Hankblog: March 2004

Movie Retrospectives: Play Ball! Week
Field of Dreams

"If you build it, he will come."

Those are the cryptic words heard by Iowa farmer Ray Kinsella (Kevin Costner) as he works in his cornfield one day very early in this film. What "it" is, he does not know. His wife Anni (the downright adorable Amy Madigan) can't figure it out either. She's a very understanding woman. She neither dismisses Ray's claims of hearing voices outright, nor does she try to encourage what could be a delusional fantasy. She just lets Ray plug along until he figures out what "it" is.

Eventually, Ray is granted a vision. "It" is a baseball field. As improbable as it may be, he knows inherently that he must plow up his corn and build a baseball field. And he also instinctively knows that this field must be built so that the ghost of Shoeless Joe Jackson (Ray Liotta), one of the 8 players banned for throwing the 1919 World Series, will have a place to play baseball again. And from this seemingly absurd premise springs forth one of the most enjoyable baseball films I know.

Ray eventually finds himself putting together a sort of metaphysical puzzle. He figures out that what he has been set out to do is more than just give Shoeless Joe a place to play again. He also knows that this puzzle has something to do with Terence Mann (James Earl Jones), one of the most influential American writers of the last half century. He learns that there is also some connection with an obscure former player named Archibald "Moonlight" Graham (played in different capacities by Burt Lancaster and Frank Whaley). Graham got into one major league game, but never got involved in a play. He's also been dead for sixteen years. And ultimately, Ray knows there is some part his late father plays in the grand scheme, perhaps allowing Ray to make up for regrets he has carried for several years.

Director Phil Alden Robertson recovered from penning the oddball comedy All of Me and the abysmal Rhinestone (for those who don't know, starring those thespian powerhouses Dolly Parton and Sylvester Stallone) to write and direct this moving drama about the national pastime. The screenplay was adapted from the novel Shoeless Joe by W.P. Kinsella. Kinsella has mined baseball for some really fascinating stories. I personally recommend reading The Iowa Baseball Confederacy after giving Shoeless Joe a read.

The novel takes a bit more philosophical and introspective turn than the film does. Told from Ray's perspective, the novel has something of an anti-establishment streak running through it. The fictional novelist Terence Mann from the film is replaced with real life novelist J.D. Salinger, who did in fact write a short story called "A Young Girl in 1941 With No Waist At All" that featured a character named Ray Kinsella. The reclusive Salinger objected vehemently to being a character in the novel, and threatened legal action if used in the movie.

The film focuses more on the ideas of dreams and regrets. History plays a large part in both, giving the characters in the film things to regret and the guidelines by which they may be able to make better choices in the future. In the end, Ray, Terence, and Joe all get a chance to make up for things they might have done differently in their lives. And Archie Graham shows us that sometimes the first choices we make are the smartest ones.

Understand, I can see where some might find this film to be melodramatic. There are some who may find the film to be burdened with a fair amount of schmaltz. But speaking for myself personally, I can not help but be moved by it every time I see it. I know several guys who would sooner gnaw off their own arm at the elbow than be caught dead crying at a movie, who will find themselves choked up watching this movie. It's just one of those "guy" movies where it's acceptable to be moved by it, I think (right up there with Old Yeller, I guess, though I've never seen Old Yeller). Regret is something we've all had to grapple with at one time or another. And there have been times in everyone's life when you have to say "Should I take the chance? Should I shoot for something bigger?"

In the end, this film reminds me a lot of Close Encounters of the Third Kind. I think that it shows that there are times when you really need to try and take a shot at the brass ring. The rewards are worth it, if the dreams are big enough.

Tomorrow: Pride of the Yankee or A League of Their Own, depending on which one I can rent. Will be late though, as I am playing softball tomorrow night.

Movie Retrospectives: Play Ball! Week
Bang the Drum Slowly

Baseball has the potential for drama more than any other sport, I personally believe. In football, if you have a lead, you can run out the clock on your opponent. To a lesser degree this is also true in basketball. In baseball though, there is no running out the clock. You still have to get those last three outs to end a game. And as a result, the team that is behind values every last opportunity. Every swing is a chance to claw your way back into the game. Every moment is precious.

Baseball has also seen this adage extended into the real world amongst its own. There is the very dramatic story of Lou Gehrig, later immortalized in the film Pride of the Yankees with Gary Cooper playing Gehrig (a film I hope to feature later this week, if I can get my hands on a copy). Less well known is the story of Willard Hershberger, to date the only player to have committed suicide during the season (view stats and a brief bio here). Hershberger's story was told in an exceptional piece in Sports Illustrated by Frank Deford I believe, titled "The Razor's Edge".

Along the lines of Gehrig, there was a fictional story of doomed ballplayer turned into film in 1973 titled Bang the Drum Slowly. The film starred a very young Robert Deniro as catcher Bruce Pearson, a player for the fictional New York Mammoths (who in blazes came up with that name?). Pearson we learn at the start has been diagnosed with some mysterious disease that has put Pearson in the last innings of his life. The only person he trusts to tell is the star pitcher of the Mammoths Henry "Arthur" Wiggen (Law & Order's Michael Moriarity, looking very strange to me with actual hair on his head).

Wiggen and Pearson both keep Pearson's secret from the rest of the team. They don't want it to become another target for the many barbs team members throw Pearson's way. Pearson gets a lot of grief from the team because the simple fact is he's not too bright at all (think Forrest Gump, without the fortune cookie style comments on life). He also is a marginal talent at best. And it looks very likely that Pearson will not even make the team out of Spring Training, due to the arrival of a stud catching prospect with the incredibly contrived name of Piney Woods. Through a sequence of events, Pearson makes the team, is shephered through the season by his new friend Wiggen, and eventually becomes a rallying point for everyone. Cue weepy music, and tug heartstrings.

If I sound cynical about the film, I think it's only because this film is so horribly dated. There are so many 70's film staples that are just awful by today's standards scattered through the film. The music is hideous, the camera work is pretty lame overall, except when they resort to stock footage from actual games. There are some classic 70's/early 80's actors in here, including Danny Aiello in a small role as the first baseman Horse (I am not making this up), and Vincent Gardenia as team manager Dutch. There's some non-sensical subplots surrounding Wiggen and his sideline selling life insurance to other players (?!?!), and ultimately that comes full circle when the time comes that Pearson wants to change his beneficiary on his policy to a Madame he's fallen in love with.

The screenplay is adapted by Mark Harris from his novel. I can only gather from his entry on imdb.com that Hollywood recognized his limitations as a screenwriter, as his only other credit is for a TV movie in 1980. And that is one of the biggest problems I have with this movie. It feels like one of those TV "Disease of the Week" movies that get run during sweeps week, or appear to be staples on Lifetime.

In fact the only thing that surprised me or affected me at all about the film comes very late in the story. The big secret of Pearson's disease eventually leaks out and finds its way to all members of the team. But what he has is never mentioned until a meeting late in the season with Wiggen and the team's upper management. It's in this meeting that one of the upper management types mentions that it was named for the man who discovered it: Thomas Hodgkin.

It blew my mind to think that what we now know to be the most treatable form of cancer, and the one with the highest survival rate, was just 30 years ago spoken of in the same hushed tones that today we speak of HIV with in TV and movies. It's something of a wonder to consider just how far we've advanced medically in such a relatively short period of time, that today Mario Lemieux plays professional hockey not 2 years after he was diagnosed and treated for Hodgkin's.

In any case, as a baseball movie, this one is pretty weak. It's almost trying to be a poor man's Brian's Song, and doesn't even come close to achieving that level of quality. It's amusing as an opportunity to see a very young Deniro doing his thing before he became a caricature of himself as an actor, and to see the traits that work so poorly for Michael Moriarity as he tries to play a baseball player, but worked in his favor as District Attorney Ben Stone on Law and Order.

Tonight: Field of Dreams

Play Ball Week will have two posts tomorrow.

Got a headache that won't quit right now. Will be going over the exceptional Field of Dreams, and the awful Bang the Drum Slowly.

See you in the morning.

Nothing they could have done, eh?

My friend Mike the Evil One brought this link to my attention. Look at the date. This story was posted on 7/26/01.

"In response to inquiries from CBS News over why Ashcroft was traveling exclusively by leased jet aircraft instead of commercial airlines, the Justice Department cited what it called a "threat assessment" by the FBI, and said Ashcroft has been advised to travel only by private jet for the remainder of his term."

But they've been vigilent, and they're tough on terrorism. Uh huh....yeah.

In the interest of equal time

There's a goodly amount of Yankee bashing going on over at Daily Kos. Give it a look, and add some of your Yankee love or hate

Damn!

Shame she's going to the wrong UT, but still. This is really impressive.

