Downtown San Francisco
posted by Intervision at 11:27 AM
0 comments
Saturday, May 20, 2006
Friday, May 19, 2006
RIAA VS XM
The link above is one of the best I've seen so far, not only because of the sardonic tone, which I always appreciate, especially when applied to the anathema of the earth RIAA, but its links and intervision. McKenzie picks up on why these vermin so undermine the fabric of our society, dragging us back to the dark ages of overvalued music. It's music! Not fucking gold bullion that spawns like fruit-flies for your endless profit.
I also liked this report, the first I saw, a few days ago, that show what liars these guys are.
And of course you can always count on the Extraordinary Freedom Fighters for a good assessment of the issues.
So, go XM! Save the world for democracy, freedom, music, Apple pie and all we hold dear! Let's hope they stay strong despite their set-backs, having dropped off 50% this year.
I also liked this report, the first I saw, a few days ago, that show what liars these guys are.
And of course you can always count on the Extraordinary Freedom Fighters for a good assessment of the issues.
So, go XM! Save the world for democracy, freedom, music, Apple pie and all we hold dear! Let's hope they stay strong despite their set-backs, having dropped off 50% this year.
posted by Intervision at 5:46 PM
0 comments
Wednesday, May 17, 2006
The New World
Some of the Native Americans that participated in this film objected to the title. It's not a new world to them. Their culture has been around for some 10,000 years here. They have lived in ecological harmony with this land for a long time and lead a lifestyle of grounded simplicity and joy in the natural world. To native, indigenous societies it is certainly our world, based on raping the planet for riches, that is the newer one. The old one was working just fine for thousands of years, how is this new one working for us? Global warming and its resulting hurricanes, heat waves, landslides of ravaged hills, $3. gas.... not to mention a world of people cut off from their connection to nature and their god-given instincts and intuition.
Before I launch into a review of this exquisite film, I must disclose my deep affection for Terrence Malick and his 1978 film Days of Heaven. I saw Days Of Heaven in the theater, back when I used to go to the movies a lot. I had returned from a three month car trip through this country earlier that year and watching his film filled me with so much longing for the American landscape that I packed up my car, saw the film again three days later and then took off the following day for another long car trip West.
The setting for Days of Heaven was Texas, in my view, not nearly the most beautiful part of this country, but Malick has an absolutely unparalleled genius for bringing out the peace and majesty of nature. There is no one who can put nature onto film like Terrence Malick and I would hate to think of this world, old or new, without him in it. Ansel Adams captures some beautiful forms in little black and white pics that enhanced our appreciation of what's out there, but Malick understands the color, the movement, the scope. I can't even use the word capture for Malick, he presents, he embodies, he translates something that is one of the hardest things in the world to duplicate on film... the absolute awe-inspiring feeling of being entranced and encompassed by nature.
I really regret not seeing The New World on the big screen and will look for it in art theaters, though the DVD is definitely worthwhile because there is a long section on the making of this film. Malick, who was strangely absent from the documentary feature must have spent the last eight years from Thin Red Line looking for financing for this project because it sure doesn't look like they spared much expense. Jamestown, the entire settlement, was completely re-created for the film, Native Americans were brought in to act and consult. Every attempt was made to be completely authentic; using a few journals from the time.
The story is basically a love story, about John Smith (Colin Farrell) and Pocahontas. The latter is played almost silently, but strongly, by fourteen year old Q'orianka Kilcher and she does a good job of conveying a girl completely in touch with herself and the world around her, even after she is removed from her tribe to be, in effect, a hostage of the English. She is well treated and eventually marries, even has a son, and goes to England to be feted by royalty, but never loses her center or her love. For most of the story she loves John Smith, even though he returns to England without her and has her told that he is dead.
She later discovers he is still alive and with that her love for him re-blossoms. She is honest with her husband and, unlike most men, he acts in a very loving and selfless way. He re-unites the pair to see where it goes. She realizes, when she re-connects with Smith, that what she has with Rolf is actually truer and she returns to loving him. He was very wise to let her follow her nature and allow her to love freely. He realized that love can't be forced. Maybe living close to the land, with Pocahontas, taught him that.
