiger's "Top Ten Dick Cheney Excuses for Shooting a Guy" and Tbogg reminds us that, unlike Dick Cheney who only wounded his hunting partner, Laura Bush has actually had the exquisite pleasure of killing someone.]

UPDATE: Also, Josh Marshall points us to a Washington Post article where we learn the following:

"The vice president was concerned," said Mary Matalin, a Cheney adviser who spoke with him yesterday morning. "He felt badly, obviously. On the other hand, he was not careless or incautious or violate any of the [rules]. He didn't do anything he wasn't supposed to do."

Except...you know...shooting a guy.

Saturday, February 11, 2006

Dakota Fanning's Eerie Floating Head

First up, Retrocrush has an awesome collection of Polish movie posters. Unlike American movie advertisements, which tend to feature the floating, disembodied heads of movie stars looking approvingly over the film's setting...



Yeah, just like that. In this one, there's the additional, creepy element of Dakota Fanning looking out approvingly over herself walking with a horse. "Wow, I am doing a great job of walking around with that horse," says disembodied Dakota Fanning Head. "I wonder, if I hocked a loogie on myself from up here, whether I'd feel it on the back of my disembodied, floating neck?"

In Poland, they just hire artists to draw interpretations of the movie for the poster. Many of the posters come out extremely cool. I've seen this image for Rosemary's Baby before, and it's awesome...way better than the bland, greenish cover of the regular American DVD.



Totally sweet...Not a whole lot like the movie, but it captures the spirit of the enterprise a lot more than a mist-encircled baby carriage or whatever.

Some of the posters are spectacularly odd, and would provide people with an extremely warped, not at all accurate concept of the movie. Like, say, this poster for Robert Zemeckis' light-hearted romantic comic adventure Romancing the Stone.



Why do I think this artist might have only received a vague plot description before beginning work on his design? I mean, I get how it ties in to the film's plot, but still...inappropriate...In fact, there has not been a Danny DeVito movie yet for which this is a viable marketing image. Unless he finally signs the deal and agrees to become the new Pinhead, which of course we all hope he will.

Similarly off-putting and unassociated with the actual film being advertised is this Polish take on Weekend and Bernies. Please note the fact that this poster is horrifying and would lead a consumer to believe he or she was about to view a movie about an evil hand that goes around plucking out people's eyeballs and wearing them in necklace form, a la Dolph Lundgren and ears in Universal Soldier.



Maybe this poster was a public service. Perhaps, in Poland, that hand sign indicates extreme danger, and added to the presence of eyeballs, the overall meaning of the poster might translate as "don't watch this stupid Andrew McCarthy movie, lest your brain ooze out your ears and on to the dirt floor of this Polish movie theater."

Anyhoo...

In other movie news, the trailer for Will Ferrell and Adam McKay's follow-up to the significantly funny Anchorman: The Legend of Ron Burgundy is online. Talladega Nights: The Ballad of Ricky Bobby (...sigh...I don't like the name repetition thing) is the story of NASCAR driver Ricky Bobby, played by Ferrell, who has a rivalry with a French driver played by Ali G. star and CBI personal hero Sacha Baron Cohen.

This all sounds promising, but from my perspective, the trailer is a real disappointment. The last little bit - with Ricky Bobby praying to all the gods he can think of in a moment of crisis - made me laugh, but other than that it seems really...well...dumb and obvious. I mean, making fun of NASCAR fans to begin with is setting your sights pretty low, but I'm honestly surprised at how desperate a lot of this material seems based on the trailer.

Hopefully, I'm wrong. Maybe the best bits from the movie are so crazy and outrageous that they couldn't work into a trailer. Or maybe Ferrell and Cohen (and co-star John C. Reilly as Ferrell's pit crew manager, or something) rise above the material to make the final product funny. But I'm more concerned than I was 10 minutes ago...

Into the Woodland Hills

On Monday, I start a new job as a researcher in Woodland Hills.

It's only a temporary thing, a three-week gig helping a TV producer prepare to pitch a new documentary series. So, I'll still be working weekends and off hours at Le Blaizir. How else would I get free movie rentals? Over the past year, I've developed something of an addict's dependency on readily-available, no-cost DVD's. If I had to pay $2 a pop for these things, not to mention late fees, I'd be bankrupt inside a week. It would be cheaper for me to simply take up smack as a way to pass my leisure time, rather than to rent all these movies.

Anyway, I'm not really sure exactly what it is that a researcher does. Oh, I get the gist of it. Researching stuff. I can do that. I'm just having a hard time visualizing a typical day in the life, you know what I mean? Will I go to this office and look shit up on the Internet all day? Will I go to the library? Do I have to go report back to this Woodland Hills office all the time?

I guess I'll find out on Monday, when I report to the office at 10 a.m. like a regular working person. Although I'll still get to wear jeans and a T-shirt, mercifully. I wouldn't even take a job that requiring dressing up every day, at this point. At 27, I'm set in my ways...I've given up on living a proper, respectable life like an adult human.

