I’ve spent 3 days waiting for some sort of lucidity for discussing The Fountain, but it hasn’t come. I think this is one of those rare films that sort of defy synopsizing and effective analysis. If you go home after this movie and try to break it down or make all the disparate pieces fit together, I think you’ve missed it altogether. It’s not a film that is the sum of its parts; it is strictly to be experienced in a comprehensive manner, because when you try to piece it together it will probably fall apart within its own labyrinthine logic, but it all works, so it's not a failure despite being messy.
Darren Aronofsky (writer-director) definitely over-reached on just about every level with this one, bringing together conquistadors, Mayan religion, Christianity, animal testing, 26th century space travel, complex non-computer-generated visual effects, and more, only rarely completely achieving what he is aiming for (though the vfx are stunning most of the time); and yet it is all done with such earnestness and passion that you have to appreciate the effort, if not the finished product. There is something to be said for a filmmaker reaching for the stars (literally) even if he doesn't quite get there, especially in comparison to the number of “safe” efforts that come through the cinemas these days.
One thing everyone should agree on, regardless of their thoughts to the material, is that Clint Mansell, the Kronos Quartet, and Mogwai create a hauntingly magnificent score for the film. The music is just perfect all the way through.
I highly recommend this film if for no other reason than to see no less than one man's display of just about everything he knows/thinks he knows about life, love, death, and his medium of creative expression poured out with incredible energy. Not everyone will be entertained and not everyone will like it, but all should be able to appreciate it.
Coming up:
Discussions of Happy Feet, Flushed Away, and The Queen
Thursday, November 30, 2006
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
In Response:
I was responding to a comment in regards to a post yesterday and I figured I might as well post it for all to see:
Excerpted from the inciting post:
There are too many movies being released these days. It seems every weekend there are 4,5,6 new movies...this week we saw the wide release of Bobby, Deja Vu, Deck the Halls, The Fountain, Tenacious D, and For Your Consideration...This..has contributed to mass amounts of DVD sales/rentals; it's not that people don't want to go to theater, it's that the movies are in and out so quick there's no chance if you don't go in the first 2 or 3 weekends.
The comment incited:
arent their so many more movies becaue there are so many more niches. like borat is for one crowd, bobby is for another. No longer are film studios trying to make movies for everyone its niche marketing. In order to maximize profits they realease movies for short time in theater to get the die hards and the recoup the rest in DVD sales.
And now, the rebuttal:
The studios don't make much money on theatrical runs unless a film is a mainstream hit so they need movies that appeal to as wide a base as possible. And they don't make as much on DVD's if a film isn't a hit in theaters (or at least pushed by strong word of mouth a la Fight Club and The Boondock Saints). If they don't make it in the theater, odds are it won't play on DVD either. I don't imagine there will be too many people rushing out to rent/buy DVD's of You, Me, and Dupree, The Ant Bully, or even Snakes on a Plane this winter.
Besides, the studios don't really decide what plays in theaters, the theaters do. If it's playing well, they will keep renting the print, if it bombs, they'll try to get something else. Theater owners (at least outside of LA and NY) tend to only rent the prints for the films that are most broadly marketed, which is why in Fresno we won't get to see Half Nelson, Last King of Scotland, we got Marie Antoinette and The Queen on 1 screen out 50+ in the city for 3 weeks each, etc. The individual theater owner needs to make a profit, independent of the studios, and since they make the majority of their profits off concession sales anyway, they need as many people as possible in theaters, eschewing as many niche films as possible in favor of the next Denzel/Tom Hanks/Julia Roberts/Will Smith movie, because those actors appeal beyond any niche.
Of course, there is no way for them to know what is going to appeal. Who would've guessed Titanic would be the highest grossing movie of all-time? Who would've guessed Brokeback Mountain would've played so well in Montana, Idaho, and the Dakotas? Fox didn't expect Borat to be a hit, so they cut the number of theaters it released in from over 2000 down to about 800 in the first weekend; it killed and still opened #1. Someone over the summer expected "My Super ex-Girlfirend" to make more than $20mil return (less the cost of prints and advertising) on a $100+million investment. So the studios/theaters don't know, it's all guesswork.
