Rachel Getting Married: 2/5

Directed by Jonathan Demme, screenplay by Jenny Lumet, cinematography by Declan Quinn.

I confess: I am a big fan of Anne Hathaway.  It began with Ella Enchanted, then the mountains of Genovia, and finally Agent 99.  But not even the muse of the Bard could save Rachel Getting Married for me.  Her acting---heck, all the acting---was superb; I really cared for and believed in the characters.  And the cinematography really tore down that fourth wall.  But . . . too little plot, too much confusion, and not enough communication.  I spent half the running time trying to figure out what I was missing.

Ms. Hathaway: You did extremely well.  Ms. Lumet: not so much.

Web 2.0 for movies

So I've been active on this website, Flickchart.com, for a few weeks, and I thoroughly enjoy it.  Except for one thing.

According to my profile, I have watched 426 movies, consuming 29 days, 23 hours, and 24 minutes of my life, and picked a favorite 1,818 times.  But that same profile has been viewed once.  And it tells me this depressing fact:

You've got no friends!

Dang.  Exclamation point and all.

So if you like movies and you like talking about them, sign up.  We can be friends, compare our lists, and have pillow fights.

Or just talk about movies.

So Sideways I'm Lost

SPOILER ALERT

From C.S. Lewis's The Voyage of the Dawn Treader:

"Child," said Aslan, "did I not explain to you once before that no one is ever told what would have happened?"

In this, the final the season of Lost, the creators have caught some flack for their new experiment, "flash sideways," explorations of what would have happened in a World Without the Island.  Ben sacrifices his ambitions for Alex's good; Sayid kills his brother's creditors; Jack works through his daddy issues; Locke comes to terms with his handicap; Kate lets Claire keep her baby.  Some people think this is lame.

A friend of mine suggests that he can't decide whether Jacob or The Man in Black is the real bad guy of the series.  I'm firmly on Team Jacob, but I am keeping my mind open.  Consider this, on the nature of literary tragedy:

After all is said and done, the audience should not feel impotent rage, denial, confusion or having been cheated. They should feel that the ending is a natural outcome to the hero's actions, and that in having faced punishment for those actions they [the audience] are purged of anxiety and worry. The world does make sense, the guilty are punished.

Is't possible that the purpose of the flash-sideways is to give us, the audience, a chance to see what would have happened if Jacob hadn't interfered with everybody?  Maybe the flash sideways are meant to telegraph the end of the series, to explain to us that the world does make sense and the guilty are punished.

Don Quixote and Lady Macbeth

From Stephen King's Firestarter:

Andy moved slowly away from the van.  The other fellow . . . had his gun out now.  He pointed it at Andy.  He was less than fifty feet away.  "I advise you very sincerely not to move," he said in a low voice.  "This is a Colt forty-five and it makes a giant hole."

The young guy with his wife and baby at the picnic table got up.  He was wearing rimless glasses and he looked severe.  "What exactly is going on here?" he asked in the carrying, enunciated tones of a college instructor.

The man with Charlie turned toward him.  The muzzle of his gun floated slightly away from her so that the young man could see it.  "Government business," he said.  "Stay right where you are; everything is fine."

The young man's wife grabbed his arm and pulled him down.

Query: Between the young guy and the wife, who is being practical and who is being romantic?  Who is being reasonable and who is being irrational?  Who is really trying to save lives and who is merely pretending?

Surprise, based on the blog Alico Dreams by Jeremy Masten

Out of the mouths of multinational corporations:

The Sandra Bullock win really surprised me. Not to say she didn’t deserve to win, but she was going up against Meryl Streep as Julia Child and an awesome performance by Gabourey Sidibe in Precious, which I believe is based on a book or something. It’s hard to tell, because nobody ever mentioned what it’s based on. I guess it will remain a mystery.

Scooby dooby doo---where are you?  We've got a job for you, now.

Spoiler Alert

One of my favorite things about movies is that, if done right, they end with a question you have to ask yourself.  Everything is done to build up to that question.  The greatest movie of all time asks a question that every successful suitor faces, and what some movies might call the 6-month question:

Now that I got the girl, what do I do?