So that means a morning weekday freeway commute, a prospect that's like a grim death sentence in Los Angeles. I'd be more anxious to wake up Monday morning and put on a Guiness-record-sized beard of bees than get on the 405 North. The good news is, the majority of the traffic at that time of day is heading in the opposite direction as me - from the (not really) affordable housing in the Valley to cramped, poorly-lit cubicles in Los Angeles Proper. The bad news is, it will still take goddamn forever for me to get the 11 miles north to Woodland Hills.

I wouldn't even take the job if it required going South on the 405 at 10 in the morning. I'd probably be offended if some potential employer even suggested such a thing, without backing up the suggestion with at least a 7 figure salary. It'd be easier for me to get to Jupiter than Torrance by 10 a.m.

Think I'm exaggerating?

By the Texas Transportation Institute's reckoning, the cities having the worst traffic problems are:

1. Los Angeles, Long Beach, Santa Ana, Calif.
2. San Francisco, Oakland, Calif.
3. Washington, D.C.
4. Atlanta
5. Houston
6. Dallas, Fort Worth, Arlington, Tex.
7. Chicago.
8. Detroit
9. Riverside, San Bernardino, Calif.
9. Orlando, Fla.
11. San Jose, Calif.
12. San Diego

Can I just ask...why does anyone live in Riverside, California? Talk about the worst place on Earth. You have all of L.A.'s traffic problems, all the smog that sits over Los Angeles in the morning gets pushed over to your community by mid-afternoon and there's nothing to do in your city but go to one of the local strip clubs that wasn't classy enough for the San Fernando Valley. Do you know how not classy you have to be to not be welcome in Chatsworth or Van Nuys?

In Riverside's favor, I will say that their local UC campus' mascot is the Highlander, which is a pretty badass mascot. Unfortunately, it's just some dippy bear in a kilt, and not an immortal guy wielding a sword. Missed opportunity, if you asked me.

Everybody's a Critic

You all remember Bill Bennett, right? He's the charming former Secretary of Education, Drug Czar and current loopy right-wing talk show host who recently suggested that aborting all black babies would be a good way to reduce the crime rate.

You may also recall the revelation that Bennett, who publicly opposes legal gambling and even wrote a book on morality in which he decries gambling as sinful, in truth had lost millions of dollars in Las Vegas as a high-stakes gambler.

So, yeah, he's a racist fool and hypocrite. But did you also know he was an amateur film reviewer?

Has anyone seen, does anyone know of, a movie depicting the war we are in now, the fight against the barbarians? We've had movies about the first Gulf war, and a morally ambiguous fiction about something or somewhere called Syriana--but anything about our over-four- year- old fight for civilization against the Islamist barbarians, based on fact? Anything? Anyone?

Props to Alicublog for catching this hilarity. Check out their response, which imagines Bennett going into a video store and asking this question. Funny stuff.

Bennett, in his lame attempt to attack Hollywood for somehow "ignoring" the War on Terror, only demonstrates his total lack of knowledge about film production and cinema history. One need only look to the Vietnam era to see how big studio movies tend to deal with the issues of the day without depicting them, head-on, for fear of being seen as insensitive or inappropriate.

Audiences don't want to see the grim reality of a news broadcast when they go see a movie. That's why, during and immediately after the actual Vietnam war, movies tended to either substitute other wars in place of Vietnam (like the Korean war film M.A.S.H.) or go totally allegorical (like Walter Hill's 1981 Southern Comfort). You didn't start seeing a lot of mainstream movies set in Vietnam until after the war.

Likewise, today we're seeing a lot of movies about paranoia, corruption, terrorism and technology. Because that's where we're at as a society. Only morons need everything spelled out plainly for them. Can't Bill Bennett see that, though Jarhead may take place during the first Gulf War, and Munich is set in the 70's, and Syriana isn't the actual name of a real place, that all of these films are dealing with the current War on Terror?

You sense Bennett won't be happy until we have the Hollywood of the 1940's again, with big studios urging people with each new picture to buy war bonds, support the president unquestioningly and enlist to go overseas and fight the evil, faceless enemy. After you see Bruce Willis and Josh Hartnett in Operation: Tikrit, you can proceed immediately to the lobby where recruiters will serve you hot buttered popcorn while they describe to you the many different ways you can nobly die for your country. But don't forget to return to your seat in time to catch the serial and the newsreel!

Also, I hadn't realized we declared war on the barbarians. Are they still sacking our border villages, burning the straw huts and kidnapping the womenfolk and the livestock? Can't we just call their heathen leader to our capital city, ply him with the gift of 20 gold coins and his choice of maiden from the king's harem and send his dark armies along to seek plunder from the Phoenicians or the Visigoths?

Mirrormask

Mirrormask is a marvelous-looking film that's exceptionally dull. The world McKean and his animators have created - a child's doodle-pad come to bizarre life - contains all manner of imaginative, otherworldly design features, but also has no rules nor sense of space nor personality, really. As a piece of animation, it's a wonder. But it's not very exciting to watch.

It kind of reminds me of the early days of computer animation, when it was called 3D Animation and consisted of trippy, alinear shorts shown on late-night cable TV and backed up with industrial music.