Also, at least 2 major studios announced they are cutting back their production slate for the coming years from 18 to 15 or 12, so the studios are clearly seeing some downside to the film bonanza as well.
Excerpted from the inciting post:
There are too many movies being released these days. It seems every weekend there are 4,5,6 new movies...this week we saw the wide release of Bobby, Deja Vu, Deck the Halls, The Fountain, Tenacious D, and For Your Consideration...This..has contributed to mass amounts of DVD sales/rentals; it's not that people don't want to go to theater, it's that the movies are in and out so quick there's no chance if you don't go in the first 2 or 3 weekends.
The comment incited:
arent their so many more movies becaue there are so many more niches. like borat is for one crowd, bobby is for another. No longer are film studios trying to make movies for everyone its niche marketing. In order to maximize profits they realease movies for short time in theater to get the die hards and the recoup the rest in DVD sales.
And now, the rebuttal:
The studios don't make much money on theatrical runs unless a film is a mainstream hit so they need movies that appeal to as wide a base as possible. And they don't make as much on DVD's if a film isn't a hit in theaters (or at least pushed by strong word of mouth a la Fight Club and The Boondock Saints). If they don't make it in the theater, odds are it won't play on DVD either. I don't imagine there will be too many people rushing out to rent/buy DVD's of You, Me, and Dupree, The Ant Bully, or even Snakes on a Plane this winter.
Besides, the studios don't really decide what plays in theaters, the theaters do. If it's playing well, they will keep renting the print, if it bombs, they'll try to get something else. Theater owners (at least outside of LA and NY) tend to only rent the prints for the films that are most broadly marketed, which is why in Fresno we won't get to see Half Nelson, Last King of Scotland, we got Marie Antoinette and The Queen on 1 screen out 50+ in the city for 3 weeks each, etc. The individual theater owner needs to make a profit, independent of the studios, and since they make the majority of their profits off concession sales anyway, they need as many people as possible in theaters, eschewing as many niche films as possible in favor of the next Denzel/Tom Hanks/Julia Roberts/Will Smith movie, because those actors appeal beyond any niche.
Of course, there is no way for them to know what is going to appeal. Who would've guessed Titanic would be the highest grossing movie of all-time? Who would've guessed Brokeback Mountain would've played so well in Montana, Idaho, and the Dakotas? Fox didn't expect Borat to be a hit, so they cut the number of theaters it released in from over 2000 down to about 800 in the first weekend; it killed and still opened #1. Someone over the summer expected "My Super ex-Girlfirend" to make more than $20mil return (less the cost of prints and advertising) on a $100+million investment. So the studios/theaters don't know, it's all guesswork.
Also, at least 2 major studios announced they are cutting back their production slate for the coming years from 18 to 15 or 12, so the studios are clearly seeing some downside to the film bonanza as well.
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
Various Things That Occured to Me at the Cinema
I went to see The Fountain this afternoon (I'll write about it tomorrow) and in regards to the experience, there are 3 or 4 points I'd like to make if I may:
1) There are a lot of people out and about in the middle of day during the week. I never really thought about it before, but there is a large portion of our population (at least here in Fresno) that does not work the regular M-F 8/9-5/6.
2) Movie theaters would probably sell more "combo packs" if they were discounted. Selling me a "Medium Combo" that is a regular priced popcorn and a regular priced medium drink does not constitute a "combo". And while I'm at it, there is no reason anyone should pay $5 for a soda, $4 for a bag of skittles, or $8 for popcorn, regardless of size or how hungry/thirsty you may be.
3) There are too many movies being released these days. It seems every weekend there are 4,5,6 new movies, it's impossible for anyone to keep up. Just this week we saw the wide release of Bobby, Deja Vu, Deck the Halls, The Fountain, Tenacious D, and For Your Consideration, not to mention various other indies/docs that come out every week in LA/NY.
I saw a stat last week that said the average American goes to the movies 4.77 times per year (2nd only to Iceland), but at the rate we release movies, that's not even enough times in one year to see all the movies released this past week. This, I think more than anything else has contributed to mass amounts of DVD sales/rentals; it's not that people don't want to go to theater, it's that the movies are in and out so quick there's no chance if you don't go in the first 2 or 3 weekends.
