this ain't livin'

Golden Age | 01Nov07

My father and I just returned from seeing Elizabeth: The Golden Age, and I have to say that I have been colored rather unimpressed. Visually, the film was outstanding, with some lush costumes and beautiful scenery, but the film itself was scattered and rather overwrought. It felt almost as though the goal was to keep viewers in a state of constant, swelling tension, which was poorly released at the end of the film with a saccharine baby scene in which Elizabeth looked perilously like the Virgin Mary.

As my father put it, the film was fragmented, and I imagine that for people who aren’t familiar with this period in English history, it would have been really confusing. Complex characters flashed on and off screen in a flurry of fine fabrics, but no one was really introduced or given depth. Many of these characters were quite interesting people in their day, and I was disappointed to see that the film paid them little heed, so that it could skip back to a catfight between Elizabeth and Bess Throckmorton, or a torture scene in the dungeons. It’s a pity, really, because I thought that the actors did a decent job, although they were a bit overwrought themselves. I’ve always rather liked Kate Blanchett, too, and it’s hard not to be overwrought in a film like that.

My father pointed out that the score and cinematography were eerily reminiscent of Titanic, what with the strange camera angles and drawn out scenes. The execution of Mary Stuart seemed to take about an hour, rife with historically accurate Catholic symbolism, and don’t even get me started on the Spanish Armada. In fact, for a moment I thought they might have actually used footage from Titanic, for a generic men floating in the water with sad music scene. But I might have been mistaken.

It’s always so disappointing when you expect a movie to be excellent and it turns out to be mediocre. Especially since the first Elizabeth was rather good. I’m dying to see them make a third film; they should be able to get some nice bathos out of Elizabeth’s death scene, especially when they cut the royal seal off her hand.

I was also disappointed that they didn’t use my favorite Elizabeth quote: “I have the body of a weak and feeble woman; but I have the heart and stomach of a king.”

Reading Food | 28Oct07

I just finished reading two interesting food related books, Good Calories, Bad Calories and Alone in the Kitchen With an Eggplant. Both totally different, but very interesting; I would recommend them highly if you have any interest at all in food, which I assume that you do, since you probably eat food on a fairly regular basis. Although Good Calories, Bad Calories is a pretty meaty specimen; it’s more for readers who are interested in nutritional politics.

Let’s start with Alone in the Kitchen With an Eggplant, which was a compilation of essays (and a piece of fiction by Haruki Murakami) about eating alone. The book was birthed in the mind of the editor when she started wondering what other people ate when they were alone, and she wrote to a bunch of authors to solicit essays on dining for one, cooking for one, and so forth. She also excerpted a couple of pieces, like one from MFK Fisher.

The star-studded list of authors was interesting in itself, since a couple of them happen to be personal favorites, so it was interesting to read about what they eat at home.

What was more interesting, for me, was that the book made me realize that most people don’t cook for themselves. I do. I had assumed that this was normal, that everyone actually cooked meals when they were hungry and alone, but apparently that’s not true. Other people throw pasta in a pot, eat saltines and peanut butter, or make other makeshift meals, which seems very alien to me. I make stir fries, roast things and serve them with fluffy mashed potatoes and delicately sauteed vegetables. Invent new pasta sauces, experiment with Indian curry, put together kebabs.

Most of my cooking I learned from my father, who more importantly taught me about the interactions between different foods, and the tricks which could be used to make something out of nothing. Both of us can open a seemingly empty fridge and produce a three course meal with some backup from the cabinets. It’s taken me a long time to learn that most people do not have this ability, which makes me kind of sad. Alone in the Kitchen With an Eggplant made me sad, thinking of all these people who wouldn’t make a glass of eggnog for themselves because they felt like it. How depressing.

Good Calories, Bad Calories wasn’t much cheerier, to be truthful. It’s a close look at the evolution of official dietary guidelines and policies, looking at the interaction of fats, protein, carbohydrates, and so forth. It’s sort of complicated to explain, but well worth reading if you’re interested in nutritional politics at all. The author provides some very interesting and convincing evidence that our current dietary guidelines are wrong, which makes sense given the rising number of people who are overweight. It takes a profound dietary imbalance to go dramatically over one’s set point, and he argues that this imbalance may actually be encouraged in dietary guidelines, which is a pity.

