Intervision

Robert Plant

2010-09-19T07:57:00.000-07:00

Plant is one of the most underrated blues singers of all time. For all his fame, he's usually linked more with rock than blues. But that's because he brought in the modern age of blues vocals, and because he was playing with hard rockin, electrified musicians... they called it rock.

To me, blues is about the emotion, the cadence, the riffs. What he was doing was, in many ways, basic blues. But his range, the high pitch, the nuances, the pleading, aching tone he brought was such a leap, it just wasn't often compared to the original bluesmen. I guess the closest would have been Howling Wolf.

Listening to Plant today, as he's back now with his slap to Zep Band of Joy, makes me appreciate his early vocal performances all the more. As with Aretha Franklin, Elton John and others, Plant has lost his chops over time. Chops, at least for vocalists and guitarists, are the high notes. They're harder than the low notes and, at least for vocalists, they take their toll over time.

I've gone through many of Aretha's videos, for example, and cannot find any recent performances where she demonstrates the chops she had in her youth. She does not sing the songs the same way today that she did in the 60's and 70's, and neither does Plant. I'm sure they'd love to do that, and we'd love to hear it. But the throat is a delicate instrument and what they gave us in those years just can't be maintained indefinitely.

While Gospel always had it's high notes, and Aretha drew freely from that, blues was a chest voice genre... until Plant came along and gave the blues octaves it never had. So, it's in honor of you, Robert Plant, I write my first blog post in several years because micro-blogging doesn't do you justice.

2010-09-06T06:25:00.001-07:00

Quarter Note

2008-12-07T08:07:00.001-08:00

Quarter Note
Originally uploaded by Intervisions

Wine Party

2008-10-05T20:47:00.003-07:00

Wine Party
Originally uploaded by Intervisions

Connoisseurs Faire Menlo Park

2008-07-21T07:05:00.001-07:00

Connoisseurs Faire Menlo Park
Originally uploaded by Intervisions

Groove Kings

2008-07-20T21:23:00.001-07:00

Groove Kings
Originally uploaded by Intervisions

Connoisseurs Faire... lots of dancers!

Devil's Canyon Brewery

2008-06-28T08:38:00.001-07:00

P1010016
Originally uploaded by Intervisions

Big Crowd at the Brewery

2008-06-28T08:36:00.001-07:00

P1010015
Originally uploaded by Intervisions

JackAces

2008-06-28T08:34:00.001-07:00

JackAces
Originally uploaded by Intervisions

Valentines Party

2008-02-14T15:49:00.001-08:00

P1010016
Originally uploaded by Intervisions

Wine Party

American Idol

2007-03-02T11:23:00.000-08:00

I don't dislike everything about this show, in some ways I actually like it because it gives you a chance to get to know the performers a bit. While video killed the radio star, TV certainly saved the pop idol. I agree with Martha Stewart's view of omnimedia and cross-breeding to make healthier stock. Music certainly needed something and the Brits (who gave us American Idol) and TV saved our asses again, just like they did after Kennedy died, when the Beatles on Ed Sullivan got us all happy and musical again.

So now every other new star is coming off this show, its ratings are huge. I'm happy to see music on TV, I'm happy to see singers on TV, at all levels... let people see how hard it is. As with the dance competitions, hearing the opinions of those with well-developed ears and eyes expands our own ability to appreciate the components of the artform. I used to think singing was easy too, for those specially gifted few. Now I realize how much of it is craft and hard work. It's been a real reality check and it has sharpened our artistic sensibilities. My 11-year old can barely tell the good singers from the bad ones. With five years of singing under my belt I'm becoming better at spotting the flaws and assets, but it can be tough, particularly when it's a capella and you've never heard the song before.

Mary J. Blige made an interesting comment about the Grammy attention she received this year. She said "When people can see you, they award you." Like Mary, we see these performers humanized, as imperfect beings, like us. We commiserate with the one with the baby daughter, the one who spent her career so far singing back-up, the one splayed on the internet. We watch their auditions, their dedications, their practices. We watch their joy when they make it through each elimination and by the time that winner is elected the whole country knows as much about them as their own family members.

The problem for me is that, ultimately, the show is exactly what Simon keeps saying it is... it is a singing competition. Personality is definitely a factor, but artistic expression and message are not. With this type of emphasis we would have plenty of Mariahs and Christinas dominating our airwaves (hello) but how about the Lennons, Dylans and Madonnas. Those artists went into music not because they had great vocals, in fact, Dylan in particular took a lot of flack over his vocals, they made music because they had something to say and music was the art they used to do that. So now the new music, the music of the 21st Century is fantastic, vocally. Kelly Clarkson has the goods, but, as I listened to Kellie Pickler last night singing something that Loretta Lynn could have written, I thank God for artists like Natalie Mains and Billie Joe Armstrong, both highly awarded by their peers, for standing up, speaking out and being unafraid.

We may enjoy vocals, but what we really need are voices.

The Grammys

2007-02-12T06:10:00.000-08:00

Thank God I taped this crime against humanity or I wouldn't have been able to fast forward through the unending Carrie Underwood section. Watching her try to countrify Eagles music would have been most unpleasant. I mean, I know Don Henley is delusional, but couldn't someone tell him the Eagles wasn't a country band?

And while you're at it, have someone tell NARAS that Grammy night isn't supposed to be day of the dead. Although I appreciate their recognition of the Dead (more than they do, only the drummers turned up), the first in forty years, the rest of the show was basically for the walking dead.

I should have known the vibrance and recognition of fresh new artists was only a momentary reaction to free-flowing internet music. Now with all those settlements under their belt, they have a false sense of security and have returned to their little comfort zone. The best they could do by JB was Christina Aguilera's version of It's A Man's World, what an insult, not to mention missed opportunity.

If the if NARAS wants to educate, fabulous, make some documentaries, put it on DVD or another time slot, give it free to the schools. But if you want the public to embrace music again, then make your annual showcase entertaining and put the real talent and energy up there. I had such hopes for this new century, the past few years have been fine, almost good. Oh well, meet the old boss, same as the old boss. That's not a typo, I mean, these guys can't even make a show of a new boss. It's just the same old tired values, promoting the artists that fit the mold. Oh well, at least they stood behind the Dixie Chicks.

BTW, what is the deal with all the movie stars? It seems like there were more than ever, don't you have enough faith in the pull of your own industry? I don't see any rock stars up there on Oscar night. I know their industry dwarves yours, but have a little pride. Your job, NARAS, is to promote your industry and you fucking suck at it! And that's why it's continuing to shrink, unceasingly, year after year. It's heartbreaking, but, like the administration you stood up against, you just won't listen, there's nothing getting through and you'll go down the way they will, in deserved disgrace.

Oh, and to top it all off, you shafted Danger Mouse... you guys really are CRAZY!

Settling

2007-02-11T05:48:00.000-08:00

I guess we all settle. While, on a certain level, we all create our own realities, we each, unless we're psychotic, operate in a "real world" which, for most of us, does not seem to be a warm, nurturing, loving environment, but a challenging place where we need to make our own way. We're all taught to be responsible, to make things happen, to not expect something for nothing.

From an early age we learn to compromise. We learn not to expect all we can dream of or hope for. Those would be "unrealistic expectations". Life is more manageable if we keep our dreams and expectations in check. We dare not dream for Candide's "best of all possible worlds". That's a pipe dream. That's Hollywood, baby... don't ever get caught up in dreams of fame, glory. wealth or you'll end up like Anna Nicole Smith or Marilyn Monroe. And don't get caught up in dreams of success through artistic integrity or you'll end up like Kurt Cobain. You'll be disillusioned, crushed, it's a one in a million shot. The best you can hope for is to "make it" and live a life being chased by paparazzi.

So, most of us take it down a notch at some point. We lose our imagination, our creativity, our dream of making a fortune doing what we love to do and find a respectable profession, or at least a decent , paying job. Maybe we hang onto our calling as late as college, only to end up in some dehumanizing corporate slot. Within a few years, it's no longer a dehumanizing corporate slot, it's your life, your career, your world... for many people around here, it's everything. By the time most people are in it, it's not considered settling, it's considered more like success. They have a sense of their role in the world of commerce or technological progress, they are surrounded by others with the same lives, and that is enough.

OK, so maybe we can't all be Christina Aguilera or Tiger Woods... only a lucky few can achieve so much fame and fortune following their calling. But how about even the more modest dreams, the American Dream, the white picket fence, Bobby and Susie, a Chevrolet convertible and, of course, the perfect, sexy, adoring spouse. No one buys into this dream either. Almost every news story you see these days has the same premise; this famous person or that has as many problems as you do. The lovely Brad and Jennifer are torn apart, the wealthy and powerful Donald and Rosie are so insecure they have to quibble in public... on and on it goes, in entertainment, politics, business... even the church has had its maggots exposed.

So we settle for loveless lives, free of illusion, free of passion, free of hope. We comfort ourselves by thinking that even the most famous and privileged among us has similar problems and challenges. But, do they? In a way, yes, no one makes it through life on all green lights. We're all human, all imperfect. But, in a way, no. There are people who face life with less fear, who welcome change and growth and challenge, who spend time looking within and creating and dreaming, who approach life with depth and passion, who risk themselves emotionally, who express themselves openly, honestly and creatively, who think for themselves, who question the status quo, who speak out, who don't surround themselves with yes-men and others just like themselves. These are the people I respect and who inspire me. These are the ones who don't settle for the loveless marriage, the bad relationships, the shallow, meaningless relationships, the contacts. These are the ones looking for something more real in their own lives and in their relationships with others. So, with Valentine's Day approaching, have a heart. Don't settle. There is so much happiness and love and available for you if you open yourself up to it and dare to let it in. Don't miss out, ask for what you want.

Rose & Crown

2007-01-17T15:28:00.000-08:00

Rose & Crown
Originally uploaded by Intervisions.

Donald Trump

2007-01-13T04:37:00.000-08:00

It's gotten to the point where there is no avoiding this guy, unless you want to demediate yourself. Don't bother looking it up, I made up the word. It means to crawl in a hole and avoid the media, which is about what you'd have to do to avoid the media these days. I hope the word will gain as much traction as the economic term, disintermediation, which also flags a misspell, meaning it's not recognized as a word by spell check (so does blog, btw), but which has made it to Wikipedia (also a "misspell"). Disintermediation is big because so much of it is going on right now. It means, basically, getting rid of the middlemen, cutting short the supply chain, most of is made possible by the internet. I greatly enjoyed the effect on the music industry.

Anyway, demediation does not seem to be a trend here, quite the opposite, we've added numerous layers over this century. However, selective demediation could probably go wide. A sort of universal spam blocker... I simply type in "Donald Trump" and no images of the guy and his "wisdom", venom or indefensible hairdo will get through to me in any form. The TV would automatically change to a default station as I passively enjoy my Trump-free life, never having to see one of his infomercials about how to make it big like him (I hope his course comes with a developer dad, like he had). My magazines would come with appropriate references removed... ok, enough dreaming, it's years away, time to get on with my actual point.

I read Donald's book in the 80's, my kids and I are Apprentice fanatics, and, I have no real problem with his unabashed NY style, as a New Yorker, I totally get that. He came from wealth yet has the bravado of a self-made man, which is somewhat offensive. He lives in a shallow world of deals and yes-men, he makes deal after deal after deal, he writes books about the art of the deal. He won't let the deal go down. He is the deal. He makes no apologies. Is this man what we all want to be?

That is the crux of the question for me. Do you want to be Trump? Do I?? Do the millions of applicants to his show, the readers of his books, buyers of his water? Obviously. He is the American Dream..... or so I thought. Now I see him engaged in this Rosie feud. If all the money, fame, power, young wife etc. make him so happy, wouldn't he be above getting annoyed with a comedian's barbs? Is Donald Trump happy? And, if he isn't, why should we devote our lives to the goal of becoming more like him?

He certainly comes off like a happy guy, but, even his own kids seem to have a sort of business-like relationship with him. He doesn't strike me as a particularly warm or peaceful guy. Unlike most famous people, who achieve fame in the arts, Trump represents the average "successful" person, someone who is confident and used to being treated with a certain amount of deference. He's like the guys I see downtown all the time in pressed shirts with Crackberries on their hip, on important calls, taking important lunches, making important deals.

It's a shallow, temporal happiness at best, but that's not how any of these guys see it. It's mental state that's easily ruffled and it's a narrow comfort zone because, most of these guys have a tough time getting real with themselves or others. As long as they're talking about business or some other mundane feature of their lives it's smooth and easy, but ask why they do this or feel this or think this and there's a total sea change, now they're in the ocean in a rowboat looking for an island. When they sense the platitudes aren't working, it's even worse, now they're peeking within and seeing nothing, feeling nothing but mild fear and confusion.

They start to sense that there's a whole other level they are not tuned into and the reaction, sadly, is not to try and tune into it, but to ignore it in favor of terra firma. Your job will not support you spiritually, even your church will probably not sustain you. If you want true peace and happiness, you have to work for it. It's hard work. In many ways, much harder than career work. But, you shouldn't run from it. Hard as it is, and probably with little support, at least at first, it is so worth it. If you're not centered in yourself, if you're not facing yourself, the career, even at the pinnacle will never really satisfy you.

James Brown

2006-12-25T07:11:00.000-08:00

I didn't expect Christmas morning to start with tears, but JB has been a huge inspiration for me, as a white woman. As for black men, what can you say? He was the first black man to get up there and be a black man, truly, thoroughly, genuinely. If you ever want to know what it means to be a real person on this earth, to be uncompromisingly true to yourself, look at the master. Rural, uneducated, coming from nothing, but he heard the music, never stopped. When James was coming up, the last thing you wanted to be was a black man, no matter the talent. I love Chuck Berry, and Little Richard deserves props too, but James came out as neither effeminate nor literary, nor with a whitewashed do-wop group. He was a fully sexual black man, right out there with it, at a time when that was so threatening that guys were getting killed all over the place.

I thought the man would go on forever, he was touring this year. I'll be covering some of his music this Friday and next Wednesday. Come out and listen, or at least go see Dreamgirls, with Eddie Murphy renewing his old SNL hot tub personality into a funky JB-esque homage to the performer. In a few more years there should be something even better; Spike Lee will direct and Brian Grazier will produce a biopic on Brown's life, production to start late 2007.

Take a look at what the man wrote in 1964:

This is a man's world, this is a man's world
But it wouldn't be nothing, nothing without a woman or a girl

You see, man made the cars to take us over the road
Man made the trains to carry heavy loads
Man made electric light to take us out of the dark
Man made the boat for the water, like Noah made the ark

This is a man's, a man's, a man's world
But it wouldn't be nothing, nothing without a woman or a girl

Man thinks about a little baby girls and a baby boys
Man makes then happy 'cause man makes them toys
And after man has made everything, everything he can
You know that man makes money to buy from other man

This is a man's world
But it wouldn't be nothing, nothing without a woman or a girl

He's lost in the world of man
He's lost in bitterness

James had his demons, hard childhood, and I don't apologize for the way he treated women, or men. But, at least there was awareness. I see lots of these workaholic men all over the place, so happily immersed in their world of deals, cut off from their kids, their hearts, their souls, their passions, and never even knowing it. They have the wife, they have the kids, and all their stuff, and they think they are men. They think that's what it means to be a man. Well check it out guys, cause it takes a hell of a lot more than that. Yeah, it IS a man's world... and take a look at it.

So, save yourself the pain and cut the fucking vapid, petrified carols today and do what's right... turn up the burn and funk out! Look at how much hip hop dominates music today and how many of those beats came straight off his cuts. Virtually every act making money today owes Brown a huge debt. I can't think of any artist who has had more of an impact on the sound of popular, lucrative music today. Bye JB. I'll miss you.

Streamcast Goes Down

2006-09-27T21:18:00.000-07:00

Each of these P2Ps have fallen, one by one, folded, turned over everything they could put to together to the labels. Even wonderful Limewire, which just countersued, is on death's door. Now this, the Streamcast decision (link above). If that's not the death knell, I don't know what is. I guess things have come full circle. Now,Dianne Feinstein, my own Senator, just introduced legislation to screw digital radio in favor of the labels.

It was a good fight. The fight to free up music for the masses was like the Summer of Love, it was such a great idea, had so much promise, even worked for awhile. A small, temporary Utopia snuffed out by mankind's inevitable lust for money and power. I feel like Peter Finch in Network being told in no uncertain terms, you do not fuck with the forces of nature. Human nature, that is. I guess we all value money and control, so maybe I shouldn't blame the people who work at the labels... or Northrup... or Halliburton... OK now I'm cracking up.

Things have changed a bit, at least you don't have to buy the whole crappy album any more. You can now get label music (with tons of DRM) off the web legally. Music got better for a while. But, change will be much slower now and I think we will slip back to the status quo. In the end, people are essentially passive and prone to habit. TV is as strong as ever. People do want to control their media and kids are used to it but the mainstream media delivers a sophisticated palette and this idea of grassroots empowerment, is, in the end a red herring. Will these Echo Boomers, grown up on soccer teams, really rebel in any meaningful way? Not like the Boomers did, they don't have the same relationship to their parents.

At this point, there still seems to be a pretty sharp demarcation between the viral 'web junk" and commercial entertainment. Perhaps that line will blur. People should get paid for their content and there will be some opportunity for that, but, I think it will continue to be negligible compared to what the Murdochs and Bronfmans of this world will skim off.

YouTube/Warner Deal

2006-09-18T14:42:00.000-07:00

Despite Bronfman's hard line approach during the Napster days, the guy, like Murdoch and Redstone, knows where we are headed and figures if you want to make a buck you've got to go with the flow and listen to the kids. So, like Murdoch who went for MySpace and now Snocap, and Redstone who sees the future in games, Bronfman, who has been heading Warner in an increasingly indie direction, sees the writing on the wall.

As Bob Lefsetz has correctly pointed out, the big problem the labels had with P2P was never as much about piracy as it was about control over the best acts, who they feared would not need the old line distribution channels. As Bob so tactfully put it, "99% of music is crap". Given that, the name of the game is about securing the rights to rape the few, the talented... the lucrative.

So, now you know what these deals are all about. Whether it will work remains to be seen. None of these start-ups have turned a profit and once they sell out, the kids, many of them real smart, may move on to purer pastures. Good luck guys.

Just Be True

2006-09-14T12:01:00.000-07:00

The true profession of man is to find his way to himself.
-Herman Hesse

I was hanging out and singing with a friend the other day, someone who I had performed with, who I hadn't seen for years. Les used to sing with the band Cold Sweat and now produces and writes his own music as Just Be True. He said a lot of profound things that really made me think. The way he has found to himself is through his music, which, needless to say, really resonated with me. Singers wear targets on their back, they need to struggle, it's part of being a singer, a performer, an artist.

But, before I get too into the musical journey, I want to talk about the quote above. It's from the classic book Siddhartha, very popular since the sixties, when the first generation of Caucasians discovered hallucinogens and we had massive boomer interest in exploring the meaning of life, happiness and fulfillment. The story of Siddhartha is basically the Westernized version of the story of Buddah.

Unlike Jesus, a poor man and fervent revolutionary, Buddah was a prince and focused less on social change and more on methods to find inner wealth, inner peace. The two men were quite different but it's necessary to understand both together in order to get the truest picture of life, society and the path to God. Until there is social justice, our individual paths to fulfillment will always fall short. Until we all face ourselves and work on our inner path, there will never be social justice. We all need to look within and we all need to speak out for the legions of materially poor people who can never really get a leg up because the small group of wealthy and powerful people exert so much effect.

So many of my posts, like the last one, focus on social issues. But this one is harder to write. It's so difficult to express the importance of facing yourself in truth and making change from within. It's something I've tried to do all my life, often not very successfully. I was married for sixteen years and I think it was especially difficult during those years because I was focused on my husband and kids. And I'm glad for that. Spending a lifetime contemplating your navel is not what life, love and learning are about. But, there needs to be balance and I'm experiencing far more balance now.

So, self awareness, looking within, growing, changing... all necessary goals and the paths to them are many. There's yoga, meditation, dance, prayer, reading, communes, churches, fellowship groups, alone time, retreats, contemplation, communing with nature... all of which I've tried. Then there's art and expressing oneself. Taking the inner stuff out to the world. Music, for me, so far has been primarily about outward expression. I expressed feelings about my marriage, housewife trip and current interests through my music, or at least my lyrics. I express my love of music through performance.

But Les helped me understand how music can be an integral part of the inner journey. One thing he did was help me identify fears that I hadn't really recognized. I think of myself as such a fearless person now, relative to my housewife days anyway, when I feared the social consequences of doing what I felt like doing. Yet, there's still fear: fear of losing bands, fear of not sounding good, fear of people thinking I don't sound good, fear of music. Yes, fear of music. I typically describe myself as an intuitive singer. I really feel these songs when I sing them and it sounds that way. But, I've been in situations where I've been asked to take it down a third or what key something is in, and there's fear around that because I'm not a musician and I don't have a thorough understanding of the structure and mechanics of music.

There's always so much more to learn and I'm afraid I'll never learn it, that I'll never be able to hold my own with musicians. I'm afraid that even if I could learn it, it would be a waste of time because it's too late for me to have any type of career in music. Like 99% of musicians out there, I'm afraid I'll never be able to make a living singing or playing music. I'm afraid, or perhaps a more appropriate word would be convinced, that I'll never master Logic, never be able to produce music the way Les can. Anyway, Les talked about not running from the fear but facing it and continuing to try. I tend to do just what I really enjoy from the heart and know well, which is the singing, and run from the more technical aspects of making music, even though I know it will help me and give me more confidence and control.

Les also talked to me about looking within. As with many performers, there's a lot of ego involved, the desire for applause, approval and maybe even adulation. This causes me to look outward, to others, and I've typically put too much stock in the opinions of others. Les helped me to hear myself and have confidence in what I hear.

So, thanks Les, for sharing your journey with me and for encouraging me to face my fears and not run from them. Thanks for inspiring me to understand more of what music can be for me and do for me and to listen to my inner voice, not just the vocals. I hope to pass some of what I've learned to my readers. Your fears are probably very different from mine, but, you have them, and you will continue to have them until you address them. They will hold you back from your happiness until you look at them and decide to follow your true voice and desires despite them.

Ohlone School

2006-09-03T11:02:00.000-07:00

Ohlone School
Originally uploaded by Intervisions.

Forces Of Good And Evil

2006-07-17T21:23:00.000-07:00

The irony, in these "long tail" times, when it's becoming increasingly difficult to have a hit, when box office was hit, hard... the biggest seller ever is about pirates. Kudos to the underrated Gore Verbinski, my friend Janine's brother.

It's not looking good for Grokster, looks like Wilson is going to grant summary judgment for RIAA. So check out the link above for a much-needed laugh.

Check this out for why YouTube hasn't been sued successfully for copyright infringement... yet. Though now we'll get to see it tested.

Why We Fight

2006-07-13T09:48:00.000-07:00

The film that explores this issue just came out on DVD and should be viewed by anyone who wants to understand our activity in Iraq, our economy and our Empire. The director, Eugene Jarecki, began his interest in this issue prior to the Iraq War when he saw Eisenhower's farewell speech. And it is this speech that opens the film. The night before he left office, Eisenhower issued a straightforward warning to the American people, the speech was not for any other purpose than to alert the public that the war machine, the "military/industrial complex" was gearing up and, without a vigilant public we would see the rise of misplaced power.

This is exactly what has been happening, and is now ramping up more than ever. Unelected think tank elite rationalists like Scooter Libby, Ken Adelman and Richard Perle now have power without accountability. They drive policy with position papers like the Downing Street Memo which outlays the preemptive doctrine in place today.