Movie Review: Hellboy

Hellboy (2004) Director - Guillermo del Toro; Starring - Ron Perlman, Rupert Evans, Selma Blair, John Hurt, Karel Roden, David Hyde Pierce, Jeffrey Tambor; Screenplay - Guillermo del Toro, from the comic books by Mike Mignola; Rated PG13 for some action violence, and some graphic images.

Intro
In my high school and early college years I was an avid comic book reader/collector. My interests were almost exclusively centered in the D.C. Comics universe (home of Batman, Superman, The Flash, etc.). In particular, I enjoyed D.C.'s forays into darker material with the Vertigo line of comics. Neil Gaiman's Sandman and the Alan Moore version of Swamp Thing plumbed the darker sides of comic fiction, and provided some truly inspired writing combined with amazing visuals. They may have been disturbing at times, but they truly tried to raise the stakes for comic books to a new level.

I fell out of comic collecting long before Hellboy came onto the scene. I had heard about the character from friends who still collected, glanced through the odd issue lying around. It sounded like something that would appeal to me. Quirky, dark, and unconventional. When I heard there would be a Hellboy movie, I hoped that the movie would try and play on that same level. I'm happy to say that while there are some bumps along the way, the movie delivers a lot of that and more.

So what (or who) is Hellboy?
In 1944, Hitler tried to turn the tide of WWII. Delving heavily into mysticism and the occult, he attempts to change the momentum of the war back to his favor by enlisting the help of the mad Russian monk Grigori Rasputin (Karel Roden). Rasputin attempts to perform a ceremony that will unleash demigods of chaos upon the earth, destroying it completely. Before the ceremony can be completed, US Forces accompanied by Professor Bruttenholm (John Hurt) of the newly formed Bureau of Paranormal Research and Defense intervene. Rasputin is believed dead, the Nazis are defeated, all would appear to be right with the world. Until they find something not of this world. A bright red, baby demon. What role he had if any in Rasputin's ceremony is unclear, but Bruttenholm thinks that the demon could help the Bureau in some capacity, if provided the right guidance. They called the demon Hellboy.

Flash forward to the present day, and a series of events leads the now aged Bruttenholm to believe that Rasputin may still be alive. The only hope for humanity lies in the hands of the Bureau. And the Bureau must rely on Hellboy, and his other misfits the Bureau has taken in: Abe Sapien (voiced by David Hyde Pierce), a fish like creature with empathic powers; and Liz Sherman (Selma Blair), a troubled pyrokinetic, and the woman Hellboy loves.

Sounds...well...weird. How does it all come together?
Really well for the most part. It all starts with a script that really lets some of the actors get into the characters completely, and feel comfortable walking around in their skin.

Obviously with that comment, the movie really starts and ends with Ron Perlman as Hellboy. Though 60 years old in the present day sequences, in "mental age", he's an adolescent/teenager. And Perlman plays him with all the joy of a teenager who knows the things that he can do that exceed the abilities of those around him. And he enjoys doing the things he does. The Bureau investigates paranormal disturbances, and Hellboy is the muscle that investigates.

But as a "teen", he's also struggling with finding his place in the world. He knows he loves Liz Sherman very much, but feels that he can't ever really tell her how he feels, because they are so very different. She is human, and despite her pyrokinetic abilities, can pass largely for normal in the outside world. He can not, and because of this, he feels like the ultimate outsider. He also has to grapple with the perceived threat of Agent John Myers (Rupert Evans). Agent Myers has been brought into the Bureau to be Hellboy's new handler. And while there are things that Hellboy might be able to learn from Myers, the potential for a connection with Liz leaves him very conflicted. I know that in rereading this, it sounds kind of hokey, but on screen it's played with a great deal more skill and grace than the goofy love story between Tobey Maguire and Kirsten Dunst in Spider-Man.

Also, Hellboy wouldn't be nearly as neat an on screen presence were it not for the brilliant makeup work done by Academy Award winner Rick Baker. Baker has been a film god to me ever since I saw the awe-inspiring work he did on An American Werewolf in London. The work he does bringing Hellboy to life with Perlman is absolutely amazing. You can take a look at Mike Mignola's old website (under redesign in anticipation of the movie I would think), and see what Hellboy looks like here. Compare that to the look of Perlman in full makeup here. He's stepped right out of the page and into our world.

Well you've gone on about Hellboy for quite a bit, but what about the rest of the movie?
The supporting cast is solid. Evans does a really nice job in the role of Myers, essentially playing Hellboy's straight man. In a role like that, it would be real easy to play it too over the top earnest, and become really annoying. Evans plays it just right, so we can like him, even if we're not entirely sure about him.

Hurt is really solid also as Professor Bruttenholm. He's a father figure to Hellboy, and he shows a warmth and love for Hellboy that makes you think that maybe he really is the professor's son. The chemistry that exists between the two of them is really nice.

Sounds like you're leaving something out.
I am, and that sort of brings me to the only things I am apprehensive about with the movie. The script itself is good, and my understanding talking to friends who've read the comic is that it's a fairly faithful translation of one of the larger collected Hellboy adventures. But just as there's only so much depth that can be done in the comic format, there's a similar lack of depth here that left me wanting a little more.

Liz Sherman should be one of the most interesting characters on screen. As the object of Hellboy's affections, she should be torn between wanting someone like Hellboy who can deal with her powers (which can get out of her control under the wrong circumstances), and someone who can give her the sense of normalcy that she has desired since she was young (Myers). We get some glimpses of that, and there's a really entertaining scene in which the love triangle is given real opportunity to show itself off. But then it disappears and never really gets touched on again.

I also think that there are some real wasted opportunities with the other supporting characters. Abe Sapien is really interesting as something of a middle ground between Liz and Hellboy. He's come to accept his "freak" status as something he can live with, and is trying to make the most of it. But we don't get into him as an individual nearly enough for my taste.

The same could be said for Rasputin as the villain of the piece. He looks all sorts of evil/weird/menacing, but we don't get enough of him to really feel the kind of threat he poses. He's not as wasted as, say, Michael Clark Duncan was as Kingpin in Daredevil (to use another comic book example), but Rasputin isn't a baddie that I can really savor getting beaten down by the good guys as much as he could be.

Lastly, I found the ending/big finish to the story to be very unsatisfying. The movie almost goes out with a whimper instead of a bang, and for me that's the most frustrating part of the film. For all the potential that is set up with the sequences that went before, there's the potential to really knock the ball out of the park. And I just don't feel like the ending hits the sweet spot enough to use that potential.

So ultimately is this movie and angel or a devil?
No question it's an angel, and that's because of the devil inside Hellboy. Perlman makes a lot of the flaws in the movie forgivable, because he's so damn much fun as Hellboy, that you really kind of forget all the rest of the problems, and just enjoy the fun that he's having. And the movie is paced really well, letting you enjoy the action when it happens, but relax when we get to the quieter moments and gear up for the next thing del Toro tries to throw at us. It would be worth the price of admission even if the rest of the movie around Perlman were just atrocious, he's that much fun. And the rest of the movie around him is good, with the potential for greatness, if not here, then maybe hopefully in a sequel or two. Whatever the flaws, the film is still a good ride. I can safely say that I would have no qualms about telling people to go to Hell(boy).

Qualms about typing that last line? Yes. About the movie? None. :-)

I think it might be safe to say...

This will be the greatest romantic zombie comedy ever...

Movie Retrospectives: Play Ball! Week

Bull Durham

"I believe in the Church of Baseball. "
Annie Savoy, Bull Durham

For me personally, this is the best time of year to be alive. You start March out with college basketball conference tournaments, followed by three weekends of the best college basketball of the year in March Madness. Then when you're about to go into basketball overload, you have the first day of baseball season on the first Monday in April.

This year, the goober that is Bud Selig has set up my New York Yankees to "open" the season a week early halfway across the world in Japan against Tampa Bay. So one the eve of this sham event, I'll start a look back at five great baseball films, starting with one that is widely considered one of the greatest sports movies of all time.

Ron Shelton's ode to life in the minors starts with a monologue from Annie Savoy (Susan Sarandon) about the merits of the Church of Baseball. Annie sees a great spirituality in baseball, and there are metaphors for life aplenty throughout the game. Annie also has a goal in her sojourn to the ballpark. She seeks the player with whom she will hook up with for the season.

She quickly narrows the field down to two players. The first is star pitching prospect Ebby Calvin "Nuke" Laloosh (Tim Robbins). Ebby is the epitome of the player with a million dollar arm, and a five cent head. He's had the world handed to him because of his potential, but he doesn't really know how to harness it. The man who would be able to help him towards the end is Annie's other candidate: Crash Davis (Kevin Costner), a career minor league catcher who has long since left his best days behind him as a player. Crash has been brought to Durham to be a mentor to Nuke, and teach him the difference between being a thrower and a pitcher.