4) Jennifer Connelly.....wow
now, 5) There needs to be a way to soundproof theaters so that if I am watching a relatively quiet movie I'm being bothered by the incessant blasts coming from the action movie in the theater adjacent. And there is readily available technology to block cell phone signals from coming into the theater, and it is ridiculous that theaters don't take advantage.
6) Generally speaking, the better the movie, the better the audience.
(for those who didn't catch the obvious Dr. Strangelove reference in this post...shame on you for your cinematic illiteracy)
1) There are a lot of people out and about in the middle of day during the week. I never really thought about it before, but there is a large portion of our population (at least here in Fresno) that does not work the regular M-F 8/9-5/6.
2) Movie theaters would probably sell more "combo packs" if they were discounted. Selling me a "Medium Combo" that is a regular priced popcorn and a regular priced medium drink does not constitute a "combo". And while I'm at it, there is no reason anyone should pay $5 for a soda, $4 for a bag of skittles, or $8 for popcorn, regardless of size or how hungry/thirsty you may be.
3) There are too many movies being released these days. It seems every weekend there are 4,5,6 new movies, it's impossible for anyone to keep up. Just this week we saw the wide release of Bobby, Deja Vu, Deck the Halls, The Fountain, Tenacious D, and For Your Consideration, not to mention various other indies/docs that come out every week in LA/NY.
I saw a stat last week that said the average American goes to the movies 4.77 times per year (2nd only to Iceland), but at the rate we release movies, that's not even enough times in one year to see all the movies released this past week. This, I think more than anything else has contributed to mass amounts of DVD sales/rentals; it's not that people don't want to go to theater, it's that the movies are in and out so quick there's no chance if you don't go in the first 2 or 3 weekends.
4) Jennifer Connelly.....wow
now, 5) There needs to be a way to soundproof theaters so that if I am watching a relatively quiet movie I'm being bothered by the incessant blasts coming from the action movie in the theater adjacent. And there is readily available technology to block cell phone signals from coming into the theater, and it is ridiculous that theaters don't take advantage.
6) Generally speaking, the better the movie, the better the audience.
(for those who didn't catch the obvious Dr. Strangelove reference in this post...shame on you for your cinematic illiteracy)
Sunday, November 26, 2006
Music Binge 2006: Episode #2
I recently went on a second fall music binge (the first was covered at the end of this post back in October), collecting 6 more new CD's the last week or so:
The modern tunes:
V - The Revelation Is Now Televised
The album was recommended by Amazon, and executive produced by DJ Jazzy Jeff, so I took a chance on it. It's one of those neo-soul records where all of the songs are mediocre attempts at poetry with 5-6 minute running times with about 2-3 minutes worth of actual content, filled out with repeating and looping the track and you can't tell when one track ends and the next one begins because it all sounds the same. V is a decent singer, and with better production he could be a good artist, but as it stands he is a poor man's Dwele, and Dwele is a poor man's Musiq.
Anthony David - The Red Clay Chronicles
Anthony David made one of my favorite albums of the decade thus far with "3 Chords and the Truth", so I had high expectations for this one, and he subverted them by working in a slightly different direction. He moved toward a more studio produced sound, opposed to the more acoustic sound of his debut. I was unsure about it upon first listen, but it has since convinced me that those reservations are unmerited. The album is solid, with 3 songs (Words ft. India Arie and On & On, and the title track, which sounds like a bona fide Curtis Mayfield song) being better than just about any on his first disc. The rest of the album meets with varying degrees of success. The only misfire is the song "ATL Sunshine", his ode to summer out on the block in Atlanta, which would probably mean more to me if I were from the area, but even then it would still be tepid. I respect the effort though, giving love to his hometown.
James Hunter - People Gonna Talk
Van Morrison declared him the best kept secret in British music, and he may be right. This guy sounds as you would expect Van Morrison to sound if he had been making music in the 1950's. That Little Richard-era R&B sound. A lot of horns and 2.5 minute songs. 14 Straightforward, simple tales about love/relationships without an ounce of pretense. It's fun music, and one of my favorite albums of the year.