Those elected also can have power far beyond the intended scope of their position. Dick Cheney, along with many others, moved seamlessly between government and corporate positions that changed him from a non-millionaire to a man worth $70M in a few years. He went on to become the most powerful Vice President in history and along with a small cadre of ideologues directs policy more or less out of his own head. He is a man who does not listen, can't tolerate dissent and makes bad decisions.

Eisenhower had written the military/industrial/Congressional complex but left out the "silent C", as it is referred to in the film, because he had enjoyed a good relationship with Congress. But, Congress is the key to solving this increasingly militaristic and expensive problem. They are the only gatekeepers we really have, but, they are much more attentive to the votes from their constituents who work for this huge industry, then they are from a fat and happy, duped and silent American citizenry.

Jarecki lifted his title from a series of Frank Capra propaganda films from WWII, but feels Capra would make a film like this today because of his sympathy for the common man, the average American, who is the biggest loser here. As Eisenhower pointed out, for every destroyer we build, 8000 homes could be built.

Instead we increasingly spend on the tools to protect our corporate interests and promote our consumption-driven economy by installing 860 military bases in 135 countries all over the world, spending a trillion dollars on a standing army, selling arms to anyone who will use them, no matter who they are used against, invading leaders who do not want our soldiers, calling them terrorists, toppling unfriendly leaders, propping up heinous dictators and spending one half of our discretionary tax money on weapons.

Jarecki did the commentary track with Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson who had travelled a journey from patriotism to cynicism and concern, as did a number of people featured in the film such as veteran Wilton Sekzer who almost fell off his chair when he heard Bush saying that Saddam never had any involvement with 9/11. "Oh really", he says, "Then what the hell did we go over there for?" This after his successful request to have his 9/11 victim son's name put on a bomb that fell on innocent Iraqis.

There was also the personal story of the orphaned, troubled inner city kid who joined the air force on the bullshit that he could fly helicopters, even though the recruiter knew he would never get to do that. But, he signed him up and drove him to the base, in his car. No busses full of recruits any more, it's personal, one-to-one as the silent draft of our poorest goes on.

In the film, 9/11 was explained as retaliation for our placing military installations in Saudi Arabia. This was described by Chalmers Johnson as blowback, payback for our imperialistic activities. Only thing is, their military action cost about $500K, ours cost $220B and counting. And of course, we killed many more innocent victims.

Also clarified is another fallacy we were told about precision air-strikes. 90% of the thousands of Iraqi casualties were civilians. Those huge bombs miss... a lot. We saw worldwide sympathy for us disintegrate into worldwide disgust as we blatantly lied to the world. At some point we will have to face the reality that the administration wants, and has wanted for decades, permanent installations in Iraq and lied to the world in order to get them. We will never leave Iraq.

We are also helped to understand that while we have seen a huge acceleration in build up since 2002, this is an endemic, systemic problem beyond any administration. Parts of the B2 bomber are made in every state, this is to ensure that no Congressperson will favor cutting the project. Projects must be huge to succeed. Wilkerson submitted a $400M plan for the Hummer for the 82nd Airborne and was told by a Congressional aide to make it bigger or get dumped. He made it into a $9B project, which was passed. The typical scenario is to underestimate costs and over-promise capability.

As this sector of our economy spirals out of control we see our ideals go along with them. Most developed nations spend 2-5% of GDP on arms, we spend 50%, more than all members of NATO, China and Russia combined. China, which comes in second, spends 16%. It's a good business, given the planned obsolescence of explosives, and the number of oppressive dictators and conflicts. But how much better off would we be if that money repaired roads and built libraries and hospitals?

We would then be able to walk beyond our protected shores into the world and be proud to be part of a country that stands for something more positive and sustainable than greed, war and endless violence. The American Empire is distinguished in its exportation of ideas, but what ideas? Notions of fame, glory and a life like Trump and Britney which, if lead by all of us, would turn our planet into a barren rock? But, it looks so good and we fall for it, without apology. Who, after all, would we apologize to? Our kids? The oppressed masses?

No, we'll turn to them and say we didn't know and we didn't want to know. So, we didn't go protest the war or write our Congressperson and we drove SUVs around a lot and we were part of the problem. Why do we fight? Everyone Jarecki asked said the same thing, "freedom". However, he felt that in a free society, there should be a variety of answers so he probed people about how we were fighting for freedom, and inevitably those same people with the spoon-fed media answer were at a loss to actually explain how we fought for freedom.

We think we live in a free society but our media takes rhetoric unquestioningly from leaders in order to continue to have access to them, they all work for one of a handful of large corporations that control content. Activity goes on in Congress every day to take away access to alternative sources of information. We are now in danger of losing the open internet we have, we've already lost rights to time-shift content and share content that we previously held.

After Vietnam the military began training all personnel in how to answer media and how to present its message in a way the American public would support. So, they, and our media, wave the flag and talk about mom and apple pie and how we represent freedom and that's why we fight... and if you still believe that "we fight for freedom" after reading this review, see the film and decide for yourself.

Freedom

2006-07-04T08:54:00.000-07:00

So, it's Independence Day. The airwaves and our skies are filled with expressions of pride in the United States and what it stands for in terms of freedom. We've been conditioned all our lives, not only by media but by our media influenced families and friends to believe that the US stands for freedom all over the world. Our country is filled with people who came here looking for the opportunity to live in a society where they could practice any religion, or no religion, where there was a fairly elected President, where they could work hard and prosper.

When our government sends our soldiers out to die, what is it in the name of? Not America, freedom. We don't kill others to convert them but to free them, right? Well, not according to George Clooney, if I could make heads or tails out of Syriana. But what I'm getting so far, from this film and from another great film, Lord of War, with Nicholas Cage, is that our government needs to be looked at as an arms corporation. Donald Sutherland, in Oliver Stone's JFK comments that the primary organizing principle of any government is war.

In Syriana, we see an arab prince commenting that if their country won't buy enough arms they are faced with embargoes and being called terrorists. In Lord of War, we see the arms dealer get off in the end because they are needed to get small weapons sold in Africa and elsewhere. We pay big money for oil and we need it back. What we offer up are guns and rifles and grenades and land-mines and rocket launchers.... it goes on and on. We enforce our monopolies on all this stuff as we do our others, the copyrights, with any force necessary.

How free are our choices, even as Americans, when we get all our news from corporate-owned sources? I read recently in Rolling Stone (RS 1002) how Bush not only stole the 2000 election, but the 2004 election as well, by focusing on critical states, mostly Ohio in 2004 and thwarting the electorate on a precinct by precinct basis and also by installing right-wing zealots as Secretaries of State, particularly in "battle ground states". Heard much about this? Seems like it should be a pretty big story when some 11 key precincts have results that differ so dramatically from exit polls that pollsters can't explain it... all going inexplicably to Bush.

Why don't the media cover stories like this, or stories about arms dealers, or the laws passed every day rolling back our rights to enjoy copyrighted material, essentially, all material? Why doesn't the media talk about how Americans who venture outside into the real world out there are embarrassed and mortified to see how we are perceived around the world?

Sure, we have freedoms here, freedom to shop at any Wal-mart we want, eat at any McDonalds we like, as long as we have the gas to get there. And don't worry, Bush will make sure you do. Do you have the freedom to lead a good life, a simple life, a healthy and balanced life? Kind of. It's hard, cause the government wants you working and consuming. If you try to slow down and enjoy your life, and listen to your heart and body and soul, you'll find freedom curtailed.

Patsy Ramsey

2006-06-25T10:38:00.000-07:00

Sometimes the synchronicity of names amazes me. This woman spent all her life trying to be the perfect Patsy, and maybe she succeeded. But there is no doubt about one thing. She was the perfect patsy. Unlike Lee Harvey Oswald, who used his airtime to proclaim himself the patsy, Patsy never used her ample time with a mike to the public to play the victim. She was completely unfocused and confused by the public's venom for her.

She never turned the cameras back at the press, who demonized her while raking in billions off the images of her dolled up daughter. I can just see the rich and powerful men who control content in this country saying, "We've got to use these images over and over again because each time we run them we gain a percentage point in viewer-ship, and if we don't, Fox will. But, hmm, we can't just keep running them with no reason or story so let's focus on this bungled police case and whip up some venom for an arrogant, rich, white woman who sexualized her daughter for some mommy-pride contest."

So, goodbye Patsy, you're right up there with Patty Hearst and Karen Silkwood. Now you can be with Jon-Benet, it was all you ever wanted. You started dying when she did. If ever there was a victim, it was you. Going from the richest bitch in town, buttered up the yin-yang, to losing your beautiful little daughter, and all your fake friends, and fake status and your insulated illusions, and ridiculous values. You learned more than you ever wanted to... but what have we learned from you, from your story?

I learned a lot. I learned, once again, how much sexuality is feared, especially when we see it in women. We won't tolerate exploited sexuality, on the public level anyway. Things are different in our souls and bodies, not to mention the internet. Don't doll up your daughters and put them on display, because there are too many people out there are looking for relief from the corporate, work all day, de-sexed life they live.

Like Princess Diana, Patsy Ramsey enjoyed a life of privilege and money she did little to earn, and they both saw some of those things stripped from them in a very public way. They were criticized and attacked as women and as mothers. As for Patsy, many believed, and still believe she is a murderer. I think she's a victim of circumstance and showed little of Diana's insight. Her story is a sad one of the superficiality of status and the way our society views women and sex.

Block Party

2006-06-11T20:12:00.000-07:00

Block Party
Originally uploaded by Intervisions.

Blue Chalk Cafe

2006-06-11T20:11:00.000-07:00

Blue Chalk Cafe
Originally uploaded by Intervisions.

POPaganda: The Art And Crimes Of Ron English

2006-06-07T08:56:00.000-07:00

In this endless stream of images, that we exist in, in a world where kids are growing up where their entire visual landscape is bought and sold and entirely co-opted, you can either have an acquiescent, passive approach to it and sort of enjoy the spectacle or you can try to confront it in some way.
-Carlo McCormick, editor Paper Magazine

In American society where art isn't a part of people's lives, I feel like I'm almost on a mission to bring art back to people. Everywhere I looked, I saw billboards, so I started co-opting billboards to put my art on.
-Ron English

Corporations don't deserve free speech, people deserve free speech.
-Ron English

These are some of the quotes that open the film Popaganda: The Crimes and Art of Ron English, along with quotes of passers-by who say things like, "This is truth, ads are lies", and the kid who observed that the billboard satirizing Joe Camel will make kids laugh the next time they see a real Joe Camel billboard. And there were lots of cigarette and alcohol billboards in the poor neighborhood that black kid lived in. Camel faced the pesky problem of its customers dying off and it became increasingly desperate to capture the youth market. They made their models younger but it still didn't appeal to kids so they began a campaign using a cartoon character, Joe Camel, which was hugely "successful", for them anyway.

Ron English didn't like this, none of us do, but Ron actually did something. He went after their billboards (and all cigarette boards) using their look, logo, taglines, like "Smooth Character", or “Salem Spirit” but incorporating his own ghostly, garish images that show the death and lies these images really represent. He also twisted their tags into things like "Cancer Kid". He would change the warning label to stuff like, "Courting kids leads to early retirement", or ask “Hook any new kids today?”. Camel did indeed discontinue the billboards, and Joe Camel, after a while.

He also went after Apple which, at the time, was appropriating the images of great, but conveniently dead, artists and thinkers like Einstein, who may or may not have wanted to endorse Apple products. They were using the motto "Think Different". So did Ron English, who put up similar billboards, only with faces of Charles Manson and Bill Gates. If you want to attack Apple, fine, but at least do it for the right reasons. Ron himself makes a living appropriating images and has been sued by Disney and the company owning the rights to Charlie Brown. So, it's a bit hypocritical to criticize Apple for doing it, even if for far less savory reasons.

I think the common images of our culture should not be sold off by heirs like crown jewels to big companies who extort huge fees for their use. Copyright law is one of our biggest enemies to free speech and English should have focused on this for Apple, which is extremely litigious and aggressive in protecting its IP. It had Ebay remove artwork by someone who offered an iPod altered to highlight the fact that U2, with whom Apple had joined, sued Negativland for parodying their songs. The story on that incident is in my blog.

One of Ron's favorite targets is McDonalds because, like the cigarette companies, it targets children. He has attacked them many times with numerous images such as the one of a bloated Ronald McDonald pictured on this blog below. He paints each public piece individually on canvas to hang in front of a billboard, almost all of which are dead ads, meaning the advertiser up there has received the time on the board he has paid for. Once the time is up, billboard owners typically just leave it up there for free because blank boards indicate to potential advertisers that it's not a location that sells well.

One of his McDonald's billboards was the inspiration for Morgan Spurlock's excellent film, which I reviewed on this blog, Super-Size Me. Morgan noticed the billboards in his neighborhood. Ron has inspired other artists who are featured in the DVD such as the Billboard Liberation Front, who wear bandanas and disguises and paste up messages on public spaces, including billboards, where they worked with English to put up the mileage statistics on SUV ads along with comments on how pleased Saddam would be, such as, “Saddam’s SUV Oil Dependence Day Sale.”.

Speaking of Saddam, Ron learned that he is the living person with the most songs about him, many probably written at gunpoint. Ron, while not at all competitive with his fellow renegade artists, did apparently want to best Saddam here and implored similarly minded musicians to write songs about him and his art. These little ditties run all through the film, and are pretty funny, as are the sayings on Ron’s billboards, in a sad sort of way. Mostly, they just make you think about the corporate messages that are usually up there in a different way. Here are a few:

The media is the massage.

You are what you own.

America: Home of the homeless

Your apathy is our strength. (image of the Capital)

Shop while they drop. (image of bombs)

Ron tackles all the sacred cows and powers that be, including the church and Bush administration. His goal is to take back the media and the message from those who have the only real access to most mediums of communication in our society. People have asked why Ron risks the arrests and doesn't just rent the billboards. The boards, owned by huge conglomerates like Viacom, Clear Channel and Ted Turner, who made his fortune off billboards, won’t sell the ad space to Ron.

Sure, you can paint your little painting and hang it in the gallery, or your studio, for a few eggheads, but people like Michael Moore and Ron English have no real access to media that has any sizable audience. Those entities take too much money from McDonalds and gas guzzling car companies. Independent film, fine art and internet, which is currently in grave danger from big telecom who would like to destroy net neutrality, are the only avenues open to those who oppose the messages bombarding us constantly.

There’s a commentary track with Ron English and the film’s editor saying that they had no idea that the director, Pedro Carajal, would ever actually make a film out of all this. Apparently, he just followed them around with a camera a lot. There’s no shortage of footage of these illegal capers, or anything else. Being an indie filmmaker myself, I’m pretty sure why Ron and the editor, not the director, did the commentary track. It’s all in the editing people! It’s the most under-appreciated endeavor there is, and the most necessary. And as art becomes more and more accessible (I got the photos of Ron's work for this blog from Flickr in a few minutes) editors will rule the world. They already do.

I’m sure it was a huge job on this project because you could make a four-hour film just showing Ron’s art at a pic a second. Talk about prolific, he works twelve hours a day and is a very popular and strong selling fine artist, hanging in galleries all over the world. Originally, he just wanted to bring his art to the people and put his incredibly detailed photo real pop/surrealistic art up for free. After a while he realized he could raise awareness of social and political issues in a big way and do what any good artist is supposed to do, encourage free and original thought.

The beauty of this art form is that you get something immediate and real. The artist just goes up there and plasters their message, like graffiti art. No editors, no censors, just the comment of someone willing to stand up and be counted. Ron puts his website address on all his boards, he doesn’t live in hiding and in fact refers to himself as a soccer dad. He does brag about coming from a family of outlaws though and says he didn't make the rules and sure as hell isn't going to follow them.

I have nothing but respect and awe for Ron and all artists willing to be that .01% of the population daring to say that the Emperor has no clothes, that consumption is costing us our planet, and we need to think about how much we really need, what we’re eating, what we’re doing to our bodies and minds and spirits and souls. They are competing with corporations that have the only meaningful “free” speech in this world and whose existence depends on our continued consumption.

We’ve come a long way since Andy Warhol replicated soup cans to show how mundane our lives had become. Ron has replicated Andy and his muse, Marilyn, over and over and over. They are some of his most requested pieces. Even art dealers want what is familiar. Of course, Ron’s Marilyns have Mickey Mouse boobs… but doesn’t everybody? We all live in the house of mouse, for now, but with a little more satirical, low-brow art, we at least have hope.

The Art

2006-06-07T07:28:00.000-07:00

Ron English preview
Originally uploaded by Laughing Squid.

Son Of Pop

And Subversion Of

2006-06-07T07:21:00.000-07:00

Ron English
Originally uploaded by Marco Tsai.

2006-06-07T07:12:00.000-07:00

Anti Imperialism
Originally uploaded by Palestine Pictures and Cartoons.

Disney = Franco = censoring dictators

Multinipples

2006-06-07T06:54:00.000-07:00

Multinipples
Originally uploaded by Eric in SF.

This is one of four Billboard Liberation Front/Ron English billboards that appeared in San Francisco over Memorial Day weekend. What is it says in black, if you don't feel like clicking on the pic, to enlarge it, is "Recombinant Growth Hormone injected cows are". BSTpasses through to the milk we drink and is in all of McDonalds dairy products. It is associated with everything from breast cancer to premature adolescent development in children.

6-6-06

2006-06-06T17:24:00.000-07:00

Jesus Returns
Originally uploaded by squidish.

Jesus Returns. Look Religious!
POPaganda: The Art and Subversion of Ron English

Get Rich Or Die Trying

2006-06-05T06:01:00.000-07:00

He's smart and absolutely driven. If he was born to Fred Trump, he'd be The Donald. Instead he was born to an alluring and adept NY drug dealer who was murdered when 50 was 10, and an unknown father. Instead of living in a penthouse on Central Park South, he lives on an immense estate with the proceeds of his first album, which sold a mind-boggling twelve million copies. He earned $41M last year, largely through branding deals for clothes, video games, ringtones and Reebok sneakers. He's about to sign a deal with Apple to brand low-cost computers. He was #8 on Forbes celebrity 100 List last year. He's 50 Cent, born Curtis Jackson, he's an artist, a multimillionaire, a drug dealer and an ex-con. He's been shot nine times and lived to tell about it.... in this movie named after his album and his philosophy.

It's the American dream; no matter where you start, with enough hard work and dedication, you can make money, lots and lots of money. If the American Dream was to find happiness and peace of mind maybe we wouldn't be facing the inconvenient truth that we squandered our planet in a few generations. But that's not the American dream. The American dream is wealth and now it's not just the American dream, it's the dream of everyone, all over the world.

It's all about making smart deals and giving your customers what they want. Trump's customers want the best quality New York housing available, 50's wanted crack. Like any other successful entrepreneur, 50 worked long hours and managed his crew well. Dr. Phil says the difference between winners and loser is that winners do things that losers don't want to do. Other dealers didn't want to take coins, or go to the trouble of ironing bills in order to give crisp change, but 50 did.

Now, I would argue that people who spend a lifetime doing things other people don't want to do isn't necessarily a winner, no matter how rich and powerful their sacrifice makes them. But, again, in this country, in this world, with the values we've developed, wealth is considered success and the lack thereof is considered failure... and this is the subject of this post.

Looking at 50 Cent begs the question, what is success? Anyone trying to argue that 50 Cent is not successful would have a hard time of it, yet, the guy is an unapologetic criminal... a Gangsta. Not only is he unapologetic about it, it's vaunted. Unlike Usher, who went with a traditional vanity project, In The Mix, to capitalize on his fan base, 50 went the route of his mentor, Eminem, and did a story loosely based on his life. He made this choice because he knows what sells, it's not just the melodic, hypnotic raps, it's his story, and his reality, his cred.

He's the real deal, a true artist. A true artist, in my book, is one who can expose. Exposing one's pain, particularly in an aesthetic way, is one of the hardest things in the world to do. Very few do it. John Lennon was brilliant at it, how can you listen to his music and not realize the deep pain he felt all his life over the lack of his mother? People have pain, all of us do, but we often don't know how to understand it, process it, heal it. Artists help us do that, or are supposed to. When an artist really exposes their pain, it helps us relate to our own pain and heals us, makes us feel that we are not alone in our human situation.

Who buys 50's albums? Twelve million black kids? Hardly. He sells big all over the world. It's your own suburban white kids, folks. Why do they buy it, relate to stories from the inner city? Because it's real... like their pain. The pain they feel from parents who see them as little success machines, who must rep them well to the neighbors with stellar grades and lots of extracurricular activities. Unlike adults, who get used to the idea of living in an unreal world of getting paid to be a cog in the wheel, kids want a life that feels immediate and meaningful.

They want to live for today, be in the present, feel their emotion and struggle and humanity. 50, with his close relationship to his maker, the one he encountered after being shot, and his unwillingness to alter his image or himself inspires kids to be real, to be genuine. Kids are battened with morality and rules every moment, some of which don't even make sense to them, there is no room for them to go outside the lines. But, 50 gives them permission and safety to do that, or at least experiment with boundaries.

What's interesting to me is how modest 50 is as an artist. Lennon knew his ability to expose and write music was genius. Though lacking parental love, John had full confidence in his identity as the tortured artist. 50 sees himself as a businessman first, something almost unique to hip hop and rap artists. He credits his ability to sell to white America to his scary image, not his art. So does Disney, that's why there's always a scary scene in their movies. In his own words, he thinks kids go into the store looking to pay $17.99 for a fear thrill. They want a dangerous thug image to pretend to, in order to make themselves feel tough and cool.

I think kids know what's real. You just can't fake it to the kids cause they're at school all day talking to each other. Now, with the internet, the buzz goes faster, stronger, and wider than ever. Kids don't just follow trends, they make them, and they are the only ones to make them, that's why advertisers seek them out. They loved Lennon, they loved Cobain, and they love 50 because those guys put their pain and weaknesses and mistakes out there for all to see.

So, is 50 successful? Hell yeah, but not because of the money, or even the drive, but because, like Lennon and Cobain, he was transformed by the love of his child to be a caring human being and expresses himself as a true artist.

Sweet Sweden: Pirate Bay Lives

2006-06-04T05:27:00.000-07:00

I've always loved Northern Europe: socially progressive, aware, clear thinking and proactive. While most Americans haven't got the slightest clue about what RIAA and MPAA have been doing to curtail their access to and control of content, even content they "buy" (lease, rent, get to listen to twice....), the Swedes aren't gonna take this shit lying down.

RIAA has been closing down or responsible for revamping every fileshare site online during the past few years, even stalwart Limewire has taken all the fun out of downloading. Not one significant protest has been launched in response to this... until MPAA messed with Sweden.

Lots of pirate flags waving over there, and it's not for the premiere of Gore Verbinski's sequel to the Disney ride derivative. MPAA had the local police do its usual thing show up at the servers with handcuffs... what, did they forget the dogs? They confiscated the servers and successfully shut down The Pirate Bay, a BitTorrent site showing file locations, for a few days. Dan, Mitch, Cary, and Dean were all happy again, until..... they fought back.

There was protest in front of Parliament with hundreds of people waving pirate flags, hackers broke into the computers of the Swedish police and disabled their site and The Pirate Baywas put back online with the following message, which was a bit different from what the Grokster assholes put up, here it is:

"Only torrent files are saved at the server. That means no copyrighted and/or illegal material are stored by us. It is therefore not possible to hold the people behind The Pirate Bay responsible for the material that is being spread using the tracker. Any complaints from copyright and/or lobby organizations will be ridiculed and published at the site."

