Ray Bradbury died today at 91.
I have Bradbury to thank for my reluctance to mentally shelve books as 'Science Fiction' or 'Fantasy' or 'Literature' as opposed to just 'Fiction' or 'Stories'.
It seems as though so many writers start their stories setting out to write a 'hard fantasy' or a 'sci-fi noir' or whatever, but it always felt like Bradbury just wrote. And we were all the better for it.
Thanks, Ray.
Wednesday, June 6, 2012
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
About that whole 11-11-11 thing
Relax, I'm still reading 11 books in 11 genres by November 11, 2011. I'm just not reading the books I assigned to myself. I'm still stuck on 'Bleak House'. Haven't read one damn book on the list. I've had this complex since I was a kid in school--I hate, hate, hate being assigned books to read. Even if I assign them to myself! Pathetic.
So, I'll just take a look at the books I've read since January 1 and see if I can squeeze 11 distinct genres out of the pile. I suspect I can; it might take some creative accounting, but I think I can do it.
In a few days I'll post the new lineup. Probably after I post my all-time favorite film.
So, I'll just take a look at the books I've read since January 1 and see if I can squeeze 11 distinct genres out of the pile. I suspect I can; it might take some creative accounting, but I think I can do it.
In a few days I'll post the new lineup. Probably after I post my all-time favorite film.
Sunday, September 4, 2011
Two: The second lonliest number.
2. Rear Window (1954)
Directed by Alfred Hitchcock. Written by John Michael Hayes. Cinematography by Robert Burks.
Starring Jimmy Stewart, Grace Kelly, Thelma Ritter, Raymond Burr.
Yes, I know, it's about watching, it's an indictment of us moviegoers as voyeurs, blah blah blah. But 'Rear Window' is also about helplessness, weakness. Stewart plays Jeff, a news photographer who is wheelchair-bound after being caught in a race car crash while photographing it. (How cool is that?) There's a scene in which he's being given a therapeutic massage* by his nurse, Stella, and he takes his pajama top off and he looks wretched--like someone who has spent weeks in a wheelchair. I've seen this film at least a half-dozen times and the sight of a shriveled Jimmy Stewart shocks me every time.
That scene establishes that Jeff's accident has left him physically diminished, but it turns out he may have suffered some emotional fractures as well. Later in the film Lisa--Jeff's girlfriend, keep in mind--is across the courtyard being manhandled by murder suspect Thorwald. Jeff and Stella are watching this when Lisa begins screaming to Jeff for help, and Jeff tells Stella to back into the shadows so they can hide from Thorwald. Our hero, everyone! For me, this moment is Stewart at his most unappealing, and I've seen both 'Vertigo' and 'It's a Wonderful Life.'**
Christ, I love Grace Kelly. Not going anywhere with that, I just love her as an actress. My favorite Grace Kelly moment in 'Rear Window' comes when Lisa and Jeff are explaining to Jeff's cop friend about the murder they think has happened across the courtyard. Lisa says "we think Thorwald's guilty" with the same tone you might expect her to say "we're voting Republican" or "we're Lutheran."
To even things out, my favorite Jimmy Stewart moment was when Jeff's trying to convince Lisa about the murder. The camera lingers on a neighbor across the courtyard, the voluptuous Miss Torso, and Jeff says "that'd be a terrible job to tackle." Lisa looks at him and he continues "just how would you start to cut up a human body?"
Couple points: This is as good a place as any to mention that Hitchcock is my all-time favorite director. Also, Jimmy Stewart is the second actor to be in two of my top ten films. This might be the only place where Elija Wood and Jimmy Stewart are ever in the same sentence. Treasure it, Frodo.
*Get your minds out of the gutter.
**Don't believe me? Watch it again; George Bailey is kind of a jerk.
Directed by Alfred Hitchcock. Written by John Michael Hayes. Cinematography by Robert Burks.
Starring Jimmy Stewart, Grace Kelly, Thelma Ritter, Raymond Burr.
Yes, I know, it's about watching, it's an indictment of us moviegoers as voyeurs, blah blah blah. But 'Rear Window' is also about helplessness, weakness. Stewart plays Jeff, a news photographer who is wheelchair-bound after being caught in a race car crash while photographing it. (How cool is that?) There's a scene in which he's being given a therapeutic massage* by his nurse, Stella, and he takes his pajama top off and he looks wretched--like someone who has spent weeks in a wheelchair. I've seen this film at least a half-dozen times and the sight of a shriveled Jimmy Stewart shocks me every time.
That scene establishes that Jeff's accident has left him physically diminished, but it turns out he may have suffered some emotional fractures as well. Later in the film Lisa--Jeff's girlfriend, keep in mind--is across the courtyard being manhandled by murder suspect Thorwald. Jeff and Stella are watching this when Lisa begins screaming to Jeff for help, and Jeff tells Stella to back into the shadows so they can hide from Thorwald. Our hero, everyone! For me, this moment is Stewart at his most unappealing, and I've seen both 'Vertigo' and 'It's a Wonderful Life.'**
Christ, I love Grace Kelly. Not going anywhere with that, I just love her as an actress. My favorite Grace Kelly moment in 'Rear Window' comes when Lisa and Jeff are explaining to Jeff's cop friend about the murder they think has happened across the courtyard. Lisa says "we think Thorwald's guilty" with the same tone you might expect her to say "we're voting Republican" or "we're Lutheran."