From there the story gives a wonderfully vivid snapshot of life in the minor leagues, draped around the frame of a love triangle. Crash is strongly intrigued by Annie, and sees well past the intellectual/philosophical facade she puts up to mask her personal weaknesses and vulnerabilities. Annie has committed herself to Nuke, trying to teach him the ways of life, and help him grow up as a person, just as Crash is trying to help Nuke develop as a player.

This is a wonderful movie from beginning to end. There's a real chemistry between Sarandon and both of her male leads. I believe that this is where Robbins and Sarandon first met on their way to becoming a Hollywood power couple. And the chemistry between Costner and Sarandon is very different in a lot of different ways. Annie and Nuke very much convey a relationship between a young buck, and an older, more experienced woman. Annie and Crash on the other hand have the experience card played on both sides. So their connection is a lot stronger, more developed, and potentially richer than anything Annie could ever have with Nuke.

The script also gives a real feel for what life is like as a minor leaguer. From Nuke as the bonus baby who has the baseball world on a string for him to take, to Crash's career minor leaguer, who's come to grips with his mediocrity, there's a character that every person in the audience can relate to, and you don't have to be a baseball or sports fan to make the connection. You see people you know, and maybe have worked with in your own walk of life.

I think for me, that's one of the things I love about the movie above all else. It's very true to the spirit of the game, and recognizes the difficulties of it. But it also makes you understand that to the fan, this may very well be just a game. But for people playing it professionally, it is every bit a job. It is one that has it's ups and downs. It is one where everyone is looking for the break that will net them the big promotion that they dream of (in the case of all the Bulls, it's the chance to go to "The Show"). And it's a job that make you very humble when you fail, and wonder whether or not you've made the right career choice. When the manager of the team has to break the news to a player that he's been released, you see just how uncomfortable he is breaking the news. He's a boss who's having to lay off one of his employees. There's an awkwardness there that makes you understand just how tough a job he has pulling the crew together.

And the funny moments that give the movie its color are truly inspired, goofy touches. There's a story about a manufactured rain delay that comes from Shelton's own experience in the minor leagues. The conversations that the players have on the field are just this side of absurd given the context they are being held in. And all of it moves towards the end being neither good nor bad, but are just part of the story to help fill in the bigger picture. Just like one game in a season doesn't define the season as a whole.

I earnestly believe that this movie captures what Annie describes when summarizing what she believes in at the start of the movie. "I've tried 'em all, I really have, and the only church that truly feeds the soul, day in, day out, is the Church of Baseball."

Holy season starts a week from today. I can't wait.

Trivia note: Kurt Russell was originally slated for the role of Crash, but events conspired to keep him from the role. He did help Shelton write the script. While rewatching the movie for this piece, I watched the credits to see if Russell got a contribution credit for the movie. While Russell did not get credit anywhere, I did see one name who caught my eye. There was a credit for "Baseball Trainer", presumably someone who worked with the actors to get the motions done right. Check out who did the work here.

Somewhere, I hear some of my VBL brethren screaming :-).

Movie Review: Dawn of the Dead

Dawn of the Dead (2004) Director - Zack Snyder; Starring - Sarah Polley, Ving Rhames, Jake Weber, Mekhi Phifer; Screenplay - James Gunn from a screenplay by George A Romero; Rated R for lots of zombie oriented, flesh munching violence, and gore, along with some language and sexuality.

Intro
I found a great deal of humor in the fact that the weekend of March 19th, when this movie opened, a movie that had been number one at the box office for three weeks about a man who came back from the dead and told us to eat of him (The Passion) was displaced by a movie in which thousands of people come back from the dead and try to eat of us. Not being a huge follower of the zombie oeuvre, nor having seen Romero's original version, I had few preconceived notions heading into this one. I was rather surprised at how I came out of it.

What is Dawn of the Dead?
In present day America, a young nurse named Ana (Sarah Polley) goes home for the night after a shift at the hospital, and wakes to find her city, perhaps the entire country or the world, overrun by the living dead. People everywhere find themselves under relentless attack by these deadly, aggressive beings, who seem to feel nothing save a constant hunger for the living. She throws in with a rag tag group of survivors who retreat to a local mall to make a last stand for their lives.

Sounds like pretty standard horror/zombie fare. How well does it work?
Surprisingly, this one works really, really well for me. Let's start with the performances. With the understanding that you do not go into a zombie movie looking for Oscar quality performances, the main players are all pretty good at what they have to do.

Polley's Ana provides a fairly solid focus as one of the nominal leaders of the group. She relies on her training as a nurse to help try and ferry the group through the extreme emergencies their situation presents them. But you are given some more human moments to remember that she's just as overwhelmed by this as the rest of the group is, and is just as distraught by what has happened.

Ving Rhames has a turn as Kenneth, a local cop. He's mainly there to provide the bad ass mother presence that he's sadly been typecast with a lot since his turn as Marsellus in Pulp Fiction. Nothing ground breaking here, but he's enjoyable just being himself.

I thought Jake Weber had a really interesting low key role as Michael. Michael is something of a cipher when he first enters the movie. We only get a little bit of who he was before the dead started showing up for a buffet. But he's got some really interesting moments where we get to see he has some really good strengths to bring to the group. As well as some fundamental weaknesses.

Last of the performances to note is Mekhi Phifer as Andre. Andre and his wife/girlfriend Luda (you never find out really which it is, and it doesn't matter much) are on the verge of becoming parents (Luda is due any day now). They just want to try and bring their baby into the world, and maybe make a difference in how the world turns out, even in the face of zombie Armageddon. Their subplot is one of the interesting potentially.

The script itself has a lot of wry humor about itself. The first 5-10 minutes of the movie hit you in the mouth hard and doesn't let up much the whole way through. As such, the humorous moments really take the edge off and lull you into a false sense of security before going back to full throttle again. The movie really tries to wring you out by the end.

So is this one a rotting corpse of a movie? Or a fresh kill?
Personally, I think it's a pretty solid outing all around. I actually found myself watching it twice in a two week span. Normally I would find myself tearing apart a genre film like this on a second watch, having already gotten my kicks out of it on the first run. But this one I actually found myself appreciating a little more the second time. There are some camera shots that really give the movie a sense of the surreal for me (there's a couple of long tracking overhead in the opening sequence that I dig a hell of a lot). And there are some shots that I think have to be references/homages to some of the great horror movies of the last 25-35 years, including The Exorcist, Jaws, and I think maybe Aliens. I am hoping anyone else who sees this flick can let me know in the comments if they pick that up too. And I think the musical choices for the soundtrack are really inspired. Anything that can work the Jim Carroll Band, Johnny Cash, and Richard Cheese into the same soundtrack, and make it work, I think deserves some credit.

Overall, the movie is a nice fun little romp. It doesn't have the same aspirations of social commentary that the original supposedly had (my understanding is that Romero wrote the original as an anti-consumerism screed). But as fun, scary popcorn fare goes, this movie has a lot to offer. It's got action, some gallows humor, and a really good energy to the piece. If you can handle some scares, it's definitely worth giving it a look.

I love Tom Burka

The man is pointed.

Do as we say, not as we do!

That would seem to be the philosophy of the Republican party. See this.

I personally think they just don't Kerry using scripture, because then there's a chance that W might have to read something besides that damn Caterpillar book.

Nader's windmills

Saw this AP story about Nader possibly coming to some kind of agreement on the next election. I think I'm more in line with Billmon's take on Whiskey Bar. I don't think I "respect" Nader enough to think he could be bought off, as much as I think that Nader's guilty of either ego, or misguided idealism. If his goal is truly to try and establish a true third party option, he would still be running under the Green ticket. But even a fair amount of the higher ups within the Greens don't want Nader to run. The Progressive touches on this fact and Nader chastising the Greens for their reluctance in this editorial. In essence, Nader's quixotic tilt feels very much like an ego driven move, or (pardon the pun) his not being able to see the forest for the trees.

At the same time, I do respect the honest effort to try and bring a third party into being. I voted for Perot in his first try at the Presidency, and would still support his party had it not been hijacked by Pat Robertson. On St Patrick's Day I was stopped by some people out near Austin's Warehouse District on my way home from a single's mixer. There were people out there trying to get Nader added to the ballot in Texas as an independent.

I went back and forth with the woman who was trying to get me to sign, with neither of us making much headway convincing the other. It was then she made a point that convinced me to sign the petition. There's not a snowball's chance in hell of Kerry carrying TX, and since the popular vote doesn't have an impact in the face of the electoral college, why not support the movement while still being able to cast my vote for Kerry when the time comes. I couldn't really argue with that logic.

Long as Kerry carries the states that add up in November to get W out, I'll be happy.

Back on the air

Work last week was pretty rough, but I am back in the saddle again. Will hit the news items for today and late last week, and then get a movie review or two up.