Also, sites all over the world mirrored The Pirate Bay, making the site, which already gets some fifteen million hits a day, stronger than ever.

Dean Garfield, MPAA's legal director, was instrumental in getting Swedish police jazzed about the big raid. It amazes me that corporate associations like RIAA and MPAA are able to mobilize police departments this way for, at best, civil infractions, but they have been doing it successfully all over the world, and getting away with it. Dean has been outed doing some very nasty things, like paying hackers to break into the emails of people working at TorrentSpy.

It's like McCarthyism, the law now is all about intent so finding emails and evidence of specific intent to contribute to infringement is what it's all about, so anyone working in this field at all is likely to be subject to intensive spying. This is supposed to deter anyone from even thinking about P2P, and it's been fairly effective. People all over the world have been taking this lying down, but not the Swedes. So, hopefully, citizens in other places will be alerted and emboldened by news of this. It won't make any mainstream newscasts, that's for sure, but, that's what citizen journalism via the internet is for.

Why Internet Beats TV

2006-05-24T09:02:00.000-07:00

This is from Current TV, Al Gore's baby. Between this and An Inconvenient Truth, the Hillary future is starting to look a bit murky.

Downtown San Francisco

2006-05-20T11:27:00.000-07:00

Downtown San Francisco
Originally uploaded by Intervisions.

King Thai in San Francisco

2006-05-20T11:26:00.000-07:00

King Thai in San Francisco
Originally uploaded by Intervisions.

RIAA VS XM

2006-05-19T17:46:00.000-07:00

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.

The New World

2006-05-17T06:20:00.000-07:00

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.

Rumor Has It

2006-05-15T15:55:00.000-07:00

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...

Munich

2006-05-10T18:11:00.000-07:00

This is the story of a group of Israeli men who were given the mission of executing those responsible for killing eleven Israeli athletes at the 1972 Olympics. Although Golda Meir publicly ordered the execution, the mission was essentially covert. The events of the hostage-taking and subsequent killings in Munich are covered through flashbacks that I found distracting, especially since Avner, the guy having them, wasn't even there at the original crime. The story arc would have been better had Spielberg kept a tighter chronology. I also thought a lot of the violence was gratuitous. The film seemed too consciously paced for the typical young male ADHD theater goer.

At times it just seemed to go mindlessly from one bungled bombing to the next. It's hard to believe they couldn't find one skilled bomb-maker in Israel. One of the more interesting aspects of the film is the way it addresses some of the larger moral issues concerning justification for war and killing. Some of the group have a hard time with what they are doing, on a moral level. Capital punishment is not used in Israel, so these executions violated their own laws. These men were not captured, for trial, they were killed, with bombs, to get press and terrorize the terrorists.

Another creative twist was showing how immorality and violence take a toll on the human being. Avner's wife is seven months pregnant when they approach him and he loves her. At the end, while he is making love to her, you see all the worst flashbacks of killing the athletes. Even as he makes love to the woman he loves, a woman he has missed for months as he was away on his mission of death, he thinks only of violence. How many men think of work as they have sex with their wives? His life had become about killing, justified or no, and it was a part of him, irrevocably.

Then there's the "meet the new boss same as the old boss" aspect. You can go on killing the bad guys forever, and even worse guys will take their place. One of the agents had this response to offer, "Should I stop clipping my fingernails because they will grow back?" So, there are a lot of opportunities to ask moral questions about what is happening in the Middle East and elsewhere. How much violence do we need already? Does endless retribution serve any purpose? When does it end? Every side has it's justifications. The Palestinians want a homeland, and are sick of being mistreated. Their tactics are meant to show their desperation. It's a bit astounding to me that a Jewish director would be so even handed in his treatment of this issue. It's an extremely difficult line to walk, especially in such a public way.

If these Israelis have trouble justifying killing those who plot against innocent athletes, how the hell do we justify killing thousands of Iraqis and Americans for oil? What are we doing to promote peace in the Middle East? I commend Spielberg for smelling blood in the water and being a part of the Hollywood and musician uprising against Bush, which I think accurately describes this film. That guy is gonna stink so bad by '08 that wise to wait Hillary will have smooth sailing.

Did this film deserve a nod for best picture? No, there were far better films made last year. Spielberg feels that whenever he uses his obscene power as the world's most famous film director to shed light on a social issue he deserves an Oscar. We have never seen a director, in all film history, with the power to bring viewers into a theater like he has. He is truly the first rock star director, a phenom. I recently started watching Terrence Malick's The New World and it's been an interesting contrast because, while both are great directors, their approach is so different.

With every frame of Malick's, you see art, you see the artist, you see a man who wants to put beauty up there for people, you see a man who wants to paint the natural world in an awe inspiring way. You see the restraint, the eye, the artistry. When you watch a Terrence Malick film, you see the highest form of what a director can achieve as a visual artist. Spielberg is a disseminator, a populist, a panderer. In his films you see the conscious manipulation of emotion, the pacing for heart-racing, the story, the charm. In his mind he's a storyteller surrounded by kids at the campfire.

So, whether you think Munich was one of the five best pics of '05 depends partly on what you want out of film. For me, I don't look to film to be my thrill ride. If I want to get my heart racing, I don't do it sitting in a dark theater. I want film to be beautiful, I want it to bring me in and capture my emotion and soul and take me to some new knowledge and feeling. On the other hand, as I said, it's not easy to take the unwashed masses and try to teach them a little something. He definitely had to chop a few million off his back end to do it, not to mention all the dough he had to spend to promote himself into the race. But Spielberg already has the dough and fame, he wants to be considered a great director, which to me, means artist, even though he's not.

I'll be the first to agree though that, in art, beauty is only half the story. Art is equally about communication and bringing people in and changing attitudes and culture. This is where visionaries like Spielberg, Jobs & Gates excel. Of these, Spielberg is the only one who could call himself an artist, and can do so with his head held high. He is an artist, but in a more general way. A lot of his skill set is more business than art and while I have great respect for what he does, Malick compromises less and achieves more to further the art of filmmaking by showing what can be achieved in the art form itself.

American Banned

2006-05-08T18:59:00.000-07:00

American Banned
Originally uploaded by Intervisions.

The Greatest Game Ever Played

2006-05-08T15:51:00.000-07:00

Golf? You want to tell me golf is the greatest game ever played? Why, because Francis Oumet rose from lowly caddy to businessman on the strength of his game? If that's the criterion I guess I'd have to offer the very obvious fact that far more men, and even women, have moved from poverty to prominence in basketball than golf. Even football, violent as it is, as least offers the chance to move up and earn money. For basketball, it moves fast, can be played almost anywhere, offers ten guys the chance to play at once, demands stamina, strength and grace. All this makes it great for spectators and participants alike. It can easily be played indoors, making it year round and all-weather. It requires strategy, quick thinking and an ability to read people and their bodies.

Tennis also offers a lot of these same qualities, which is why I love to play it. Like golf, it offers the chance to hang out with three friends and get some exercise outdoors. Golf, not to mention baseball, is too slow and non-athletic to even be considered a sport. And BTW, the reason Bonds, Sousa and McGwire are breaking long-held batting records is not because of the steroids. That's just what helps them build up more muscle by letting them inflame less from workouts. What's really making the difference are drugs that aid their reaction times. The reason I know this is because I dated someone who helped develop the drugs. They're not used by many, and are known about by even fewer.

Since golf isn't even arguably the greatest game ever played, except by wealthy men looking for the longest possible time away from their wives, what's the deal on the title? Are they saying this particular round of golf, the last in the eighteenth US Open, was the greatest game ever played? Well it may have been the greatest game of golf ever played, at least for American players, because it completely energized the game over here. It was a huge upset for the Brits, who dominated the game, particularly since the title went to an unknown player. Francis Oumet, and his ten year old caddy, did have enormous celebrity after the game. Tiger Woods, black, a phenom since age 5, has certainly had a big effect on the game.

As to the greatest game ever played in terms of whipping up US emotion, that would have to go to the last game of hockey in the 1980 Olympics where the US, a team of college players took the gold over the Soviet Union. In fact, this "miracle on ice", immortalized in the film Miracle, was voted the greatest sporting event of the 20th century by many in 1999. If you're looking for the greatest game in terms of upsets, that would have to be 1969 the year the amazing Mets won the World Series.

If you're looking for an event that radically changed a sport, I would have to point to "the thwack heard round the world" when Nancy Kerrigan took a whack from Tonya Harding's thugs. As has been said, every skater out there today ought to be bowing in Tanya Harding's direction five times a day because whereas before, Olympic champs could barely make a living, now, just about any skater with a name can earn millions. Billie Jean King turned tennis around for women in terms of what they could earn. Certainly her game with Bobby Riggs garnered almost as much attention as the 1913 US Open, which did attract some 25,000 people to the course.

Now I'm not saying this was a bad movie or anything. It's well worth buying on DVD because it's uplifting, inspiring, historical, socially aware and has lots of commentary tracks and other bonus features. One of them is by Bill Paxton, of Apollo 13 fame, who directed and took an interesting approach highlighting the tactical features of the game as well as making a lot of visually interesting shot choices.

Cinco de Mayo

2006-05-06T11:59:00.000-07:00

Cinco de Mayo
Originally uploaded by Intervisions.

American Banned

Rosie's Cantina

2006-05-06T11:57:00.000-07:00

Rosie's Cantina
Originally uploaded by Intervisions.

Shopgirl

2006-05-04T13:57:00.000-07:00

Steve Martin adapted this screenplay from the novella he wrote in 2000. During the height of the bubble he must have noticed the class differences in LA going full throttle. So he brought to the fore themes he had let lie since LA Story. That ensemble clearly showed us how Martin sees the world, his outsider eye always brings such delightful perspective whenever he presents it, from The Jerk on. I've been a fan of Steve Martin since King Tut, the zany dance meant to spoof the millions of spectators lined up to see the gold of the boy king.

Here he shows the contrast between rich and poor LA. We go back and forth from Ray's aquatic, modern mansion to the austere Silver Lake apartment of Mirabelle (Clare Danes), a young average girl with 40K in student loans and, for some reason, a job selling gloves at Saks (doesn't a college degree get you more than that?). Martin plays a wealthy older man who is attracted to her and they begin to date. The plot is pretty simple, he likes the sex but she starts to get needy and he realizes she doesn't have much else to offer, so breaks up.

She cries but moves on, grows from the experience and by the time all that happens, the younger, more appropriate, I guess, guy (Jason Shwartzman) has a little more maturity and takes her off into the sunset. Ray finds a nice gynecologist his own age and everyone lives happily ever after. I guess we're supposed to see two dynamics at work here, the class differences as well as the age difference, and how they play out.

In anther film that just came out on DVD, which I didn't review but maybe now will if I find a lot to say on this issue, is Prime, where the gorgeous Uma Thurman plays the older woman to a 23-year-old guy. She tells him at the end that she will give him the biggest gift of all by letting him go find someone his own age... she doesn't need his sperm to have a baby that bad, thanks. At least in Prime there's a little twist on on the stereotype, Martin's is pretty true to form. The older guy seems pretty dead emotionally. It's hard to see what he really wants in a relationship. Though he's somewhat enchanted by Mirabelle he doesn't know how to relate to her on an emotional level and since she's clinically depressed, she doesn't have much to offer him in that department to help him understand his emotions and help him grow.

I feel sorry for Ray. He's got lots of money and security but no real passion, no real compassion and doesn't seem to have much going on spiritually. Mirabelle excuses all that because she's poor and young, she probably sees her prospects mostly in terms of marriage. Since she needs help in almost every way, someone who at least offers money, offers a lot. Money can buy a lot, not everything, but a lot. Someone older and wiser would find a lot lacking in Ray. Even if we assume he's pretty good on a mental level, we've still got emotional, physical & spiritual to deal with.

Lots of women, particularly young women do see men in terms of money and security. Guys know this, especially guys with money, and they need to know they are loved for themselves. It's hard to know this when the lady has no dough of her own. Yeah, Ray can see she really cares for him, but would she care so much if he were poor? Maybe not, after all, she blew off the artistic Jeremy until she sees him in a snazzy white suit, and doesn't give him a second look till Ray dumps her and it starts to look like Jeremy might do OK as a provider.

What it gets to for Ray is that all he can get from her is physical, he doesn't see her as a source for anything else. So, at the end, Mirabelle has seen another slice of life, courtesy of Ray, and is a little more worldly and sophisticated but still has a long way to go. I wish her well but don't pity her the way I pity Ray. This guy is well into his fifties, if not 60's and, really, should be a lot further along. I don't get the sense he's ever shown real commitment or known real love. That's what gets me. When I see people waste their lives, that's the stuff that really saddens me.

We are so much more than our intellects, our mental achievements, no matter how much power and money they give us. But, because they give us so much, they can be distracting, alluring, deceptive and addictive. The world, not to mention, Palo Alto is full of guys, and even some women, who are what Antoine St. Exupery calls mushrooms, big heads without much underneath. Their emotional, physical and spiritual sides are like deformed little appendages that never grew, just lying there. But unlike with limbs, most people never see these handicaps, unless you look close up. I have and it's sad.

There are a lot of sad, empty men out there looking for glove salesgirls, and confidantes and intimacy but never really finding it because there's always some deal around the bend. So, Steve's personal comment is on the loneliness and emptiness not only in the lives of young, poor salesgirls but wealthy, powerful men... and everyone in between.

The Family Stone

2006-05-03T09:11:00.001-07:00

More like the family stoned. Most of the all-star cast portrays a liberal Northeastern family contrasted against Sarah Jessica Parker's overly uptight, conservative, or maybe just asinine, potential in-law to be. Luke Wilson plays the affable, mandatory stoner. After his stint in the even weirder Royal Tenenbaums, he may corner the market on quirky family dramedies. In this one he sleeps with the aforementioned prig, or at least passes her the duchy, and, well, she does loosen up a bit. Of course you can see the happy ending coming a mile away.

The liberal yet rigid, judgmental clan learns not to be prejudiced against the clueless yuppies of the world because, hey, sometimes they show some sensitivity and throw you off completely. The blind ambition tour realizes there's more to life than career, realizes she's a mere cog in the corporate machine and marries her new fun dealer. The original date also needs some loosening up via the sister and by the end, everyone's happy. Anyway, there are even more issues than this. What with a cast of seven principals above title, there's a lot of dialogue, a lot of issues... including the meandering nature of the plot, if there is one.

Maybe it's just a warm heartfelt exploration in family dynamics, or at least that's what they probably had to tell Diane Keaton to get her involved. She certainly wasn't thinking clearly when the hair colorist came around, that's for sure. I preferred her in her last major role in 2003, with Jack Nicholson, in Something's Gotta Give, where she was at least vibrant & healthy & had some actual interests, other than matriarchy. As for the rest of the cast, Clare Danes is far better in Shopgirl. Rachel McAdams was better in Red Eye and Parker, you got it, her sex was much better in the city.

This is the place in the review where I normally veer off into my personal views on some social issue and use the film to buttress and reflect my views. Unceasingly unwilling to let my readers settle for mere plot summations and erudite twaddle on film history or something, I offer full out propaganda and incitement. So, my choices are (1) a discussion of liberal vs. conservative values (no need to wonder where I'll come down on this one), (2) the difficulty of fitting into a different social group, especially someone else's family (3) the complexity of interpersonal relationships, or... (4) the results of my recent personality tests.

So, one thing they said was that while I was unlikely to become the president of a company I would very likely become president of the revolting faction the company. Therefore, I will avoid going off on item #1 above. It also said that because I have really high intuition about people, I often think others see into me, when, in reality, they don't. Since people so rarely see anything hidden (or even unhidden) in me, much less my film reviews, let me just trot this out for you (and watch how I, as usual, bring this back to the film at hand). Prejudice is bad.

Whether you're a liberal or an unthinking, unchanging, stick with the status quo cause I'm rich or scared, conservative, we should keep an open mind because, as we see in the syrupy epilogue to this film, you just never know your friends from your enemies and which will make you grow more. To wit, by the next Christmas Mom is but a memory, two babies are added, and the new people making the kids happy have both been brought in by the uptight conservative asshole and even she has found redemption in the form of a stiff joint and flexible guy.

So, as they say in the movies, this only happens in the movies. In real life people stay in their own little worlds where things are safe and predictable and everything labeled different ends up on the scrap heap. But, if you're in a Christmas-y mood in May, check this one out cause it moves well and has lots of commentary tracks and other bonus features.

Brokeback Mountain

2006-04-26T21:18:00.000-07:00

There's so much to love about this film. First off, the landscape is captured beautifully. The majesty of nature is one reason we'll never lose the theatrical experience for movies. Seeing this film definitely made me long for the time I spent in Montana & Idaho. For all this film is to so many, for me, it's a film about contrasting attitudes and approaches to life. Jack wants to feel his life, be himself, have courage and boldness toward life, take chances. Ennis was traumatized by his father as a child and lived the rest of his life in fear and denial, never knowing what to do with his emotions and needs.

It's almost amazing to me that the Oscars so often get it right. It's such a political game that films, particularly indies, hire year-round Oscar consultants. We are a busy nation, a busy world, and most of us have only enough attention to pay to a few big winners. There are millions of incredible athletes out there we'll never know about because they don't have a gold medal and thousands of great films we'll never discover. So, producers will do almost anything to break the waves. The Brokeback Mountain screenplay, written by the revered best-selling western author Larry McMurtry and Diana Ossana, was known for many years in Hollywood as the best screenplay never made.

Producers were as afraid of homosexuality as Ennis was. McMurtry said when he read Annie Proulx's short story in the New Yorker, his first reaction was that he wished he'd written it. How had he missed such an obvious facet of the west when he'd written about it all his life? I mean, guys up on mountains alone for months.... But, more than that, I think this is a story a lot of authors missed because it's a twist (pun intended) on a classic fable. The progeny of Romeo & Juliet and West Side Story show young lovers willing to face a small-minded, prejudiced family and society... together. It's the kids against the parents, so to speak.

This is the classic fable modernized, we're now ready to see what it looks like when there's only one real protagonist and he has to, essentially, fight not only a culture frightened of its sexuality, or anything different, but his lover, who embodies more buckling than bravery. This makes Jack all the more courageous and ahead of his time, or maybe it just shows his desperation or naivete. Jack has a focus and desire to be himself that guides his life and will not be silenced. Like Gwen Aruja, the transsexual killed several years ago, he insisted on authenticity and paid for it with his life. They are martyrs, they brought awareness and change, and emboldened others. They're heroes.

It's funny cause even though we're all waiting for the big sex scene, when it comes, it's both shocking and natural at the same time. Man, that's a lot of testosterone. No wonder people find lesbians easier to swallow. I must say, this is one film that, watching it on the small screen, I really longed for a bigger one. When it comes to Heath and Jake romping in the Rockies, bigger is better, and much bigger is much better. Let's get some IMAX in here.

But, I digress. Here's why I think this is a great story, I said it up top, it shows the contrast between a brave man and a coward. Yeah, the bold one gets his face bashed in and the scared little mouse faces his small unlived life for many years, but, who do you sympathize with here? Who do you admire? Jack loved. He lived his life, rode horses he loved and wanted to live his life with a man he loved. He loved Ennis. I totally related to him when he said the line that's already become a cliche, "I wish I could quit you". I've been there, loving someone I wish I didn't. But there's satisfaction in knowing that you are living your life in a full, deep and feeling way and that you can be honest about it.

Someone said to me once that in the end, it's all about the love we felt. Jack was able to feel love. Was Ennis? What did love feel like to Ennis? Did he, in fact, love Jack Twist? In many ways, that's the intriguing "twist" to this film. When we look at Jack, it's clear, he has a certain integrity, despite living, basically, a lie with his wife. Ennis is cloudy. We never know quite who he is or how he feels. Something got turned off, way down, way deep, very early and I get the feeling no one will ever really know Ennis, including himself. Who is this guy? What does his life stand for? What does his life mean? He is just existing. He doesn't want awareness. His life is a process of shutting down.

He loves his daughter and, through knowing Jack, he musters up enough love for her to show up at her wedding, or at least promises to. Now we clap and that endless guitar loop comes up bigger than ever. Ennis smiles at his daughter and agrees to go to her wedding. Wow, what growth. I think of characters like Celie in Color Purple, or even many of the characters in Crash. Maybe Annie Proulx should have thought of that before making all those tacky comments about Crash. I think if anything shortcuts the film, it's the story and character development. We see the emotion come out of Ennis as, literally, retching. So, it's a realistic ending for such a sad, empty man, but, I guess we expect more out of our big Hollywood movies these days.

JJ's Blues 5

2006-04-25T21:24:00.000-07:00

JJ's Blues 5
Originally uploaded by Intervisions.

Tebo & I whipped it up.. my first time performing with a Grammy nominated artist.

JJ's Blues 4

2006-04-25T21:22:00.000-07:00

JJ's Blues 4
Originally uploaded by Intervisions.

Kam & I having fun.

Hustle and Flow

2006-04-23T22:23:00.000-07:00

If you liked Walk the Line and Memphis music, this is a great companion. Here we are in modern, if you call cassette tapes modern, Memphis as we watch a fabulous performance by Terrence Howard depicting a hustler on the lowest rungs of the city. He sells whatever he can: his women, his pride, weed. He's a promoter with the chutzpah of Bill Graham, Steve Jobs & Bill Gates, just with none of the other skills they possess. All he's got is raw drive and raw emotion and when he puts it into a rap, a producer friend layers the track and they go about promoting the song. The song didn't do bad. 3-6 Mafia won an Oscar for it, the first Oscar to ever go to rappers.

While watching this film I thought of lots of things I wish I'd included in my review of Walk the Line. It's about the comments of the director that, although Johnny only spent one night in jail, he wrote about prison extensively, recorded a live album at Folsom and many people think he did do hard time. But what Johnny wrote about are the prisons of our own mind. He was himself tortured by the ghost of his brother who was killed under mysterious circumstances as a child and Johnny suffered from the loss all his life. He had been very close to his brother.

But Johnny recognized all types of mental prisons and I definitely saw them at play in this film. I have known people who lived in the same type of mental prison DJ lives in. The small time hustler, always looking for some little one-up but never really understanding what is needed to make fundamental change that would alter their social status or milieu or the deeper aspects of their personality and soul.

But, the prisons small-time hustlers and tortured artists live in are not really that different from the prisons the unfulfilled housewives and workaholics live in. When I'm in book group, I always hear the women commenting on the trapped, unhappy lives of the fictional protagonists. All the while I look at these women and the walls that bind their own minds and hearts, walls they do not see. I talk to powerful businessmen who are filled with self-importance who never seem to see their lack of heart or courage or creativity or openness. I see people in prison everywhere I look. I used to live in one myself, and probably still do, in ways I don't see. Though at least I talk to people who can, and do, point out my blind spots to me.

We look into our real prisons and see a lot of guys like DJ, born into poverty they'll probably never rise above. But, DJ does try to raise himself and he does accomplish something meaningful, creative, expressive and real. I don't see people for the place they inhabit, I look at them for the distance they've travelled. I look to the efforts they have made to love, to extend themselves, to grow, to change. I look for people who are self-aware, who value self-knowledge, who can talk intelligently about their emotions, responses, childhood, family and who show an understanding of how their life experience has shaped them but moreover, who have shaped their life experiences.

I look for masters of their own destiny, who understand that they are the directors of the film of their life, and that their life is supposed to stand for something, something more than making money and using stuff. DJ, low-life that he is, shows growth, shows some love, some creativity, he's real. He's an unseen, unwanted part of our society but has meaning and redemption in his own life, so who are we to judge?