Mindy Smith - Long Island Shores
I read about this album in the paper on Sunday and just happened to see it at Target, on sale for $9, so I decided what the heck, I'll give it a shot. She falls somewhere in between Norah and Sheryl Crow, with a nod to her Nashville roots. It's only got one true country song, the rest is pleasant sounding pop-folk with a slight country flavor. She has a good voice, and is musically competent enough to make it worth the purchase price. The lyrics are so-so, but she sings them so well.
And now, the throwback records:
The Byrds - Sweetheart of the Rodeo
I have in the last 2 years or so become a fan of all this hippie-era music, and while writing this post about country music I was doing a little research and found this album was considered maybe the best country-rock album ever made, and since just about every other album I have from the 66-69 era (Sgt. Pepper, Odyssey and Oracle, Forever Changes, Pet Sounds, Velvet Underground and Nico) are among my favorites, I figured I should give this a shot, and the album didn't disappoint. Classic rock crossed with classic country = classic music. This album is definitely a pre-cursor to The Eagles, (and probably many other bands I don't know who made similar music). The harmonies, compositions, and arrangements all work astonishingly well. Consider it added to that aforementioned litany of my favorite hippie music. As with several of these vintage albums, the alternate versions/previously unreleased songs are just as good as those on the original album.
The Men of the Robert Shaw Chorale - Sea Shanties
This is the showpiece of the new additions to the collection. This is an album of good ol fashioned sailor's tunes, sung by an all-male chamber chorus that treats them as serious pieces of choral composition. It is one of my favorite music purchases ever. I walked into Borders intending to buy Mozart's Requiem (K. 626). I picked it up, and as I was on my way to the register I saw an album sitting out of place in the Bluegrass section that said in bold letters "Sea Shanties." I turned it over to see what qualified as a "sea shanty". I recognized the songs "Blow the Man Down" and "What Do You Do With a Drunken Sailor" and immediately thought to myself "Forget Mozart, I must posses these glorious sea shanties." And, oh, what a marvelous idea it was. No offense, Mozart.
The modern tunes:
V - The Revelation Is Now Televised
The album was recommended by Amazon, and executive produced by DJ Jazzy Jeff, so I took a chance on it. It's one of those neo-soul records where all of the songs are mediocre attempts at poetry with 5-6 minute running times with about 2-3 minutes worth of actual content, filled out with repeating and looping the track and you can't tell when one track ends and the next one begins because it all sounds the same. V is a decent singer, and with better production he could be a good artist, but as it stands he is a poor man's Dwele, and Dwele is a poor man's Musiq.
Anthony David - The Red Clay Chronicles
Anthony David made one of my favorite albums of the decade thus far with "3 Chords and the Truth", so I had high expectations for this one, and he subverted them by working in a slightly different direction. He moved toward a more studio produced sound, opposed to the more acoustic sound of his debut. I was unsure about it upon first listen, but it has since convinced me that those reservations are unmerited. The album is solid, with 3 songs (Words ft. India Arie and On & On, and the title track, which sounds like a bona fide Curtis Mayfield song) being better than just about any on his first disc. The rest of the album meets with varying degrees of success. The only misfire is the song "ATL Sunshine", his ode to summer out on the block in Atlanta, which would probably mean more to me if I were from the area, but even then it would still be tepid. I respect the effort though, giving love to his hometown.
James Hunter - People Gonna Talk
Van Morrison declared him the best kept secret in British music, and he may be right. This guy sounds as you would expect Van Morrison to sound if he had been making music in the 1950's. That Little Richard-era R&B sound. A lot of horns and 2.5 minute songs. 14 Straightforward, simple tales about love/relationships without an ounce of pretense. It's fun music, and one of my favorite albums of the year.
Mindy Smith - Long Island Shores
I read about this album in the paper on Sunday and just happened to see it at Target, on sale for $9, so I decided what the heck, I'll give it a shot. She falls somewhere in between Norah and Sheryl Crow, with a nod to her Nashville roots. It's only got one true country song, the rest is pleasant sounding pop-folk with a slight country flavor. She has a good voice, and is musically competent enough to make it worth the purchase price. The lyrics are so-so, but she sings them so well.