Atrios is right

Send John Cornyn some love, and encourage him to take time for his family. That way maybe the bull around the FMA will go away.

And if he won't take encouragement, perhaps we can send marital aids?

After all, what's more American than owing money?

Pandagon hosts this nice short piece about the really messed up messages we're getting on debt these days.

I freely admit to having had a bad credit card problem in my youth, that bounced back once. I can safely say that I am not at the point of stress that Jesse talks about in this post. But I'm one of the lucky few. Everytime I get some piece of junk mail that comes from the Texas Exes, I just want to scream. They have no right to start trying to whore me out for more money, when they're already slamming the students in terms of higher tuition to make up for budget shortfalls. When I started at UT in 1990, I paid just over $900 for 13 semester hours. That's total. Tuition and fees included, and that was with the Intercollegiate Athletics package so I could take a shot at getting football tickets when the team was lousy, and a parking permit that basically just gave me the option to HUNT for parking.

When I finally got back to UT this last fall to finish the degree up, it cost $1000 for 3 measly hours!!! What the hell? And this is for a STATE institution. I'll grant that it's a damn good one, as far as public colleges and uinversities go, but really, what the hell??? And don't even get Brea started on this. She got scalped because of messed up rules regarding residency that left her paying out of state tuition for the first 3 years of her time at UT if I remember right.

You know what, Texas Exes? Last thing either of us needs right now is another damn Visa with a freaking cow on it, ok? Now leave us alone.

Sticks and stones baby. Sticks and stones.

Via Atrios, we see that even regular joes can see some of the BS out of whack perspective the Bushies have.

God Bless Josh Marshall

Josh Marshall calls out Paul Wolfowitz on his attempts to discredit Richard Clarke's allegations on 60 Minutes. In this case words speak loudly about inaction.

Wolfowitz is not an isolated case. We've heard a great deal of trumpeting from all the various bobbleheads in the Bush Administration talking about how tough they've gotten on terrorism, and how they've always been this way. But we know the record on this clearly shows that is not the case. Why do they keep saying this? And more to the point, why do people keep listening?

Am I sensing a pattern here?

Straight from the Whiskey Bar.

I think they're taking the concept of spin a little too literally over at the White House. More to the point, what speaks worse of these people: 1) That Clarke is right in the allegations he made in his book and on 60 Minutes; or 2) That W's judgement is so poor that he keeps putting people in important positions and then doesn't keep them in the loop?

If this were me in charge like this at my job, I would have been fired ages ago.

Kevin Dru breaks that ideal down a little more completely here.

Just a quick note about baseball head games...

Story.

I know that a lot of baseball is mental. Hitters say or do things to try and get into a pitcher's head, and vice versa. But this is kinda excessive no? I mean, if the tatts were really giving him any kind of edge, wouldn't he have had a better ERA last season than 5.54?

Course the first game he strikes out 2 Yankees in an inning, I want him thrown out of the game, and the flesh flayed from his arms. But that's just me :-).

No posting this weekend...

And only light posting for the week upcoming. Work has been kicking my ass, and it changes feet to make sure I am kicked evenly on both sides :-). Seriously, though, things should settle down enough for me to post more regularly after Saturday (3/27). We'll start with a new movie restropective week a week from tomorrow, with Baseball movies for a lead up to opening day. I'll try and put up some comments on the news as I can during breaks at the office.

Be well.

Spanish withdrawal

Atrios has a good point about the Spanish withdrawal from Iraq. The Coalition of the Bribed, Bought, and Paid For has been largely the US, and a lot of positive wishes from other countries. Spain removing their 1300 will have some impact, no question, but if their presence is such a focal point in maintaining what tenuous control we have there, then there is no way in heaven, hell, or Houston that Bushco can make any claims to having a solid postwar plan for Iraq.

Now if Britain were to pull out prior to stabilization, then we'd be talking about a familiar creek sans paddle. And no the seat in front of us can not be used as a flotation device.

As long as we're trying to help others

From my friend Hartman, we have this link. If you go to the site, and click on the button marked, you help poor women receive free mammograms as part of breast cancer prevention. This is for real. Snopes.com helped verify the legitimacy of this program. Please take a moment, click a link, and help some people.

Send some prayers out please.

Via Daily Kos, who directs us first to this blog from a gentleman who did some very good humanitarian things in Iraq, as well as give us a snapshot of non-military life in the country.

Sadly, as you can guess from the title of this post, things have taken a turn for the worst. Buzzmachine has the news here.

There are a lot of other people out there making a contribution towards trying to build Iraq in their own way, just as Robert Zangas was. If you were opposed to the war as I was, never EVER forget that we need to offer support for anyone who is over there, American and Iraqi alike. Many are trying to help those negatively affected by the Hussein regime get their lives back to some semblance of normal in very trying times and circumstances. And some are paying the ultimate price in sacrifice. If you have disagreements, or anger, or frustration with the leadership that put the US in this position, you are obviously entitled to those feelings. By and large, I am in agreement with you on that front. But that is no excuse, nor is it acceptible, to indiscriminately condemn anyone who has a part in this action. Zangas was a Marine reservist who had already contributed one tour in Iraq. He was back over there of his own volition to contribute in every way he could. There are others like him. My friend Jamie has a brother who was idspatched to Iraq this year in the Army. We must support these people in their efforts in every way we can.

And for the conservatives who may read this, please support that it is in fact possible to oppose the war in Iraq and at the same be supportive of the troops. I can't speak for all who opposed it, but from my limited perspective, I believe that any action that can result in the loss of life in large numbers should be undertaken only as an absolute last resort. I do not question that in the long term, Iraq is much better served with Hussein gone. I think that the atrocities committed against his own people are crimes against humanity for which he can never be punished enough. But I think that the justifications that were used to motivate the country towards supporting this war were highly duplicitous at best (I say that in the name of being generous). I think that changing the reasons for which we engaged in this endeavor after the fact shows just how craven the current administration has been in its evaluations of the Iraq situation, and how like 9-11, they will do anything, politicize anything, in order to get the things they most desire. And that is not acceptable for the leader of this country, regardless of whether he or she is Republican or Democrat.

I will keep an eye on the posts to the blogs cited above to see it there is any word on a memorial fund for Zangas to aid his family. If there is, I will post it on the blog as soon as possible. Until then, keep his family in your prayers. May he be at peace knowing he did good work while we had him on this earth. In the meantime, you can also contribute to the Armed Forces Relief Trust, which helps service members and their families with medical bills, emergency needs, flights home, etc. You can give to them here.

Thanks for listening to some serious thoughts on a Friday.

Nothing like perspective to make you happy with what you have

In China I might be construed as a dissident.

They're probably also concerned about practicing thespians performing in public...

Courtesy the goddess, we see how gullible elected officials are

Scalia revisited

Tom Burka shows that is conflict walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it needs to be blasted out of the air.

Hypocrisy thy name is Scalia

Daily Kos contributer Meteor Blades has a nice takedown on the BS Scalia is spinning since he has decided he will not recuse himself from the case to know who was on Cheney's Energy Task Force. In particular, look who wrote the last legal opinion shown.

I'm waiting for Bush scientists to spin this one

Story sent to me by my friend Evil Mike.

We're making a difference on this planet. Whether that's good is still subject for debate.

The proposal was endorsed by Cletus the Slack-Jawed Yokel

Read this. Pray your head doesn't explode. (via Jesus General again).

"But all you have to do is knock on any door and say, "If you let me in, I'll live the way you want me to live, and I'll think the way you want me to think," and all the blinds'll go up and all the windows will open, and you'll never be lonely, ever again."

Henry Drummond, Inherit the Wind

We don't need no education...

Jesus General does some really tongue in cheek stuff from time to time. I wish I could say the stories he quotes in the boxes of this post are some of his off the cuff satire. Sadly, that would not be the case.

We don't need no thought control...

For those who hadn't seen it yet

Someone finally called "bullshit" on one of Rummy's lies. Moveon.org made it into a commercial. Check it out here.

More tapdancing than Gregory Hines, in his day.

Non political related mischief

Kevin Drum of Calpundit is now blogging for Washington Monthly. The blogroll on the right has been updated.

In the meantime, this post he has tells an interesting story about Dr. John Gray of "Men are from Mars" infamy.

I wonder if all those people who bought this hack's books and whatnot are going to demand refunds. When the Goddess and I were starting the decline that led to our parting of the ways, ~~a well intentioned aunt gave me one of his books to try and helps us along (I think it was Relationship Rescue)~~ Correction: It was a Dr Phil book, which would be almost as bad. Never read it. Now looking back, I think that the chances it would have helped us at all were slim at best. After all, there's only so much fun we could have made of the book before losing interest ;-)

Movie Retrospective: Kiss Me, I'm Irish Week
Miller's Crossing

Leo O'Bannion: Oh, come on, Tommy. You know I don't like to think.
Tom Reagan: Yeah. Well, think about whether you should start.

