Jonathan Richman, NPR’s Marketplace, Walmart, Eagles

This is not the first post of this nature. Anyway, the show included a riff from Jonathan Richman’s “Lonely Little Thrift Store” after a segment on Walmart’s banking service. Good choice! They’ve used this riff before, and the album is sold on the Public Radio Music Store. Speaking of Walmart, I again saw South Park’s Something Wallmart this Way Comes, fabulous social commentary. Still, I should get around to reading Walmart & the Politics of American Retail. Back to radio, I’ve noticed my growing distaste for songs by The Eagles. I can’t think of another band that makes me change the radio station faster and more decisively.

movie: Collateral

I saw this movie tonight and enjoyed it. It’s worthy of a blog entry, but perhaps not worthy of being on my del.icio.us video links page. Anyway, this is an action movie with good dialogue and something to think about. I identified with Max, played by Jamie Foxx, who was basically a perfectionist, that is, someone who puts off choices (and his life ambitions) for fear of making a mistake. As David Byrne sings in “Back in the Box

If I don’t make no decisions, then I won’t make no mistakes. But through all those tiny holes, well the light’s still getting in! I’m going back in the box…Back in the box again

Good point, though the double negatives make me cringe.

Hmm. Apparently the director of this movie, Michael Mann, also produced the ’80s television show Miami Vice, and a movie will come out this year. Now I wonder if Crockett and Tubbs are made to be the clear-cut (but not clean cut) good guys in enforcing drug prohibition – which, to say the least, is bad policy, according to both wonks and those in law enforcement. I was nine-years old when I saw it last. I mean, did the dynamic duo get their cool car from asset forfeiture? Well, at least according to at least one article, “Vice did not portray federal law enforcement agents as heroes. Instead, they often were portrayed as crooks at worst and bumblers at best.”

More on movies

One movie I did not mention in the May 29 post was Sideways. Jo Ann Skousen wrote a good review of it in the April edition of Liberty Magazine. Too bad it’s not on-line. I’ll exceprt some quotes when I get a chance. When I was back East I read an article about Paul Giamatti (co-star of Sideways and son of Bart Giamatti, former Yale President and baseball commissioner) in Time, where the movie’s director Alexander Payne says

It’s my hope that we’re getting into an era where the value of a film is based on its proximity to real life rather than its distance from it.

Yep, that’s pretty much why I did not like Sideways, a movie about a couple of losers who remain that way. From my limited knowledge of aeshetics, Payne seems to embrace Naturalism, as oppposed to say, Romanticism. Perhaps I can find a good article on this as applied to film.

Memorial Day movie

I should post this while it’s still Memorial Day: One of the best movies about the dangers of glorifying war has recently been released in DVD: The Americanization of Emily. Rick Gee wrote a review of the movie that includes some great quotes, and the word osculation. It’s also sold as part of a Controversial Classics box set. Arthur Hiller directed it, and Paddy Chayefsky co-wrote it. (It’s based on the novel by William Bradford Huie) They also teamed up in The Hospital. I should see that, too.

a movie genre I don’t like

I was considering seeing the movie Crash, so I went to mrqe.com to look at reviews and started to read the one my A.O. Scott in the New York Times. Now, I’m averse to this publication because of their assinine punctuation policy of using apostrophes for pluralizing acronyms such as DVD (“DVD’s). They do this because their headlines are in all caps, and god forbid, on the rare occasion a plural acronym would be in a headline (there’s only on UN, IRS, FBI, and CIA, and what about the more commom possessive form?), they throw in a lower case “s.” Idiots! (see my blogs from Nov. 30 and Dec 23 2003.)

As I was saying before ranting, here’s how Mr. Scott describes the genre (the Times also puts quotes around movie titles — I thought italics were appropriate):

What kind of movie is ”Crash”? It belongs to a genre that has been flourishing in recent years — at least in the esteem of critics — but that still lacks a name. A provisional list of examples might include ”Monster’s Ball,” ”House of Sand and Fog” and ”21 Grams.” In each of these films, as in ”Crash,” Americans from radically different backgrounds are brought together by a grim serendipity that forces them, or at least the audience, to acknowledge their essential connectedness.The look of these movies and the rough authenticity of their locations create an atmosphere of naturalism that is meant to give force to their rigorously pessimistic view of American life. The performances, often by some of the finest screen actors working today, have the dense texture and sober discipline that we associate with realism. But to classify these movies as realistic would be misleading, as the stories they tell are, in nearly every respect, preposterous, and they tend to be governed less by the spirit of observation than by superstition.

I made my decision upon reading the comparison to 21 Grams, which I disliked for pretty much the same reasons I disliked Leaving Las Vegas and Sideways: they are movies about about people I cannot admire. There must be more to it, though, but it’s a start.