Fifteen-year old Helena (Stephanie Leonidas) hates working at the circus run by her parents. She spends her days working on her drawings and ignoring the fact that she lives in a trailer next to a Big Top. When her mother (Gina McKee) collapses during the show and is rushed to the hospital, Helena has a dream that she enters the world of her drawings, a land split between Light and Darkness.

It's kind of like The Neverending Story, except that film gave its hero (Bastian) a real quest, with a definite conclusion and a clear enemy. Helena just kind of wanders around this bizarre fantasyland, in kind of an aimless fashion.

She meets a peculiar man in a mask (everyone in this world covers their face except Helena) named Valentine (Jason Barry) who serves as a guide, and together they bumble around exploring polygonal wonders.

Mirrormask has been described as a family film, and it's reliance on shiny visuals instead of any kind of human drama might appeal to the younger set more than adults, but it's a bit too creepy for kids. There are dogs with human faces on them, that yell and sneer at Helena. And spiders with large, googly eyeballs that spy for a Wicked Queen (also played by McKee). Also, there's an extremely creepy group of robots that sing The Carpenters' "Close to You," in what is surely one of 2005's most unsettling film sequences.

Mirrormask's trippy designs are the work of illustrator Dave McKean, and he does a great job at giving the film a unique look. The live-action scenes, as well, are innovatively shot with some measure of success, particularly a long zoom out through Helena's bedroom early on.

And the script is by Neil Gaiman, whose Sandman comics I have not read, but whose novels American Gods and Good Omens (written with Terry Prachett) I have long admired. I'm afraid its his script that falls down on the job here. Mirrormask is really obvious - we understand from the outset that Helena is dreaming, and that this world is composed of her drawings, even if she doesn't.

So, because it's all a dream, there's no rules to this world. Add to that the fact that Gaiman doesn't really bother to give Helena and Valentine anything to do, and you get one aimless, leisurely movie. Their search for an item called a Mirrormask, which will unite the two worlds and save the Good Queen (also played by McKee), comes up occasionally in conversation but doesn't ever really drive the story forward.

I kind of gave up on it after a while. The movie looks cool, but it wasn't really even trying to entertain me. Just bedazzle me with crazy visuals. Meh.

Elizabethtown

To get a quick idea of the sensation of spending 2 hours with Elizabethtown, try to visualize the following scenario. You're at a very long memorial service for a stranger. Some obnoxious DJ keeps playing songs at high volumes at inappropriate intervals. There are a lot of treacly speeches about the meaning of life. At one point, Susan Sarandon gets up on a stage and does some ribald stand-up comedy followed by a tap dancing act. And the entire time, you're seated next to this chirpy blonde girl who won't shut the fuck up for two seconds.



This movie is an ugly, horrifying ordeal.

Cameron Crowe has lost his goddamn mind. He's never been my favorite director, though I enjoy Almost Famous. Mainly, I feel like his movies start well, but wind up fumbling on their way to overly-cheery endings. Like his characters pull him into the darkness, but he refuses to end a movie on anything other than an optimistic note, so the entire second and third acts are this futile, unsatisfying tug of war.

But Elizabethtown, a movie obsessed in its own right with failure, is surely Crowe's lamest outing yet. I can even say with some assurance that it will be his worst movie ever. It feels almost like something really gross he had to get out of his system before moving on, the culmination of every awful impulse and stupid idea he's ever had as a screenwriter/director.

In the tradition of films like Crowe's own Jerry Maguire and Zach Braff's 2004 assterpiece, Garden State, Elizabethtown is one of those quirky comedy-dramas urging audiences to take a fresh look at life, to get the most out of every day, to not sweat the small stuff, and a lot of other happy horseshit. In fact, the movie's a lot like Garden State, which careful readers of this blog will note is never ever never a good thing.

Like in Garden State, we open with a chronically depressed young man far from home. Shoe designer Drew Baylor (Orlando Blo.....zzzz....oh, sorry, I must have nodded off there...the movie stars Orlando Bl....zz......oh, excuse me again...) is an egregious, disgusting failure. His latest shoe is threatening to bankrupt the entire company, and the CEO, Phil DeVoss (Alec Baldwin, bad in a small role) wants him to go down with the ship.

Drew's about to kill himself (using a home-designed stationary bike/knife-wielding device!) when he gets a call from his frantic sister (Judy Greer) and frantic mother (Susan Sarandon, the not quite as frantic as Judy Greer). Drew's father has died. They want him to fly to Elizabethtown, Kentucky, where Dad was visiting his family, have his body cremated and fly with it back home to Oregon.

On the otherwise-empty flight to Kentucky, an extremely annoying and chirpy flight attendant named Claire (Kirsten Dunst) flirts with him, sits next to him, and essentially forces herself into his life through any means neccessary. You sense, if he hadn't eventually come around and started to chat on his own, her next step would be to spike his drink.

So let's pause now to talk about why none of this stuff works in any way, shape or form. First, Drew. He's uninteresting in the extreme. I understand that the point is that he's a failure, and so the first thing we see is him failing big. But he doesn't fail in a way that's interesting. He has no panache, no style. He seems neither desperate nor overly sad. His is the most composed suicide scene in any movie ever.

(For example, before strapping himself to the death machine he's built, he packs up a lot of personal items and throws them into the dumpster outside. Why do this? Surely, after you're dead, others will come along and take care of throwing away your crap.)