It's in this brief exchange at the end of the opening scene in Miller's Crossing that the audience quickly learns Tom Reagan's worth to Leo O'Bannion. Leo (Albert Finney) rules the Irish mob in a Prohibition era town. What Tom (Gabriel Byrne) is advising Leo think about relates to a man, a woman, and her brother.

Johnny Caspar (Cohen Brother's regular Jon Polito) wants Leo to give up a shiftless bookie that works for Leo. The bookie, Bernie Bernbaum (John Turturro), has been cutting into Caspar's racket fixing fights. Bernie is selling inside info one the fights Caspar fixes, thereby driving down Caspar's profit on the transactions. Caspar wants to knock of Bernie to settle what Caspar tries to pass off as a matter of "ethics". Honor among thieves indeed.

The catch that keeps Leo from seriously considering Caspar's request is that Leo is in love with Bernie's sister Verna (Marcia Gay Garden, in her first major role). Verna knows that as long as she's involved with Leo, Bernie will benefit from Leo's protection, even if it proves detrimental to Leo's business in the long run.

Tom knows that also. And he knows just how badly Leo is getting played because he's sleeping with Verna too. Tom knows that Leo is measuring the business with Bernie with his heart, not with his head. He knows that if he doesn't do something to get Caspar some satisfaction, the whole business could go up. He can't just talk about his affair with Verna, because he could lose his position working for Leo. Plus Verna might get hurt, and part of Tom loves her. And somewhere along the way, Tom needs to figure out how to pay his gambling debts. Because while he's a very smart criminal, he's also a very poor gambler.

From this convoluted tangle of relationships, the Cohen Brothers weave one of their most interesting stories (in my opinion, it's the best thing they've ever done), and also one of their most low key. This is a straight forward story of crosses and double crosses, as everyone involved tries to play the angles to protect their interests as much as possible. The twists and turns the story follows take you some places you wouldn't expect. And it does so in very entertaining fashion.

The performances in this movie are all very top notch. Byrne is a really fascinating study as Tom. You never really quite know where his thoughts are going to take him. A lot of the time when it seems like he's pulling something out of his ass, he seems genuinely surprised when his BS seems to pay off. And he and Harden as Verna really crackle with some strong chemistry. There's a fight they have in the powder room of Leo's club that is really amazing, and has a couple of the best lines I've heard in a Cohen Brother's movie (or any film for that matter). It has the feel of a film noir mob drama right out of the 40's or the 50's to me. Definitely appeals to my film geek side :-).

The supporting performances are all really solid as well. Polito as Caspar is a nice dichotomy between a man who isn't nearly as smart or well read as he thinks he is, and a psycho who's even more ruthless than he gives himself credit for. And he's complimented nicely by J.E. Freeman as his bodyguard Eddie Dane. The Dane (as he's called) is a really fearsome figure. He's just someone you look at and right away you know he's seven different kinds of mean.

Turturro is also great as Bernie. Shifty little SOB really knows how to work everything he possibly can. He IS as smart as he thinks he is and more. And he knows just how to play people's weaknesses against them in the way most beneficial to him.

The movie moves to another level altogether because of the way it is shot. This was the last film Barry Sonnenfeld shot for the Cohen's as their cinematographer. He's camera work gives the film some very surreal overtones that make everything seem just a touch off kilter, but draw you into the story even more. There's an execution sequence that occurs in the middle of the woods (if you buy the DVD, it's the scene depicted on the cover) that is really compelling for it's dreamlike qualities. Combined with a great score from Carter Burwell, and you've got a really complete package that works on just about every level.

I wouldn't rank this film in my top 10 all time, but it might be in my person top 20. There are just so many things about it that really appeal to me, and there are still scenes that just leave me breathless no matter how many times I watch it. As a mob film, it works really strongly, and as a Cohen Brother's film, I think it's as strong a "straight" drama they've done as Blood Simple. Definitely a film to see if you're in the mood for something just a little bit dark, but not too dark. Give it a shot.

Tomorrow I have a social engagement to attend to, but will try and The Brothers McMullen up if possible.

No posts today

Too much Irish cheer ;-) See you tomorrow.

I think MLB really needs to find a permanent home for the Expos

But Connecticut is the last place I would have expected. But if they can support the team, more power to them!

Movie Retrospectives: Kiss Me, I'm Irish Week
Waking Ned Devine

For many people, it's a popular subject of daydreams to wonder what you would do with your life if you won the lottery. Coming into a large sum of money can open new doors for a person, create new opportunities. It can change a person completely. Sometimes for the better, other times not. In the case of the first film we look back on for Irish week, it turns someone into a completely different person. Literally.

In Waking Ned Devine, we meet Jackie O'Shea (Ian Bannen) and Michael O'Sullivan (David Kelly). Jackie and Michael live in the small Irish town of Tullymore. Both gentlemen have seen a number of years in their lives. They are longtime friends. Like most folks, they are getting by. Maybe not as comfortable as they'd like to be, but they manage. Jackie has a wonderful wife named Annie (Fionnula Flanagan) with whom he's enjoying his golden years. Life is pretty good.

Things take an unexpected change though, when Jackie learns that someone in their small town has recently won the lottery. Only he, Annie, and Michael know that one of the 53 villagers is the new possessor of a large sum of money. The three of them work like the devil trying to figure out who the winner is, that they might become best friends when the time comes to cash the check.

Might it be Pig Finn (James Nesbitt), the local pig farmer? Or perhaps Maggie O'Toole (Susan Lynch), Finn's true love? Maggie often has said that she'd marry Finn tomorrow, if it weren't for the pigs (or rather, their stench). Perhaps Mrs. Kennedy, who runs the post office? Or the foul tempered Lizzy Quinn, who seems to be on everyone's last nerve?

After some comic sleuthing, Jackie comes to find that the winner of the big prize is the former fisherman Ned Devine. Jackie would be more than happy to help Ned spend the money were it not for one little problem...Ned's dead from the shock of winning. With Ned having signed his ticket before the drawing, there's no one to claim the winnings, as Ned has no family. The money would appear to be going to waste. Or would it?

The affair of claiming the money becomes the heart of the story, as everyone in the small town would have good use for some part of the winnings. And it's in getting to the end of the story that English screenwriter and director Kirk Jones takes the viewer on a ride that is delightful, as well as a damn bit funny.

I absolutely adore this movie. It's one of those film watching experiences that can't help but brighten my day no matter what may have gone before for me. The acting performances are all very solid and worlds of fun. As you watch Jackie and Michael try to work out the logistics of getting the winnings, you can't help but find yourself rooting for them to make it all work out. Maggie and Finn's awkward courting also has a lot of appeal. Finn is a genuinely good guy. You like him just because he keeps trying to win the fair lady's heart, despite the handicaps that he knows he has that stand in his way. And you see enough of the townspeople's reactions to him to know that he's a fair person to know. Provided you're upwind.

Jones also does a magnificent job of pulling you into the story, and never lets it jump the tracks. In some other writers hands, the movie could have easily degenerated into black comedy, or some level of crude humor. But the film always manages to stay light, fun, and full of really contagious energy. And he throws a few twists along the way that always keep you guessing as to whether you really know how things are going to turn out. As a first time film director (his previous work consisted of TV ads for Absolut Vodka), Jones shows an incredible amount potential talent with his first go at a feature. Amazingly, he hasn't put another film out since. He is in pre-production on Emma Thompson's second screenplay, and her first script since she wrote her adaptation of Sense and Sensibility for Ang Lee in 1995. So there is something to look forward to for later this year.

If you need something to brighten your day and put a smile on your face, you really should check the film out. Pop it into the DVD player or VCR, pull yourself a pint or a wee jar, and enjoy the show. And make sure to raise a glass to Ned Devine. The most generous man in death you could ever want to know. Slainte!

Tomorrow Miller's Crossing

Trying to pass the buck on everything?

From trying to slough off the recession on Clinton, to trying to blame the "bad intel" on the CIA, W and the neocons have tried to pass responsibility for everything that has gone wrong during this administration off on someone else.

Now 9-11 would appear to be John Kerry's fault. See this piece in the New York Post.

There's just one teensy little problem with this story. Hesiod at Counterspin Central explains it to us here. Please note the date of the interview between NBC and the primary source of the Post article. And ask yourself "Three years later, and all of a sudden this SOB is changing his tune? Why?"

I quote from All About Eve: This has to beat all records for running, jumping, and standing gall.

I need to place an order for some perspective

For Terrell Owens. Read this from Pandagon.net.

The man has absolutely no class at all. Philly fans will blast his ass the first time he whines.

Paging Dr Freud...Dr Freud to the white courtesy telephone....