Days of Heaven also featured a love triangle and a woman who loves two men interwoven into such an incredible natural landscape that you really don't even need a story or plot. I remember in Days of Heaven about twenty minutes into the film I was saying "Wow... a plot too!" It was like an extra bonus. I would have been more than happy spending two hours just watching how Malick films water or wheat.
It's sad to me that this film, while receiving lots of critical acclaim, went unnoticed by viewers and the Academy. In my mind this film does everything a film is supposed to do. It's stunning, enchanting and engrossing even on just a visual level. It educates our minds about important events that changed the course of history. It speaks to us about love and its difficult choices, its pain and confusion and longing, its deep and unchanging nature that has no pretense to rhyme or reason. It shows clashes of cultures and ideas and their resolution. And this film also does something that very few films can do, it viscerally engages our deepest spirits and brings us a sense of what nature can do to our souls when given half a chance.
I remember on a lot of my young travels watching the tourists who would pull up to the Grand Canyon or some other magnificent natural wonder and say, basically, wow, that's amazing, what's next? They weren't really living and breathing it, they were watching it, like TV. Take the kids, let's visit some museums, some mountains, write a few postcards and there's your vacation. There are tourists, and then there are travelers. Malick is for the travelers, the learners, the experiencers. That's why the film didn't draw crowds, most people are tourists and will miss what Malick is really about, will miss what the world God gave us is all about.
For most, this world is one of offices and cell phones with little spots of beauty and nature thrown in to keep it from being unbearable. How unbearable would life be if we all realized how shallow and detached our lives really are? God gave us so much. And we stupidly decided we could do better. Never satisfied, we grasp always for more and better and newer. Did the British see the world anew when they met the natives? Not really, progress marches on and much of what has been brought is indeed better, making life on this planet more comfortable, predictable and safe... but, at what cost?
To me, the new world is indeed the world seen anew. When we wake up in the morning and see the world a bit differently than we did before, it is an achievement. When we keep our minds and spirits young and fresh and open, full of love and wonder; that is the new world. Watching this film refreshes our world-view if we let it.
Before I launch into a review of this exquisite film, I must disclose my deep affection for Terrence Malick and his 1978 film Days of Heaven. I saw Days Of Heaven in the theater, back when I used to go to the movies a lot. I had returned from a three month car trip through this country earlier that year and watching his film filled me with so much longing for the American landscape that I packed up my car, saw the film again three days later and then took off the following day for another long car trip West.
The setting for Days of Heaven was Texas, in my view, not nearly the most beautiful part of this country, but Malick has an absolutely unparalleled genius for bringing out the peace and majesty of nature. There is no one who can put nature onto film like Terrence Malick and I would hate to think of this world, old or new, without him in it. Ansel Adams captures some beautiful forms in little black and white pics that enhanced our appreciation of what's out there, but Malick understands the color, the movement, the scope. I can't even use the word capture for Malick, he presents, he embodies, he translates something that is one of the hardest things in the world to duplicate on film... the absolute awe-inspiring feeling of being entranced and encompassed by nature.
I really regret not seeing The New World on the big screen and will look for it in art theaters, though the DVD is definitely worthwhile because there is a long section on the making of this film. Malick, who was strangely absent from the documentary feature must have spent the last eight years from Thin Red Line looking for financing for this project because it sure doesn't look like they spared much expense. Jamestown, the entire settlement, was completely re-created for the film, Native Americans were brought in to act and consult. Every attempt was made to be completely authentic; using a few journals from the time.
The story is basically a love story, about John Smith (Colin Farrell) and Pocahontas. The latter is played almost silently, but strongly, by fourteen year old Q'orianka Kilcher and she does a good job of conveying a girl completely in touch with herself and the world around her, even after she is removed from her tribe to be, in effect, a hostage of the English. She is well treated and eventually marries, even has a son, and goes to England to be feted by royalty, but never loses her center or her love. For most of the story she loves John Smith, even though he returns to England without her and has her told that he is dead.