Similarly, the best movie of 2009 asks a very difficult, very ubiquitous question.  For centuries, war has asked women one question (What if my son/brother/husband doesn't come back?) and men another question (What if I don't come back?).  We always assume that, if you make it back, society will wrap you in its arms, build you a statue, and try to make it worth your while.

But since the Vietnam fallout, war has asked us a different question, one that has taken us a few decades to work out:

What if my son/brother/husband/I make it back, but he/I can't handle the real world anymore?

The movie doesn't give us the answer, but it asks it very beautifully:



There's also a Russian (or something) dubbed, longer version on YouTube, but this one works.

According to Screenwriter Boal himself:

Both of those scenes, and the juxtaposition between them, sum up the film. . . . The supermarket scene is one that veterans in particular have pointed out to me - it's probably the single scene that they talk about the most, which is surprising to me. It really seems to ring true to a lot of them in the sense of capturing that feeling of being lost when you come back to a normal life.

So that's my two cents.

Stranger in a Strange Land: 3/5

Today, I finished Robert A. Heinlein's Stranger in a Strange Land.*  The book has two versions, between which I alternated.  The 1961 publication ran for 160,067 words and won the Hugo Award.  In 1991, the Widow Heinlein published an expanded, original version, which weighed in at 220,000 words.

*I also discovered a new and interesting website.

Since learning to read circa 1988, I have read over 230 books, including 11 in 2010; seen at least 350 movies, including 19 in 2010; read a bazillion cases and statutes; and heard probably over 1,000 sermons and lectures.  Perhaps hypocritically, I appreciate brevity.  I believe that books longer than 500 pages and movies longer than 2 hours should have a blankity blank good reason for the surplus.*  There comes a point where thoroughness gives way to self-indulgence.  I simply don't have patience for that.

*Interesting note: Shakespeare never wrote anything longer than 5 acts.  I'm just sayin.

And I'm afraid that self-indulgence marred an otherwise good story here.  I began in the 1991 version but ran out of steam about three-fourths of the way through.  I got tired of reading extended "conversations" between characters that served little more than to either (a) set the table for something coming or (b) give the author a soapbox.  So I switched over to the 1961 version and still waded through the last 50 or 60 pages.  By "waded," I don't mean to say that those pages were boring or uninteresting; I mean to say that they began as interesting and just went on a little too far.  Even the very last page went one sentence too far.

UPDATE: Just ran across Niven's 4th Law for Writers: "It is a sin to waste the reader's time."

Balto, the STL, and the KC

Yesterday, I noticed that Baltimore has been abandoned in three of the four major North American sports.  After some quick research, I learned that no other city has been abandoned four times, but St. Louis and Kansas City each have lost a team in three sports.

First, what you already know.

The New York Yankees were founded as the Baltimore Orioles in 1901, but left after the 1902 season to meet their destiny.  This year's Super Bowl runner-up joined the NFL as the Baltimore Colts in 1953, won three NFL championships and Super Bowl V, and left in Mayflower trucks in 1984 after stadium renovation talks fell through.  And the Washington Wizards played ten seasons in Baltimore (as the Bullets) before moving a little west in 1973.

Now for what you might not know.

The (second*) Milwaukee Brewers moved to St. Louis for the 1902 season and began play as the Browns.  Fifty-one years and a pennant later, they moved to Baltimore for the 1954 season, reviving the old Orioles nickname.  Angry about that loss, the City of St. Louis responded by luring the NBA's Hawks away from Milwaukee for the 1955-56 season.**  The St. Louis Hawks won the 1958 NBA championship, but couldn't take Mid-American winters.  They skipped town in 1968.***  Finally, the Chicago Cardinals moved to St. Louis in 1960, piddled around for almost three decades, then moved to the desert of Arizona in 1987.

*The first Milwaukee Brewers played 36 games in the American Association in 1891 after Kelly's Killers folded.

**Milwaukee and St. Louis should have bitter rivalries.  What kind of town steals from another town twice?

***Atlanta must have been the place to be in the late '60s and early '70s.  The MLB's Braves moved there (from Milwaukee, believe it or not) in 1966, the NFL's Falcons were founded the same year, the NBA's Hawks moved there in 1968, and the Atlanta (now Calgary) Flames came along in 1972.  To recap: in 1965, Georgians had no local teams; less than 10 years later, they were represented in all four major sports.  Los Angeles is jealous.