Read the top story here. If you're running a Mac, it might have trouble in Safari on first load.

My Pop Singer, The Car

I really don't know what to say to this one....

Story

Maybe he just wanted someone to put him up for the night?

Ok, I can't take credit for that line.

Letter from Spain

Tom Tomorrow of the comic This Modern World posts a letter he received, ostensibly from someone in Spain familiar with the attacks of last week. With the usual caveats that it could be a fake, much as anything else is on the internet, it's worth a read.

Pop Quiz

Many thanks to The Goddess for pointing this editorial out. Gadflyer is a new progressive site that just started up yesterday. If anything clearly illustrates the difference between W's rhetoric and action, it's this piece.

Gadflyer also has a nice breakdown on the smoke and mirrors show behind the Medicare prescription bill recently passed. Though I am blessed to have a good job with solid health benefits, not everyone is. This piece highlights some of the stories during the current administration which show how duplicitous some of their choices have been.

Pooooor Aggies...

Ok, so first Texas A&M gets Coach Fran away from Alabama to save the program, after he lies to his recruits at Alabama to get them to stay through probation and no bowl games. Now it appears that A&M is considering a lush to add to the athletic program.

Please note: I am not ridiculing alcoholism, which is a serious disease that many people are coping with every day. I hope that Eustachy has been able to get the help he needed for his problem.

I also hope all the coeds in College Station have been warned to keep chaperones handy during basketball season...

Saw this in Peter King's column on SI.com this week

"The American League is going to be like the old NFC Central. You know, the Black-and-Blue Division. We're all going to beat the crap out of each other."

--Boston Red Sox pitcher Curt Schilling

God bless I'm excited for baseball season to start. 21 days and counting.

Ok, usually I think he's just a crochety old SOB

But dang Andy Rooney had some zingers today.

Popcorn Packers' Lung Case

I alluded to this one last week. The civil suit came back. The plaintiff won $20 million. Whacked stuff.

JonBenet's Dad is going into politics

No I am not kidding. See for yourself.

The question is: Will his platform be in favor of, or against, No Child Left Behind?

Yes that was tacky. So is the idea of him running.

Some people need to get out more

It was just a flipping TV SHOW!!!

I am giving serious consideration to not getting cable when I get my house. Reality is weird enough without them televising it.

(Tipped to me by Jesus General)

Playing politics with our safety

Pandagon.net has this piece, commenting on a story in Time this week about the dynamics of the upcoming election. Please take particular note of the paragraph they mark out. In the interests of making things easy for you readers, I'll reproduce it here:

"Administration sources tell TIME that employees at the Department of Homeland Security have been asked to keep their eyes open for opportunities to pose the President in settings that might highlight the Administration's efforts to make the nation safer. The goal, they are being told, is to provide Bush with one homeland-security photo-op a month."

So the next time you see it on the news where W is showing us how much safer we are, remember there's a fairly decent chance that dog won't hunt.

Some damn funny stuff

Tom Burka hits one out of the park.

Bush ads miss the mark

So Daily Kos has this piece showing early polling that would indicate that W. needs to rethink his strategy a bit more.

Bringing up one the greatest tragedies in American history as a means to remind people how great you are. Yeah. That's gonna get them.

Spain tragedy and outrage

Norbizness is a site I usually read for a laugh or two, but in a post he put up yesterday, he really summed up some of the outrage I felt as I saw how some of the sentiment directed towards Spain after the horrific bombings last week turned from sympathy to bitter resentment. The idea that people could say that the Spanish people are "surrendering" to al Qaeda by voting out a party that supported a war in Iraq against the will of the people is political posturing of the most grotesque variety. People, it's called democracy. We even have some hints of it here. The only thing I can think of that might explain some of the sentiments I have read is that those parties are afraid the same thing will happen here come November. I think they have good reason to be afraid.

On the flip side, Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo has a very well reasoned analysis on what the elections really mean, and what they potentially mean in the context of Iraq and the war on terrorism. It's a common statement on blogs, but I haven't made it since I started this one: Go read this now!

Lastly, Atrios has a link to a lengthy story on Salon that gives you a summary history on how Spain has evolved to come to the point they were at with the elctions this last weekend. As I've mentioned before, if you're not a Salon subscriber, you can view the whole thing if you view an ad. It's a lengthy read, but well worth it if you'd like to understand more about what's gone on in Spain since the bombings, as well as before.

Norbizness also had a link to what appears to be the Spanish chapter of the Red Cross to benefit the victims of the Spanish train bombings. If you could go and drop a few Euros their way, thank you and god bless.

PS: I freely admit to being one of the most non-Hispanic Hispanics out there, so I can't read the Spanish on the Red Cross site to confirm what it is there for. If someone out there who's fluent can give it a look see and let me know in comments if this assumption is incorrect, I'll update.

Movie Retrospective: Troubled Artists - Pinero

The Goddess chips in with her first guest review/retrospective at the new web location. Her email has been added to the column on the right. Here's her look at Piñero.

He was Dead
he never lived
Died died
He died seekin a cause
Seekin the Cause
Because
He said
He never saw the cause
But he heard
the cause

Piñero, written and directed by Leon Ichaso
Starring: Benjamin Bratt, Giancarlo Esposito, Talisa Soto, Nelson Vasquez, Mandy Patinkin, Rita Moreno

Miguel “Mikey” Piñero was one of the founding writers of the Nuyorican writers…movement? Style? Identity?…in the 1970’s. Born in Puerto Rico in 1941 he came to New York with his family in about 1948. He is credited with being one of the forerunners of hip hop and rap. He did a stint in Sing Sing for armed robbery and while he was there he wrote “Short Eyes”, a play about the prison fate of a child molester. The play won the New York Drama Critics Circle Award for best American play of 1974, was nominated for several Tonys and was adapted into a movie. The movie featured himself, a young Luis Guzman (before he met Steven Soderbergh, who thankfully recognizes the man’s talent and never casts him simply the token Latino) and Tito Goya (played by Nelson Vasquez), Mikey’s best friend, fellow inmate. In 1973 Piñero, Goya and Rutgers University professor and poet Miguel Algarin (played by Giancarlo Esposito) founded the Nuyorican Poets Café. His star quickly waned as he spiraled downward into booze, heroin and other drugs and he eventually became homeless. He also kept his hand in with an occasional robbery here and there, his closest friends among his victims. He died of cirrhosis in 1988 at age 40.

Much of the film is taken from the words of Miguel himself, and my favorite scene is his rooftop performance of the poem quoted above, “Seekin the Cause”. This is also the scene that makes me suspect that he should also be given posthumous credit for poetry slam. There are glimpses of the writing and public performance of “Short Eyes”. There is always salsa music in the background and often in the foreground, a tribute to the poet’s love for his culture and origins. A close second favorite scene is he, Tito and Miguel playing in the surf during a trip to Puerto Rico, the first time they have visited their birthplace since their families immigrated.

This film walks the line between straight and fictionalized biography, probably because so many people are still around who knew the subject. I will not comment on the performances (exception below) because every one, even the smallest, shines and complements. It would be as if I ignored the narrative of The Iliad to talk about the beautiful phrases “wine-dark sea” and “rosy-fingered Dawn”. The director, Leon Ichaso, presents the lives of poets in a film that is visual poetry.

Bratt owns this movie as Piñero. If you thought you knew how good an actor he is from “Law & Order”, you really didn’t. No matter how vile, cocky or unlikable Mikey becomes as time wears on, Bratt always makes him understandable, if not sympathetic. Bratt plays the man straight, this is what he was, how he is, and as Bratt plays him you can’t imagine Piñero being any other way. He does not play Miguel as the clichéd tortured artist, or the artist who subsumed his gifts to visceral pleasures and chemical escapism. He doesn’t play him as a man who gradually alienates everyone he once cared about as his star rises and falls. He was a criminal, a man, a poet, and actor, a tender lover and loving son, and a drug addict, and these are the parts that comprise a stunning if not always attractive whole. It is possible to be all of these things at once, and Miguel was.

I strongly urge you to watch this movie on DVD for one of the bonus features: interviews with the cast and crew, many of whom had met and knew Miguel Piñero and who talk about him first hand. Ms. Moreno has a wonderful story to tell about the night she saw “Short Eyes” during its first public run, before it became a critical hit at Joseph Papp’s (Mandy Patinkin) Public Theater.

Movie Review: Hidalgo

Hidalgo (2004) Director - Joe Johnston; Starring - Viggo Mortensen, Omar Sharif, Louise Lombard, Zuleikha Robinson; Screenplay - John Fusco; Rated PG13 for violence, and some very limited innuendo/sexual situations.