The commentary track adds a lot and I really enjoyed the film itself, particularly watching how they made the tape. 3-6 Mafia is a platinum selling rap group and represent a lot of what is going on in the south today musically. In many places, music and basketball are the only roads out and there is a lot of hip hop production in almost every city but the south has the best crunk as far as I'm concerned. I happen to love Outkast and the Atlanta scene, but each city has good solid layered tracks which are rich with sound. So check out this DVD.

Save The Internet

2006-04-21T10:28:00.000-07:00

On December 26, I wrote an article called Who Owns The Internet pointing to the dangers of allowing the telecoms to control access speeds and access, period. They have lobbied key Congressmen to have provisions taken out of a bill that would have ensured net neutrality. The watered down bill is now before the House Energy and Commerce Committee and vocal opposition can make a real difference, possibly to get the language stronger.

Take a look at the link above which is a good primer on this issue and will take you a spot where you can write your congressperson. Mine is Anna Eschoo who is on the committee and is on the right side of this issue. In any case, make your voice heard, it does help. The open, democratic nature of the web has changed all of our lives for the better and it should not be taken for granted.

Fun With Dick and Jane

2006-04-19T14:48:00.000-07:00

I definitely had at least as much fun with Dick and Jane as I did with Johnny Cash or Ed Murrow, the subjects of the two films I just reviewed, both of which were Oscar darlings. Comedies always get the shaft (pun intended), but this Dick was Jim Carrey. He's fabulous and the movie was both funny and thought-provoking. The commentary/comedy track was less so, but the self-admitted Hollywood pinkos get most of their shots off in the film, which sets the remake in the wake of an Enron-like company implosion.

Despite the overblown sets and physical gags, there's a serious irony at play here and the barbs are no-holds-barred. A list of world-class cons is thanked at the end and includes such luminaries as Ken Lay, Skilling, Fastow, Koslowski, Ebbers and more. We see the wide pendulum swings up and down in the life of the capitalistic middle class at the turn of the century in America. Lovely and funny as it is portrayed here, it's not easy to watch because it is recent, it is real. Should we be shouting "too soon", like those watching the 9-11 films?

Certainly Enron, Worldcom, Tyco and Adelphia directly and indirectly affected as many lives as the bombers. You can't compare economic disaster to loss of life, but both are real and lasting tragedies. The latter isn't as photogenic, but, it was made so here and I commend Dean Parisot for allowing us to look at losing one's career, house, pride and just about everything else in an easily digestible, entertaining way.

We watch compassionately as this happy go lucky couple who has everything deals with true loss and hardship. The farce doesn't give us anything that rings true except the embarrassment, cover-up and desperation. Robbery dressed as Sonny and Cher or working at Wal-Mart are not options for most, though this concept was beautifully covered before in Albert Brooks' classic Lost In America. Most of us face the less telegenic task of phoning and emailing all day, trying to get careers and lives and security back. But, if you're looking for humor in massive heartache, and we all do... this DVD is true to its name - fun, and well worth watching.

Walk The Line

2006-04-18T08:20:00.000-07:00

I walked the line between two streams of thought during this film: number one; why do I have to sit here listening to Joaquin Phoenix instead of the Cash voice and two; Ray was better. Having said that, it's hard for me to not like a musical biopic, even though I'm not a particularly big fan of Johnny Cash or country music. Despite the choice of vocals, I liked this film, particularly its focus on the road shows Cash played with Elvis, Jerry Lee Lewis, Roy Orbison and Carl Perkins, all his contemporaries who were then signed with Sun Records in the early 50's.

Once Cash sung for Sam Phillips my interest in watching the Johnny Cash story diminished and my desire to watch the Sam Phillips biopic grew. While Taylor Hackford fleshed out a solid portrayal of Ahmet Ertegun in Ray, this film teased with a scene of Sam Phillips taking Cash from a flat, ordinary gospel singer to the true artist by telling him to look inside and find his true voice. This is when we hear Joaquin launch into such a poor rendition of Walk The Line we wonder why Phillips would have been interested, but then, he got to listen to Cash, no such luck for us.

Why should Cash license for a biopic when they would have clearly preferred the money from the makers of some hemorrhoid ointment, to whom they licensed Ring of Fire for a commercial a few years back? For God's sake, June wrote that about her burning love for Johnny. I mean really, have they no pride? They did give the rights to their music for this film and I can't understand why the performances weren't used. On the whole commentary track, Mangold offered no clue.

But back to Sam Philips, this is the guy who brought us B.B. King, Howlin' Wolf, Elvis, Jerry Lee Lewis, Roy Orbison and Carl Perkins, in addition to Cash. When you think about what music was in Memphis, and throughout the south, in the early 50's... it was slow dirge gospel in a slow paced culture. We are talking upright basses here. These traveling road shows of souped up music and screaming teens jumping around in gymnasiums were quite a stretch. To this day, we've rarely seen a performer like Jerry Lee Lewis, the guy was truly out there and this film does point to an enormous change in the musical landscape that was happening in that time and place.

I think this was the true birthplace of rock and roll. Maybe Alan Freed coined the term and got radio more involved, maybe Dick Clark was the ultimate popularizer, once it got to TV, but Sun and Sam is the real seed change, as he tells these turned on white boys to tune in and then recorded them, set up shows and let them go. One night in '54 Elvis was recording the same old country tunes in basically the same way they'd been sung forever and got bored, so he picked up a guitar and started speeding up That's Alright Mama. This is when Sam heard what he'd been waiting for. He knew it when he heard it. He recorded it on his two Ampex 350s. And the rest is history. Music was forever changed from that point on. Rockabilly soon became rock and roll.

This film did help me understand the relationship between country and rock in a deeper, fuller way. I hadn't realized that Cash was country music's biggest seller, at least till Garth Brooks, and I didn't find it out from this film, which focused exclusively, unfortunately, on his early years. He is also one of only three artists to be included in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, the Country Music Hall of Fame and the Songwriters Hall of Fame. Again, that fact, and his unique ability to crossover into so many types of music, was not included in the film or commentary.

The film did help me understand the man, the role of his brother, who died as a child (something he shares with Ray Charles, Elvis and Joaquin Phoenix) and the role that Johnny Cash played in musical history, at least early rock music history. There was too much time spent on the first marriage and the kids, who played no real historical role and didn't do much to help us understand the man, much less the music. His relationship with June and the love and admiration he felt for her was portrayed well and Reese was able to convey some of her strength and spunk.

Although this film has flaws it is certainly worth seeing on DVD. The commentary track adds lots of personal insight from Jim Mangold, who directed and co-wrote the script over a four year period as they tried to get a studio to back this film. With a $28M budget, which is extremely low for a musical with two bankable stars, who were attached, it took four years to get this film made. Ray had not yet come out, and even with the success of this film and Ray, which won many awards and was a hit, it is still incredibly tough to get a biopic financed in any major way.

The Janis Joplin biopic with Pink was shelved, as well as the Hendrix biopic with Andre 3000. These are two musicals that would have been fascinating, and it is truly sad that they fell apart. How can you go wrong with Pink and Andre? Pink does a medley of Joplin songs at her concerts that blew me (and everyone else) away and Andre is the closest we're ever going to get to a reincarnation of Jimi Hendrix, so let's not wait till the guy's 40, OK?.

So, go out and buy this DVD, because, as Mangold points out, that's what you have to do if you like films like this and want to see more, which I do. It's either this or more comic book and video game derivatives. These biopics are the closest we'll ever get to musicals again and it's our folklore, our musical culture and history. We look at the artists, their lives, but all the while they are looking back at us. Or, I guess I should say we are looking back at ourselves in the mirror, because we all idolized these people. We were their fans. When I see Jerry Garcia's biopic, there I'll be, right in the front row. We watched these artists perform their music, listened to their records and now we watch their lives play out as they change the world around them.

Good Night And Good Luck

2006-04-17T10:00:00.000-07:00

This slow moving, black and white ode to when newsmen had balls is definitely more appropriate for the DVD set. Watching Frank Langella's face 30 feet high is something I don't need to see. Yes, he's commanding as the towering Bill Paley, who did indeed allow Ed Murrow to tackle Joe McCarthy head on, but then you would miss George Clooney's commentary track. I did find it interesting to find out that they put that vapid Rosemary Clooney-like singer in because they "needed a girl".

Clooney also points out that what ultimately took McCarthy down were the Republicans, once he started targeting their heros, like Eisenhower. And perhaps that is what he hopes for here. It is happening. Bush is losing the support of his original backers and this is, increasingly, a problem for him.

You can't help liking George Clooney. No one can. While Paul Haggis, Ang Lee, Philip & Reese skulked around, George was the man of the hour at the Oscars this year, and this movie is the main reason why. George kowtows to no one, when Diana dies, and Gawker Stalker abounds, George is willing to stand up and be counted. He was brought up by a button down newsman dad who taught him to stand up for what he believes and not be afraid to speak out. So, I guess it's not surprising he would make a film glorifying someone like this. Murrow definitely had the same quality.

We live in an age of such ass-kissing phonies that folks just find people with guts refreshing, even if they don't particularly care about the issue at hand. Let's face it, paparazzi annoyance is something the general public does not relate to, but George is still willing to speak out, so he's the darling of Hollywood. I like him too because the fakely self-effacing, affable guy is almost always on the right side of the issue. The issue discussed in the movie ripped at our freedoms in a way paparazzi don't, McCarthy was a Senator and had power, people's lives were destroyed and those in the media were indeed buckling to the red-baiting, turning in friends, changing editorial and artistic product.

He takes on the politicos who rise up on the fears they can monger among the unwashed masses. Gee, if I were studying this in some college class, and I'm sure it will be, (although I had some shmuck law professor tell a whole class once that McCarthyism had little affect on mainstream America) the first question they would ask is why is this movie being made in 2005? What is going on today that mirrors this situation? Can you say Rumsfeld, Cheney, Rove, Bush? Why can't we launch a decent investigation anymore? The GOPs got their big extravaganza... can't we get some fucking public embarrassment big enough for closure here?

These little dribs and drabs with Scooter and the Dissident Generals (good band name) is not cutting it at all. We do need some McCarthy/ Lewinskygate type denouement to galvanize all the right-thinking people who have been on autopilot for the past six years. Unfortunately, we're gonna need something prettier and more interesting than Good Night and Good Luck to do that. It's a good DVD, nice features, had good buzz and press, I recommend renting it, but it's just too old looking and irrelevant feeling to get much color up.

The companion feature discusses the way TV news has changed over the years. Just as money and technology have changed music, they have changed news. News used to stand for truth and objectivity. The American public used to have far less options and far more trust in terms of its news. Straight news is, by nature, somewhat repetitive and dry. Murder, mayhem, weather, war... that stuff never stops. There are only so many ways you can make it interesting, especially when you're competing with 80 channels, blackberrries, iPods, videogames and 70 hour workweeks (should we really wonder why every content company is tanking?)

The stalwart anchors of television are now in hospitals or de-perking from cooking segments. We've got the fake Fox news, right-wing news and now the new, fledgeling Al Franken left-wing news, and the fake news spots I reported on last week.... it's crazy. No one knows who or what to believe any more. Increasingly, people are seeking security in numbers and are turning to search engines and blogs to ascertain accuracy. In fact, I just happened to click on Napsterization today and they had an interesting comparison of blogs relative to bigger internet news venues, check out the link above. The average age of the viewers, for all three network newscasts, is 60. CBS couldn't even offer Couric a raise, that's how much they need that audience.

The combined audience for the evening news is down to 30 million, less than half of its 1969 high, but is still a huge audience. And the network that went from Murrow to Couric is going the way of Williams and Vargas and infiltrating the web with a vengeance, so it won't join the ranks of the dinosaurs. Williams is on MSNBC.com, blogs and does podcasts. Vargas streamed a preview to her first news broadcast. Couric clearly wants on the web. According to IPA, 66% of of internet video watchers are viewing news. With RSS, anyone in the modern world is used to getting their news hot and fresh, the only ones willing to wait till 6:30 just finished up the early bird special.

Murrow lived in an age where he was widely viewed and highly trusted. His word meant a lot in turning the tide against McCarthy, just as Cronkite played a pivotal role in turning the Vietnam War around. I think Clooney wishes for a day when we had figures like this to help us as a society, maybe would like to play that role in real life, perhaps he can. It will fall to the movie stars to do it, because there are few newscasters with that kind of influence today. Maybe what Clooney would really like is for some of his peers to step up to the plate with films like his, that shed light and ask questions instead of what so many of his Oceans 11-111 pals do, go for the lifestyle and bucks, without any real regard for social justice. Well, Brad's in Namibia and Julia's on B'way, so maybe he is persuasive. With any luck, maybe there'll be a few politically conscious films this fall to gear up the mid-term elections.

Open Mics In April

2006-04-07T19:55:00.000-07:00

The open mics have been catching on and we had a great crowd and lots of excellent music by a variety of local musicians, several from Palo Alto. They will be April 9th and 23rd from 5-8 (though I left after 9 last time) at Blue Chalk Cafe at 630 Ramona in downtown Palo Alto. Hope to see you there!

StreamCast Goes To Trial

2006-04-07T19:17:00.000-07:00

So, this is good news. Grokster's codefendant in the Supreme Court case is now going to follow this through and provide the entertainment, legal and venture capital communities some security in this litigious world. I've felt all along they would win if one of these spineless P2P's would stand strong and I find Michael Weiss' hubris inspiring.

I mean, really, without the central servers and incriminating Sean Parker memos, Napster probably could have found the protection it needed under Sony. I wonder whether they will be able to get a jury trial for this. I don't know why Wilson would do it, unless he's very sympathetic. God, would I love to see RIAA in front of a jury. I'd love to do a documentary on this; the drama.

RIAA: But judge, how can we find a jury of people who haven't been sued by us? Without our wonderful DRM the world would be chaos, madness, goddamn it, we're talking Communism here!!

EFF: 75 Fucking years, does that mean anything to you? Happy Birthday is copyrighted for god's sake, I'm gonna have to pay Time Warner a million bucks if I sing it for you right now cause we're putting this all into a Michael Moore film.

From what I can tell, the labels were taking the approach they always do; go away and leave us your users and your brand and we won't flood you with discovery motions. Looks like Weiss may have been willing to do that except wanting, I don't know, maybe a job there for him and a few insiders? Then some new, meaner lawyers came in; lawyers who realized that there was a lot more money to be made if this went to trial.

Since RIAA is desperate, they were able to be persuaded to do an end run and go for a decision. But, what a gamble! If they lose, there will be no stopping the P2P's. The word will spread like wildfire and P2P traffic will increase exponentially, not just for music, for film too. It would eviscerate both industries. The labels are hoping this is exactly how the court will see it and will find some next step on liability.

If there's no smoking gun, some memo or email talking about what their users are doing, how will the court find liability? From the software itself? Well, Sony said you can't make that kind of jump. Then the Supreme Court said you can't find protection there if it looks like you are trying to contribute to infringement. But, what if you're not? Then you're back at square one, no liability. The Supreme Court never said you could use the system itself to infer liability, just that you couldn't find shelter there.

So, EFF and everybody and their brother are going to jump into this fray, bigtime. StreamCast is already $4M in the hole and will probably need help. Now I really do think we'll end up with a big bang when all these players start showing up to court. This is where the media usually jumps in, especially if there's a jury. So, stay tuned.

Spielberg Gets Real

2006-04-07T06:24:00.000-07:00

The king of fantasy has just signed with Mark Burnett and Fox to do a reality TV show called "On The Lot" which will play like a cross between American Idol and The Apprentice. The idea came from the preeminent film director who is apparently quite a fan of Burnett and Survivor.

As I've said for years now, as the traditional barriers of entry into music recording and film production come down, those in charge of traditional channels will show increasing interest in the next wave of independent filmmakers. I know everyone thinks I'm crazy for making films as a rank beginner, but I know what most people don't; opportunities for gaining visibility and distribution are growing, and will continue to grow. In my film, about Silicon Valley, we see how companies like Google and Apple look for promising young directors. Well, apparently Dreamworks, and probably every studio, has the same idea.

The winner of On The Lot will be given a production deal with Dreamworks. After scouring the country for filmmakers, sixteen finalists will be brought to Hollywood and put into teams for making films in a short amount of time, sort of like CinemaSport. Like Apprentice, each group will choose a leader (director) and prepare a film, I guess in a week, on a particular subject, or perhaps in a particular genre. It will be an elimination game, like all the rest, with the losing team having to lose a member.

The films will be judged by a panel of experts and, of course, the American public, who will start the winner off with a fan base as big as the Idol winners get. Think of all the dough Kelly Clarkson, alone, has made for Simon Fuller and Fox. So, I look forward to this show. Not only do I plan to watch it, but, I'll be entering as well.

Fake News

2006-04-06T11:04:00.000-07:00

I thought I was pretty cynical and jaded, but this surprised even me. It's certainly the first I've heard about this story, and became aware of it only through an email from one of the many internet freedom and public advocacy groups I belong to; Free Press (link at right).

Apparently, it is commonplace, at many, if not most, of the biggest stations in the country to pass off corporate sponsored videos (VNRs) as journalism. If you click on the link above you'll see a long list of stories that have actually been outed, but, it seems pretty obvious to me that this is a common and accepted practice at stations everywhere. It makes me wonder if there's any objective reporting left. Who can we trust to give us balanced information? Who can we turn to, as a society, to tell us what the corporations won't?

We have "news stories" promoting wonder drugs that are taken verbatim from footage provided by the very drug companies manufacturing the stuff we put into our bodies. Drugs are obviously the most disturbing examples, but this issue applies from everything to consumer products promoted by shills to electronics suggestions offered up by manufacturers.

These pieces are portrayed on traditional news shows in major markets, with reporters seeming to have researched and written the stories themselves, when they are actually using video footage lifted wholesale from the corporate suppliers trying to sell product. Here in the Bay Area, KPIX reporter Thuy Vu did a three minute piece singing the praises of the drug Exubera lifting half of it from a Pfizer video without any type of disclosure. In fact, the warnings about adverse effects that were contained in the original VNR due to legal requirements were actually omitted from the newscast. I mean, how pathetic is it that the ads are a better source of information than our news stories?

WCBS in New York, the CBS-owned station with the third largest market in the country, ran a story on chondroitin sulfate without mentioning that every shot, fact and soundbite was taken directly from a VNR from Leiner Health Products, which distributes the product. They put their own narrative and logos on the story to make it look like legitimate, objective reporting yet failed to mention that the New England Journal of Medicine story referred to in the piece actually said the drug was ineffective.

Free Press and the Center For Media and Democracy are holding a press event in Washington today to release a groundbreaking report of this activity, which is illegal. They caught 77 local stations, 80% of which were owned by major media conglomerates. It will be interesting to follow this story... into the ground, where it will surely be buried and never reported on (although the NY Times ran the story today). My guess is that this practice in endemic and unless Elliot Spitzer decides to get interested, my readers will be among the few who now must take a jaundiced eye to almost everything they see on TV because truly, there is no real independent voice in mainstream media today. Save for a few websites and organizations, almost every "fact" we see out there today probably emanated from some conglomerate selling something.

And, maybe that's fine for some dress or sofa we think is pretty, but what about the food and drugs we put into our bodies? We are more drugged out than ever but our overall health is worse than ever, almost every disease out there is becoming more prevalent, not less, so we need to take more drugs... hmmm... what a coincidence. The cost of healthcare has a huge impact on our society. Life expectancy is going down, not up. Half of all Americans are overweight, a third are obese. How long are people going to take this? How drugged and blind can we be? Maybe PT Barnum was right, you can't fool all the people all the time, but if you can fool 99%, and you can, you can make a lot of money doing so.

Derailed

2006-04-01T19:40:00.000-08:00

As this film pulled me in, first with sex, then with suspense, I kept thinking, damn, why can't I get my plots this tight. You really have to hand it to writers who can pull you along like this, as thrillers often do. It's the oldest plot in the book; what happens when you find yourself in a bed of lies? Again, this film uses two of the most frequent, the affair, and embezzlement. Our "protagonist", Clive Owen, is doing both, and this prevents him from seeking help when victimized by a very, very bad man, who works in a group of con artists.

He runs into the too good to be true Jennifer Aniston on a train and becomes, yes, derailed. Everything goes off track once lured. How many times have we seen this? Fatal Attraction and Crimes and Misdemeanors both go deep into the extended life of becoming embedded in living a lie. Clive is still the good guy, despite the affair, because he's so devoted to helping his daughter and has been dealt an unfairly harsh hand. We cheer for him when he kills all the bad guys in the big climax. Hope I'm not giving away any surprises here, but don't the bad guys get it in every film, or at least every big budget, standard Hollywood film, which is exactly what this is.

It's the right formula, two hot stars, a great script, action, violence, blood. Blood is very big now, so big in fact, that I haven't been too into reviewing films lately. The History of Violence wasn't bad but what really are you supposed to say about it? Nice prosthetics there, good blood spurt? Oh, I know I should get real philosophical about why we are so drawn to violence, why so many wars (testosterone). I even took a class once on the philosophy of war (yes, this was the same professor who had the class in Carlos Casteneda, let's not go there). But frankly, I'm much more interested in sex, and since that sells just as well, albeit in different markets, may as well focus on that.

Apparently, this all started a few years ago when a few execs followed some guys into the men's room to get the sort of real focus group experience and the word was all about blood, blood, blood and more blood. If you go to the movies, they'll be redder, I guarantee it. They took all the cute daughter homey scenes out of this one to get more gore in. Now, my teenage son just loves this, he wants us to go and get some prosthetics for our next film and I have to admit, putting fake blood in condoms does sound fun, but no, even if it brings in twice the viewers, it's so cheap and manipulative. Now, I didn't mind encouraging my actors to be more sexual, but that wasn't just to make it more marketable, it's because to me, sex between consenting adults is basically a beautiful thing and violence is about pain.

So, I would like to see Hollywood rely less on violence to move story or at least make it less graphic. They won't do that. There are too many people who need that shock to engage in the film. So, if you like violence, check out this DVD and History of Violence, which has cooler behind the scenes features. They're brutal but, both tight, well-acted stories.

More Rodeo Clowns

2006-03-16T21:03:00.000-08:00

It's hard to get enough of this group, reminds me a bit of America, the acoustic trio of cuties. Better yet, they're having fun too and are holding their open mics at Blue Chalk Cafe (630 Ramona, Palo Alto) more and more often. I've been to a couple and have consistently had a good time singing with them. It's a nice set-up, good amps, good sound, great crowd. They're on Sundays from 5-8. Hope to see you there this Sunday!

The Prizewinner of Defiance Ohio

2006-03-16T07:38:00.000-08:00

It's interesting to me that Terry Ryan's account of growing up in poverty with nine siblings mentions her hometown of Defiance. Her mother, the prize-winning protagonist, was anything but defiant. Evelyn Ryan, who fed her ten kids with the winnings of her jingle writing ability, is really glorified in this film, the book, and the two commentary tracks on the DVD. However, her blithe acceptance of her violent, volatile, alcoholic husband is nothing I admire, 1950's Ohio or no.

Yes, I realize things were different then, women had less options. But Evelyn did have options. Hey, how about not having ten kids with a loser guy? Ever think of that one? And once you had those kids and watched your husband drink away their milk money every night, ever consider using your obviously intelligent mind to actually do something about it? Did you ever consider telling him to change or get out?