While explicit dietary advice is not offered, it is clear that the author thinks that two major culprits behind weight gain are complex carbohydrates (white rice, white flour, etc; highly refined foods with reduced fiber, in other words) and white sugar. He’s got a serious beef with sugar, and he might be right, given that we all eat way more sugar than we should probably be eating.

I’ve been thinking of embarking on a project next year where I catalog and review every book that I read. It might be overwhelming, because I read a lot of books, but I thought it might be interesting. The rule, of course, is that I must be strictly honest, which means admitting cheesy popcorn novels right along with War and Peace. Does this project sound interesting to you, gentle readers, or horribly dull?

Shaken, Not Stirred | 05Oct07

I couldn’t resist cracking open the complete James Bond I got the other day, even if I did nothing other than cackle over it and stroke it thoughtfully. Since I’d had the theme to Diamonds Are Forever stuck in my head, I decided to go ahead and watch it, thus establishing that I’m not going to watch the collection in any sort of logical order. Given that the Bond movies don’t have a coherent plot line, I don’t think it’s really an issue to watch them out of order, and switching back and forth between Bonds is a fun way to contrast their performances. (Sean Connery, needless to say, is simply the best, although Daniel Craig looks like he might shape up pretty well.)

I have to say, I’ve been colored impressed. The whole boxed set is in four separate cardboard sleeves with five discs each. Each disc comes in a nifty slimline case which includes a special features disc, with a featurette on the movie along with some really interesting interviews with Bond crews and other interesting supporting material. If you’re a Bond nerd like I am, the extra features are really fabulous. Each disc also has what I guess you would call linear notes, which talk briefly about the film and its cultural context. (Yes, gentle readers, the Bond films do have a cultural context.)

The DVDs that I ordered are the “Ultimate Edition,” which basically means that MGM cleaned up the prints and restored them before making the DVDs. As a result, the film is a lot more crisp, and you can see a lot more detail than in some older prints. People apparently take these DVDs pretty seriously, since they have their own fan site. Which is, I mean, I like James Bond and all, but that’s a little out of control. Although I do appreciate the cleaner print, don’t get me wrong.

A lot of crew, especially stunt people, returned to do the films over and over again because they got to do so many fun and neat things and work with lots of amazing toys. I imagine some also stayed for the explosions, since the Bond films do blow rather a lot of fun things up. Many of the famous stunts in the Bond films, especially in the title sequences, had never been done before, like the awesome skydiving scene in Moonraker. It’s really neat to see interviews with the stunt crews, especially when they talk about surmounting really challenging obstacles after the executive staff says things like “ok, now jump a car across a canal.”

There are also some fun interviews with actors, including some of the Bond girls. Now, I realize that popular opinion on the Bond girls is split, with most self-respecting feminist types railing against them while everyone else treats them like eye candy. Which, I suppose, they are, but some of them are also complete badasses, like Ursula Andress as Honey Rider in Dr. No. Yes, there’s the classic scene where she comes out of the water in that white bikini, but she’s also portrayed as savvy, smart, and athletically talented. Some of the more modern Bond girls have been even more impressive, especially now the M is a lady. Never underestimate a Bond girl, I say.

A lot of my friends make fun of me for being such a fan of James Bond, because they think of the films as archaic and rather silly. Silly they may be, but I think there’s more to them. You get to see an awesome assortment of exotic locations, for starters, and some of the Bonds have also been incredible actors. Some of the stunts are also really revolutionary, especially when you consider the fact that everything you see on screen actually happened; the Bond crews have really worked to avoid the use of CGI, which is one of the reasons the films are expensive to make. I think it’s also interesting to watch the cultural shift in the movies, from a focus on the Communist threat to more modern issues like smuggling and nuclear proliferation.

I wonder if anyone’s done a PhD on Bond?

Ahem | 02Oct07

Dear Amazon.com,

You know, I haven’t ordered anything from you in quite awhile, because the last time I ordered something, you messed the order up royally. You probably don’t remember because you have millions of customers a year, but I ordered a couple of books for a friend’s birthday, in plenty of time, I might add, and you shipped them at the last minute, so that they arrived on the day of his birthday, which would have been fine except that you didn’t bother to pack them properly. So I ended up with two completely trashed books rattling around in a box and I have to run to Mendocino and get some different books so that I would have something to hand this person. And when I returned the books, you people were snarky about it and didn’t even refund me shipping despite the fact that you fucked up.