And . . .

The Philadelphia Athletics, trying to push Connie Mack into the grave, moved to Kansas City in 1955.  After serving as the Yankees' farm team for 13 seasons, they headed west in 1967.  Five years later, the Cincinnati Royals moved to Kansas City, played their 13 seasons (including 1979, when they won the Midwest Division) and headed for Sacramento in 1985.  The Kansas City Scouts didn't get the 13-year memo.  They joined the NHL in 1974 and moved to Colorado in 1976.  Eventually, they would win a hat trick of Stanley Cups as the New Jersey Devils.

Who will be the next thrice-abandoned city?  Five American cities have been abandoned twice:

• Philadelphia: Athletics (1954) and Warriors (1962)
• Minneapolis: Lakers (1960) and North Stars (1993)
• Seattle: Brewers (née Pilots) (1969) and Thunder (née Supersonics) (2008)
• Chicago: NFL Cardinals (1959) and Packers Zephyrs Bullets Wizards (1963)
• Milwaukee: Brewers (1901) and Hawks (1955)

I think it's high time St. Louis stole another team from Milwaukee.  It's been a half-century or so.*

*Or I suppose a team from Philadelphia could make its way west to Oakland, but that would involve making a new joke, and Mrs. Moak always told me never to introduce new material in the last paragraph.  That probably includes a footnote to the last paragraph.  Aw snap.

When in Baltimore

Yesterday, I bought one of the coolest baseball caps I know:

Now, I know that you say, "Jeremy---you grew up two hours south of Nolan Ryan's 5,000th strikeout and sixth and seventh no-hitters; there is only one 'Pudge' in your vocabulary; you believe strongly in waiting till next year; Rickey Henderson is your favorite player of all time."  Yes, that is all true.

But I also hate the Yankees.*  And I live in Baltimore.  And I love Camden Yards.

*Few cities have a greater claim for hating the Yankees than Baltimore.  Now that I think about it, Baltimoreans have been abandoned in three of the four major North American sports.  The Colts left in the middle of the night in March 1984, and the Wiz left town in 1973.  Interesting question: Have any other cities been abandoned at least 3 times?  Does a Baltimore-to-Washington move count as "abandonment"?  Post may follow.

Sports are about uniting friends and neighbors against a common enemy, so it doesn't make sense for me to cling exclusively to my Rangers fandom.*  It's OK for me to put on an O's cap when I'm in Baltimore and an A's cap when I'm in Oakland and an R's cap when I'm in Dallas.**  I know the time will come when I can't have it all three ways, and I will be forced to decide.

*Especially since August 22, 2007.  Oh no he didn't.  Yes he did, Peter!  Yes he did!  I just saw him!

**Why don't any National League teams inspire loyalty in me?

But let's face it: October 2010 will not be that time.

Why the Sky is Blue

Why I think a lot about chemistry:

Chemistry has the power to explain everything in this world, from the ordinary to the bizarre. . . . Understanding chemistry is the key to understanding the world as we know it.

That's also why I think a lot about jurisprudence.

Adventureland: 4/5

For all of my readers out there with a spec script for a rom-com, this is a key ingredient you must have in your script:

[Y]ou can totally see why James would subject himself to the things that he does in pursuit of Stewart’s Em.

There should be reasons for Guy and Girl to get together.  Don't expect your audience to just buy into the old syllogism:

+ Guy is Lead Actor

+ Girl is Lead Actress

> Guy and Girl should fall in love

Life doesn't work that way, and neither should your plot.

The Representative from California

I am tired of hearing "Boulevard of Broken Dreams" and "When September Ends" and acting like they're anything but boring songs I've heard too many times.  AltNation should play lots and lots more "Jesus of Suburbia."  Or at least "Basketcase."  Sheesh o meesh.