The more I think about this woman and the accolades she accumulates throughout the telling of this story, the more disturbed I am. The trailer calls her remarkable. Director Jane Anderson lauds her, calling her passive acceptance of just about everything, "mid-west zen". I think Jane needs to do a little reading on Zen. Zen is about mindful awareness. I see Evelyn's attitude as quite the opposite. Cheerful exuberance as your husband goes on violent rampages in front of your ten kids is not mindful, no matter the decade, the Catholic indoctrination, the midwest isolation.

Evelyn's winnings allow her to put a down-payment on a house. But, she lets her clearly irresponsible husband put it solely in his name. Big mistake, he took out a second mortgage without her knowledge and almost lost it. Yes, unbelievably, by some miracle, she won one of the last big prizes given out to clever housewives in a Dr. Pepper contest and saved the day, moments before they had to move out. Would Terry have admired her mom so much had she not won these contests? It was, after all, basically, luck.

Yes, this was a real-life story just made for Hollywood, which treasures its non-probable happy endings. But, without the exciting miracles, this is a story of a woman who is even less sympathetic to me than the average battered woman because Evelyn was smart. She did have options and she spent her whole life with a man who did nothing but drag her down. I'm all for having a positive attitude, but this woman was in denial. She allowed herself and her kids to be impoverished by an out-of-control man without ever really demanding change. I see no prizes there.

The Desperate Optimism of Dan Glickman

2006-03-15T16:26:00.000-08:00

The link is to the transcript of the MPAA President's speech at ShoWest. Most of the news stories covering this speech pointed to the lame website that theater owners are supposed to refer their $6./hr ushers to, in order to motivate them to root out viewers with camcorders.

What I think is most amazing about this speech is his announcement that the MPAA is going to do a study on what theater goers want. Actually, that isn't what shocked me. What floored me is that this is the first time this organization has actually done this!

Hello. Film producers have always spent a lot of effort with focus groups. They've so given up on adult viewers that focus groups generally exclude anyone over thirty. Glickman is so out of touch, he points to the sophomoric Wedding Crashers and The 40 Year Old Virgin as being "adult hits". How sad is that?

The former pork promoter, Glickman, whose previous stint was at the Dept. of Agriculture helped me understand why the Academy had to nominate such low-grossing films. The only high grossing films are for kids! And, sorry, the voters just aren't gonna go there. Thanks for having a little pride.

Our Fathers

2006-03-11T07:35:00.000-08:00

The title of this DVD, taken from David France's best-seller about the scandal that rocked Boston, is perfect. It is time to shed light on the men of the Catholic Church, particularly those who are ordained as "our fathers". Ordination elevates a priest from the ordinary realm most of us live on. According to their doctrine, priests, while not gods, occupy a semi-godlike status. This was impressed upon all Catholics, including the children, 80% of whom were boys, who were abused by these priests.

Most of the activity that goes on in Catholic churches around the world is done by women. However, the Church, as an organization, is run by men and for men. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. The Catholic church has, and continues to, lose credibility in the modern world because the men will not give up any of their power and the women, indoctrinated for years to be barefoot and pregnant, won't step up to the plate and take it.

This film is a fascinating study in what happens when power goes unchecked. With all the women whose lives have been altered irrevocably and horribly by the Catholic Church, this film takes a look at the devastating effects on some of their most fervent, spiritual, special boys. Thousands of boys were raped, sodomized, and brutalized by their priests. According to Tom Doyle, the whistle-blower priest, there are over 100,000 victims in the US alone. Even according to the church itself, there are over 10,000 victims. Father Birmingham, alone, raped over 1,000 boys.

These were often viscous attacks by KNOWN men. These were not unknown men, in fact they were adored, elevated, esteemed members of their communities. Their identities were known to their attackers and often their families. And yet this savagery ran rampant throughout Boston, LA and elsewhere for many decades without ever coming to light. Think about how shocking this is. We are amazed that Hitler and the Third Reich could kill six million Jews under the world's nose in the thirties & forties and yet we have something as extensive as this happening in the 21st century in the US.

The seminal problem is a seminary problem. St. John's Seminary, in Boston, was one of the worst breeding grounds. Up until the late sixties, the seminary students were taken from their homes at young ages and put into environments that were basically like Lord of the Flies with rapists for counselors, think of the worst juvenile jail you can imagine. John Geoghan, one of the more prolific offenders, was ordained in 1962, one of the worst "classes" for abuse. Most of the offenders were former victims, as is usually the case.

This knowledge helped me to put less of the blame on celibacy itself. I don't think celibacy does anything to help one's sexuality or spirituality, quite the opposite. It only hinders someone's ability to provide pastoral care and counsel others and it is part and parcel of putting shame and secrecy around sex which is a fundamental problem with the Catholic Church. I mean, who came up with this idea of celibate priests anyway, Paul? I don't remember Jesus advising celibacy to anyone. He was a pretty lively, friendly, flirtatious guy... remember the lady at the well? Remember how he liked to have the ladies around, drinking wine, listening to his stories?

There are those who think deviant behavior is somehow intrinsic to homosexuality. As France points out, well integrated homosexuals are no more likely to rape and attack as well integrated, healthy heterosexuals. It's neither celibacy or homosexuality, in general, at the heart of the church's malfeasance. This abhorrent state of affairs grew directly out of the culture and structure of the church itself.

As with Nazi Germany, it has a lot to do with the expectations and mores of the culture, which elevates obedience over listening to one's heart and thinking critically. The German culture, like the church's culture, is very much a top-down, authoritarian affair. The first promise made by a priest in his ordination is the promise of obedience... obedience to the Pope... period. It's like the military. Even the priests have no autonomy, much less the millions of lay Catholics around the world.

In 1968, when Vatican II came out, there was great hope among Catholics, particularly in the US, that the church would somehow enter the real world and loosen its stance on contraception and celibacy for priests. When the Encyclical letters came out two years later, millions of Catholics left their churches and, over the next few years, over a third of all priests left the priesthood, most, to marry. So, who remained? Mostly the old and the gay, who had fewer good options.

I hear so many people these days saying things like, "I'm spiritual, but not religious". They make a distinction between their spiritual fulfillment and their community life. For me, church is, at best, a place where you can congregate with people who have similar ideas about God and worship and spirituality. As with many of my friends, my ex and I church shopped when our kids were young because we wanted to offer them a spiritual community. We have all enjoyed the many wonderful, spirit-oriented events at our Congregational Church and the people we know there.

What I find interesting about the Catholic Church is that, although I know many Catholics, probably more than any other denomination, I have never known a single person to join the Catholic Church. While many members of our church, including myself, were not brought up as Congregationalists, and you see this overlap in most churches and temples, it is very uncommon in the Catholic Church. Most of the people I know who are Catholic, grew up Catholic, and, although they have a hard time with the church's stance on homosexuality, contraception, abortion, women in the seminary etc., still go and take their kids because that's how they were brought up, it's their history, legacy, family. They are uniformly quite dissociative when it comes to their religion. It's like the schizophrenia you see when talking to people from dysfunctional families that never came clean.

It must be something that runs deep in them because god help you if you challenge them on it, they can get very defensive, and nothing seems to dissuade them. Certainly not the logic of asking them why they want to devote so much of their time and money on an organization that opposes the dispensation of contraceptives to rape victims in Africa and that covers up thousands of cases of rape by its own priests.

Cardinal Law had received many complaints about his priests, he paid each of the families a few thousand dollars to keep quiet and moved the priests around. The church enjoys a limit on damages. No one, by law, could receive more than $20K, no matter the charge. The way Mitchell Garabidian, who represented 186 Boston victims, got around this, was to sue Cardinal Law personally. Law lied to the various families, reassuring them that the priests, who frequently had the audacity to rape whole families of boys, were being sent to office jobs away from children when he was, in fact, transferring them to one unsuspecting, trusting, parish after the next. Almost all of the abuse could have been avoided if these rampant priests had been stopped at the first child, instead, hundreds of innocent children were offered up to these priests, the semi-gods.

Law did everything he possibly could to keep his secrets. He called down "the wrath of God" onto The Boston Globe. The august paper had turned a blind eye to the shortcomings of the church for a hundred years, as had every powerful man and organization in Boston, including the police who often busted priests out of uniform for sex crimes and then turned them over to the Diocese without even booking them when finding out they were priests. The Globe won a Pulitzer Prize in 2003 for its reporting. Law never apologized, never even listened, never showed any contrition or awareness of the havoc he wreaked on the lives of thousands, he was finally forced to resign, after hanging onto his position as long as he could. Like most of the church hierarchy, he couldn't care less what the press or anyone else, except the Pope, thought. They live in a luxurious, rarified, unreal, world unto themselves, where they are regarded as gods by all around them. I refer you back to my post on Michael Jackson, who lived similarly, and the Pope.

Think about that one next time you drop your money into the collection plate of your Catholic Church. Doyle estimates the total payout the Church will have to cover is a billion dollars. Insurance would not cover the Boston suits because Law allowed the incidents to continue by not removing the offending priests. Do you think your contributions just stay in your local Diocese? Think again. No one knows where the money goes. There is no transparency whatsoever in the Church, no audits, no disclosure. They have a lot of land and buildings, which they are unwilling to sell, even when laying fallow, as St. John's Seminary is now, with only one or two students per class. But, their only real income is donations. Like Enron, they don't really create value or wealth, they just enjoy living off governments that look the other way until devastation reaches the millions and patrons too unquestioning and powerless to do anything about it.

Remember, individual churches have no real autonomy, they all answer to Rome. When in Rome, do as the Romans do. They can be a pretty persuasive bunch. I'll take the modern world, of enlightened attitudes about sex and morality any day. Catholics can come out into the light of day and try to defend or change their church or show themselves for what they are; meek, unquestioning followers unwilling to change your church from the inside by speaking out for what is right. Let's see you defend your new Pope, who bans gays from the priesthood, giving rise, yet again, to shame and secrecy about sexuality which will distort and disrupt the ability of the many gay priests in the church today who will be called on to counsel adults and care for children.

The psychological scars that go along with this type of abuse are deep and long-lasting. Most of these kids were happy, healthy children whose lives were plagued with rage, confusion, guilt, shame, secrecy and lies from the point of their abuse onward. Whole families were destroyed. The men, as adults, had problem marriages and troubled lives; drug and alcohol abuse, inability to work, to function. Many became abusers themselves. Some committed suicide.

The faith of so many people was irreparably damaged. Most people who I know, who don't believe in God, had some negative experience with religion, usually via their parents or church, as a child. When you abuse someone and use the excuse of God to do it, you strip the person of their natural connection to god, you undermine their most basic birthright. It's the most venal of crimes, to strip someone not only of their human dignity but to destroy their innermost integrity. The scope is vast. Not only is the faith of the families immediately affected compromised, but the faith of all Catholics, the faith of everyone of all religions.

One might think, reading this review, that this film is a documentary. It's not. Produced originally for Showtime, it includes real life Catholics Daniel Baldwin and Brian Denehey. Christopher Plummer plays Law way too sympathetically. I think the story is far more compelling as a drama than it ever could have been as a documentary. The two commentary tracks and additional features, which show the real life characters, make this a DVD well worth buying.

Making Sense of the Oscars

2006-03-06T04:28:00.000-08:00

Confused? Surprised by this year's Oscar nominees and winners? You should be. It represents a fundamental attitude change on the part of the Hollywood elite. After six years of Bush and increasingly onerous studio control, they finally gave a collective finger to the suits, big time. For starters, Crash, the "spoiler" was a Lions Gate Film. Lions Gate releases films in the $1 - $10M budget range, it is part of a new breed of studio and their product was considered preferable to that of Rupert Murdoch's News Corp's formulaic contender Walk the Line, Jack Welch's GE owned NBC Universal's contender Brokeback Mountain and Sony's offering, Capote.

Usually studio marketing has much more effect on Academy voters, they usually walk lock-step up to the plate to vote for the films most heavily promoted "for your consideration". This year it was supposed to be "Walk the Line" which so poorly imitated that which made Ray great (next time try James Brown, focus less on the seamy side and more on the music and please, please, please don't ever make us listen to Phoenix and Witherspoon instead of Johnny Cash). Then of course, Cinderella Man and North Country used popular formulas (Million Dollar Baby and Erin Brokovitch) as vehicles for big stars. All of these films were made and marketed as Oscar contenders and failed.

George Clooney, Hollywood's premiere insider this year, told us all, when he took the first award of the evening, what's going on. As he told us, and New Yorker Jon Stewart, we like being out of touch in Hollywood. They're not out of touch like DC is out of touch. When you get out of touch in DC, you get Bush/Cheney/McCartheyism. In LA, out of touch is giving an Oscar to Hattie McDaniel in 1939, so there. What they're out of touch with in Hollywood is the type of close-minded attitudes and fears that creep into the hearts and minds of people all over this country, all over the world, who trust Wal-Mart, which spends billions for your love and trust, more than their next door neighbor who has a different ethnicity. The next door neighbor would need to be "crashed" into on an LA freeway before any real compassion and understanding could take place.

So, all five nominees for Best Picture this year cumulatively grossed under $187M (Does that include Crash on DVD? Probably not.), less than the gross for Chicken Little. According to my teenage son, to whom all of Hollywood genuflects, Pixar's offering deserves it. And there you have it people, this year the nominations were not run around the teat at which Hollywood suckles. Sure, we know the only people going into theaters these days are teenage boys, but these highly paid actors can only take so much Steve Jobs/Peter Jackson/George Lucas... we want art with heart and if the American public can't make its voice heard because, yes, the Hollywood suits are completely out of touch, the actors, who make of the bulk of the Academy, will do it for us. Thanks!

Show me another year where Oscars went to rappers (for song) and black actors who made pimp films for $12K (yes, that's what Terrence Howard was paid for Hustle and Flow). Dolly said it best, redemption comes in all forms. And last night, Hollywood redeemed itself, just in time. I mean Jon took a very pointed shot, right off the top, and I think it stunned everyone. He said, hey don't pirate the goods people, these millionaires are hurtin'. Jeez, that showed a hell of a lot more balls than the music industry, who has been ranting and raving at the Grammys. Not that Stewart was cleared on that remark, I'm sure he'll never be asked to host again, but, it just goes to show how even the New Yorkers, who have a similar economy, based in the arts, view Hollywood and its product. What a comeuppance!

Poor Jake Gyllenhall looked pretty embarrassed at being the Michael Green of the film industry. Please people, go see the films in the theaters, the last time and place on earth where people are gonna pay ten dollars to see a film. Look how big they are (Hey, on the big screen HDTVs you can see every pore on the faces) and how much fun it is to see them with a bunch of strangers, look, hundred year old Mickey Rooney thinks so. Did you check out the theme? Cinema Paradiso, old time theater, it looked like a black and white ball, everyone got the memo, even the penguins (Enron movie got robbed!!). You know what that was about, don't you? It was the soft sell. They've learned from what happened to their poor cousins in music. No ranting... yet.

I guess the Academy members saw the neutered Grammys, realized that there but for the grace of Bram Cohen go I, and got religion. They've seen one industry go down and they're scared shitless, they're next. Well, at least they're taking matters into their own hands and using the guilds they have created to keep more centered in their art. I hope it will pay off for them. The music industry had its day in the sun and can't survive but the film industry can reinvent itself, as it has done before, and extend its longevity, possibly forever, if they keep doing their job, as they have this year.

Justice Dept. to Probe RIAA!

2006-03-03T09:54:00.000-08:00

I told you the tide was turning in DC. The Justice Dept. is launching an investigation similar to Eliot Spitzer's in NY to address the rampant price-fixing in this industry, this time they're specifically looking at online sales.

The labels are not gonna have that cush ride they expected when they were in there screaming about Napster. It's sort of like the US after 9-11. At first, people did feel sorry for us, but we squandered our goodwill and of course that rube Bush didn't care, or notice. Same with the labels, there was some sympathy at first, I mean, they did take it up the ass, and they got a sympathetic reaction from the courts and Congress. But, they don't know where to stop, they just got more and more aggressive and greedy, and they didn't even care how it looked.

But, you know, people are like that. They get imbued with a false sense of entitlement or power. I've started to notice how often it is the case that people don't realize what they've lost till it's long gone. I've seen marriages that are dead as a doornail go for years with no one willing to point it out, Skillings and Lays who rape and pillage California down to its last dime, people who don't realize how far they've gone, how much respect or sympathy they've lost until it's way too late. So, here's another example of desperate companies doing increasingly desperate things instead of doing what good businesses do and respond to the needs of their customers. And, the message is, there is a price.

The studios will survive for many more years distributing exquisite action films with lots of violence and voluptuous women to a worldwide audience but, the labels are dinosaurs. The once $16B domestic industry is now under $12B and it will go nowhere but down. Music can be democratized so much more easily than film and it's gone too far to stop it. They've lost the youth. Their last hope was to hold on to catalog, but, they can't, the files are too small. They're out there, the genie is out of the bottle. It's like Tina Turner's patter before Proud Mary, she says, "Some people like it easy, and some people like it rough" . Well, these label guys are the toughest of the sharks and they like it rough. And, rough it's gonna be, for them and the folks who want their music.

Netflix '06

2006-02-26T11:52:00.000-08:00

Netflix grew more than any company in the film industry last year. So, I was intrigued by this article on their current thinking and direction. Personally, I think it's clear their current business model has a limited lifespan. It's only a matter of time before DVDs go the way of vinyl and VHS. But for now, the digital distribution models are not taking hold because there are broadband issues that still need to be resolved and, at this point, most everyone still watches most of their entertainment through cable on TVs because the computer screens are still used primarily for what I'll call "traditional purposes" small screen delivery of applications, web browsing and music... not to mention sex.

In a few years these distinctions will break down and any successful content distributor will need to do so digitally. For now, it's all about Netflix. It's the best alternative out there right now. I left last year, when they started throttling me and went to Blockbuster. Blockbuster is too slow, even without the throttling factor, so, I returned to Netflix. I'm able to watch a full DVD, often with features like commentary tracks and other stuff that makes the mystery behind movie-making so accessible, almost every day for under $20./month.

This fits my lifestyle, and apparently that of many others, since the company's stock tripled last year. Consumers want control. We all want control. We want to watch films on our own timetable. Why should I run my life around theater schedules, traffic, or even VOD rules, which usually force you to watch the whole movie at once, or in one day. With Netflix, I keep the film as long as it takes me to view it, I can stop it, rewind, watch one scene twenty times, skip another entirely. I view the film the way I want to view it, when I want to view it.

You may have noticed I never review the theatrical run of a film, only the DVD, because in addition to the reasons I just mentioned, I want to be able to do a full review of a film, including the deleted scenes and comments of the director, actors, writers, cinematographers and everybody else whose views I've heard expressed on these invaluable tracks.

Seems Reed Hastings and the Netflix guys are typical Valley ideologues who want a revolution. They want a seat at the table, they want to democratize film. They are doing it. Their business model is intimately tied to the trend toward indie films, to public desire for independent art, particularly in music and film. They are responding to to the disconnect Hollywood had with the American public for twenty years preceding Napster. Napster and its progeny brought the public an awareness of the corporate structure shaping the product that was supposed to pass for American art and culture. Our music and film had become pablum, so when artists started responding with something real, and avenues started to develop to distribute it, Madison Avenue and Hollywood were eventually forced to respond.

But meanwhile, Silicon Valley has increasingly realized its own power on this field. I've lived in Silicon Valley a long time and it's a very cyclical place. The last few years of the past two decades saw wild growth, followed by depression and then a deceptive calm before things go crazy again. In another few years (especially if it's Hillary in '08), we're gonna be drunk with power again around here when all these geeks move from the dry, quantitative stuff into content. Welcome to the new Hollywood baby, don't forget where your new king, Steve Jobs, lives. For now, The VCs are still scared shit of content because their poster boy is still Hollywood's whipping post. If Hank Barry and John Hummer are cleared, and they should be, things could change and the vultures could get a taste of the big cash that awaits them.

It's gonna be wild and Netflix will be a big player, if they can fend off a challenge from Amazon, who seems most interested in taking the second big direct attack (Blockbuster being the first). They also need to watch Google, who is clearly going for the young, indie filmmakers. Any big internet company not looking at indie filmmakers today, will be sorry tomorrow, and they are starting to know it.

Being a smart, forward looking company (hey, at least they tried some VOD), Netflix is now going into development and trying to do more with their user data. Just don't make the mistake of producing by numbers and committee or you'll end up where Hollywood is now, films that show no real heart and vision. When the director's vision is undermined too much, the film always suffers. The audience intuitively picks up on the disconnect.

Netflix rents only 30% new releases and the rest is catalog (unlike brick and mortar stores which typically rent 70% new releases), showing that Netflix users are getting enough product to start reaching out. I like to watch the big budget pictures too, and once I have, I have more time to check out smaller films. People will watch the heavily promoted films, they're often very good. Here's the concept that those in control of these huge media conglomerates never seem to get. There is relatively little penetration. The powers that be look at this as a zero sum game, even though it's not, and that's what causes so much of the problem.

While consumers may not spend much more on entertainment than they have in the past, they do have the ability to consume far more and better content. They want to do so, and they will pay for it. There is so much more room in the marketplace for good quality content than is recognized by the big players because they are so intent on keeping the bucks they had before and from the same sources. They refuse to accede to the desire of consumers to spend their entertainment dollars in ways that respect their autonomy.

Take the issue of video windows. Netflix is on the right side of this, demanding these onerous windows, which force people to see a film on the big screen or wait six months to see it at all, to close up. Even though the grosses for home video/DVD are now over three times the size of box office receipts ($10B), all the studios can see is the threat to box office receipts. They are far more attuned to their margins than gross sales. Stop looking at your price points and start looking to overall revenue and alternate revenue streams. Instead of putting all your upfront investment, our equivalent of R&D, into production, use it for development of new business models.

Separate Lies

2006-02-25T20:02:00.000-08:00

This DVD is worth getting for the commentary track alone. It's all so British I felt like I was in some Noel Coward play. Julian Fellowes, first time director, Oscar-winning writer of Gosford Park, showed an interesting blend of British haughtiness and sensitive introspection. He also wrote the screenplay, based loosely on a novel, that explores, as one might expect, separate lies, and the separate lives and perspectives from which they spring. The lies start falling like bricks from a crumbling building once Anne, played by Emily Watson, accidently runs over a neighbor.

She holds her secret a bit until her husband, James (Tom Wilkinson) begins to suspect their bachelor neighbor Bill, (Rupert Everett) was at the wheel. During an all too Martha Stewart-like chopping session, she admits to her husband first, that she was with Bill when the man was hit, then that she was driving (Great Gatsby anyone?) and then that, OK, she fucks Bill. Hubby barfs and then his moral dilemmas begin. Seems that James was all for "doing the right thing" and turning Bill in, even before he knew he was fucking his wife. But, now that his wife is the driver, well, how would that look for a rich, important barrister to have a hit-and-run wife?

So, the lies begin. It's an interesting exploration of morality because, although we have affairs and even a killing, there are no real villains. Fellowes himself says when he's asked who the audience is supposed to root for, his answer is "all of them". One would think the adulterous, reckless Anne would come off pretty badly but we understand her affair. James is a straight up, hardworking guy but insensitive, removed. I can't put it any better than Fellowes who describes the situation as one where Anne is diminished, nothing she ever does is quite right. With Bill, she can breathe. We also forgive the accident, as does the victim's wife, because she shows true contrition and wants to confess.