So I had basically decided to never order anything from you again, but my friend Petey pointed out that wasn’t really very fair of me. I mean, you do have millions of orders every year, and you’re bound to mess a few up now and then, just statistically.

I finally broke down and ordered something from you yesterday because it was so cheap that I would have been crazy to order it anywhere else. (And no, it wasn’t books.) Now, I happen to be really excited about getting this particular something, so I ordered it with two day shipping. Let me repeat that: I paid extra for two day shipping.

Now, I placed my order at 9:13 AM. So you can imagine that I was surprised to learn that it didn’t ship until almost five o’clock, and my package tracking thingie says you don’t expect it to arrive until October Fifth. 5 October is not two days from 1 October, it is four days from 1 October. Can you please explain to me why I paid extra for two day shipping for a package that is arriving in four days?

Now, I am all for erring on the side of caution. But two day shipping means “two day shipping.” Had I ordered it by Ground or Standard or whatever the hell you call it, it can show up any time. But when I give you more money because I want a package by Wednesday, it had better damn well show up on Wednesday. And if it doesn’t, there had better be a really good reason for it, like the UPS depot was taken over by rabid zebras so no deliveries were made.

Look, Amazon. I’m considering this a trial run. I was not “taking you back,” I was considering whether or not I wanted to continue doing business with you. So far, you’re getting an F. So surprise me and make sure that package shows up at some point tomorrow.

Or…lose one of your millions of yearly customers and quail in fear at my impotent fury.

-Sincerely,

A Dissatisfied Customer

Jericho | 09Sep07

I’ve spent the last two days rewatching the first season of Jericho, which CBS has kindly left up on their site. I believe I’ve written about the show before; for those of you just tuning in, it’s a completely awesome thought experiment about what would happen in the United States after a series of nuclear attacks. Oddly enough, shortly before I discovered Jericho, I was working on a piece of short fiction about the events in a small town after the end of the world. If you haven’t started watching it yet, you should. The first season comes out on DVD on the second of October, so it probably won’t be up on the website much longer.

I’m not a television watcher because I don’t own a television, and I discovered Jericho in a circuitous fashion through StumbleUpon. I’m glad I found it. The show has a complex and interesting plot, along with compelling and well developed characters. But, perhaps most importantly in my opinion, it takes place in a small town much like my own, and the events feel very realistic. The sense of being cut off, of not being able to obtain information, of fear and confusion; it’s very believable. I wasn’t surprised to hear an interview in which the producers mentioned the events of 11 September and Hurricane Katrina as inspirations for the behaviour in the show.

Jericho doesn’t just have an very interesting story, in my opinion. It has a brilliant story, and the history of the show offscreen is pretty interesting too. The concept was originally worked up as a film, but the developers realized that a film wasn’t long enough to tell the story they wanted to tell, so they pitched it as a television show. Over the course of a season, events unfolded slowly and very naturally. We saw the best of people and the worst of people in a scenario which wasn’t that abstracted from reality; it could happen, although it’s not likely. Unfortunately, the first season of the show tanked. It got horrible ratings, and shortly after the cliffhanger final episode, CBS announced that the show was canceled.

What happened next…was fascinating. There was nothing less than a fan revolt, in which 20 tons of nuts were sent to CBS headquarters, referencing an event in the show (and a real-life event from the Second World War). After immense pressure, the network caved and agreed to pick up the second season, or at least seven episodes of it. I am eagerly looking forward to it, as are other rabid Jericho fans.

It’s especially awesome that the cast and crew have posted several videos publicly thanking fans for their efforts. In addition to the joking “thanks for securing my job,” they’ve talked about how they have grown to love the show and characters as well, and they’re grateful for the opportunity to explore Jericho for at least seven more shows. I think that the cast and crew were also impressed by the sheer level of devotion involved, and the huge outcry about the cancellation.

What’s interesting about this, to me, is the change that media is going through. The reason the first season appeared to tank is because people were watching it online, on the CBS website, or they were recording it to watch later. The ratings system clearly did not work for Jericho, since people weren’t watching it on their televisions. This almost spelled the death of the show, and it may prove to be an issue still, since CBS hasn’t committed to a full second season just yet, let alone future seasons. Given how complex the plot is, I can’t see it being wrapped up quickly; and I don’t want it to be.