Like every other character Legolas has ever played (except Legolas), he's incapable of expressing even the most basic of emotions. Dead. Weight.

And then there's Claire, the dumbest and most irritating movie character you're likely to see anywhere for a while.

(When I say dumb, I mean dumb. In the first conversation she has with Drew, she explains that you can tell a lot about someone's personality from their first name! I suppose Crowe thinks this is the kind of charming personal idiosyncracy that gives girls personality, but all I could think about was how you'd be biased based on the particular people you had met with that first name, and how the trick wouldn't work with people like me who had unusual names. Oh, and how this was a stupid conversation.)

Drew winds up staying in Kentucky for weeks because...well, for no good reason, really. Like everything that happens in Elizabethtown, events unfold because they are convenient for Cameron Crowe's filming schedule, not for any reason. Crowe needs to keep Drew in Kentucky long enough to fall in love with the dippy Claire, so he has memorial services and funerals that stretch on for days and days.

And it's not like there's so much great dialogue between the two lovebirds for Crowe to savor, either. The guy always uses a lot of recognizable songs on his soundtracks, but Elizabethtown is filled to bursting with music. The couple falls in love almost exclusively in montage, including a really embarrassing early sequence where they talk all night on the phone while music plays so we can't hear what they're saying.

Every once in a while, we'll get a little snippet of conversation. (Like, seriously, "men see the world as a box and women see the world as a round room." Ooooohhhh...Kirsten Dunst, you just blew my mind). Then, in the next scene, they're in love!

Aside from the fact that they have no chemistry, and that the Kirsten Dunst character is extremely annoying and just talks shit constantly, much of the rest of the film doesn't make any sense. How does Claire always know when Drew will be around where he will be, and how does she keep getting days off to do nothing but dick around with him? Who gives a shit about Drew's cousin (Paul Schneider) and his stupid son, who we spend time getting to know and are then totally dropped by the film? And why is this girl Claire, who is clearly attractive and, in the reality of the movie, irresistably charming to everyone she encounters, all alone in the world and obsessively trying to get this dull, suicidal shoe designer to fall in love with her?

But when I said Cameron Crowe has lost his mind, I didn't just mean he made a seriously bad film. I mean that the entire film is bursting to overflow with bad ideas, like Sarandon's funeral service "boner"-obsessed stand-up act, or the use of Tom Petty's "Learning to Fly" on the soundtrack, or the scene where Drew twirls around by himself in the woods as an expression of his freedom or joie de vivre or some shit.

And that's just it...After watching 2 hours of this film, I have no idea what Crowe was going for. He sets up a lot of dramatic scenarios and a lot of potential themes - a young man with no real identity meeting his large colorful Southern family, a disconnected son getting to know his dead father and harried mother all over again, a sudden and strange new romance, coming to grips with failure, learning to accept responsibility, daring to experiment and take rists. It sets up all these ideas, but doesn't bother to do anything with them. They all just float around, and I guess when Crowe plays soft Elliott Smith songs and shows Kirsten Dunst looking around in slo-mo, we're supposed to reflect on all of them, quietly, to ourselves.

Also, the last 15 minutes or so of Elizabethtown classifies its author as certifiably insane.

SPOILERS - I will now talk about the end of the film Elizabethtown. Read no further if you watch romantic comedies in suspense as to how they will end.

Okay, so at the end, Claire gets Drew to agree to drive, by himself, back to Oregon from Kentucky. Oh, yeah, and he brings his dad's ashes with him, and scatters them wherever this crazy idiot tells him to.

She draws him up a personalized map with exact directions and CD's timed perfectly to accompany his journey. As if that's not obsessive-compulsive enough, she has also included photographs of herself at all of these various locales. Oh, and on the CD's that are timed to his experiences, she sometimes includes her own voice.

"This is the motel where Martin Luther King was shot...His death was just the beginning of his victory."

I swear, this is in the movie. This is insane. Anyone who would even think of this idea, and then think it was a really cute, sweet way to end a romantic comedy, is nutso. Can you imagine if someone really did that? Recorded themselves on a series of CD's to accompany you and your dead father's remains on a cross-country journey.

"Hey, Orlando Bloom. How are you and the ashes today? We're going to see a lot of exciting attractions..."

Creeeeeeepy.

In one final note, near the end of Drew's road trip, Claire arranges to meet up with him and give him a choice about being with her romantically. This means she arranged to get herself from Kentucky to this random spot on the road to Oregon at the precise moment that Drew would pull up in his car, and that he would definitely find all this expended effort charming and delightfully romantic. Right.

It's just bizarre, like some sort of alternate-reality rom-com version of Bring Me the Head of Alfredo Garcia. Bloom crying and yelling at his Dad's ashes while listening to Kirsten Dunst DJ blues albums and recommend good spots to stop in Tennessee for chili. I think Cameron needs some lithium.

Thursday, February 09, 2006

Twitching Powder

Ari turned me on to Twitch Film, a really cool movie website that focuses on Asian films, but not exclusively. The great thing about Twitch is that they update all the same movie news you'd get on the big websites, like Ain't It Cool or Dark Horizons, without all the endless fanboy blather. You don't have to hear the guys at Twitch go on and on and on about how they went white-water rafting with Stephen Sommers or played a really satisfying four-hour game of hackeysack with some of the Adventures of Sharkboy and Lavagirl animators.