And now, the throwback records:
The Byrds - Sweetheart of the Rodeo
I have in the last 2 years or so become a fan of all this hippie-era music, and while writing this post about country music I was doing a little research and found this album was considered maybe the best country-rock album ever made, and since just about every other album I have from the 66-69 era (Sgt. Pepper, Odyssey and Oracle, Forever Changes, Pet Sounds, Velvet Underground and Nico) are among my favorites, I figured I should give this a shot, and the album didn't disappoint. Classic rock crossed with classic country = classic music. This album is definitely a pre-cursor to The Eagles, (and probably many other bands I don't know who made similar music). The harmonies, compositions, and arrangements all work astonishingly well. Consider it added to that aforementioned litany of my favorite hippie music. As with several of these vintage albums, the alternate versions/previously unreleased songs are just as good as those on the original album.
The Men of the Robert Shaw Chorale - Sea Shanties
This is the showpiece of the new additions to the collection. This is an album of good ol fashioned sailor's tunes, sung by an all-male chamber chorus that treats them as serious pieces of choral composition. It is one of my favorite music purchases ever. I walked into Borders intending to buy Mozart's Requiem (K. 626). I picked it up, and as I was on my way to the register I saw an album sitting out of place in the Bluegrass section that said in bold letters "Sea Shanties." I turned it over to see what qualified as a "sea shanty". I recognized the songs "Blow the Man Down" and "What Do You Do With a Drunken Sailor" and immediately thought to myself "Forget Mozart, I must posses these glorious sea shanties." And, oh, what a marvelous idea it was. No offense, Mozart.
Friday, November 24, 2006
The Joy of Minor League Hockey....and the San Diego Chicken
Last night I made my way down to the Save Mart Center to see a little minor league hockey action. Out on the ice, it was the Fresno Falcons vs. Idaho Steelheads, an early season slugfest in the ECHL (how Fresno and Idaho, not mention Alaska, play in the East Coast Hockey League is beyond me).
Watching the game I was once again reminded why there are many people who love hockey. It's a great game to watch live, but it just doesn't translate to the television, and I think part of it is where they have to put the cameras. Watching hockey from the side is like watching tennis from the side, you can do it, but the game makes more sense watching from one of the ends, behind the goal if you ask me. But I digress. What I also noticed was how poorly both teams played the game of hockey.
It was exciting 3-2 game, with Idaho scoring the game-winning goal as the guy who scored it got hammered into the boards, but they didn't play well. The games can be thrilling, but they don't play the game as well as we're used to seeing it played; and minor league hockey is not like minor league baseball, where the best players are good enough to get called up to the pros and just about all pros played at least one season in the minors. No, these guys are as high up the hockey ladder as they'll ever get. At what point to you have to tell these guys to give it up. I mean, it's not like they can be making too much money playing in front of 2-3 thousand people a night, and hockey is a violent game and it takes a toll on you physically. I understand love of the game, but I would think love of the ability to walk when you're 45 would be preferable. Anyway, I won't begrudge these men their game, as it provided me with a night's entertainment.
Although, last night, the entertainment was provided by none other than the legendary San Diego Chicken
For the uninitiated, the San Diego Chicken was the first pro sports mascot and has been, for the last 30 years, THE great vaudevillian of American sports. He was recently ranked as one of the 100 Most Influential Figures in Sports for the 20th Century by TSN, and was invited by President Bush to appear at the first game of the White House T-Ball League. Simply put, The Chicken is a legend. Now, he is getting up in age, so his antics have been scaled back a bit in recent years, but even so, he's still got that irreverent, irascible spirit going, and any time he makes an appearance it's a treat for anyone in attendance who cares about American sports history and/or has a sense of humor. Go see him if he's coming to your area any time soon, he is allegedly looking toward retirement in the coming year(s) and obviously can't make it to every city in the country on an official farewell tour.