Now, CBS is putting fans in an interesting position. The network is actively asking fans to watch the show when it’s scheduled to be on, and the cast and crew is adding their appeal as well. Basically, the network is rejecting alternate modes of watching the show, and essentially blackmailing viewers into watching the show “when they’re supposed to.” I’m not sure that this is smart or good business.

This puts viewers like me in a bad place because I don’t own a television, and I don’t want to. I like and appreciate being able to watch the show online, and I think that my vote should be counted. Putting shows online is getting to be more and more common, and CBS was an early adopter. I think that was a smart choice, and by doing that, the network opened up to a lot of new viewers, like me. Instead of punishing us for their own progressiveness, CBS should be stoked that they have so many devoted Internet fans of their shows. The ratings system needs to be rethunk, since shows like Jericho appeal to a different market than garbage like reality TV which one sector of the population gathers faithfully for every week. Nerds like their media flexible, and there are a lot of nerds watching Jericho.

As CBS has learned, it’s not a good idea to get nerds angry. We get awfully creative.

[Jericho]

Stardust | 02Sep07

A gang of us finally went to see Stardust last night, after weeks of stalling due to unexpected events. It was amazing. If you haven’t seen it, you should go, immediately. I informed passerby of this fact as soon as we got out, because it was a genuinely awesome movie which left me feeling…really good. It’s rare that I like a film with such a disgustingly happy ending, but I really, really loved it.

Somewhat unfairly, the film has been tanking at the box office, which is, I think, partially due to poor marketing. I’m seeing a lot of reviewers classifying it as a “girl” movie, which it isn’t. It’s a human movie. Actually, I don’t think it would really be appropriate for young children of any gender, because there are some very dark moments. It’s a sort of Princess Bride like film which will captivate people of any age with imagination. The movie was filled with magic and delight, as well as adventure and action.

I’ve always had a passion for fantasy, and the idea that magic really is just around the corner. It’s why I’ve always liked Neil Gaiman’s work, and I was hesitant about Stardust at first, because I thought that it wouldn’t do justice to the novel. But it did, and more. It captured an England of the past living side by side with an unabashedly magical world. When a unicorn appears on screen, it seems very right and ordinary, and not at all hokey. The witches are viciously evil, and they use gory haruspicy right alongside with runes when they’re not transforming people into animals. There are kings and trapped princesses and femmey pirates, and it’s all excellent.

There’s also a love story, which develops naturally and beautifully in the midst of this strange world with a wide assortment of characters and creatures. The relationship which develops between the two main characters has an elegance and a rightness which is simply undeniable. It’s certainly a compelling argument for the possible existence of true love.

In addition, the movie is simply really pretty. There are lots of sweeping, beautiful scenes, gorgeous horses, and lush visuals. I often found myself lost in the details of some ornate and fabulous scene, so much that I’m tempted to go and see it again, because I think that more things will emerge each time I see it. I am definitely adding Stardust to the list of movies I really, really like.

If you want to lose yourself in delight for a few hours, go see Stardust, and I think that you will emerge with some hope for a better world.

Superbad | 31Aug07

Petey and I went to Superbad last night, before it left Fort Bragg forever. We weren’t really that attached to seeing it on the big screen, but I was restless and wanted to get out of the house, and Baxt was otherwise occupied, so we decided to go and see a trashy movie.

We both ended up rather liking it. It was fun, and silly, and reminded me simultaneously of being in high school and of a fictional high school existence which never really happened. Yes, it is another teenybopper movie, but it has the potential to become a sort of high school classic, like Can’t Hardly Wait, The Breakfast Club, Sixteen Candles, Fast Times at Ridgemont High, and Ferris Bueller’s Day Off. I’m curious to see if it will have the staying power past our generation to become an official classic, or if it’s going to fade from the radar in a few years, too badly dated to be entertaining.

For those of you not at all familiar with the movie, the basic concept is that it’s about two friends, about to graduate high school. The movie unfolds over a 24 hour period, and all sorts of madcap adventures take place while the two try to obtain alcohol for a party. There’s a strong hipster sense of the ’70s in the film, from the opening titles to some of the songs and outfits. But I dig it, they didn’t lay it on too heavy.