Pirate Latitudes: 3/5

Pirate Latitudes by Michael Crichton


My rating: 3 of 5 stars

Michael Crichton writes three kinds of books: (1) thrilling blockbusters (or at least wannabe blockbusters), like Jurassic Park or Sphere; (2) contemplations on science and the human condition, like State of Fear or The Lost World; and (3) simply fun historical novels, like The Great Train Robbery, Eaters of the Dead, and, now, Pirate Latitudes. So if you only like Crichton for his Jurassic Park-like thrillers, stay away. If you only like Crichton for his Prey-like contemplations, stay away. But if you like lightweight, easy reading that's fun, give it a chance. It's not his best work, but it's not his worst either. (Sphere and Congo, respectively, get my votes.)

Maybe the best I can do is quote Robert Louis Stevenson's prologue to Treasure Island:

If sailor tales to sailor tunes,
Storm and adventure, heat and cold,
If schooners, islands, and maroons,
And buccaneers, and buried gold,
And all the old romance, retold
Exactly in the ancient way,
Can please, as me they pleased of old,
The wiser youngsters of today:
--So be it, and fall on! If not,
If studious youth no longer crave,
His ancient appetites forgot,
Kingston, or Ballantyne the brave,
Or Cooper of the wood and wave:
So be it, also! And may I
And all my pirates share the grave
Where these and their creations lie!

To paraphrase: If you think boats/pirates/sea adventure are cool, you'll probably like this book. If not, you probably won't.

First Law Job

Because I want to shout it from the rooftops, I'll post it on my blog.

As of this morning, I accepted a position with The Law Offices of Peter G. Angelos.  I'll be doing my part to make the world safe to drink groundwater in.

Thank you and good night.

Eye Spy

Have you ever noticed how you can tell a person's gender by just their voice?  And it's not just pitch.  When you listen to the artist formerly known as the artist formerly known as Prince, you never think "Is that a fello or a fella?"*

*I guess I should admit that Coheed and Cambria always throw me for a loop.

But here's something interesting: you can usually pick a girl out by her eyes, even if she's trying to look masculine.  Case in point:

 

No matter how you try to disguise yourself as a manly giant-radioactive-ant-fighting entomologist, Ms. Weldon, we can see the truth in your eyes.

Moon: 4.5/5

I don't often get excited about movies, but two movies in the past year have gotten me really excited.  (2009 was an exciting year for movies.)  I haven't seen one yet (Sherlock Holmes), and I just saw one last night (Moon).  I've seen a lot of movies in the past 12 months, but these are the only two I've been really excited about.

 

I loved Moon; The Missus hated it.  To be fair, this is not the kind of movie you can half-watch and enjoy.  Rather, it's the kind of movie where you immerse yourself, float around in it for a while, and never really get your bearings but never really get bored either.  (Think: 2001.)  Some things can be more important than plot.

Maybe that's what I love about science fiction.  One of my favorite reviewers described it this way:

[Science fiction] geeks love clockwork stories full of hidden messages and structural tricks, so much so that the puzzle-solving nature of the narrative is as much a draw as the subject or ideas.

For my money, the plot of Moon (how Sam escapes) is less intriguing than the clockwork nature of the story, its hidden messages, or its structural tricks.  Tack on brilliant acting by Sam Rockwell, a phenomenally atmospheric score, beautiful story-reinforcing imagery,* and an interesting play on the how-far-is-too-far theme, and you've got a movie well worth your rental.

*One of my favorite tricks/imagery: the base seems decently roomy, but Sam sleeps in a cramped twin-size bed.  That, my friends, is showing-not-telling.

In the interest of full disclosure, I feel I should disclose two things.  First, the Moon is my favorite celestial object.  Second, I guessed the twist around the 1:07 mark, and you know you always like a movie better when you guess the twist.

By the way, Sherlock Holmes is in my queue for delivery as soon as it comes out on DVD.  If you feel bad for me, please donate $20 so The Missus and I can make a date to see it in the comfort of a dark theater.

NFL Predix III: Let's try that again

To recap the NFL Postseason so far: Jeremy was right about the Cowboys beating the Eagles, the Jets beating the Bengals, and the Ravens beating the Patriots.  He picked the Packers, Cardinals, Ravens, Cowboys, and Chargers and lost.  So after a sterling 3-1 start, I dropped to 3-5 after the Divisional Playoff Round.

But I am not one to lie in the dust after getting thrown by this bronckin buck.  So let's try this again.