Here's a nice sampling of some classic Chicken moments, courtesy of Youtube. Enjoy
Watching the game I was once again reminded why there are many people who love hockey. It's a great game to watch live, but it just doesn't translate to the television, and I think part of it is where they have to put the cameras. Watching hockey from the side is like watching tennis from the side, you can do it, but the game makes more sense watching from one of the ends, behind the goal if you ask me. But I digress. What I also noticed was how poorly both teams played the game of hockey.
It was exciting 3-2 game, with Idaho scoring the game-winning goal as the guy who scored it got hammered into the boards, but they didn't play well. The games can be thrilling, but they don't play the game as well as we're used to seeing it played; and minor league hockey is not like minor league baseball, where the best players are good enough to get called up to the pros and just about all pros played at least one season in the minors. No, these guys are as high up the hockey ladder as they'll ever get. At what point to you have to tell these guys to give it up. I mean, it's not like they can be making too much money playing in front of 2-3 thousand people a night, and hockey is a violent game and it takes a toll on you physically. I understand love of the game, but I would think love of the ability to walk when you're 45 would be preferable. Anyway, I won't begrudge these men their game, as it provided me with a night's entertainment.
Although, last night, the entertainment was provided by none other than the legendary San Diego Chicken
For the uninitiated, the San Diego Chicken was the first pro sports mascot and has been, for the last 30 years, THE great vaudevillian of American sports. He was recently ranked as one of the 100 Most Influential Figures in Sports for the 20th Century by TSN, and was invited by President Bush to appear at the first game of the White House T-Ball League. Simply put, The Chicken is a legend. Now, he is getting up in age, so his antics have been scaled back a bit in recent years, but even so, he's still got that irreverent, irascible spirit going, and any time he makes an appearance it's a treat for anyone in attendance who cares about American sports history and/or has a sense of humor. Go see him if he's coming to your area any time soon, he is allegedly looking toward retirement in the coming year(s) and obviously can't make it to every city in the country on an official farewell tour.
Here's a nice sampling of some classic Chicken moments, courtesy of Youtube. Enjoy
Tuesday, November 21, 2006
Thanksgiving is Here (almost) or: There's A Reason Most People Eat Turkey Only Once A Year
Thanksgiving is a wonderful American tradition, dating back to the Massachussets pilgrims, thanking Squanto and the local injuns for teaching them farming techniques in the New England climate through the winter of 1620-21, while the tribes thanked the pilgrims for introducing malaria and other such maladies to the region. All in all, a delightful display of reciprocity.
Today, Thanksgiving is little more than an excuse to overeat and ring in the "Christmas shopping season". Of course, for many in this country, overeating and overspending is business as usual; nevertheless, we continue to "give thanks" with a parade courtesy of Macy's, a Cowboys football game, and a giant family feast every November.
And oh what a feast it is: mac & cheese, cornbread, ham, black eyed peas, cranberry sauce, "pillowy mounds of mashed po-ta-toes, butter drenched dressing, tiny onions swimming in a sea of cream sauce", and of course.... turkey.
Ahhh, turkey. The one fowl deemed fit to serve as the Thanksgiving piece d'resistance. Why? Who knows. There is apparently some evidence that the pilgrims may have eaten, among other items, swan and seal (really think about that for a second....now read on) at the first Thanksgiving, but turkey has evolved into the role of centerpiece. And what a sad thing that is, and you know why:
Turkey is dreadful.
Of all the meats out there, they (whomever "they" are/were) decided the biggest feast of the year would have turkey as its cornerstone. What were they thinking? The driest, blandest, arguably the most boring food there is. Pretty much everything capable of being ingested and digested in the human body tastes better than turkey. I've had good turkey and I've had bad turkey, and it's all the same: Awful. Same goes for pumpkin-based products. Anything that is "pumpkin _____" = terrible. I know this reads like heresy for those of you T'Day purists out there, but I'm just telling the truth. Those items are woeful, and should have no place on your table come Thursday. Think about it, for a week after Thanksgiving there is leftover turkey sitting in the fridge. Is there ever leftover barbecue sitting in the fridge for a week? No sir, it's too delicious to just let is sit there. It's not because there's just more turkey. It's because it's bad and we just don't want to admit it. I tend to be all for traditions, but this is one I would be glad to see fall by the wayside.