And now, a couple of cool recent updates...

First, and most importantly, news on a whole slew of upcoming projects from one of my favorite working directors, Terry Gilliam. Not a lot has worked out for Gilliam thus far this decade - in addition to last year's financially and artistically disappointing Brothers Grimm, Gilliam's long-awaited Don Quixote movie fell apart a few weeks into production, and he has since lost the rights.

But things are looking up! In addition to Tideland, due out some time in 2006, Gilliam has a bunch of other films planned that might actually make it to theaters eventually.

Up first is word that Gilliam has signed on to direct Anything For Billy, a western based on Larry McMurtry's Billy the Kid novel of the same title and scripted by McMurty himself.

Sounds pretty sweet. McMurtry, of course, is the favorite to win an Oscar this year for his work adapting the short story Brokeback Mountain. So another Western-themed script of his would easily find financing. Hopefully, Gilliam will be attached at that time, as I'd be fascinated to see what he'd do with a more traditional genre film like a Western.

And as exciting as new Gilliam is, Screendaily also updates the status of three Gilliam projects thought dead. They confirm the longstanding rumors that the man is in the process of reacquiring all rights to The Man Who Killed Don Quixote, so that will be coming somewhere down the line. Even bigger news is that Good Omens aint dead yet, and Gilliam has apparently even revived The Defective Detective, on which he'll apparently be collaborating with Dave McKean!

This is just awesome news. Gilliam's been trying to get Defective Detective going for years now. We talked about it briefly when I interviewed him for Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas, way back in the late 90's. Good Omens would also be a fun film, an adaptation of a very silly novel by Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman. (Pratchett is, of course, responsible for the "Discworld" books while comic book writer/novelist Gaiman wrote 2005's Mirrormask).

And anyone who has seen the documentary Lost in La Mancha, about the tragic, failed Gilliam production of Man Who Killed Don Quixote will be excited to see that film finally coming together. The few scenes that had been completed looked creepy and odd and visionary in that usual Gilliam way.

Next up, it seems that Laser Blazer customer and Devil's Backbone director Guillermo del Toro is planning to film a script called "Killing on Carnival Row," a serial killer mystery set in a fantasy world populated by fairies.

"Set in a mystical and dark city filled with humans, fairies and other creatures, the story centers on a police detective investigating a series of murders unleashed against the fairies. The detective becomes the prime suspect and must find the real killer to clear his name."

Don't get me wrong...It sounds kind of cool, and I'm sure GDT will make the thing look great. But I'd much rather see him work on Hellboy 2 or his long-discussed Lovecraft adaptation "In the Mountains of Madness" or even that "Wind in the Willows" project that was rumored forever ago. I'm glad the guy will move on to something else after the release of Pan's Labyrinth later this year, but this is the least exciting of all the prospects I've heard thus far.

Unless, you know, the script is awesome. I haven't read it, and know nothing about it other than that paragraph.

In our final item today, Twitch hosts the trailer for Terry Zwigoff's Art School Confidential, opening in April of this year and surely one of my most eagerly anticipated 2006 films. It's a reunion of writer Daniel Clowes, who wrote the graphic novel that became Ghost World, and that film's director, Zwigoff, who made a big splash in the intervening time with Bad Santa.

The new film features a large ensemble of unknown young actors, as well as John Malkovich, Jim Broadbent, Angelica Huston and Steve Buscemi. If you don't really want to see this film, I kind of don't want to know you.

The Secret History of the War on Terror

So, George gave a press conference yesterday where he told us all about a horrifying al-Qaida plot to blow up something called the Liberty Tower here in Los Angeles.

Except that there is no such thing as the Los Angeles Liberty Tower. The White House later informed everyone that George meant the Library Tower, which isn't actually called that any more but has been renamed the US Bank Tower. But...I mean...you know...he's on top of this whole War on Terror thing. He's the Commander-in-Chief and all. He just incorrectly provided the old name of the building that was under attack. Other than that, a flawless performance.

President Bush gave new details on Thursday about a purported 2002 terrorist plan to use shoe bombs to blow open the cockpit door of a commercial jetliner, take control of the plane and crash it into a building in Los Angeles.

Bush said the U.S.-led global war on terror has "weakened and fractured" al-Qaida and allied groups, outlining as proof new details about the multinational cooperation that foiled the purported terrorist plans.

"The terrorists are living under constant pressure and this adds to our security," Bush said. "When terrorists spend their days working to avoid death or capture, it's harder for them to plan and execute new attacks on our country. By striking the terrorists where they live, we're protecting the American homeland."

Atrios and a lone intelligent White House reporter have already pointed out that, of course, you can't actually hijack a plane with a shoe bomb. You can explode a plane, as well as your feet, but a shoe bomb is one of those things you either detonate or you don't.

But never mind!