Lamar Hunt Bowl XL

The Indianapolis Colts will host the New York Jets in the battle for the Lamar Hunt Trophy.  This is the first time these two teams have fought for control of the AFC.  The Colts are making their sixth appearance (2-3 overall, 2-1 home), and the Jets are making their third appearance (0-2 overall, 0-2 road).  History favors the Colts.  I also told my oldest friend back in September that the Jets would make it to the Super Bowl.  But my father-in-law is from Indiana, so I'm going to go with the Colts.

George Halas Bowl XL

The New Orleans Saints will host the Minnesota Vikings in the battle for the George Halas Trophy.  These teams have never fought for the Halas either.  The Saints are making their second appearance (0-1 overall, 0-0 home); the Vikings are making their eighth appearance (3-4 overall, 1-3 road).  The Vikings haven't won since 1976.  I told my oldest friend back in September that the Saints would make it to the Super Bowl, so I'm picking them.

Super Bowl XLIV 

The New Orleans Saints will be making their very first Super Bowl appearance.*  The Indianapolis Colts will be making their fourth appearance (second as a midwestern team).  The Colts are 2-1, including 1-0 since moving to Indianapolis.  I'm a little torn, but I gotta pick the team that beat the team that beat my team.  I'm picking the Saints.

*This is ironic because New Orleans has hosted more super bowls than any other city except Miami.

There you have it, folks.  Let's hope that I can break even after this week.

Big Shot Brob

I hate the Lakers, but I love this play:




Kobe misses the short jumper.  Shaq misses the put back.  Horry nails the 3.

NFL Predix II

I did pretty well the last go'round: 3/4.  But really, was it so daring to pick the Cowboys over the Eagles, the Ravens over the Patriots, and the Jets over the Bengals?  I think not.  Now we get into the nitty gritty: the NFL Divisional Playoffs.  Since I missed one of my games, I decided to re-examine my predictions.

Divisional Playoffs

Ravens at Indianapolis - The Colts beat the Ravens in Baltimore during Week 11, 17-15.  This go'round, the Colts are on a 2-game losing streak, and the Ravens are on a 2-game winning streak.  I believe in momentum, and I still believe the Ravens win.

Jets at San Diego - The Jets and Chargers meet for the first time since Week 3 of 2008, which the Chargers won in San Diego 48-29.  The Jets won their third in a row yesterday, but the Chargers have an 11-game win streak going.  All momentum points west.  I'm still picking the Chargers.

Cardinals at New Orleans - Last time, I picked the Packers over the Saints.  Too bad the Packers lost to the Cardinals, so now I have to re-think my predictions.  The Cardinals have won 3 of their last 4, and the Saints have lost their last 3.  The friend of my enemy is my friend, so the Cardinals take it.

Cowboys at Minnesota - The last time these two met in the playoffs was during Wild Card Week 1999 in Minnesota.  The Vikings won that contest, 27-10.  But three years earlier, the Cowboys beat the Vikings during Wild Card Week in Dallas, 40-15.  All-time, the two are even, with 10 wins each.  But the Cowboys are riding a 4-game winning streak, and the Vikings have lost 3 of their last 5.  I still pick the Cowboys.

Conference Championships

Ravens at San Diego - I stand by my prior decision.  Chargers win.

Cowboys at Cardinals - The names have changed, but the results are the same.  Cowboys win this one by 87.

Super Bowl XLI

Cowboys v. San Diego at Paul Tyson Field - Still no contest.  Cowboys all the way.

Current Record: 3-1

The Graduate: 4.5/5

The Graduate is brilliant and funny in so many ways.  And it's the first movie I've ever seen where I actually sat back and thought: "Wow.  That was an amazing shot.  Incredible."

Here's the scene: Benjamin is telling Elaine the truth before Mrs. Robinson can.  He says, "Remember that older woman?  Well, it wasn't just any woman."  Then Mrs. Robinson opens the door, and Elaine turns around.  She looks back at Benjamin, who has a funny look on his face.  At first, Elaine is blurry, but slowly she comes into focus.

At just about the speed it takes her to figure out what the look on Benjamin's face means.

I sat back and thought: "Wow.  That was an amazing shot.  Incredible."