You’ve got the basic assortment of stupid teen movie characters including the nerd, the bombastic virgin who spouts off about sex, the extreme dork, and the requisite hot high school girls with a surprising intelligent side. Oh, there are also two awesome police officers, who totally steal the show in my opinion. And remind me of Supertroopers, another magnificent piece of modern cinema. No terribly surprisingly plot twists, of course, but there are some excellent and truly funny scenes. The lead actors also work well together, making their friendship seem very believable.

For those of you sensitive to that sort of thing, the film has enough f-bombs to remind me of a fucking David Mamet play. I don’t think anyone seriously fucking cusses that fucking much in real life. But maybe I’m wrong. Fuck. For those of you who don’t mind a little dialogue with their f-bombs, you might want to go check it out. It is getting an 87% on Rotten Tomatoes, so it can’t be all bad, right?

I also really enjoy the artwork which accompanies the film. I really think they should be selling prints, because I would totally buy a complete set.

The Bourne Ultimatum | 12Aug07

Lo and behold, our small town movie theatre didn’t get Stardust, but it did get The Bourne Ultimatum. I’m not sure that I’ve written about my fetish for suspense movies before, so you readers gathering blackmail material can add this to your list, along with reading girlie magazines in the bathtub, drinking beer in the shower, and eating deep fried greasy things in amounts which have been known to alarm grown men. Because, yes, it’s true, I take a deep seated delight in watching thrillers, especially complex thrillers with spies and car chases and romantic locations. Maybe it’s the CIA in my blood coming out…since I can’t work for ‘em, might as well romanticize them.

At any rate, Petey and I decided to go on a movie adventure, and I sort of cautiously felt him out about going to see The Bourne Ultimatum because I am aware that not everyone relishes such films. Fortunately for me, Petey was as into it as I was, so we romped off to the theatre to watch it. Petey, thank Pete, is not a talker, so I enjoyed the movie in blissful silence, as one might well expect on a Sunday evening. Well, we did have a brief exchange of snide comments toward the end, but that was all. I swear.

Anyway…I happened to rather like it. I thought it was a reasonably well crafted movie, although the camera angles made me slightly ill sometimes. I know that grainy film and jostling scenes are supposed to draw me into the action, but instead they make me reach for a toilet. And Mr. Bell has been doing enough vomiting for the both of us, these last few days.

As is in keeping with this genre, there were a number of interesting locations including Moscow, which seems to have a Cold War mystique still…remind me to go there sometime. We also got to visit Tangiers, Madrid, and London, among others. Some day I will not be so chained to the land as I am, and I will frolic through the cities of Europe, though probably not with a gun strapped to my ankle and a bag of confidential documents. At any rate, we saw most of these movies in a fly-by-night fashion, as the characters lunged through a series of chase scenes on the hunt for Jason Bourne’s true identity. I must say, Tangiers seems to have a rather high vacancy rate, but maybe it was just that part of town.

Oddly enough, I found myself thinking about how the movie really suggests rather not nice things about the American government. Words like “extraordinary rendition” were thrown around, and you see the people in charge of organizations like the CIA participating in rather gruesome activities. This was definitely funny to contrast with the previews, which featured not one but two “America, Fuck Yeah!” movies, as my dear friend Abe likes to call them. Yes, kids, join the Army, be a hero! Certainly a strange juxtaposition of images, with some nice jibes at the freedom of the press in the film as well, like a reporter getting shot in the head in the middle of Waterloo Station and a very Pentagon Papers-esque moment later on in the film.

At any rate, if you share my fetish for romping adventure films, I suspect that you will enjoy this movie. There was just enough of a plot to keep it interesting without being overbearing, and a generally good time was had by all. I believe it meets the Petey seal of approval as well.

[The Bourne Ultimatum]

The World Without Us | 11Aug07

I just finished reading The World Without Us and I think it might be my book of the month. The author, Alan Weisman, originally wrote a brief essay called “The Earth Without People” for Discovery Magazine. The article simply wasn’t enough, and Weisman decided to expand that work into a full length book which is nothing short of awesome. You really ought to go read it as soon as possible, because this thought experiment is simply fascinating.