I thought it was pretty cool that the government apparently has been secretly thwarting supervillains for years, and just not bothering to tell anyone. (Incluidng the mayor in charge of the city that was saved!) But, being the responsible journalist that I am, I wanted to know more about the wonderful work being done by the Bush Administration, under wraps, to keep us all safe.

So I did a little snooping around, using my insider Washington contacts, and have produced this list of all the various evil plots BushCo. has foiled since the Septmeber 11th attacks. Of course, because these were all prevented tragedies, none of you have heard anything about them. Because there's nothing the Bush Administration hates more than taking credit for things. Just a paragon of humility, each and every one of them.

Kill Phil

Back in early 2003, an Iranian-born Muslim named Abu Hazim living in Los Angeles was contracted by a terrorist organization and ordered to assassinate daytime television personality Dr. Phil.

"The terrorists are constantly trying to throw us off our guard," a senior White House official said under condition of anonymity. "That's why they want to get rid of a man who helps so many Americans heal their relationships with loved ones and lose unsightly pounds through a mixture of intense guilt, fear-mongering and pseudo-Freudian jargon. The loss of Dr. Phil would have been a crippling blow to needy, easily-influenced mouth-breathers everywhere."

Apparently, Hazim planned to go undercover as a guest on Dr. Phil's show, pretending to be involved in an ongoing argument with his adolescent daughter about dressing like Paris Hilton. He would then pull out a box-cutter from his pocket and gut the self-help guru on national television, possibly also setting an American flag on fire and yelling "death to the infidels," time permitting.

Fortunately, authorities who had tapped the Dr. Phil guest hotline number listened in on Hazim's call, and finding him Arab and therefore suspicious, they monitored his behavior. He's right now being held in a prison somewhere in Eastern Europe. Or something.

Al-Qaida/Acme Merger

In July of 2003, using a generic-sounding front company called Asian Export Co., a group of well-financed, al-Qaida-sympathetic businessmen in Qatar attempted to purchase famed American conglomerate Acme Inc., best known for outlandish weapons like the Do-It-Yourself Tornado Kit, The Bat-Man Flying Suit and magical paint that will make the side of a mountain resemble a desert road.

"Can you just imagine what might happen if terrorists could get their hands on an unlimited supply of Indestructo Steel Balls, Invisible Paint or Super Speed Vitamins?," posited a senior Pentagon official. "It would be an even worse hypothetical situation than if Saddam had theoretically had Weaopns of Mass Destruction!"

Some have suggested that, given Acme Product's propensity to fail at inopportune moments, that this may have been an intentional, covert CIA operation designed to sabotage al-Qaida's future plans. For whatever reason, the sale never went through.

Smithsonian Seige

Several al-Qaida operatives were arrested in Washington D.C. in April of 2004 in connection with a plot to steal Indiana Jones' hat and whip from the Smithsonian, along with other important pieces of national memorabilia.

2 members of the group were thought to be involved in a similar raid on a Davenport, Iowa Hard Rock Cafe the previous year.

"We had one of Liberace's powdered wigs, that's irreplacable," said Davenport Police Chief Russell Wurthington. "Not to mention a signed program from Cher's most recent Farewell Tour. And they're just taking it to be mean, cause you can't exactly move that stuff on the black market there...Collectors know it's a hot item, and don't wanna touch it."

Other items believed to be on al-Qaida's Smithsonian hitlist: Catherine Bach's Daisy Duke shorts from "The Dukes of Hazzard," Archie Bunker's easy chair from "All in the Family" and the Penguin's monocle and cigarette-holder. Also, one of the terrorists wanted to make his escape in the original Knight Rider car, but this plan was scrapped as it was too complicated, and none of the other terrorists knew the show "Knight Rider" that well.

Wrecking the Rock

This particularly devious scheme was first detected by Staff Pro at Albany, New York's Pepsi Arena. Al-Qaida operatives were secretly buying up a lot of seats in the first few rows of the loge section for major concerts, then standing up and dancing around and generally making a lot of noise. Performances including the White Stripes, the Rolling Stones, Josh Groban and more were ruined for upwards of 100 people by dumb, noisy, dancing al-Qaida affiliates.

"After the first two songs, most of us just wanted to sit down and listen to the music," said Barenaked Ladies fan Tom Cochran. "But those old, bearded guys just kept twirling around and making that sound with their tongues through the whole show. I mean, I get being excited and wanting to stand when they do 'If I Had a Million Dollars,' but 'Jane'? That's just unneccessary."

5 of the offending concert-going terrorists were arrested on their way in to local radio station WXOR's annual Wango Tango benefit concert. Among the artists who would have been rudely interrupted by flailing hippie-esque terrorists were Beyonce Knowles, Ryan Cabrera and Pink.

Pennywize

If you're afraid of clowns...best to just skip ahead to the next post.

Take a look at this photo of Teri Hatcher from the Grammys last night. Compliments of The Superficial.



Gak!

I was going to make some joke about The Joker still being uncast for the next Batman film, but The Superficial, of course, already got there before me. Curse those handsome devils!

Wednesday, February 08, 2006

Mondo Video

A couple of funny videos from around the Net for your viewing pleasure...

Dane Cooked

I haven't yet commented on the whole Danish cartoon rioting story, because it's egregiously stupid. Just another one of those international incidents that reminds us 90% of the human race has the maturity level of an autistic middle school student.