Intro
The film The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner lays out the story of a misfit youth who gets sentenced to a reformatory school for boys, and is put on the track team to try and give him some focus and direction. In the time he has on long runs, he finds the solitude facilitates his ability to reflect on his life, see some of the mistakes he's made along the way, and find a new satisfaction with who he is and what he wants to do with the time he has in front of him. There's a similar dynamic at work in Disney's latest offering Hidalgo, the tale of a long distance horseman named Frank T. Hopkins and his trusty mustang.

So what is Hidalgo besides the name of a horse?
Though there is now some question as to whether the legends surrounding Hopkins have any basis in fact, the story crafted around Hopkins, real or imagined, has the potential to be a very positive and uplifting story.

Hopkins and Hidalgo are a legendary riding duo in the late 1800s. They have competed in multiple long distance races and never been bested. Because of their joint skills at covering great distances, Hopkins and Hidalgo are also a favored courier duo of the US Government. However, when Hopkins comes to realize that one courier job he takes directly results in the Massacre at Wounded Knee, he has a "there but for the grace of God go I" kind of moment. He and Hidalgo give up their long distance travels in favor of performing as part of Buffalo Bill's Wild West show. Hopkins also tries to drown what he has seen in the bottom of a whiskey bottle.

His shot at redemption comes in the form of a challenge issued by an Arab Sheikh Riyadh (Omar Sharif, sadly looking every day of his 72 years of age and more). The Sheikh has a world class thoroughbred stallion who will be competing in a legendary 3,000 mile race across the Arabian desert. As Hopkins and Hidalgo are touted across America as the greatest long distance riding team in the world, the Sheikh feels it is necessary to show up the infidel and his mixed breed horse. Hopkins decides that he and Hidalgo have one more race left in them.

So what does this horse tale have going for it?
Well obviously the pros have to start with Mortensen. Though the film is named for the horse, it's Hopkins who were are really meant to sympathize with. Mortensen has already established himself as potentially the next great action hero with his turn as Aragorn in the Lord of the Rings trilogy. And his skill as an actor and presence as a film hero are both in good form here. Though some of the dialogue he is given is pretty awful (there's a comment about "greener pastures" and a story about a 3 legged colt that are pretty cringe inducing), he makes as much hay as he can out of what he has to work with. He gives Hopkins as much depth as he can have in a film as formula as this one. There's a secret Hopkins wrestles with throughout the first half of the film, and Mortensen does a good job of making you understand why he's haunted by it once it comes out.

And kudos have to be handed out to the horse. I believe it was W.C. Fields who said he would never work with children or animals. But this animal might have made him sing a different tune. Hidalgo gives you everything you could want out of a horse. He's a pretty animal, with some interesting coloration. And as animal actors go he is a bit of a ham, but you don't mind all that much. The interaction between Mortensen and Hidalgo call to mind a line from Silverado, when Kevin Kline is asked if he can prove a horse belongs to him. He turns to the questioner and asks "Can't you see this horse loves me?" Hopkins would be able to make the same kind of statement about his steed.

Well, I'd hope they work well together. What about the rest of the herd?
That's a bit more questionable. As I said earlier, some of the dialogue is just awful. There was a large group sitting on the row behind me that were making smart ass cracks during the trailers, and I was worried they were going to do a Mr Sinus treatment during the movie. But there were parts where I think it might have improved on what I was hearing during the movie.

And some of the casting is questionable in my mind. Poor Omar Sharif. Every time he flashes this gap toothed grin during his scenes I remember thinking 1) This is the "heartthrob" from Dr. Zhivago? And 2) I guess the pro bridge circuit just don't pay too well. I also had to wonder about casting JK Simmons from Law & Order and Oz as Buffalo Bill. It was just too hard for me to get the image of him in Oz out of my head as he was MCing his Wild West Show. The two female leads were largely forgettable. Louise Lombard has the British aristocrat thing down ok, but she doesn't bring much to the table, even when her character's role in the proceedings creates a twist about 1/2 to 2/3 of the way into the picture.

Lastly, let's be honest. There's nothing really all that original in the story here. If Rocky Balboa had four legs, a tail, and whinnied, he'd be Hidalgo, with Viggo playing the Burgess Meridith "Micky" role in support (I almost expect Hopkins to tell Hidalgo he's going to "...piss lightning" and "crap thunder.") We know where this story is going to take us, and we know how it's going to end, even before the opening credits.

Well then, if it's that predictable, why would we give this nag a chance?
Because predictable or not, there's still some fun to be had with the movie. Mortensen and Hidalgo are genuinely fun together. There's some decent action sequences, and the cinematography during some of the desert shots that bridge us from one action sequence to the next are nice and look good on the big screen. It's not Lawrence of Arabia, but it ain't that bad either.

And formula or not, I know that there are some people who like something safe in their films. Familiarity is the reason why McDonald's has sold billions and billions of hamburgers. They don't change, and people know exactly what they're gonna get out of them. And that's what they're looking for. And if you're going to go see something that treads familiar territory, you could do much much worse than this. I know that sounds like damning it with faint praise, and that's not my intention. It really was an enjoyable flick. I came out of the movie, and I felt pretty good about it. That's more than I can say for some other movies I've seen this year.

So we shouldn't look this gift horse in the mouth?
I think that if you're looking for something light to enjoy on a weekend afternoon with the family, or maybe have your folks in from out of town, this movie is at least as good as anything else you could see at the local Googaplex. Just enjoy the ride, don't take it too seriously, and you'll have a good time.

Movie Retrospective: Troubled Artists - Adaptation

I've lost count of the number of movies I've gone to and thought to myself "Monkeys banging at a typewriter could do better than this claptrap." Probably the most recent was The Butterfly Effect, though I think the monkeys might aspire to more.

But how would you feel if you were trying to write a movie, and you lived with the monkey working on that script. And he was getting along faster than you were. And he's your brother?

That is the spot Nicolas Cage finds himself in as Charlie Kaufman in Adaptation. Kaufman and Spike Jonez, his partner in crime from the head trippy Being John Malkovich, take a ridiculously wild chance by inserting Kaufman into his own screenplay.

Cage's Kaufman is a woefully insecure, lonely artist, who is struggling mightily to adapt the novel The Orchid Thief by Susan Orlean into a movie. The Orchid Thief is a non fiction documentation of Orlean's time spent working with a plant dealer named John Laroche (Chris Cooper, a role he won an Oscar for). Laroche collects/steals rare orchids, and then clones them to sell to plant collectors. Laroche and Orlean are in pursuit of an ultra rare orchid called a ghost.

You can see where Kaufman has his problems in adapting the book. As he laments to his agent when the studio starts asking to see what he's written so far, it's a story about flowers. There's nothing more to it than that. And how do you make a story about collecting flowers interesting? Especially without resorting to all the trite Hollywood tropes that get trotted out in every formulaic script you've ever seen.

Further exacerbating Kaufman's writer's block is his twin brother Donald (also played by Cage). Donald has never really been successful at anything he's ever tried to do. At this point in his life, he's just living with Charlie, until he figures out just what should be next in his life. On a whim, Donald decides to attend a story writing seminar being done by Robert McKee (in the movie played by Brian Cox). And from this chance attendance at the seminar, Donald knows what his next step is. He'll be a screenwriter just like his brother Charlie. And he'll use every single formula technique that Charlie abhors because it's exactly what he's been taught.

That's about all that can be said about the plot without giving too much away, but the movie spirals from there even more out into Twilight Zone territory than Malkovich ever did. As we follow the dual stories of Charlie and Donald racing to complete their stories, and Laroche and Orlean in the actual book, we see the two stories flirt with each other in the way they develop. And then they come together crashing headlong into each other in an explosion of story mayhem that will either cinch your love of the story, or guarantee you will hate it.

I fell into the former category. The ex is an aspiring screenwriter, and we still talk a fair amount. She's been to several screenwriters' conferences, and so I get to hear enough about the job/hobby/pastime to appreciate some of the inside jokes. None from that line of the story are nearly as funny as McKee's presence as a character, through which Kaufman jarringly lampoons his philosophies, even as he uses McKee as a device to move his own story along. Kaufman also touches on the somewhat masturbatory nature of screenwriting, both figuratively and literally, and does so with tongue thoroughly planted in cheek.

Cage makes all of this work with the best performance he's put on screen in ages. Cage in my mind has always been at his best when he lets his own natural eccentricity run wild. In my mind, he will always be the pathetically endearing criminal H. I. McDonnough in Raising Arizona. But after that movie and his turn in Moonstruck, this is easily my favorite role(s) for him. He does such an amazing job in setting up Charlie and Donald as such distinctive characters, and making each somebody we can relate to, but for markedly different reasons. As Charlie, Cage shows as much vulnerability and insecurity as you can imagine a person having and still being marginally functional. By comparison, Cage as Donald is unbelievably self assured, even when he's making an ass of himself.