Then again, if turkey wasn't such a big deal on Thanksgiving, people might serve it more frequently throughout the year and that would be tragic. Just think if chicken and turkey switched roles in the American food culture. Kentucky Fried Turkey, anyone? Ol' Col. Sanders would need more than his trademark 16 herbs and spices. He'd be better off serving up Kentucky Fried Swan.
Today, Thanksgiving is little more than an excuse to overeat and ring in the "Christmas shopping season". Of course, for many in this country, overeating and overspending is business as usual; nevertheless, we continue to "give thanks" with a parade courtesy of Macy's, a Cowboys football game, and a giant family feast every November.
And oh what a feast it is: mac & cheese, cornbread, ham, black eyed peas, cranberry sauce, "pillowy mounds of mashed po-ta-toes, butter drenched dressing, tiny onions swimming in a sea of cream sauce", and of course.... turkey.
Ahhh, turkey. The one fowl deemed fit to serve as the Thanksgiving piece d'resistance. Why? Who knows. There is apparently some evidence that the pilgrims may have eaten, among other items, swan and seal (really think about that for a second....now read on) at the first Thanksgiving, but turkey has evolved into the role of centerpiece. And what a sad thing that is, and you know why:
Turkey is dreadful.
Of all the meats out there, they (whomever "they" are/were) decided the biggest feast of the year would have turkey as its cornerstone. What were they thinking? The driest, blandest, arguably the most boring food there is. Pretty much everything capable of being ingested and digested in the human body tastes better than turkey. I've had good turkey and I've had bad turkey, and it's all the same: Awful. Same goes for pumpkin-based products. Anything that is "pumpkin _____" = terrible. I know this reads like heresy for those of you T'Day purists out there, but I'm just telling the truth. Those items are woeful, and should have no place on your table come Thursday. Think about it, for a week after Thanksgiving there is leftover turkey sitting in the fridge. Is there ever leftover barbecue sitting in the fridge for a week? No sir, it's too delicious to just let is sit there. It's not because there's just more turkey. It's because it's bad and we just don't want to admit it. I tend to be all for traditions, but this is one I would be glad to see fall by the wayside.
Then again, if turkey wasn't such a big deal on Thanksgiving, people might serve it more frequently throughout the year and that would be tragic. Just think if chicken and turkey switched roles in the American food culture. Kentucky Fried Turkey, anyone? Ol' Col. Sanders would need more than his trademark 16 herbs and spices. He'd be better off serving up Kentucky Fried Swan.
Friday, November 17, 2006
A Second Thought on Borat
While I will not recant my recommendation of the film, because I still think it is by turns funny and intelligent (while also at times overly vulgar), something bugged me earlier this week (or last week, I forget which, the days all run together) and I aim to speak on it.
In the film, the one thing that makes it all palatable is that we know the interviewees/subjects are not in on the joke, so it is funny as a comedy of manners; everyone in America (outside of New York, I guess) is too polite to tell Borat that he is a vile human being because we assume Kazakhstan (or any "-stan" suffixed country for that matter) produces naught but bigots. The anti-Semitism, unfamiliarity with toilets, misogyny and other crassness are excused by those in the film because they are under the impression he doesn't know any better, and we in the audience laugh because we get the joke (I hope). Two grown men get into a hotel elevator buck nekkid and no one says a word; we laugh because we expect someone to say something; maybe a "Get the #%&* off this elevator naked!, perhaps the softer, "Where are you clothes?". Them not saying anything is a classic example of comedy of manners.
What bothered me was seeing "Borat" the character on Jay Leno. In that setting, there is no joke on anyone. Everyone there knows it's an act, and since there is no one playing it straight other than this character, his routine lacks the key ingredient necessary to propel it toward being real comedy. In that situation, his barbs come across as meanness and the laughter is more of a tacit approval of what he says rather than laughing at a joke, because in the comedy of manners, the joke is the affectations of those being pranked. I guess on some level, the fact that calling Madonna a transvestite is met with laughter instead of, I don't know, not laughing, could be seen as the audience carrying forward the idea that they, too, are too afraid to call him out, even when they know it's a ruse.