She later discovers he is still alive and with that her love for him re-blossoms. She is honest with her husband and, unlike most men, he acts in a very loving and selfless way. He re-unites the pair to see where it goes. She realizes, when she re-connects with Smith, that what she has with Rolf is actually truer and she returns to loving him. He was very wise to let her follow her nature and allow her to love freely. He realized that love can't be forced. Maybe living close to the land, with Pocahontas, taught him that.
Days of Heaven also featured a love triangle and a woman who loves two men interwoven into such an incredible natural landscape that you really don't even need a story or plot. I remember in Days of Heaven about twenty minutes into the film I was saying "Wow... a plot too!" It was like an extra bonus. I would have been more than happy spending two hours just watching how Malick films water or wheat.
It's sad to me that this film, while receiving lots of critical acclaim, went unnoticed by viewers and the Academy. In my mind this film does everything a film is supposed to do. It's stunning, enchanting and engrossing even on just a visual level. It educates our minds about important events that changed the course of history. It speaks to us about love and its difficult choices, its pain and confusion and longing, its deep and unchanging nature that has no pretense to rhyme or reason. It shows clashes of cultures and ideas and their resolution. And this film also does something that very few films can do, it viscerally engages our deepest spirits and brings us a sense of what nature can do to our souls when given half a chance.
I remember on a lot of my young travels watching the tourists who would pull up to the Grand Canyon or some other magnificent natural wonder and say, basically, wow, that's amazing, what's next? They weren't really living and breathing it, they were watching it, like TV. Take the kids, let's visit some museums, some mountains, write a few postcards and there's your vacation. There are tourists, and then there are travelers. Malick is for the travelers, the learners, the experiencers. That's why the film didn't draw crowds, most people are tourists and will miss what Malick is really about, will miss what the world God gave us is all about.
For most, this world is one of offices and cell phones with little spots of beauty and nature thrown in to keep it from being unbearable. How unbearable would life be if we all realized how shallow and detached our lives really are? God gave us so much. And we stupidly decided we could do better. Never satisfied, we grasp always for more and better and newer. Did the British see the world anew when they met the natives? Not really, progress marches on and much of what has been brought is indeed better, making life on this planet more comfortable, predictable and safe... but, at what cost?
To me, the new world is indeed the world seen anew. When we wake up in the morning and see the world a bit differently than we did before, it is an achievement. When we keep our minds and spirits young and fresh and open, full of love and wonder; that is the new world. Watching this film refreshes our world-view if we let it.
posted by Intervision at 6:20 AM
0 comments
Monday, May 15, 2006
Rumor Has It
I like the fact that this film advances and draws on popular culture while remaining thoroughly original. If you read my blog, you'll see how often I bemoan the way the RIAA has appropriated our popular music, a deep part of our culture, and essentially, held it hostage by charging exorbitant rates to use past hit songs in films, mash-ups and other art forms. This film talks about The Graduate, and incorporates lines and plot points without running afoul of our excessive copyright protections much as Nora Ephron used Bewitched, the TV series, in her eponymous film. The convention worked better in this film because it brought in the real world more successfully.
Whereas Ephron's film felt farcical, this romantic comedy was handled better. I hate to compare Nicole Kidman unfavorably to Jennifer Aniston but the latter brings heart to her parts. Costner, portraying the real life Benjamin Braddock, is playing the same role I've seen him play in the last twenty films and Shirley MacLaine has also atrophied, though at least she didn't try to play seductive, she remains stuck in her Steel Magnolias mode. Some Charity Valentine would have been much better here, but maybe Rob Reiner stuck her in Bittertown. Too bad Anne Bancroft's dead. The Graduate, though it made Dustin Hoffman's career, was all Anne.
I mean, really, she plays an alcoholic who seduces the son of her husband's partner, literally luring him into a room and cornering him stark naked, then telling her daughter that he raped her. Charming... yet she makes us love her anyway. It's not easy to make a story like that work. So, anyway, this film also brings in the aspect of uptight suburban, rich Pasadena and the urban legend that surrounds this tale and its writer, Charles Webb.