Cooper in the role of Laroche and Meryl Streep in the role of Orlean make the other half of the story flow, and ultimately make the movie a much more complete tale than either half would be on their own. Laroche is a wonderfully complex character. A lot of who he is we learn in conversations between him and Orlean. And we learn fairly quickly that he is an unbelievably self-assured and confident person, to the point of being arrogant. But that arrogance came at a price. And Streep's Orlean, as a person who is trying desperately to figure out just what it is at this stage in her life that she cares about and feels passionately about finds a beacon in Laroche's confidence.

None of this would come across if Cooper and Streep were not at the top of their game. Cooper is always a joy, has been for me ever since I saw him in Lone Star. But Streep was the real surprise. I have seen her in many things, and it's not in question that as far as technique goes, she is a gifted actress. But this is the first time I ever felt some of the humanity behind her character. To tell you how far this went for me, I'll sum it up in one statement. This is the first time I have ever viewed Streep as a truly sexy woman. And once you see this movie, you might understand what I mean.

If you want to see something really off the beaten path, you really should check this one out. Maybe rent it on a double feature with Malkovich. You'll never feel a need for drugs. This film spins your head enough to make you think you had taken something narcotic.

Lemme make sure I have this straight.

Correction/Update: My error. It's Kerry's response ad that accuses Bush of being negative and misleading. Not Bush's ad as I stated below. Don't you just love the political season?

Kerry calls the Republican attack dogs (or all Republicans depending who you believe) "crooked."

The next day, we have:

Halliburton admitting to $2.7 billion in faulty pricing (and this after an audit found they had overcharged us for meals and gas).

The admission that the White House used strong arm tactics to keep the true cost of their Medicare prescription plan a secret until the vote was passed (Thanks to Daily Kos on this one).

The administration accusing John Kerry of being overly negative, and misleading. In an ad that plays on the worst stereotype fears of Arabs and Arab Americans (the ad has already been dubbed the Mohammed Horton spot). Consequently, the ad is both negative, and misleading (thanks again to Kos for this one).

Then House Speaker Dennis Hastert admits that he can't trust the numbers he gets from the White House (thank you Calpundit).

And in the next breath, he expects an apology from Kerry for calling Republicans crooked.

I think I agree. Crooks don't deserve to be associated with Bush and his ilk. At least there's honor among thieves.

Perspective on the gay marriage thing in California.

I love Aaron McGruder.

Good lord is this man messed up

Next thing you know, Jim Harrick Jr will be saying that Enron's executives should be hailed for teaching business ethics. Read this.

Ok, no one I know is so delusional that they think college athletes are there for an education at the big time programs. King Kaufman over at Salon.com has railed on this subject for quite some time in relation to college football. Kaufman had a pretty good column about why we might want to pay college athletes here (if you're not a Salon member, you need to watch an ad to get a day pass). And he gave a good look at how the Baylor tragedy revealed a lot about how corruption is endemic to college sports here.

But in as we approach the end of a season in which the NCAA would like the Baylor scandal to just fade into memory, Harrick Jr really needs to just shut up if he ever wants to be allowed near a college program again. For those who haven't been following the mess that Jim Harrick and his son left behind at Georgia, read this, for starters.

Now Harrick Jr says that he expected to be a "Teacher of the Year" for his work. Well no wonder! He gave a ridiculously easy final in a class where he gave every student an A. If Harrick were teaching at UT, I might have gotten my degree in 3 years instead of 13. You better believe I would have given him rave reviews.

Some people just don't know when to shut up.

PBS Needs your help

Normally I wouldn't put anything up from a mass email, but my friend Laura is good people. She sent something about a movement to cut funding in Congress for PBS. Sesame Street and The Electric Company were childhood staples for me, as they were I'm sure for a lot of you. Please take a sec and sign the petition here.

We now return you to our regularly scheduled gripefest.

Movie Retrospective: Troubled Artists - Barton Fink

I always used to joke when I was in college that I did my best work under pressure, so I would put off writing papers for class as long as possible to do my best work. Not exactly my smartest moments in life to be sure. After all, what if I was ever cursed with writer's block? There are times when I have difficulty coming up with the right words to lead into a blog entry. What would I have done if I had trouble finding the right words when a grade or a class was on the line? It is one of the reasons why I wonder if I would ever be able to make a living writing professionally. Nothing I've ever had to write or chosen to write has been so close to my heart that I would feel it personally if I wasn't able to come up with something.

In the film Barton Fink, John Turturro plays the titular playwright. Barton has just written a very successful play for Broadway. It's garnered him a great deal of praise and attention. He is touted for having found the voice of the common man, and giving the common man a pulpit from which he can make his hopes, dreams, and desires known to the world.

His skill with the written word has gotten the attention of influential executives in Hollywood, who want him to come out and take a crack at screenwriting. At the behest of his agent, Barton decides to take the chance, knowing that one lucrative payday with a screenplay can finance his writing of several plays. His meeting with studio head Jack Lipnick (played well over the top by Michael Lerner) gives Barton the material he is to work with. He has to pen a wrestling movie for Wallace Beery. Nothing to change the world, just a solid B picture with what Lipnick calls "....that Barton Fink feeling."

And that's where Barton runs smack into the wall of writer's block. He has no idea where to begin. He sits endlessly staring at his typewriter at an opening scene description of one paragraph that goes absolutely nowhere. He knows nothing about wrestling. How does he start a wrestling picture? Barton knows absolutely nothing about wrestling. Though it's not spoken anywhere in the film, I personally wonder how he can write a movie for the common man, if he doesn't really relate to them.

Enter one common man: Charlie Meadows (played by John Goodman in one of his best film roles), an insurance salesman who lives in the room next door to Fink's. After coming over to apologize to Fink for disturbing him, Fink and Meadows spend some extended time talking with each other about their respective lives and interests. Although Fink feels some affinity for Meadows, he still can't find a starting point for his movie.

Fink tries to turn to a fellow writer for help. He happens to run into celebrated W. P. Mayhew (Fraiser's John Mahoney) and his personal assistant Audrey Taylor (Judy Davis). Barton thinks that Mayhew may be able to help him find his jumping off point for his screenplay, but Mayhew doesn't seem to be able to find interest in anything except where his next drink is coming from. Audrey takes a shine to Barton though. She graciously agrees to come to his hotel one night to help him get his pitch together for the story. The pitch help turns into something more. And then what happens next sends the whole story into traditionally weird Cohen territory.

The Cohen Brothers to me have always been an acquired taste. I think they work much better when producing their own stuff on a smaller scale (Raising Arizona, Miller's Crossing, or Blood Simple), than when they try for the bigger, broader appeal (Hudsucker Proxy, which I thought was ok, and last fall's Intolerable Cruelty, which at least got the name right). And this movie falls much more into the former category.

Turturro is a wonder as Barton. Early in the movie he really seems to be one of the same highly pretentious playwrights who he rails against when he sits down with Meadows the first time. It makes the joke of Barton's writer's block even funnier, although I wonder if it speaks poorly of me to take such delight in Barton's misery. As Barton is slapped with one hard dose of reality after another about the task he's undertaken with this screenplay, you really appreciate just how much of a revelation some of this seems to be with Barton.

The other main character in the story is Goodman's Charlie Meadows. He really strikes you as just an affable wayward soul who just has some personal issues when you first meet him. Later, as more about his character is revealed, you come to realize just how much a man can hide in plain sight. He's at times funny, sad, and very frightening all in the same movie, in one spot towards the end, almost all in once scene.

The supporting roles are all solid. Mahoney as the drunken Mayhew is a blast. When he goes off on a drunken spiel, he's a serious riot. Davis has some quietly sexy moments with a southern drawl so hot that it could melt butter. Always a good actress, but this one let me see her in a light I had never quite imagined from her before. And Lerner as the Lipnick is every screenwriter's worst nightmare. Tony Shalhoub (as Barton's producer for the film) has a moment where he chastises Fink for making Lipnick interested in the movie. That apparently is the worst mistake Fink could have made. When you see Lipnick in action, you understand why. Everyone has had a manager like this at some point in their professional careers, no matter what profession. They're the kind that makes you cringe the moment you realize they've been thinking.

The Cohen's aren't for everyone, and this is definitely one of their more eccentric pieces that I've seen. But I think it's a really good ride, and gives you some of the insight into how hard it is to be a professional writer. Tomorrow's retrospective approaches the same profession, but from a slightly different point of view.

For Tomorrow: Adaptation

Hankblog

Wednesday, March 31, 2004

Tuesday, March 30, 2004

Monday, March 29, 2004

Wednesday, March 24, 2004

Monday, March 22, 2004

Sunday, March 21, 2004

Friday, March 19, 2004

Thursday, March 18, 2004

Tuesday, March 16, 2004

Monday, March 15, 2004

Friday, March 12, 2004

Thursday, March 11, 2004

About Me

Previous Posts

Archives

Blogroll