The premise of the book is this:

What would happen if humans just disappeared from the face of the Earth one day?

Weisman traveled from the DMZ to the Amazon jungle to find out, and some of his findings were very interesting, from a discussion of the death of coral reefs to a chapter on the longest running agricultural laboratory in the world, Rothamsted. He also interviewed all sorts of neat people in the process, and it is really interesting to hear the opinions of very talented, intelligent people on this subject. The first few chapters talk about the basic breakdown of human civilization, starting with New York city, and then he moves on. Weisman looks into what would happen to land being used for agriculture, whether or not nuclear power plants will explode, and what will happen to wildlife. Which new species might arise when we vanish? How will we have shaped the planet and its organisms, and how will our legacy endure?

All in all, it seems to me like the world would be a better place without us, but Weisman does not actually go that far. He does talk about the long-lasting damages which some of our actions will leave behind, and he certainly suggests that our way of life is not very sustainable. He also includes some ideas, ways to make our presence less toxic, for example. How do we want future archaeologists to view us? Or visitors from other planets?

Towards the end of the book, he also talks about the efforts of groups like VHEMT, and population control. He almost waxes poetic about VHEMT, and I cannot blame him. The organization has a beautiful and admirable goal, and I like the thought of enjoying my waning days, knowing that our species wanes from the Earth along with me. Of course, we could also just be more practical about reproduction. According to a graph he includes toward the end, we could stabilize the skyrocketing human population by the middle of the century if we restricted the birth rate to one child per woman around the world, down from the current average of 2.6. By the middle of next century, the human population could be down to pre-Industrial Revolution levels. And that would be pretty amazing to see.

The whole book really made me sort of wish that I could be here to see the end, watch cities collapse and fields return to wilderness. It also made me wonder about the series of radical and unfortunate decisions which have led us to this point, and whether we will recognize what we are doing before it is too late. More importantly, what are we going to do about it, and what kind of sacrifices are we willing to make?

[The World Without Us]

Time for Three | 18Jul07

Last night I went to see Time for Three with my father and my Asian mother. It was offered as part of the Music Festival, a venerable tradition which involves sitting in a cold, drafty tent on the Mendocino Headlands listening to music. Usually I go to at least one Music Festival thing, just to say that I went, although in the past the Festival has been…less than stellar. It used to be awesome. But I feel like I used to want to go to everything and now I start listlessly at the program and go “ugh, whatever” when my father asks what I want to see. He basically dragged me out tonight.

He also fixed my toilet, which is super sweet! Yay! My toilet fills now, like airplane taking off to foreign lands.

Anyway. So, it started raining, which was wet, and interesting, because…well…I mean, we were in a tent. The rain didn’t really interrupt the performance, but it was definitely present, like a silent menace. And I guess the top of the tent was filling with water and bowing, so someone was walking around on it literally baling it out. Yay! And the ground around the tent was soggy, which made me grumpy.

So, on to the music.

I actually didn’t like the first half very much. I felt like it was very disconnected and not very easy to listen to. Not that I am an easy listening kind of person, I just thought it was a bit much to ask, in places. They played with a Bach bit, and I kind of liked that, but the rest of the set was kind of painful for me. The musicians themselves are obviously very technically talented, so I was able to appreciate that even if I didn’t fancy the music all that much. They were also clearly enjoying themselves, horsing around and teasing each other, and the audience ate it up.

I was kind of surly over the intermission, imagining more of the same, and I was pleasantly surprised when we returned. A lot of fun stuff, a beautiful rendition of “Hallelujah” and some awesome pieces composed by the group. Also technically demanding, and asking a lot of us from an audience, but I was more into it because I enjoyed the music.

My sense of humor is actually a lot like theirs, so I enjoyed some of their asides. I almost cried out “nerdfighters!” at the end but I lost my nerve. Sorry, Brotherhood 2.0. They were exhorting the audience to meet them at Dick’s and party later, which was amusing. There were also a lot of musical jokes, which I’m not sure that everyone caught. I was actually kind of surprised by how into it the audience got. All those sycophantic yuppies were eating it up, enough that they got three standing ovations and an encore.

I would say that if Time for Three happens to be in your region of the world, you should check them out, for their talent if nothing else. And, all in all, I had a fun time.

[Time for Three]