Bill, one might think, could also be viewed askew, he doesn't much care about conventions or black and white morality. He shows no remorse for having the affair. However, I find James, who tries to follow all the rules, until he himself ends up in bed with his secretary, to be the least sympathetic because he represents that rigid, arrogant, rich, upper crust mentality that just assumes everyone should show the benefit of breeding. Anyway, the lies all intertwine like filigree, as we watch how the different characters deal with dishonesty.

We see the impact of each lie as the truth is revealed. Don't we all live lives of little lies we don't even see? Sometimes all the little lies add up to a very dishonest life. We compromise to coexist, we end up as people we never set out to be, we say it's OK when it's not, pretend we're happy when we're not. No one lives without lies and we all have to make judgments every day about how to juggle the various facts and fallacies of our lives. Sometimes people don't even know when they are lying to themselves or others. Lies come from fear. When we tell the truth, we often hear it in return, and the fear of that keeps many in the darkness of secrets and lies.

Who is more honest, the person who tries to follow the rules, but who lives a life of uncomfortable compromise, or someone who flaunts conventions but is willing to present himself as he really is? For me, the latter. Who's more honest, the person who has the affair or the one who lives as though he's happily married when he's not? For me, these murky moral issues become clear when you look for the fear. If you look, you'll find the fear. In my opinion, fear is the measure of a man. Don't look for the lies, we all lie. Look for the fear, that will tell you the trustworthiness of the man.

Valley Fog Blog

2006-02-25T17:15:00.000-08:00

The following is the welcome to my newest blog, which is, yes, Valley Fog Blog.

This blog is all about the film Valley Fog and the long, slow, tortuous history of its route to fruition. As I recall, the idea to do an independent film preceded the actual concept for the film. I was going through a period of creativity which, not coincidentally, came around the time of my divorce. I was exploring several other mediums at the time: music, blogging and painting. Film was the natural fourth, I've been a film buff most of my life.

What made it all feasible was that the barriers to entry for making a good looking, quality film were coming down. I realized it would be possible to tell my story on film for a fairly modest price... but, what story? They say write what you know and that's exactly what I did... finally, about two years later.. when I finally started writing scripts like a dervish. First I had to try several trickier routes, such as trying to get actors to improvise my drama and, generally, learn a lot of lessons the hard way. All of this along with my teenage son, who will probably go on to tell the story in his own way in a few years, and probably with a budget a million times the size.

But, back to the beginning. We started the project in earnest about a year ago, filmed with a cast of four and a crew of three over a few weekends last winter. At that point, with all the issues surrounding the demise of my own marriage fresh in my mind and wanting expression, we focused on the relationships. There was a married, interracial couple, Jason and Shari, fighting over kids, who were having an engaged couple, Greta and Nick, over for lunch. We had no script (that's one lesson I learned the hard way... never again!) and I spent endless hours with the actors going over the intricacies of their various and twisted histories with and without each other... let's just say it was complicated.

After one of the actors moved out of the area, I shelved the project. I didn't really have enough footage to make anything, despite my occasional lame comments to my son that we did. Finally, I figured out how to use the original story and make a feature out of it without using the actor that had moved. So, about a year after the original shoots, with a much bigger cast and crew, including two of the original actors, we continued the story of the original luncheon by showing the various friends of the foursome discussing it, and what happened, primarily the fact that Jason and Greta end up kissing each other. Then there are additional scenes to illustrate more of the mentality of Silicon Valley and the merging of worlds that happens when Jason's corporate type friends interact with Greta's cool band mates.

There was also more exploration of the way relationships and affairs are viewed by various constituencies, from Shari's PTA mom aquaintances, to the San Francisco independent film community. I also tackle current issues going on in Silicon Valley today surrounding the new distribution mediums for music and film. The company Jason and his buddies work for is "Lime", a thinly veiled Apple-like company which, in the fantasy world of film would be sporting the lime slice that for many is the international symbol of revolution, taken from Limewire. It's a fruit salad of innuendo, a Shrek-like stab at the powers that be.

We see a culture of arrogant executives seeking, or should I say, sucking, the fresh views of the young filmmakers but also wanting to sell them on the corporate values they embody. The young indies recognize the sell-outs for their internal emptiness and lack of creativity, but also try to figure out how long they can hold onto their freedom and expressiveness in a world where money can be made in many different ways from content they provide. These are artists who have a genuine shot at keeping their authenticity while making serious cash... or so they hope.

Below is the current draft of the official Valley Fog synopsis:

Valley Fog

Are the elite of Silicon Valley on the cutting edge or do they live in a fog of distorted values? Are those shaping the future of electronic entertainment clearly seeing the needs of the consumer or are they blinded by dead marriages and the desire for stature?

Jason Sanville is a man who grew up with everything and succeeded as a professional musician, a start-up entrepreneur and as an executive at a high profile Silicon Valley company. He has an artistic, intelligent wife, two beautiful kids, a big house in Palo Alto and all the perks of life. But, he is restless and unhappy. His wife is bored and frustrated. They can’t get along.

One day an old friend and former business partner, Nick brings over his bohemian fiancé, Greta. Jason, feeling threatened by Nick, ends up kissing Greta over a game of chess in his family room. Finally, it seems someone cares about him in a genuine and free way.

This gets him thinking about his lost career in music. He asks some of his co-workers if they would like to put together a cover band, the Limetimes, and while they are having lunch, Jason sees Greta. They reconnect and she tells Jason she will be singing at a new, hot nightclub nearby. He comes to see her play and that night they go back to his house while his wife and kids are out of town. Before long, Greta’s band mates, a group of San Francisco artists and filmmakers, show up and things get pretty wild.

The next morning finds them over croissants discussing the evening and saying goodbye at the train, but who knows if the goodbye is final? Jason has never felt more alive. He has finally regained some real connection to his creative self and clearly wants more. Greta doesn’t want to become a cliché or sacrifice her spiritual and emotional needs to become “the other woman”, but is also attracted to Jason and wants to bring out the best in him.

North Country

2006-02-23T14:46:00.000-08:00

Although the crooning Reese Witherspoon, is supposedly a lock for Best Actress this year, Charlize Theron turns in another dead-on dramatic performance in this look at sexism and sex in northern Minnesota mining country. In a normal year, this film and Cinderella Man would have gotten far more attention. But, this was a year to honor gays as a group worthy to be considered an oppressed minority.

Unfortunately, these days it takes a lot more than a twenty year old lawsuit to focus on us the problems women face in this world. This film makes it all too easy to say, yeah, well maybe in the past men could get away with tipping women in porta-potties over on the job, but they could never get away with that again. Maybe in northern Minnesota they can get away with scrawling pictures on the wall of blow jobs, but not around here. Maybe in the 80's women were still afraid to tell anyone when they were raped by a teacher, but, not now.

Maybe this film was overlooked because no one wants to talk about sexism any more. The young women say it doesn't exist. The schools are almost back in the business of openly promoting boys again because it's becoming increasingly obvious they can't compete with girls in the academic environment, particularly at early ages.

North Country is a fabulous film and I find it sad that it was shut out by newer, sexier causes. Sure, gays need rights, and blacks and Hispanics and Arabs, and just about everyone else in some way or another, and sexism gets lumped in right along with prejudice against the overweight and everything else. But, I've always seen this issue in a bigger way. Men and women have to deal with each other in a way the other sub-groups can avoid. Issues between the sexes permeate our society in a different way. While those with small, closed minds can often just avoid dealing with certain race issues, or homosexuality, we all have to interact with members of the "opposite" sex. I mean the terminology gives it away, doesn't it?

The sexes are divided by silence and ignorance that still exists all around us today. As long as we have a society that hides its fears and normal, human urges behind veils we will continue to dehumanize sex and degrade women for owning their sexuality, or as was portrayed in this film, simply for being a young, attractive woman.

Rent

2006-02-23T13:39:00.000-08:00

Although director Chris Columbus protested that a critic can't change his vote, I agree with Roger Ebert that Rent, the movie, now on DVD, is probably best for Rentheads. I'm assuming this is the rough equivalent of a Deadhead, Trekkie and whatever they call the Rocky Horror Picture Show fanatics. Although I'm a fan of musical theatre, I'm also an advocate of filmmakers taking Broadway hits into the real world. I liked what Milos Foreman did with Hair and what Rob Marshall did with Chicago. While this was a very true rendition of the play, it just didn't really add that special justification for making it a movie.

What I did love is the story of Rent and the way it highlights the bohemian lifestyle and what it means. This subject is especially near and dear to my heart right now as we just wrapped my own indie film; Valley Fog, which is also about the bohemian lifestyle. So, what exactly is "La Vie Boheme" that the cast sings about? These are the artists. This is the counterculture. This is the very small group of people, in every society, that directly questions the prevailing values embodied in the culture around them. While the bohemians in Rent live the total underclass lifestyle in an aids and drug-ridden squat in 1989 NYC, the lifestyle has been shown more recently in a film called "Undiscovered", which is about a young musician facing the industry.

Undiscovered and Rent have the typical antagonists, the A&R guy, the landlord, the people who want to rape your talent, who want you and need you to sell out. Valley Fog takes this into Silicon Valley as we see these executive level guys exploring the young SF talent in filmmaking. It's the same vampire game shown so brilliantly in The Graduate; the older, established, burdened, trapped generation trying to suck the life out of the young in order to justify their own sad, fearful decisions. I think Rent is too sad. And, with the story coming out of the Reagan era, it is understandably sad. We are at a similar point today, with the conservative right in full control.

Don't ask about our bohemia today. It doesn't seem to have a strong voice these days. Although the powerful boomers have stood up to the plate with an enormous slate of films this year, and we have label-supported Green Day, Howard Stern, Bram Cohen, and the hackers, I would not call any of that particularly bohemian. We need a grass roots artistic movement and about the closest thing to it that I can see right now, other than possibly the true hip-hop (as opposed to the 50Cent manufactured type) community, also in SF, is the indie film community which is burgeoning beautifully through the film schools, websites, festivals and operations like CinemaSport. This is where many of the brilliant new ideas and observations are springing to life today. So, in the words of Rent, "Viva La Vie Boheme!".

Sex Sells

2006-02-17T06:40:00.000-08:00

OK, I better post this. I've been so busy filming Valley Fog, which actually touches on these issues, as well as many others, that I just haven't had time to write for the blogs. Every time my attention turns, my readership goes down. Sooo, I wrote this up a few weeks back, and shelved it, as I have done before on more personal, sexual type articles. One reason I did so in this case was because when I tried to verify some of the numbers, they didn't really hold up.

I'm not a statistician and I can certainly believe someone in the adult industry would exaggerate numbers, but, common sense and my personal experiences talking to men and having a blog leads me to believe the number of men getting "sex" via their computer is huge and it is, in general, a monumentally ignored aspect of our culture that does indeed affect us every day and in every way.

I had an interesting date yesterday with a guy who publishes adult magazines with a European style of artistic, open type stuff. He brought up interesting facts, all of which I basically believe because they make sense. He said sex spawned and spurred the video industry and the internet. These mediums both spread sex like crazy and made tons of money doing so.

Men want sex. They don't get it at home. Most of them don't want to go into theaters in trench-coats and when the concept of watching it on your own TV became a possibility, the huge demand, both on the part of the geeks who develop all this stuff and the public, in general fed the technology and laws to support it.

Being a staunch defender of music, I pointed to the demand for that as a major fire that heated up the broadband that now covers every populated area in this country. But, again, sex was first on the scene. Music was 1999, but porn, in the mid-nineties was bringing every geek in the world onto the network.

He also pointed to the fact that the US has the highest rate of teenage pregnancy in the civilized world and the lowest average age for losing one's virginity. Compare this to Holland which is at the opposite end of the spectrum. In Holland, sex is addressed very openly and naturally, in the schools, starting in third grade. Anyone who's been there knows how open sexuality is in Holland and throughout Europe generally. You don't see quite the same sad and twisted victims of keeping sex secret, the schizophrenia, the clashes of the religious right and the sad statistics we have here.

Porn is a $60B/year industry. That's the legal money, not even counting prostitution and unaccounted for cash. It's bigger than all entertainment combined. Bigger than all sports combined. Did you know that? It's not a well-publicized fact. We don't want to talk about how much money is spent on illegal drugs, or even legal drugs. We don't talk about the $200B we're spending on war. And we sure as hell don't talk about sex in any real way in this country, except to say it's bad, unless it's in a marriage.

I look around my communities, no one talks about sex. Yet, under our noses, it has to be going on all around us. $60B is not a few back-alley perverts. This is us. So, what's going on? These same people I see, not talking, except in giggles and whispers, still are sexual beings in some way and need to have that addressed, if only in some small way. It breaks my heart to see this country as it really is, a society of disconnected, materialistic people so lacking in the fulfillment of their basic human needs that the most intimate relationship most men have these days is with their computers.

And the most intimate relationships most women have is with other women, and food. You know what the other big industry is don't you? Diet. That's also in the $60B area. Why do you think Dr. Phil, and everyone else, goes there? Ever turn on a TV? How much diet advertising do you see on there?

We've lost all touch with reality here and what god meant for us. Why do you think we're all stuffing our faces and glued to our computers? Does anyone else but me ever ask themselves these simple basic questions about the society all around us? Well, let me fill you in. People who are healthily connected to their own bodies and spirits and happiness have good connections with other people.

They're not yelling at everyone, like the guy who wrote Wedding Crashers and had a melt-down over my review. They're not hiding. They're not making excuses. They're not having secret affairs. They are stepping up to the plate, being themselves, being open and available and loving and sexual. They don't segregate themselves into little populations and cliques and judge people by how much money they have.

I meet men all the time who are trapped in dead marriages or workaholic schedules, or both. They join the ranks of zombies till they find a few porn sites that start to remind them that they have bodies. But, this only alerts them to their trap. Now they see how unfree and timid they really are. I see their frustration and fear and try to help. but, it's usually pretty fruitless. Most people, even when you hold a mirror up to their fucking face won't see the real person staring back. So, they slink back, still thinking some sex on the side will be the magic bullet.

The internet has made it easier for us to connect with each other and find sex, hopefully with other actual people, instead of fantasies. At the same time it has turned us from each other. The vast majority of married people who live in dead, sexless marriages have less and less reason to really work on their relationships because now they have their computer to turn to for stimulation and companionship.

So, if I were to end with on open letter to the men of America, here it is:

Men;

Wake up!!! Whatever excuse you have for sticking with your fat, boring wife, who you don't love and who doesn't love you... it's lame. Oh, and if you think she does love you because she's not cheating on you, or cooks your meals.... that's not love. If you think it's love, you need to find out what love really is, because it's fabulous. It's worth striving for. Whatever the reason is that you accept the roommate deal, it's a weak cop-out. There is no good reason to live a lie. You may think you're fooling your kids, but, ultimately, unless they're really stupid, you can't. They'll grow up and tell their partners they don't want to end up in a dead marriage like their parent's, and then they'll do it, just like you did, and your parents did.

There is no good reason to waste your time or your partner's. Your nice and moral sounding reasons about commitment and the kids don't hold up unless you are actively working to improve your marriage, or unless you are genuinely fulfilled. Fulfilled means sharing your feelings, it means having great sex, it means having passion and intimacy.

You're on your computer for sex because it's cheap and easy and you've convinced yourself it's as good as you'll get. You are selling yourselves short. Love, sex, passion, the things that make life vibrant and worthwhile, are available to you. But, you have to conquer your fear and get up off your ass and look for a real woman and then be honest with her and give of yourself. It's only then you'll have what you truly seek, that which can bring true happiness. Until then, you're just a drone.

You go out, you earn, you do your duty, and, if you're lucky, you get some positive attention for doing so. But, compared to a real relationship with a real woman, it's a pale imitation of a genuine life, the type you'll look back on with real peace of mind and satisfaction. Make your choices thoughtfully and wisely in life, it's worth it to take the time to look at your life and your choices and your happiness, it's what you were put here to do. Don't die with your life unlived. Use your life. God gave you life, and a mind to make choices. Don't dishonor God, and yourself, and the parents who brought you forth in the world, by going through your life mindlessly. Connect yourself to your real feelings and reactions and honor those things.

Grammys

2006-02-09T04:12:00.001-08:00

Like everyone else in the world, I didn't give American Idol winner Kelly Clarkson, who talked like she actually did just fall off a turnip truck, much cred. Although her rendition of Respect on that show was pretty amazing, few people realize what a hard song that is to sing, she made Britney Spears sound sophisticated and of course we all expected the heavy promotion. What I didn't expect was the quality of her songs this year and she deserved to upset Mariah. Her music was better, her vocals were better. I'm glad to see Grammy voters noticed.

Those two, not to mention the ever nominated Gwen Stefani, (let's not even talk about dance queen Madonna, I guess living in London hasn't had much effect) need to take a cue from the men and bands and start thinking about a little thing called social awareness and relevance. Notice Paul singing about Chaos, Stones - Bigger Bang, U2 - Vertigo.... there's trouble brewing around the world. Maybe you might want to comment on that. At least Green Day took Record of the Year, or was that last year? I'm starting to wonder if 2005 ever actually happened.

After several years of good Grammy shows, this one was just one deadly disappointment after the next. I know there wasn't much good music this year, but there was certainly enough to make a three hour show entertaining. I mean, they could have at least put some visuals up there. I know business is bad and the seven figure execs might be down to six, but if you don't put something up there, even the hicks in the boonies are gonna figure out that you can't put out any good music. You don't want that, do you?

Like a sucker, I got my hopes up for the Sly tribute, but the recluse's cameo was so nominal it was almost insulting. The Linkin Park mash-up following it was much better. I got my hopes up again for Christina Aguilera's rendition of Leon Russell's gem Song for You, but her diva dish-up destroyed the simple emotion of the song Leon wrote for his mom. Speaking of parents, I was surprised that How To Dismantle An Atom Bomb was about Bono's dad. We think about music and what first comes to mind is sex, love & politics, its traditional subjects. But songs that address our parental legacy have always been around and are becoming more and more prevalent and obvious. I think that's a great trend because, until you come to terms with your emotional heritage, you're nowhere.

Yes, I could moan about how sad it was to see Kanye go from the incendiary, illuminating performance he gave last year to the pathetic demonstration of his shortage of message and talent that he proved this year. But, instead I'll end on the two minutes of thought-provoking entertainment I was able to glean from this 3+ hour waste of time; a line from Springsteen's Devils & Dust, "What if the things you do to survive, kills the things you love?"

Well, most of the show killed what I love... music. But, like Gloria Gaynor, I will survive, and so will music. It can only go uphill from here. So, hey, NARAS, I suggest you draw some air in on your dying gasp here because in a few years the Soundclick, MySpace, CD Baby, and Magnatune award shows are gonna start kicking your ass and you'll wish you had more than Carey, West & Legend to offer up.

Rodeo Clowns

2006-02-08T09:33:00.000-08:00

I'll be singing with this cleverly titled classic rock cover band at the Blue Chalk Cafe on Ramona St. in downtown Palo Alto from 5-8 this Sunday, Feb. 12. Hope to see you there!

Broken Flowers

2006-02-04T13:20:00.000-08:00

More like broken movie... what is this, some ADHD test for the insane? Every shot in this deadly film was static, silent and way, way too long. It's movies like this that make me glad I don't sink ten bucks up front just because Bill Murray was good in his last movie. Yeah, he's got that deadpan look down pat. It looks like his whole face was dipped in Botox. Any small facial expression would have been appreciated in this bore fest.

He meanders aimlessly from one very slow, quiet old girlfriend to the next even slower, quieter ones looking for meaning and a child he never met, who may be looking for him. It's a good concept, but one I'll never be awake enough to see fulfilled in this movie (and I use that term loosely). Music, a pan, anything. I'm now watching some close up take ten seconds to zoom in on Bill sleeping in a plane. Fascinating stuff. What, is this a student film? Maybe that's why there's no director's commentary, or any commentary, or any movement.

As with In Her Shoes and the trendy hook of shoes running throughout.... this one has... you got it... broken flowers. I'm sure they represent something deep and meaningful about life, boring lives, lives that are slow and boring. Yes, now I think I understand what the director is trying to say. Stop, slow down, smell the broken flowers. Life is painful and disconnected and my boring film is so much better. OK, got it.

Seeds

2006-02-04T06:43:00.000-08:00

Seeds
Originally uploaded by Intervisions.

Each seed starts out tiny
And grows its form intact
Circle after circle
Growing outward, some retract

Expanding ripples touch
Forming patterns bigger
Some swirl into others
Forming newer figures

Each grows to its destiny
The shape stays somewhat static
The ways they come together though
You can't predict the pattern

Grown up to their boundaries
Till they blend, merge and change
There's a window of time
For things to be arranged

Is the same true of people?
Do we ever really change?
Or just ride the waves of others
Until we realize we're not the same?

Do we see to the core of others?
Do we understand their needs?
Do we ever see who they really are...
Or just colored circles around their seeds?

In Her Shoes

2006-02-02T14:04:00.000-08:00

Songs that are designed to become big pop hits must have a hook. I guess it's the same for films. In this sentimental big budget comedy with Oscar darling Toni Collette and the ever bankable Cameron Diaz, the hook is shoes. If you don't pick up on that from the title, there's the closet containing countless pairs and of course the big line for the trailer; clothes never look good, food makes you fat, but shoes always fit... or something like that.

It's the story of two sisters dealing with the legacy of a mother who committed suicide in a single car accident when they were small children. I really started relating to the film at this point because I'm familiar with a real life incident like this and I do wonder about the kids and how they grow up wondering about the "crash" that killed their mother. It's hard enough to lose a parent but these two girls had to grow up surrounded by the lie that their mother was killed accidentally when in reality she was mentally ill and committed suicide. Even in progressive towns today, there is still great denial and shame and whispering. If one dies of a physical disease, it's one thing, but we still attach great stigma to mental illness.

What's also interesting is how different these sisters are (yes, they have only their SHOE size in common). Diaz is dumb and dyslexic, Toni is the plain, studious lawyer. But, although Toni is very functional, she can't really connect with Mister Right and carries great pain. The sisters do discover some truth and connection along the way.

There's no commentary track and Shirley MacLaine sleepwalks through this, but, I guess it's worth a pick on Netflix.

Carlos Castaneda: Enigma of a Sorcerer

2006-01-31T06:51:00.000-08:00

This DVD takes a look at the best-selling, controversial author who sold over eight million books in seventeen languages. He wrote, ostensibly, about his experiences with a Sonoran Nualle, holy man, named Don Juan Matus. Carlos is portrays himself in the books as the hapless, hallucinogenic drug imbibing, student trying to understand the magical powers Don Juan uses to make plants come to life and other miracles in these "reports", which earned him a PhD from UCLA in 1970.

It was, in fact, the pedigree of UCLA, with forward written by the Anthropology Department Chair, that gave the books legitimacy. Just as Timothy Leary used his status as a Harvard professor to give hallucinogens credentials, Castaneda parlays his student status into the type of love, power and attention he wanted. Like Leary, he wanted to impart knowledge of the nature of reality. From many of the reports in the DVD, he really did believe his own story.

But, unlike Leary, and more like Steve Glass, the subject of Shattered Glass, the National Review writer who made up his stories, or, more recently, Frey, author of A Million Little Pieces who had to go mea culpa on Oprah... Carlos made it all up. There is no Don Juan.

To me, it's like saying there's no Santa Claus. I mean, I took an entire course on this guy in college. I read all his books, many times, thought about them and what his exchanges with Don Juan meant. Yes, we all had to consider the notion that these far out stories were made up, but, you want to believe there is some proof for what we all know is true.