Since there's no commentary track, I don't know if Charles Webb grew up in Pasadena, or wrote The Graduate based on a real story told to him by a prep school friend. Maybe that's some of the mystery that makes this film fun. I liked the contrast between these mothers and granddaughters who freely intergenerate and the hausfrau gossips that speculate from the sidelines. OK, I made up "intergenerate" but isn't it a great term to describe those who don't confine their dating and sexual pleasure to those who are the same age?
I'm all for it. The three great loves of my life are all 6-8 years older than me. When I was younger, I had almost no interest in men in their twenties and preferred older guys. As long as they're in good shape, I still prefer men who have interesting life experience to draw on. But now I see all sorts of things in younger guys that I really didn't appreciate before such as openness, enthusiasm, access to emotion, integrity and sexuality etc. They're not so beaten down and pussy-whipped, they don't carry all the bitterness and baggage. They're freer and more idealistic and creative.
So I liked this romp through the many configurations of younger/older and fun/serious relationships. I guess the message we're supposed to get is that sexual experimentation and exploration is great but "building a life together" requires more. Hell yeah, it requires the rock guys, not rock like rock and roll, but the rock, the guy who you can have kids with and depend on. OK but just remember, that's how Mrs. Robinson ended up in her sorry state... by marrying the rock. Not the rocker, the rock.
So, let's look forward to Rumor Has It Two when we see Jen twenty years later hitting on her son's friends...
Whereas Ephron's film felt farcical, this romantic comedy was handled better. I hate to compare Nicole Kidman unfavorably to Jennifer Aniston but the latter brings heart to her parts. Costner, portraying the real life Benjamin Braddock, is playing the same role I've seen him play in the last twenty films and Shirley MacLaine has also atrophied, though at least she didn't try to play seductive, she remains stuck in her Steel Magnolias mode. Some Charity Valentine would have been much better here, but maybe Rob Reiner stuck her in Bittertown. Too bad Anne Bancroft's dead. The Graduate, though it made Dustin Hoffman's career, was all Anne.
I mean, really, she plays an alcoholic who seduces the son of her husband's partner, literally luring him into a room and cornering him stark naked, then telling her daughter that he raped her. Charming... yet she makes us love her anyway. It's not easy to make a story like that work. So, anyway, this film also brings in the aspect of uptight suburban, rich Pasadena and the urban legend that surrounds this tale and its writer, Charles Webb.
Since there's no commentary track, I don't know if Charles Webb grew up in Pasadena, or wrote The Graduate based on a real story told to him by a prep school friend. Maybe that's some of the mystery that makes this film fun. I liked the contrast between these mothers and granddaughters who freely intergenerate and the hausfrau gossips that speculate from the sidelines. OK, I made up "intergenerate" but isn't it a great term to describe those who don't confine their dating and sexual pleasure to those who are the same age?
I'm all for it. The three great loves of my life are all 6-8 years older than me. When I was younger, I had almost no interest in men in their twenties and preferred older guys. As long as they're in good shape, I still prefer men who have interesting life experience to draw on. But now I see all sorts of things in younger guys that I really didn't appreciate before such as openness, enthusiasm, access to emotion, integrity and sexuality etc. They're not so beaten down and pussy-whipped, they don't carry all the bitterness and baggage. They're freer and more idealistic and creative.
So I liked this romp through the many configurations of younger/older and fun/serious relationships. I guess the message we're supposed to get is that sexual experimentation and exploration is great but "building a life together" requires more. Hell yeah, it requires the rock guys, not rock like rock and roll, but the rock, the guy who you can have kids with and depend on. OK but just remember, that's how Mrs. Robinson ended up in her sorry state... by marrying the rock. Not the rocker, the rock.
So, let's look forward to Rumor Has It Two when we see Jen twenty years later hitting on her son's friends...
posted by Intervision at 3:55 PM
0 comments