Let me make this real clear for all of you. If you have a strong opinion, one way or another, about a Danish caricature of the prophet Mohammad...you're a mouth-breather. That means, whether you're attacking embassies in Afghanistan and being shot at by police or using this as yet another excuse to attack the religion of Islam or making a map of nations that refuse to publish the cartoon, you're a fool who is too quick to join an angry, thoughtless mob mentality.

Shut the fuck up and let adults worry about it, please. It's just a goddamn cartoon.

Here's a pair of clips, from "The Daily Show" and "The Colbert Report," that provide a bit of context to this entire debacle. Thanks to One Good Move for the clip.

Shit Getting Blowed Up Real Good

Alert reader Ofer sent me this video of a bunch of Oklahoma goobers shooting guns indiscriminately at a field full of abandoned vehicles. Wooo-eeee!

I'm not sure if he sent this to me as a goof ("hey, check out these Oklahoma goobers shooting guns indiscriminately!") or because he thought I'd find it cool ("hey, check out this gunfire and these explosions! Awesome!"). I'm going to go ahead and assume the former.

You can tell from the video that this event lasts from the morning until well into the night. What could possibly be the appeal of firing guns randomly into a field in tandem with several hundred other violence-enthusiasts? It's certainly not about accuracy, aim and skill with a weapon, because you can't even tell who is hitting what. I mean, at least if they tied up some gay guys and Hillary Clinton out there with targets around their necks, I'd understand the popularity of such an event in Oklahoma.

Is it just a desire to make shit blow up real good? If so, mission accomplished. Oh, and please note the guy teaching his young daughter to fire an automatic weapon. Sir, you're truly an inspiration.

Basically, It's Softcore

A mysterious "promo reel" for Basic Instinct 2 has magically appeared online. Check it out here (warning: the link leads directly to a Quicktime file), compliments of Aint It Cool News. It is essentially two minutes of softcore pornography, starring Sharon Stone, cut to crummy "intense" movie music.

This is probably the work of desperate producers, who need to convince Americans that this movie will be dangerous and sexy, despite the fact that Sharon Stone his been acting in films since roughly the silent era. We're talking about an actress for whom Total Recall was a comeback.

And Shar does look pretty good for her age. I'm not trying to bash her or anything. It's obviously pretty brave for any woman over 40 to star in an erotic thriller requiring full frontal nudity. This movie's just kind of a questionable decision all around. She's not exactly a genius or anything, but Sharon can act well enough that she probably doesn't need to go the Shannon Tweed route. (Although even Shannon Tweed uses body doubles, at this point.)

Modern Romance

This DVD was held off until May, so no one else will be able to see it until then, but I work at a video store and am therefore special.

Okay, Albert Brooks' low-key 1981 rom-com Modern Romance...This movie's often regarded, according to conventional wisdom, as a classic. The pinnacle of Brooks', um, craft or what have you. Back when he used to mine comedy out of the foibles of an everyday modern guy, rather than looking for comedy in the Muslim world, and apparently coming up short.

I'll tip you off right here at the top...Not much of an Albert Brooks fan. People always say that he's this alternate Woody Allen or something, but the similarities are superficial at best. Two neurotic Jews, from opposite coasts, made socially-observant, dryly funny films in the 70's and 80's that were kind of inwardly-focused. But Woody's a real filmmaker, a man who is just as capable of beautifully capturing a character (as in Annie Hall) or even a city (Manhattan) or an era (Zelig). Movies in which he appears, but where there is something else to be entertained by other than the rapier wit of Woody Allen.

Brooks is mainly good at making movies about himself and what a charmingly befuddled dude he can be. At his best, as in Lost in America, he manages to make his obsessions and anxieties universal. I mean, it's not just Albert Brooks who hates working for annoying bosses and being tied to a mortgage and responsibilities. Everyone dreams of breaking out from the ordinary and setting off on a grand adventure.

At his worst, Brooks is just some whiny little yutz who makes endless, dull films in which beautiful, nearly silent women redeem him for all his bizarre personality quirks. Modern Romance is one such film.

Clearly, the film is based on a failed relationship in Brooks' own life. I can't imagine you would bother to make up such a story. In the opening scene, film editor Robert Cole (the man himself) breaks up with his beautiful girlfriend Mary (Kathryn Harrold) in a Hamburger Hamlet. He says that they always fight, but implies that she has been sleeping around on him.

In the film's only consistantly funny sequence, Robert takes a bunch of qualuudes and stumbles around his apartment in a depressed daze. He puts on "A Fifth of Beethoven," that awful disco version of the Fifth Symphony, and dances around for a moment. He calls up a random number in his Rolodex and asks a stranger out on a romantic date. He calls his friend and assistant (Bruno Kirby) just to say "I love you." And he passes out in his car.

And there is some other amusing stuff in the movie. Passages featuring director/producer James L. Brooks (a non-actor who is no relation to Albert) as a wrong-headed director making a horrible sci-fi film starring George Kennedy work as comedy, but are pretty disconnected from the rest of the movie in terms of tone. One minute, you've got this kind of Cassavettes-lite, morbid take on the hopelessness of love in the modern world, and the next minute you've got fat old George Kennedy huffing it down a corridor in a Kubrickian space station.