Someone on the DVD discusses the idea that, like Santa Claus, it almost doesn't matter if Don Juan was a real man. He is a "fictive reality", meaning, so many people understand the concept of this individual it sort of creates it's own reality. No, no. This guy was more like the David Koresh/Jim Jones/Charles Mansons, it's not about enlightenment. It's about ego, and feeling the thrill of minions of women to fuck, women who truly love and believe in them. It's exploitation and that's what Carlos Castaneda was about.

Like the worst of the users of this world, the Jerry Falwells and Jim Bakers, he used good solid spiritual concepts to lure in his victims. They were "new age" concepts, instead of traditional bible stuff, but, it's basically the same thing. Taking truth and beauty and twisting it to your own gain, living a life surrounded, ultimately, by pain and lies. You should hear what all these people who closely surrounded Carlos in his little Sorcerers Circle say about him, "what a relief it was, when he died!".

I want to end on something positive, which is one of the biggest lessons of the books. Even if they were lies, and that's pretty much proven in the DVD by a guy who traced Carlos' writings along with other things being published at the time, the concepts are valid and here's one I've lived by. Don Juan tells us that death is always over our shoulder. Each day we need to keep somewhere in the back of our minds that we must use our time well because our life could end at any time.

If today were your last day, could you really say you've lead your life freely, honestly and without fear? Or have you made a million little compromises and told a million little lies and towed the line and did what you were supposed to, assuming you'll have plenty of time at the end to do what you really love, be with someone you really love, be who you really are?

In2Movies

2006-01-30T15:31:00.000-08:00

Can't these guys at Warners, much less Microsoft, come up with one original idea? Warners new fake P2P movie download service, In2Movies, stole my whole concept here. I just had to go grabbing up the blogspot domains, and now I do indeed have: In2Movies,In2Music and N2Movies.

You get the picture... I think I nabbed up a few similar names. But, I've been using this concept of being into stuff, or in2 stuff, or N2, or Nto.... for a long time.

When I googled IntoFilm, it actually came up with tons of stuff on the little sister website, to this one, IntoFilm. I found out that Intervision, IntoFilm and IntoTune are all traded on Blog Shares, some blog stock exchange thing that I didn't even sign up for... and I'm trading up! Now that I'm actually directing my readers there, I hope to see my stock price spike! My little blog has had over 20,000 hits in the little over a year of it's existence and all the linkage is starting to pay off as I write for more and more websites and work with more and more internet companies. More to come on that.

Havoc

2006-01-29T18:48:00.000-08:00

Anne Hathaway trades in her Princess Diaries image for what I'm going to call Crash for kids. Crash showed the relationship between adults of different races in LA today. Havoc takes this to the teens, adds a cohesive plot and even more sobering ramifications to consider. The excellent Hathaway takes us to the heart and soul of a disaffected Pacific Palisades teen, showing the workaholic and alcoholic parents, the blow jobs for the wannabe boyfriend, the desire for anything that feels real and the ability to put it all in perspective for herself and protect herself.

Every social force is more apparent when you look at it through the eyes of the young people. We see an entire culture of white high schoolers more gansta than the east side teens. When 50 Cent was asked about the fact that most of his albums are sold to white suburban kids he replied, "Those kids want the boogeyman, they want to be scared and they're willing to pay $18.99 to do it". It really makes you wonder who's buying into the bling image.

The parents are interested in their own upscale image and protecting their kids, but, hey, these poor rebellious kids have no war to protest, at least not one they're being drafted for so, got to rebel against something, or at least make it look like you are. Was college protest ever serious, or do white kids just pose, as they do in this movie? They go downtown like it's some kind of reality show attraction... but then find that, in some ways, the hispanic community, rife as it is with poverty and drugs, is actually very family oriented... something they lack.

Wedding Crashers

2006-01-28T13:54:00.000-08:00

The opening scene finds our amazingly romantic protagonists, Owen Wilson and Vince Vaughn, haplessly watching a venomous couple and their noxious lawyers trade barbs. Turns out they crash Washington weddings on the side. Not, as director David Dobkin explains, in an exploitive way, but in an innocent, idealistic way. It's a 35-year-old man coming-of-age story. Well, it does point to some of the hypocrisies of our times, but, I wouldn't draw too much social commentary from this rather predictable Hollywood big-name film.

We all know that, in the end, despite the odds of ever finding true and lasting love in this use it before you lose it world, they'll find their (filthy rich) dreamgirls and happiness ever after. It's lighthearted and mildly entertaining. The commentary track with Vince and Owen is typically lame, the actors never have anything to say except stuff like, "Well, I did feel a bit awkward touching Jane Seymour's tits because, well, she's Jane Seymour." Directors are much better, and Dobkin's track does add a bit to a pretty lame film.

We do see the insides of the Kennedy-like family our crashers end up marrying into. Behind the touch football is real anger and aggression and sadness and pain and darkness. All the stereotypes, from the batty, bigoted granny to the boozing, trampy wife (yes, Jane Seymour), are represented. The men in this film come off pretty golden. Oh well, made by guys, with very high paid guys, for high paid guys to take their dates too. I'd say dream on, except these guys are laughing all the way to the bank.

The Chumscrubber

2006-01-26T11:24:00.000-08:00

Think of Desperate Housewives meets South Park. Marc Cherry's take on the suburbs was supposed to be a morphing of Sex In The City to, basically, sex in the suburbs. Less Cul-de-Sac and more Cult and Sack, this film has an even darker tone and covers not just the secret lives of housewives but goes into the lives of the kids they and their self-absorbed husbands bring up. If you're expecting a chick flick because it features some staples of the genre, Glenn Close and Rita Wilson, think again. The violence is stark and seems to come out of nowhere.

If you really want to see the stark reality of disconnected people living in Utopias of manicured lawns and Ionic columns, check out The Ice Storm or American Beauty. This film has none of the whimsy, the characters are all a bit too weird. It's not enough to make the lawns recognizable, the people have to be genuine. I couldn't find one character in this film that felt real to me. The extremities were believable in The Graduate but, Jamie Bell (from Billy Elliot) is no Dustin Hoffman and doesn't portray the irony as well.

Director Arie Posin, a first-time director, helps us understand some of the pointless nuances, making the DVD at least less of a waste of time than a trip to the theater would have been. I did like the fact that the film covers a wide range of characters and perspectives and weaves them together well. I happen to like watching the suburbs held up to ridicule so for me, I'm not sorry I ordered it on Netflix. But, unless you're a disaffected youth, I wouldn't buy this one.

Flight Plan

2006-01-25T10:48:00.001-08:00

Isn't Jodie Foster worried about being typecast? I just saw her in this movie, except it was called Panic Room. She played the same frenzied, devoted yet somehow brilliantly protective mother. I realize we need heroines and maybe Jodie feels the need to play them since her career was earned by playing a child prostitute in Taxi Driver and that role led John Hinckley to shoot Reagan.

She's always felt the weight of that and roles like the strong yet sleazy bar hopper led to her first Oscar in The Accused. Once she managed the strong, professional, sleaze-free Oscar winning role, Clarice, she pretty much made a career out of it. This very standard, predictable thriller was literally made for her and gosh, it's hard to refuse Brian Grazier, who has so beautifully resurrected the Sid Vicious look, but, really, I'd like to see her choose more meaningful projects.

Into The Blue

2006-01-24T14:48:00.000-08:00

In Nassau, there is a land of enchantment and underwater amazement that, for only a few hundred bucks a night can be yours. It's called Atlantis, where the equally amazing Jessica Alba is stationed in this scenic aquatic thriller. According to director John Stockwell, on this just released DVD, it was quite the international big budget film, including special effects from India and actors and lots of real sharks from the Bahamas. It's an interesting look into the world of modern treasure hunters in the Caribbean, searching for the $6B worth of real life treasure that actually resides there.

So, Jessica Alba, who was even better hip hopping her way through Honey, is the sweet, principled Shark trainer who finds a boatload of treasure and a planeload of coke right next to each other. A lot of shark-chomping and action all over treasure hunting equipment ensues but, it's hard to do more than just enjoy the great bodies and beautiful fish.

Pix/Dis Done Deal

2006-01-24T14:04:00.000-08:00

Anyone got a crown for Jobs? Who's gonna play him in Shrek 3? Will he unite his kingdom? Will he inspire us toward greed or creativity? Hopefully the latter. While still being the driven, anal control freak he always has been, he has developed, over the years bigger vision and lately has shown a far simpler, gentler side. He's about all we have right now to lead us out of the mire so, do it right Steve. Just like you've been doing, holding firm on price, going for innovative, original style, function and value. Good luck! You want to be the next Walt Disney? Go for it. Stick to what you love and believe in and leave a great legacy. Just don't focus so much on the technology that you forget what Walt was all about. He was about happiness and dreams and fun. Your kids are still young, let them guide you.

RIAA's Last Gasp

2006-01-23T17:35:00.000-08:00

As we await the Pixar/Disney decision.... take a look at this story about how desperate the labels are getting. It is inevitable they will go after the ISPs... but that's a much different fight than the one they're waging against Patti Santangelo.

If they try that, I hope they have something better than contributory copyright infringement because the courts made it pretty clear in Grokster that you have to show intent and that intent based on the technology itself is not enough. They'll need to show the kind of stuff they had in Napster, internal memos showing intent to facilitate infringement of copyright. They'll never, ever win against the ISPs, and it will be so fun to watch them fry on the other side, as they see what it's like to be dwarfed.

If they think Congress will come to their aid, they're delusional. They can't even get Induce passed and there's a bill in committee right now that, if passed, will take it out of the courts, severely limiting the ability to prevail on contributory infringement. If anything, Congress is about to sway against them, even viv a vis the helpless American public.. God help them if they go up against the ISPs.

They'll end up, finally and mercifully, made into a utility, like water or cable TV, like we've been wanting for years now. Their commodity will ultimately be just so much bandwidth that they will provide under compulsory license, they'll probably have to track the the whole thing themselves. And then it will happen to the film industry.

And then they'll realize it really isn't worth it to make these big budget films, and then they'll start nominating all these story-driven dramas for Oscars and have people lined up around the block looking for small indies at Sundance and dozens of web-sites looking for content and filmmakers having lots of ways to make money off their films, with relatively low budgets and people will have lots more interesting films to watch and it will be easier to find them and... oh, that's now.

When you look at the choices and behavior of those in the know, you can see that they know exactly where the industry is headed.

Enron: The Smartest Guys In The Room

2006-01-21T14:34:00.000-08:00

In the heyday of its hubris the trading floor of the gargantuan room full of the most macho men in Houston had two long staircases. One led to Lay and the other to Skilling. They were known as the two smartest guys in the room. These were two men, born poor, who were going to rule the world by being the smartest guys in the world. And for a while, they came pretty close. They ran the seventh largest company in the country, Enron

They certainly had California on a very short leash. During the days of wild expansion and wealth we had no energy. We had rolling blackouts and paid exorbitant prices for electricity. The power plants had plenty of capacity to make power, but they were being constantly told by Enron, who bought and sold their power, to shut down or ship energy to the desert. Enron was doing this to drive down supply, thereby allowing it to increase prices exponentially. With thirty billion dollars of high tech wealth going to Houston, the bubble did indeed start leaking.

And what happened to California? George W., Ken Lay, Schwarzenegger and Michael Milken, four staunch deregulators, had a secret meeting shortly before the Gray Davis recall and, the rest is history. Previously, natural gas and electricity were regulated heavily by state and federal governmental agencies. This changed largely as a result of political clout on the part of Enron by virtue not only of its size and deceptive appearance of profitability, but Ken Lay's relationship with the Bushes.

They were also able to use their power to get permission to use what they call mark-to-market accounting which allows them to, essentially, post self-proclaimed imaginary profits. This is what allowed Enron to post quarter after quarter of profits that never really existed. They were losing money on power plants in India and bad arbitrage bets while posting profit. The accounting got pretty creative, to say the least. And we all know what happened to Arthur Anderson, who traded scruples for fees.

Thousands of people who lost their jobs and pensions worked for a company whose motto was "Ask Why". Had those employees asked a few more questions they might have realized that the company they worked for had no real way to make money and was, in fact losing money as analysts raved, and people bought and Lay and Skilling and Fastow secretly sold. The one analyst who did question Enron was fired because of his questions.

The lawyers who approved all this and looked the other way were never asked too many questions, they just said, we'll make some tougher laws. And they did. Sarbane Oxley has been a very lucrative source or revenue for lawyers and accountants. Will that protect us?

The film, according to its director Alex Gibney, is not just about a few bad men. It's about the allure of money. It about how easy it is to bluff and buy everyone: the people who worked there, professional stock analysts, governments, the media.... everyone! We're all so impressed by people who exude confidence and money. It's all about appearance. We've become so lost and superficial.

We're a nation imbued constantly with information, seemingly so sophisticated and well informed. But we've lost our true source of knowledge, our inner guides that would have asked simple basic questions. It was only after Bethany McLean at Fortune started asking questions and pointed out that the emperor had no clothes, and Enron had posted years of phony profits, and manipulated the seventh largest economy in the world (California) from raging profitability to near bankruptcy that people finally clued in.

Meanwhile Lay, Skilling and Fastow made off with hundreds of millions of dollars that are now sitting in offshore accounts that will never be found. They were indeed smarter than the regulators who sought to control them and analysts who examined them. Being smart and unethical can get you pretty far, as I'm sure Milkin told Lay at the secret meeting. They may do a few years at tennis jail but, they'll live the rest of their lives in luxury. They won't even feel guilty. That's the dark side of the American dream, as Gibney called it, the belief that money is enough of a goal, enough of a measure of worth.

Walmart: The High Cost of Low Price

2006-01-20T15:32:00.000-08:00

The title says it all: Walmart: The High Cost of Low Price. The worlds largest corporation is known for its low prices. Without those, all the ludicrous propaganda (and they are sure laying it on thick now) in the world could not build a retail company to that size. People shop there, in the billions, to save money. But what is the cost? The cost is countless towns across this country that have either no downtown or no town, at all, wiped out, left with an empty box store and empty promises. The cost is countless Chinese women and girls working twenty hours at a time at a sewing machine. The cost is making widow Walton and the four kids five of the richest people on the planet.

Walmart uses harassment and intimidation to prevent unions from forming at their sites. There is no unionization at any Walmart, except in Germany, because their government actually protects its citizens from corporate exploitation. There is an atmosphere of secrecy, lying and paranoia pervasive throughout the company. Ex-managers told about the techniques they were forced to use to cheat the workers. But, no current Walmart employees would talk.

Workers are systematically demeaned and demoted. Discrimination runs rampant and blatant. Women and minorities have barely scraped the lowest rungs of management. Workers are typically forced to work off the clock, for free. They refuse to pay overtime. They keep the weekly hours so low that workers must stay on public assistance.

Walmart externalizes its costs not only through making the state pick up the cost of its health care, but from the enormous amount of direct subsidy it has received from states and innocent towns that welcomed them with open arms. Walmart comes in like stealth and cuts incredibly favorable deals based on glossy promises with town councils before the Chamber of Commerce even knows what's happening. Rarely do they even find out the subsidies Walmart got.

There are problems in their parking lots, which seem to attract crime since they are large, dim and not monitored. Walmart spends its money protecting the merchandise. Once you pay for the stuff, you're on your own. Again, this costs a town in police time that the taxpayers have to pay for.

I commend Robert Greenwald for making this film, which is part of a movement to stop Walmart. He's doing a thankless job, and could be making lots more money doing other types of films. He is shining a bright light on a huge social problem.

I wish he made it easier to glean the facts. I think filmmakers, who usually focus on entertaining, often underestimate the statistics and facts that are so important to educating people about social issues. While involved in the anti-nuke movement in the 80's, facts were a huge part of the dissemination and education. I really wanted to have a place on this DVD I could go to and find out exactly how much the Waltons have, and how the revenues flow in the company. Greenwald said he went to great pains to make sure every statement was supported by research, but they came in two-second bursts between lots and lots of personal whining, and frankly, as sympathetic as I am, it was too much.

I think he should have done a bit more than mock the company and tug our heartstrings with idyllic visions of small town life. He does a disservice by appearing too biased and should have taken a more intelligent approach, offering real argument to points that Walmart could legitimately make in its own defense, such as the fact that it takes those on the lowest rungs of society and gives them at least some minimal leg up. Had he made the facts more central, I would have mentioned them here and they would become much more a part of the conversation.

I haven't been to a McDonalds since watching Super-Size Me and this film isn't exactly making me want to run to my nearest Walmart, which, fortunately, is not in my town. That's OK, Walmart probably wasn't that upset about losing Palo Alto. They prefer to exploit the poor. Whether they buy there, which they do, or work there or sweat their life away making the crap we all need so desperately... the poor are at Walmart... and are paying a very high price.

Wilson Pickett

2006-01-19T16:44:00.000-08:00

Wow, what a month for soul. First Lou Rawls, now Wilson Pickett. Thanks for some great tunes. Mustang Sally and In The Midnight Hour are two of my favorite songs to sing. Wilson wrote the former with Aretha Franklin for a member of her band. Aretha was giving out Cadillacs, but this guy wanted a Mustang. He also wrote Land of 1000 Dances, another great song. Like so many of his peers, he put some half a century into music, performing up until a year ago. Thanks Wilson, you'll be missed.

Steal This Movie!

2006-01-18T05:57:00.000-08:00

This incendiary title, a twist on the title of Abbie Hoffman's primer, Steal This Book!, on how to live freely, and for free, in an unfree world, would have ruffled a lot more feathers in a post-Napster world. And watching the 1999 film and its commentaries, I can only imagine what would have been said had the film come out a few years later, after Bush's election and his little Son of Vietnam excursion.

I recently reviewed another Robert Greenwald film, Outfoxed: Rupert Murdoch's War On Journalism and will soon review his upcoming feature, Wal-Mart: The High Cost Of Low Price, and his 2003 documentary Uncovered: The Whole Truth About The Iraq War. But, now I know what turned Robert Greenwald from a very average Hollywood director into a man willing to use his skills to make socially important films. It was his love for his children... and Abbie. Abbie's ideals, and how he lived his life, inspired many. And, thanks to Greenwald, will continue to do so.

Despite the title of his first film, the unforgettable, not to mention unforgivable, Xanadu, Greenwald was no Orson Wells and his film was no Citizen Kane. Yet, two decades later he took a real life stab at Murdoch, the Hearst of our day. How did he transition from being a cog in the Hollywood machine, to taking on Murdoch, Bush and Wal-Mart? His daughters were reaching the age of awareness, early twenties, and he realized they knew very little about what happened in the sixties.

That's surprising in a way. We're talking about the Baby Boomers the huge population bubble was young, idealistic and vibrant, not to mention loud, then. They refused to fight the war of their parents, changed the world, opened up jobs for women, opened up homes for blacks. We questioned authority, questioned assumptions. We wanted more than the dark, violent reality of our parents.

So why did Greenwald, a boomer himself, need to make a film in order to educate his kids? Because, despite the flowing skirts and highly embroidered tops on every young girl today, this is no Age of Aquarius. That embroidery comes from Chinese children paid pennies and the flower children of yesterday now have mow & blow Mexicans tending their flowers. Despite its size and ideals, not to mention television coverage, we are talking about a lost generation.

I guess the days of white kids fighting for social justice are over. Did they ever really care? Or did most just want to avoid the draft? It's the latter, which is why the anti-war movement shriveled up after they brilliantly went to the lottery method of drafting. Yes, we still have people out there today, helping the poor to vote, going on missions, etc. We'll always have people who do care about social justice, but will we ever have someone with the courage and creativity of an Abbie Hoffman? I don't know.

The man had a genius for promotion that would dwarf Steve Jobs and Bill Gates combined. Did he use it like they did... to build his own personal empire and ego? No, he went into the lions den, took beating after beating, lived underground, barely seeing his young son, america, for six years. He never looked to make a cent off his considerable fame. In fact, he gave the money he made from selling the film rights to one of his books to the Black Panthers.

There are a handful of men who have really affected me, inspired me, meant something to me in my life: Jerry Garcia, John Lennon, Ken Kesey, Tim Leary, Jerry Rubin and Abbie Hoffman. Of these, I sometimes think I love Abbie best of all. He was the truest and purest revolutionary and understood that it was not really about the art and the words and the fun. Those were the methods, the instruments, and without the underlying goal of social change, it was without true meaning. The first three are artists. Tim, a teacher. Jerry Rubin, I love him, but by the time I interviewed him in 1979, he was about money. He complained about Lennon being holed up in the Dakota but, when I asked him what he was doing to promote change, he turned it back on me, saying, essentially, protest is for college kids.

Abbie never had any other purpose but protest and guerilla theater. He started his career as a freedom fighter in the south registering black voters and getting his head bashed in. And, that's pretty much how he ended up. He called himself a professional defendant. A victim of manic-depression, his career as defendant, refugee and orphan of America took its toll, ultimately resulting in his suicide in 1989. He paid a high price to illustrate for America the corporate interests that control our society.

Who do we look to today? Accidental tourists like Hank Barry, Shawn Fanning and Bram Cohen did challenge the powerful control of the media but they want nothing more than cash and control themselves. How many more have to die in Iraq before someone shows some awareness, principals and courage? Will we ever see people like Abbie Hoffman again? If not, the world is a far sadder, dimmer place for the loss.

Abbie Hoffman was unique. His charm was his uninhibited freedom and courage. No one stopped Abbie from speaking his truth, ever. And, we all knew it wasn't just his truth. It was THE truth. The truth no one wanted to face about this country: what we are, what we do , what we stand for. Abbie made us look at that gritty reality as he threw cash at greedy stockbrokers and surrounded the Pentagon for a levitation. He did it in a colorful, almost lighthearted way... to bring people in. He had all the right goals and all the right methods... and he truly changed the world for the better. His life should serve as an example for all of us.

Globes Embrace Liberal Values

2006-01-16T12:53:00.000-08:00

Hollywood has spoken. First, the Guilds, then the Globes and I'm sure the Oscars will follow suit. What is it that Hollywood is telling us by its selection of films to reward this year? Felicity Huffman said it best last night, "As actors we are taught to shed our skin, but sometimes we need to find out who we really are. This is for all those men and women who risk alienation and ostracism and live their life on the margins in order to be who they really are".

She was talking to her fellow artists, most of whom know that individuality and authenticity can carry a high price. These artists are also well aware of the fact that 98% of their fellow artists live in relative obscurity and poverty, paying the true price of being an artist.

No one talked about Titanic the straight love story because it was real clear why Cameron got the Oscar, and everything else, that year. The film was a massive achievement by Cameron. No one thinks that about Ang Lee. Heath and Jake hate the guy's guts and have actually come out and said, publicly, that the guy can't direct his way out of a paper bag. He abandoned them, barely talked to them. You could see Heath, an amazing actor (check him out in Lords of Dogtown, you can't even recognize him), just uncomfortably smirking his way through Ang's accolades as his acting was overlooked.

So, what is it about Brokeback, Capote, Transamerica, Good Night and Good Luck, Crash and Walk the Line? These are all stories that help us embrace liberal values of tolerance. Capote was gay, Cash a drug addict and alcoholic. They both emerged as authentic and original artists, but walked the line, living always a hair's breath away from being a freakish outsider. Morrow stood up to the powers that be of his day, and put everything on the line to do so. The non-biopics are filled with characters that illustrate what people have to face these days in order to stand up and be someone a little different and what challenges our tolerance.