Marburger, Powell, Rushdie, and Butler

A good week for talks, and I’ll finally let myself write about it, as I found the “bug” in my program after one long and frustrating day. A multiplication instead of a division symbol. Doh!

I met the President’s Science Advisor, John Marburger. I gave him a copy of an article on science funding by Terence Kealey, and Marburger asked for my e-mail so he could get back to me. That was surprising. We’ll see. In any case, I e-mailed Kealey, in England, and he was glad to hear it:

Thank you for your kind e mail. It gave me great pleasure to receive it. I didn’t answer earlier because I was away for a couple of days. My suspicion is that President Bush, like the Republicans since Hoover, is into corporate welfare and will see the federal support for science in that light (and of course bioterrorism research has given the federal government funding of science a further boost). But I’m not American and I might be wrong and I might not understand the nuances of American policy shifts. I’m certainly delighted by the thought that John Marburger has actually seen my stuff. That is genuinely exciting – thanks!

So that made my day.

Earlier this week I heard Michael Powell speak. The Cato Institute has said some good things about him (link), and he seems to see the value in letting entrepreneurs be creative and free. Apparently he’s not too hot on censorship issues (he’s not averse to it), but it seems that the FCC did a good job on letting new technology (wireless, DSL, etc) flourish. (link)

George Butler directed Pumping Iron, which followed Arnold Schwarzenegger, Lour Ferrigno, and some amateur body builders on their quest for winning top honors in their respective competitions. Seeing Arnold back then, early-mid ’70s, was interesting, as he appeared to be quite the politician then. However, the new DVD release apparently shows that he made up some things for the camera. Alas, the politician. It was inspiring to hear Butler speak of this, his first film, and his percerverence in raising money. He approached 3000 people for money, and fewer than 1% donated/invested anything. Butler claimed, if I recall correclty, that this movie made Arnold’s career. Maybe I’m forgetting the nuances of what he said, but in any case, it’s amazing how the action of one person can change the course of history, that is, assuming that Arnold’s subsequent films and political career really change the course of history. It’s tough to tell. It reminds me of Boornstein’s Cleopatra’s Nose.

Lastly, Salman Rushdie spoke at CU. It was nice to hear from a man whose world was literature, art with words. Yet, it was a packed house, and I, like many others there, had never read a word of his, and was there only because some bad people wanted him dead twenty years ago. I thought he’d be above this, but he trashed The Da Vinci Code, as if its author Dan Brown had any pretenses of writing literature. Really. Can’t Rushdie appreciate the novel for what it is, not literature, but a screenplay for an action movie turned into a novel? I suppose Rushdie would argue the while the book had some historical context, got people interested in how things came to be, and was a page-turner, it could have had the things it did not have: character development and higher-quality of writing. But please. Rushdie complains about current TV and film (“things used to be better”), and then complains about what people are reading, too. Why not look at the positives of the Da Vinci Code, and positive aspects of current film and TV, e.g., the number of “indie” films being made, the expanded market for them, perhaps through cable stations that cater to niche tastes, as well as HBO’s TV series that can also cater to narrower, more “sophisticated” audiences, unlike broadcast TV. For things to be better, they need not be like the mythical “good old days” (when people yearned for the good older days). Things can be better in new and different ways. And sure also worse. But there’s generally more art these days, some bad, some worse.

OK, that was not the most coherent screed. But I’ll leave it at that.

Taste

I was at a friend Ben’s house to watch the Super Bowl. Eagles almost pulled it out. What’s the percentage of successful on-side kicks, anyway? I read something about that recently. Paul McCartney sure has the head bob thing going when he performs. There’s something a bit off-putting about his style. It’s as if he’s doing a cover of his own songs. The emotions I sense from him do not seem to match the song, rather, they seem to say “Hey look, I’m singing this song now (for the Nth time), isn’t it great?@! Woohoo!” Yet, the guy is still writing songs and is ambitious enough to try different styles. So that’s admirable.

Ben’s friend Pauli will soon be a chef, and Ben says that because of his influence, he can now taste the difference among different types of salt, and “organic” vs. normal milk. Pretty neat. Like anything else, cooking and tasting is a skill to be acquired, and with it, a greater appreciation of life.

What do I believe is true even though I cannot prove it?

What do you believe is true even though you cannot prove it? That is the Edge‘s annual question, posed to severla leading intellectuals, scientists, and artists. It’s fun to browse, and one of my favorite novelists (I don’t have many), Ian McEwan, is included.

Better yet, he has a new novel coming out soon. My favorite novel of his is Enduring Love. Yes, the title is misleading, but accurate. And I still have not seen the movie, which I suppose was not a big hit. I’ll try not to ruin the experience of reading the new one by comparing it to his others.