To be honest, even though its cartoonishness is out of step with everything else in the film, I'd still rather see more of the George Kennedy movie-within-the-movie. Because the stuff with Brooks and his on-again off-again romance are pretty unbearable. Cole is about the least-sympathetic or charming character imaginable.

Here's Albert Brooks from the original press kit for Modern Romance, way back in 1981:

“There are no gags in the picture,” he says. “No zany comics. There are real people in real situations, carried to a logical – or illogical – extreme. If the outcome is funny, it’s because life itself is funny.”

What complete nonsense. Is this guy delusional? Not a single scene featuring protagonist Robert Cole is reasonable, logical or realistic. The guy is a lunatic. And not in a "crazy in love" kind of way, as Brooks likely intended. In an "Albert Brooks realizes the movie isn't funny so he throws in over-the-top schtick as a way to get cheap laughs."

Take an early scene in a Foot Locker-type store, featuring a cameo from Albert's brother Bob as an opportunistic shoe salesman (who would later become world-famous as Super Dave Osbourne). Cole has decided to "change his life" following the painful break-up with Mary by becoming a runner. So we get a gratuitous scene of him being suckered by the salesman, convinced to by all manner of unneccessary runner paraphanelia. Yawn. Brooks just keeps going and going with the gag, long after it has become painfully obvious. Again, the scene violates any sort of realism - Robert's a smart enough guy to know that you don't need all this expensive BS equipment, and he's not supposed to be wealthy and wouldn't be able to afford this crap. But Brooks needs a laugh, so in it goes.

It's only after Robert and Mary agree to get back together - at about the 45 minute mark - that Modern Romance goes from merely desperate to outright creepy. Robert turns out to be an extremely possessive, needy lover, and Mary responds by becoming distant and disinterested. The more we get a sense for the dynamic of their relationship, the more clear it becomes that this film applies to Brooks' own psychology and not to any kind of universal male response to romantic love.

I mean, sure, some men are possessive by nature, and everyone who's in love at times feels threatened and vulnerable. That's what it means to let someone into your life, to take a risk that they will betray your trust. But Robert's pretty much a maniac, and Mary seems nothing but sane and reasonable. I came to doubt not only that she would remain with such a tiring, nebbishy, pathetic man, but that she would have ever become interested in her in the first place.

In the film's final scene, a long-winded and very strange dialogue between Robert and Mary at an isolated cabin in the mountains, he implies that she's attracted to his jealousy. That she wants a man who will obsess over her and make her feel wanted. I suppose this is Brooks' notion of a happy ending - rather than pity the poor couple who can't work it out, we will rejoice that they have found someone who so perfectly compliments their personal quirks and idiosyncracies.

But, again, in some closing (and unfunny) titles, he has to ruin the entire point for a cheap laugh. Sigh.

Somehow, Modern Romance has garnered quite a reputation. I suppose the fact that it's so extremely self-indulgent and narrow is, in a way, groundbreaking. Few filmmakers would attempt to make a movie that's so clearly about nothing but their own inner life, the stray thoughts that whiz through their head while they're hanging out with their co-workers and girlfriends.

"Hey, you know what I did today? I cut a part of a film and I debated whether I should break up with my chick. I should make a movie about that! Those are some universal themes!"

Maybe it's the title. Modern Romance. You think you're going to see something about the nature of love, and instead you get a movie about how Albert Brooks always second-guesses himself, and sometimes lies to his mom about having plans to avoid talking to her for more than a minute or two.

Hey, Sorry About That, You Guys...

A new study reveals that...big surprise...raising children makes you depressed. Also broke and 87% more likely to injure your foot stepping on a discarded Transformer while going to the bathroom in the middle of the night.

Not only do parents have significantly higher levels of depression than adults who do not have children, the problem gets worse when the kids move out.

"Parents have more to worry about than other people do—that's the bottom line," said Florida State University professor Robin Simon. "And that worry does not diminish over time. Parents worry about their kids' emotional, social, physical and economic well-being. We worry about how they're getting along in the world."

I mean, yeah, duh. You don't need to be a highly esteemed FSU associate professor to know that parenting is hard, whereas living by yourself in a shitty apartment with two other guys is...well, not as easy as you might think, really. I don't even know how I make a go of it, sometimes. But it's a lot easier without some snotty little child running around expecting to be clothed and fed and driven around to various sports-themed afternoon activities.

The depressing results seem to be across the board in a study of 13,000 people. No type of parent reported less depression than non-parents, Simon said.

Some parents are more depressed than others, however. Parents of adult children, whether they live at home or not, and parents who do not have custody of their minor children have more symptoms of depression than those with young children all in the nest, regardless of whether they are biological children, step children or adopted.

Now, that's a strange statistic. I'm not sure this is true of my own parents. They seem, to me, overall jollier now than when I moved out 10-some-odd years ago. (With a year-long interval of living with them again squeezed in there.) My father in particular has a bit more bounce in his step now that I and my younger brother no longer occupy his actual house. And don't even ask about the several-year stint when my mother's parents lived with us.