So, I guess the question is, at this point, in the talk show setting with Borat, what is the joke? Are we at to sit at home laughing at the fact that this audience still laughs at this reprehensible character even when they know it's a gag, or do we laugh because we think it is genuinely funny to tell Martha Stewart she should be in her cage or pulling her plow?
That's what bugged me, I think on some level, we are the joke and either we don't realize it or we are in a state of denial.
In the film, the one thing that makes it all palatable is that we know the interviewees/subjects are not in on the joke, so it is funny as a comedy of manners; everyone in America (outside of New York, I guess) is too polite to tell Borat that he is a vile human being because we assume Kazakhstan (or any "-stan" suffixed country for that matter) produces naught but bigots. The anti-Semitism, unfamiliarity with toilets, misogyny and other crassness are excused by those in the film because they are under the impression he doesn't know any better, and we in the audience laugh because we get the joke (I hope). Two grown men get into a hotel elevator buck nekkid and no one says a word; we laugh because we expect someone to say something; maybe a "Get the #%&* off this elevator naked!, perhaps the softer, "Where are you clothes?". Them not saying anything is a classic example of comedy of manners.
What bothered me was seeing "Borat" the character on Jay Leno. In that setting, there is no joke on anyone. Everyone there knows it's an act, and since there is no one playing it straight other than this character, his routine lacks the key ingredient necessary to propel it toward being real comedy. In that situation, his barbs come across as meanness and the laughter is more of a tacit approval of what he says rather than laughing at a joke, because in the comedy of manners, the joke is the affectations of those being pranked. I guess on some level, the fact that calling Madonna a transvestite is met with laughter instead of, I don't know, not laughing, could be seen as the audience carrying forward the idea that they, too, are too afraid to call him out, even when they know it's a ruse.
So, I guess the question is, at this point, in the talk show setting with Borat, what is the joke? Are we at to sit at home laughing at the fact that this audience still laughs at this reprehensible character even when they know it's a gag, or do we laugh because we think it is genuinely funny to tell Martha Stewart she should be in her cage or pulling her plow?
That's what bugged me, I think on some level, we are the joke and either we don't realize it or we are in a state of denial.
Thursday, November 16, 2006
Christmas Movie Marathon
This past week, I spent a fair amount of time contemplating a relatively hair-brained idea: Holding the ultimate Christmas-movie marathon; Several days, several sites, nothing but Holiday double-features the entire week leading up to Christmas.
Will this ambitious project will be pulled together? I'm on a maybe, leaning towards a no, especially since I'll be working tirelessly on the church Christmas production until the the 17th, and there may be a limit to how many sappy holiday films a person can stand, even at Christmas, but in the words of those old McDonalds commercials, hey, it could happen.
If by some unfortunate twist of fate you find yourself in Fresno the week of Christmas, come join in.
Currently on the slate:
Home Alone
Love Actually (if I can find my copy)
Holiday Inn
Noel
Last Holiday
Santa Claus Conquers the Martians
Also in consideration: Elf, The Santa Clause, White Christmas, The Preacher's Wife, Beyond Christmas, All I Want for Christmas, Miracle on 34th Street, Prancer, A Christmas Carol, It's A Wonderful Life, Joyeux Noel
Am I missing any Christmas classics?
Will this ambitious project will be pulled together? I'm on a maybe, leaning towards a no, especially since I'll be working tirelessly on the church Christmas production until the the 17th, and there may be a limit to how many sappy holiday films a person can stand, even at Christmas, but in the words of those old McDonalds commercials, hey, it could happen.
If by some unfortunate twist of fate you find yourself in Fresno the week of Christmas, come join in.
Currently on the slate:
Home Alone
Love Actually (if I can find my copy)
Holiday Inn
Noel
Last Holiday
Santa Claus Conquers the Martians
Also in consideration: Elf, The Santa Clause, White Christmas, The Preacher's Wife, Beyond Christmas, All I Want for Christmas, Miracle on 34th Street, Prancer, A Christmas Carol, It's A Wonderful Life, Joyeux Noel
Am I missing any Christmas classics?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)