Roger Ebert, Richard Roper and everyone else is commenting about what a strong slate of films has been made this year. It's been a year filled with relevant, social commentary coming out full force from Hollywood. So, what's going on? In the early 70's, after more than enough years of war and Nixon, Hollywood (via Bob Evans) finally figured out that the public was refusing to go see the mindless drivel the studios were putting out, and started to react. A spate of rebel films made by radical directors ensued and we saw many years of good movies.

Now it's 2006. We've had six years of lies and war and flag-waving bigotry. We've got Alito and Roberts and and a tow the line, deaf dumb and blind Congress supporting a trio of zealots isolated in the Oval Office. If anyone thinks this is not related to what we see Hollywood supporting and rewarding, think again... and don't forget Weeds... about the soccer mom/drug dealer... she won too! I mean really, once the revolution gets to the suburban housewives... you know they've really stepped over the line.

Outfoxed and Unprecedented

2006-01-15T06:24:00.000-08:00

Unprecedented is a look at the 2000 Presidential election that led to the appointment of George Bush to the position of President of the United States. It follows the chain of events starting with election eve when we saw unprecedented confusion about the winner of that election. Earlier that day, Gore was projected the winner, with many question mark states going to him. Florida was also projected to go to Gore. All the major networks were forecasting Gore. That is, until Jack Welch, president of GE, which owns NBC, went into the studio, put his hand on the shoulder of the man who projected the winners and said, "You know, I think it's time we called Florida for Bush".

The film takes a much closer look at the players and irregularities. Even with such glaring coincidences as having the candidate's brother as Florida's Governor and the chief election official in the state being an active campaigner, at least, for Bush, the American public and even Al Gore himself, with the whole party in tow, just rolled over like it was some kind of soccer match.

In fact, I take that back, soccer players would be screaming foul. When the US bombs and subverts our enemies, or, our friends, as we just bombed Pakistan today, the people take to the streets in protest. I just saw them today, there's always lots of footage of foreigners out there shouting about fucked up US policy. Well, you know, there were people protesting in Washington when Bush was inaugurated, not many, but certainly enough to warrant news coverage. However, the media, en masse, ignored it.

I guess it would be naive to think that more information, better, more accurate reporting, would make any difference. Yet, the film does shed more light on what the Republican leadership in Florida did to insure his brother's election. I mean, it's not like Florida is exactly known for encouraging blacks to vote, intimidation and disenfranchisement of black voters went on throughout the south since slavery was abolished. There was a huge effort to get out the black vote in Florida in the years leading up to 2000, because many local elections were unexplainably going to Republicans.

But, come on, they took 92,000 people off roles and refused to allow them to vote. Were these 92,000 random people? Not exactly, they paid a company $400,000.00 to ascertain who should be deleted. Ostensibly, they were removing felons. When other states have done this in the past, it cost a fraction of the price. But, then again, they weren't getting the smart sort the Republicans were going for. They knew it would come down to Florida, and, they had to make sure Florida would go to Bush. When you consider the fact that Bush won Florida by a margin of less than 600 votes, it just shows how much Bush had to subvert the electorate to get that win.

And, I'm not even going to get into the computerized voting, but, let's just say that throughout the south election results from computerized voting have been going to many republicans who were not the true winners. There was no way to prove it. The machines leave no paper trails, there is no way to examine the tallies because the makers of these machines will not let anyone look at their technology. But, in all cases, the exit polls pointed to different winners. And, they were all considered upset elections, in that all prior polling projected a Democratic winner. The companies that conduct these polls threw up their hands in disgust and quit. Ever hear any news stories about all this? Me neither.

The film was made by Joan Sekler and Richard Perez in 2002, well in time to warn us, yet, two years later, we reelected Bush. How did we lose our democracy not once, but twice, to same liars? Well, that gets us to the second film, Outfoxed.

While the media in this country, in general, turn a blind eye to the corporate forces that effect what we are shown and told about, and how it is covered, it gets even more egregious than that. This is the subject of Robert Greenwald's film, Outfoxed, which turns the light on Rupert Murdoch. This man's media holdings are unbelievable. It absolutely boggles the mind that one man, a blatant zealot, no less, is allowed so many media outlets. He owns over 100 cable channels, nine satellite broadcasting networks, a major movie studio, 175 newspapers. Frankly, I can't even remember it all, but News Corp's holdings are beyond extensive. I would estimate a fifth of all US media is Murdoch, an Australian.

And, if you think this is some kind of neutral, benign ownership... think again. Fox News was allowed three years to operate as a fairly traditional news outlet. It was successful and trusted, and in 1988 that trust was completely subverted. At that point, Murdoch started to implement an autocratic leadership style that dictated exactly what was run on the channel. He sent daily memos telling staff what stories to run and how to run them. Anyone working for him that countered the right-wing extremist views he held, was fired.

What makes all this so dangerous is that the shows run on Fox network do not look like the unabashed propaganda they are. They are formatted to look and feel very much like real news shows and many, many people believe that is exactly what they are. It's not like they run a little banner throughout the 24/7 propaganda day saying this is really opinion. Quite the opposite. Their motto is "fair and balanced". The film had interviews with a number of past employees speaking to the methods used to make the extremist right-wing swill seem like real reporting, such as putting up seedy looking, unqualified shills to present mildly liberal, if weak, views.

Yes, it's hard to believe there are people stupid enough to buy all this, but there are. I'm sure Bush owes many, many votes to Rupert and gee, what a coincidence that US law, changed under Bush, now allows him even more media outlets to own. And we are talking exponential numbers here. The amount of media outlets that can be owned by one company went from a handful to hundreds.

The Republicans (and the Democrats) are working hand in hand with the huge conglomerates in charge of 98% of our media outlets to keep ownership in as few hands as possible. The goal is to concentrate the power in the hands of a very few, extremely wealthy, and powerful individuals who will work very hard to keep the status quo. So, if you ever ask yourself why the media did so little to challenge a clearly unfair Presidential election, or why Copyrights, originally for seven years, now last for over 75, or why our news coverage is so different from the rest of the world's.... now you know. Will you do anything about it? Will you start getting more of your news from the internet? Will you start blogging about the problems, or write to your Congressperson or FCC Commissioner about these issues?

I hope so. Do it for MLK, who had some dreams about fairness and equality and democracy. They're still dreams. Anyone who thinks that the interests of the massive majority of average people who work hard and vote are in control in this country today better get a clue and start looking at what is really going on. Take a look at the films of Robert Greenwald over the past few years and educate yourself. I assure you, it will be quite an eye-opener. Let's do something unprecedented and refused to be outfoxed by a cadre of individuals who love the power we've turned over to them while playing the thought-provoking Mariah Carey on our iPods.

The Island

2006-01-10T16:48:00.000-08:00

This film was such a box office disappointment that Michael Bay had to take twenty minutes out of his commentary to explain. According to him, it's Warner, who had the domestic marketing rights. Apparently, they tried to sell it as an intelligent sci-fi mystery. Have those guys never even heard of H.L Menken, who said you can never lose money underestimating the taste of the American public?

The film did much better internationally, where it was marketed as "a typical Michael Bay action film". He also said that, with DVD sales, he still expects to make a profit. A lot of the expense did show up on the screen: beautiful crane shots, mile long sets, elaborate tank rooms, I'm sure Scarlett took a big cut.

I found the film quite thought provoking. At first I thought it was a spin on 1984, how a future society would operate when Big Brother has even more control. Then we find that the social structure is more complex, and hasn't really changed much from the way it operates now. While organ-carrying poor disappear off the streets in China today, tomorrow we can look forward to the rich having their own personal clones to provide organs, babies, or whatever parts might be needed.

The CEO in charge has no problems with inventory, he made them, he strips them for parts... no moral problems there. The middle becomes a standard thriller and at the end, it falls apart, even by Bay's own admission. I love any film that makes people think about the information they are being given and helps them develop a more questioning attitude. This film brings up issues about cloning, organ donation, immortality, ethics, media, mind control, economic inequality and what that entails.

It also, for me, brought up issues about religion, heaven and hell. You see how the clones are led to accept their dreary, mind-numbing lives by the promise of a bright future once they win the lottery to paradise. They try to make sense out of the random nature of who is rewarded and who is not. Despite the senseless, illogical nature of their world, they don't revolt or even question.

Are these clones really any different from the average person today? I don't think so. Most people have routine lives and are very happy to have them. I see very few people who question the prevailing view of those around them. We may quibble about minutia but few question the basic assumptions presented by the mainstream media or our friends & neighbors. We all live for that week we can go to the island while we work away the other 51 weeks.

Content Is King

2006-01-10T10:00:00.000-08:00

In the eighteenth century the huge demand for cotton led to the enslavement of many, who were needed to get that soft stuff from it's prickly pod. We still want clothes, and gadgets and cars, and people will always accumulate this stuff. But the capacity to consume this stuff pales by our ability to consume information and entertainment.

So, the previous predominant COMDEX has been gone for two years, maybe forever. What's the big, big show now? CES, consumer electronics, and what was that really all about? Content and it's delivery. Google wants in. We now have them selling CBS catalog, sports and jumping into the fray looking for user generated content, paying producers 70% of the take. Try getting that from a record label or studio. It's what Indieflix charges, but they put you on CDs they sell through the mail. Movielink allows movie downloads via the web, but not if you have a Mac, and they deal only with the studios and sell only stuff copy protected by Netcos.

Google will allow an optional copy-protection feature and will accept content from all comers. Will they pre-screen everything in order to make sure there's no copyright infringement? Cause, that's quite a job, they'd have to look at every frame to make sure T-shirts, art on the walls, snippets of songs, stock footage, etc. contained in the film is not by someone other than the filmmaker. Magnatune and the other music websites do this and haven't been sued out of existence.

In a few years, the content you'll be able to find, buy & sell on Google will certainly be as good as the average TV show is now, probably much better. Best of all, we will be able to take a more active role in searching for appropriate content instead of channel surfing through a random and limited selection of channels.

You'll Never Find

2006-01-06T09:30:00.000-08:00

As long as you live
Someone who loves you tender like I do
You'll never find, no matter where you search
Someone who cares about you the way I do

Whoa, I'm not braggin' on myself, baby
But I'm the one who loves you
And there's no one else, no-oh-oh-oh-oh-oh-oh-oh one else

You'll never find, it'll take the end of all time
Someone to understand you like I do
You'll never find the rhythm, the rhyme
All the magic we shared, just us two

Whoa, I'm not tryin' to make you stay, baby
But I know some how, some day, some way
You are (you're gonna miss my lovin')
You're gonna miss my lovin' (you're gonna miss my lovin')
You're gonna miss my lovin' (you're gonna miss my lovin')
You're gonna miss, you're gonna miss my lo-o-ove

Whoa, oh, oh, oh, oh (you're gonna miss my lovin')
Late in the midnight hour, baby (you're gonna miss my lovin')
When it's cold outside (you're gonna miss my lovin')
You're gonna miss, you're gonna miss my lo-o-ove

You'll never find another love like mine
Someone who needs you like I do
You'll never see what you've found in me
You'll keep searching and searching your whole life through
Whoa, I don't wish you no bad luck, baby
But there's no ifs and buts or maybes

You're gonna, You're gonna miss (miss my lovin')
You're gonna miss my lovin' (you're gonna miss my lovin')
I know you're gonna my lovin' (you're gonna miss my lovin')
You're gonna miss, you're gonna miss my lo-o-ove

Whoa, oh, oh, oh, oh (you're gonna miss my lovin')
Late in the midnight hour, baby (you're gonna miss my lovin')
When it gets real cold outside (you're gonna miss my lovin')
I know, I know that you are gonna miss my lo-o-ove

Let me tell you that you're gonna miss my lovin'
Yes you will, baby (you're gonna miss my lovin')
When I'm long gon
I know, I know, I know that you are gonna miss

We will miss your voice, Lou, but your legacy will continue on.
An Evening of Stars, started by Lou Rawls, has raised over $250M for the United Negro College Fund and will be broadcast on KRON this Friday evening.

I love the lyrics in this song. It conveys the way I feel about someone in my own life. It reminds me of a film I reviewed on this blog, After Sunset, where two people meet up ten years later and realize that a special connection they had was a lot more rare and valuable then they originally thought. But, what if one of them did realize at the time how special it was and had to watch the other one dither around for ten years waiting for them to figure it out?

Well, you'd say something like Lou does here. Hey, get a clue. You think you're gonna find this again, cause you lucked out and don't appreciate that you really won the lottery. It's like winning the Oscar at a young age or something, you haven't really worked long, it just sort of comes your way. It's only later, when it goes away, you realize what you had. Like that Joni Mitchell song Big Yellow Taxi, "Don't it always seem to go, you don't know what you've got till it's gone".

Well, now Lou is gone, and we will definitely miss him. And, if you didn't appreciate him while he was here... there's always an upcoming biopic.

Producers Reward Production

2006-01-05T11:42:00.000-08:00

It sounds axiomatic, but, in reality, the very exclusive 2.000 member Producers Guild of America usually awards big budget, high grossing movies. However, after being battered by the internet and seeing Netflix grow more than any studio, the PGA today nominated a roster of films that clearly show an awareness of where and how to profit in the film industry.

Nominated for best picture, by the newly expanded Guild (grown by 20% last year) are Focus Features' "Brokeback Mountain," United Artists and Sony Pictures Classics' "Capote," Lionsgate's "Crash," Warner Independent Pictures' "Good Night, and Good Luck" and 20th Century Fox's "Walk the Line." The latter was made for $29M and three of the others were under $8M in production costs. Aside from the low budgets, we are seeing thought-provoking art films and again, biopics. And, mark my words, message is in. These films were mostly labors of love, they have behind them the heart wrenching stories of how they came to fruition.

This story will not get much attention, but, I think it's one of the biggest stories of the year. This marks a clear shift in philosophy from a very powerful group of people. 2005 will be seen as a pivotal year in the film industry. Just as Evans turned Paramount around in the late 60's by making relevant, rebellious films, the producers of today are sending a clear message that the business model is changing and they are looking to this (indie) section as the best road to profitability.

The music and and film industries are predicated on the massive hits needed to sustain fixed costs. In the past, the blockbusters were seen as the only real profit centers and increasingly became the focus of LA. Now that they've seen a year where only indie studios or indie arms of major studios are profiting at all, they understand that you can't subsidize the tech houses forever, the magic of Toy Story and Monsters is over.

Hey Steve, and Peter, you can't make it look any more real! It's so real I almost forget the gum on the floor, OK? There is a limit to what the American public will pay to watch the special effects and photo-real animation. It was truly incredible that the PGA formerly nominated The Incredibles over films like Lost in Translation, which is by a Coppolla for god's sake.

So, in a year where King Kong crashed, the PGA saw the light. They now understand that big budget films are risky business and are largely responsible for year-end losses and massive cost cutting at every studio this year. When you can bet on a smaller film and double your return, thoughtful, plot-driven films which still bank on major brands like Ray Charles and Johnny Cash start to look a lot different to producers.

Hollywood is driven from the top down. If your film doesn't get financed, it doesn't get made. The only way to change things is to vote with your dollars, and we have. We've turned away from Kong and to lots of very nice stuff from Netflix. If you want us in the theaters now, you'll have to offer more than $5. popcorn. We now want IMAX, one of the very few bright spots in the theater business.

There will always be people wanting to come out for an experience, but not the experience of cranking your neck back, looking over someone's head in some uncomfortable chair, watching commercials, getting hearing damage so you can be the first one on your block to see some very entertaining and maybe very beautiful and meaningful but nonetheless, average, film.

Average is looking better to the PGA every day as average films are getting better and better every day.

The Way The Music Died

2006-01-05T05:42:00.000-08:00

You have to be awake at 4am to find this stuff on TV, but the website gives all sorts of great particulars. The title is a twist on the phrase coined by Don McLean in American Pie which traced our demise from the date February 2, 1959, when Buddy Holly, Big Bopper & Richie Valens crashed in a snowy field. For me, the day the music died was December 8, 1980, when John Lennon was shot.

Although we had lost, perhaps, our innocence, we certainly had incredible music after 1959. However, I defy anyone to successfully argue that the 25 years since 1980 have produced better music than the 25 years before it. The world of music is a world filled with death and tragedy along with the magnificent highs it produces. It will die many deaths and be reborn as often.

The program I highlight here is a great synopsis of how the industry operates, and it will probably go a lot faster than reading this blog. Though, if you really want to know, and don't mind all the extra opinion and analysis, I suggest IntoFreeMusic. The reason I write about this stuff so much is because when people understand the process by which music, and other entertainment, is filtered before it gets to them and the economics of the industry, they will use their dollars and computers wisely to improve our selection of meaningful art.

Anyway, the day it died is far less interesting to me than the way it died, or the way it is changing. As a matter of fact, I don't quite understand why PBS takes such a dour tone. The music isn't dying. The music is being resurrected. It's the music INDUSTRY that's dying, so that the music itself can live. Nothing is more worthy of death than the music industry which has been killing music, not to mention human brain activity, since it became a billion dollar sector and attracted the sharks.

First it became a commodity, and then, via MTV, it became a visual commodity. The music itself took a back seat to those marketing and visual factors to the point where we get to stars as profitable as Britney Spears who succeed almost totally on the basis of visuals, promotion & production. Yes, we reached some low points, boxed boy bands etc. You know, people have a right to be entertained without having their minds or hearts stimulated. And I don't have a problem with anyone offering up that opium.

My issues with the music industry, film, TV, radio, print and many other industries, including, increasingly, the tech sector is the lack of a free market. Yes, crappy art bothers me, so I try not to patronize it. As long as alternatives exist and the economics of the sector have sufficient checks and balances, I'm ok. If Britney is popular because there are more people who enjoy watching her tits bounce than there are people who enjoy listening to Fiona Apple, no problem. When Clear Channel, who owns every major market in the country takes the Dixie Chicks off their stations because Natalie Mains criticizes Bush, I got a big fucking problem. Especially when the powerful broadcasting lobby has Congress exponentially expand the number of stations a company can own.

I prefer not to focus on death but rebirth and the important date for me was July 29, 2000, when Napster defeated RIAA's first try at an injunction. Hank Barry, the triumphant Robin Hood telling the public, hey, we got your music back... come and get it. Well, we came, we got it. The internet has changed everything, and though we need to be vigilant, I think it will be an uphill battle for entertainment entities to control content and price the way they did before. Music is becoming less something you buy, and more something you do.

Musique est mort? Viva la musique!

Media in 2005

2006-01-02T15:05:00.000-08:00

Thank you Richard Menta, I'm surprised I never came across your site before, but I'll add it to my list. Last year I spent a lot of time on those end of the year wrap-ups, but yours was so good, I'll save myself the trouble this year and just provide the link to yours, and to the link to the survey showing only 2% of online music buyers care about the legality of internet music. And, thanks for mentioning Jon Newton, the guy is an unsung hero. They did have Patti Santangelo on both Today & CBS This Morning last Friday... finally.

I Know What You Want

2006-01-02T08:24:00.000-08:00

With all the rain, it's New Years... I may as well dig into something deep. As you may have noticed, this blog breaks roughly into four areas: film, music, commentary - mostly on media and then there's the more personal stuff, my art, my ideas, philosophy etc. I put all the film stuff on IntoFilm, the music stuff on IntoTune and the opinion driven stuff onto IntoFreeMusic.

OK, well there's another blog I've never mentioned. Don't even bother looking for it because there's almost nothing on it and by the time I finish this post even that will be absorbed. It's based on the title of a book I intend to write so that I can actually profit from some of my writing. Since much of what I write about is the frustration of living in a society where people are directed out of their creativity by a desire to have a decent standard of living, it would be nice to actually profit off my own creative efforts at some point.

The other blog, called Transformationz, discussed a term I'd seen on Roger McNamee's blog. Roger is a very interesting man, made so much money he was able to put together a top-notch band by putting them all on an annual salary, he plays guitar and tours with them for his vacations. He put Elevation Partners together with Bono. High energy, extroverted, very much about contacts and networking, so it was somewhat surprising he would get me thinking about self-awareness. I'm far more introverted than Roger, want a slower pace but I have always been very self aware, or, at least I've tried to be.

You know, making money requires a person to service others in some way. Artists can make money by connecting to themselves, their god and portraying it out into art. But most people learn that if they want a job and a paycheck, they need to focus on other people and what needs to be accomplished by the group. So, there are always these competing needs, and this was the subject of my movie. How does one balance the intrinsic need to understand their life and their thoughts and feelings while still accomplishing useful work and making money?

It's very easy to understand the value of money and things and it's also very easy to forget the value of our spiritual needs.

The other day I asked my teenage son some typical mom question like why did he do or say some particular thing and he gave me the standard answer, that he didn't know. So, I said something like, well, you should know why you do things, you should understand yourself, have some insight, something.

Then a few days later he comes up and asks why he should need this type of understanding. So, I said something like, "Oh nothing big, just happiness. peace of mind, fulfillment... that type of thing." Then we probably had one of our mother-son talks where my daughter tries desperately to join in, but, it's just still over her head. Having a son and a daughter, I do think women come by self awareness more naturally in way. The female hormones are more emotion driven and male ones more motion driven. Plus, women are always dealing with their bodies in a way men don't.

So, I thought our little exchange was just the sweetest, most archetypal thing. God only knows how many of the hundreds of men I've spoken to in the past few years did not have this type of conversation with their own moms. Maybe their moms were too busy washing their dishes and shorts. My kids clean up after themselves and I try to guide them in their lives cause I've come by my self awareness the hard way, the only way, and I'm willing to open up and expose myself and my mistakes and my thoughts and feelings, even the unsavory and unpopular ones.

My kids are already getting quite deep and incredible and grow in their relationship to each other. They've had a lot to deal with in their young lives and I try to demonstrate and impart skills. I have definitely found myself much more attentive to this quality in others. Basically, I'm sick of dealing with immature, dense, clueless people. My son has more maturity and self awareness at 14 than his father has at 55. I know plenty of young people who demonstrate more sensitivity and awareness than older ones.

More Junk on TV?

2005-12-28T06:34:00.000-08:00

After buying iFilm only a month ago, MTV Networks has unveiled plans for a new show to run on VH1 called Web Junk hosted by Patrice O'Neal. A retro way of looking at it would be to call it the next generation of Americas Funniest Videos. God knows, the American public never tires of laughing at others meet with disaster, and I'm sure this type of footage will show up, but, really the web-based interactive nature of the show is the opening shot of a whole new world of user-generated content infiltrating television.

In ten years the distinction between internet and TV will be so seamless, we'll know it only in memory. Memories of the old days when art and entertainment came at us from "professionals" and we absorbed, like good little drones will be replaced by interactive platforms. Right now, the shorts uploaded onto iFilms will show on three platforms: TV, the iFilm website, and VSpot, which is a broadband platform also owned by MTV.

I'm not quite sure what VSpot is or what it offers that the other two platforms don't, apparently, an on-demand feature that TV doesn't have, but better speed than you'll get through the iFilm website. It seems like for the next few years, at least, we'll have to deal with this patchwork quilt of disseminators, or actually, they are now referring to themselves as aggregators... it's better than what they used to be... aggravators. While the small music files screeching across the internet overturned business models and content in the space of a year, it will take longer with film. For now, don't even bother with your feature films, focus on three minute shorts and get yourself some visibility.

Web Junk promises an easy upload feature, so break out your camcorder and Final Cut Pro, make your three-minute statement and watch it on TV, internet and the VSpot streaming option. You don't have to think of movies only in terms of sitting in theaters anymore, or even in terms of sitting at all. Soon, we'll all be watching each other, not only on reality TV, but reality life.... only this time, with special effects. And don't forget to vote for your favorites... our next Steven Speilberg might be Kelly Clarkson.