To even things out, my favorite Jimmy Stewart moment was when Jeff's trying to convince Lisa about the murder. The camera lingers on a neighbor across the courtyard, the voluptuous Miss Torso, and Jeff says "that'd be a terrible job to tackle." Lisa looks at him and he continues "just how would you start to cut up a human body?"
Couple points: This is as good a place as any to mention that Hitchcock is my all-time favorite director. Also, Jimmy Stewart is the second actor to be in two of my top ten films. This might be the only place where Elija Wood and Jimmy Stewart are ever in the same sentence. Treasure it, Frodo.
*Get your minds out of the gutter.
**Don't believe me? Watch it again; George Bailey is kind of a jerk.
Monday, July 4, 2011
The Reason For The Season
Benjamin Harrison to Elbridge Gerry on the signing of the Declaration of Independence:
"I shall have a great advantage over you when we are all hung [sic] for what we are doing. From the size and weight of my body I shall die in a few minutes, but from the lightness of your body you will dance in the air for an hour or two before you are dead."*
Enjoy the booms and the pretty flashes in the sky.
*Source: http://www.digitalhistory.uh.edu/database/article_display.cfm?HHID=269
Friday, May 27, 2011
The number of the counting shall be three.
3. Almost Famous (2000)
Directed and Written by Cameron Crowe. Cinematography by John Toll.
Starring Patrick Fugit, Kate Hudson, Frances McDormand, Billy Crudup, Jason Lee, Phillip Seymour Hoffman.
One of the biggest criticisms that I've seen leveled at 'Almost Famous' is that it sugar-coats the rock n' roll experience of the time. This is grossly unfair because the overwhelming majority of films about the life of rock stars focus on the sex and the drugs. Why do we need one more? After all, why do rock musicians become rock musicians in the first place? The music. Most musicians--like the actors who portray them--go their entire careers without achieving money or glory. Why? They would have a much easier time of it by going to school, getting MBAs, becoming corporate executives and earning enough money to score women and drugs.
But they don't. Because they want to rock. And in 'Almost Famous'--unlike in a lot of other rock movies--being a rock star looks like a fun and rewarding pursuit.
This might be the last time Kate Hudson was good in anything, how sad. I was miffed at the time when she didn't win Best Supporting Actress, but now I realize that it was probably for the best.
This is the last film on the list that I saw in the theater, by the way.
Directed and Written by Cameron Crowe. Cinematography by John Toll.
Starring Patrick Fugit, Kate Hudson, Frances McDormand, Billy Crudup, Jason Lee, Phillip Seymour Hoffman.
One of the biggest criticisms that I've seen leveled at 'Almost Famous' is that it sugar-coats the rock n' roll experience of the time. This is grossly unfair because the overwhelming majority of films about the life of rock stars focus on the sex and the drugs. Why do we need one more? After all, why do rock musicians become rock musicians in the first place? The music. Most musicians--like the actors who portray them--go their entire careers without achieving money or glory. Why? They would have a much easier time of it by going to school, getting MBAs, becoming corporate executives and earning enough money to score women and drugs.
But they don't. Because they want to rock. And in 'Almost Famous'--unlike in a lot of other rock movies--being a rock star looks like a fun and rewarding pursuit.
This might be the last time Kate Hudson was good in anything, how sad. I was miffed at the time when she didn't win Best Supporting Actress, but now I realize that it was probably for the best.
This is the last film on the list that I saw in the theater, by the way.
Sunday, May 8, 2011
Embarassing omitions
I realize that I should have listed the cinematographers (or directors of photography) for my top ten films, so I'm going to fix that now:
Notorious: Ted Tetzlaff.
Lord of the Rings (All three films): Andrew Lesnie.
Vertigo: Robert Burks.
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind: Ellen Kuras.
L.A. Confidential: Dante Spinotti.
Silence of the Lambs: Tak Fujimoto.
Raiders of the Lost Ark: Douglas Slocombe.
From now on I'll list cinematographers.
Notorious: Ted Tetzlaff.
Lord of the Rings (All three films): Andrew Lesnie.
Vertigo: Robert Burks.
Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind: Ellen Kuras.
L.A. Confidential: Dante Spinotti.
Silence of the Lambs: Tak Fujimoto.
Raiders of the Lost Ark: Douglas Slocombe.
From now on I'll list cinematographers.
Wednesday, March 16, 2011
That's what it's Four.
4. Raiders of the Lost Ark (1981)
Directed by Steven Spielberg. Written by Lawrence Kasdan. Story by George Lucas and Philip Kaufman.
Starring Harrison Ford, Karen Allen, Paul Freeman, John Rhys-Davies, Ronald Lacey.
I have no memory of the first time I saw 'Raiders.' I was nine when this came out in the summer of 1981, so I could have seen this in the theater. My dad would definitely have taken me. However, I have a feeling I probably first saw it on cable a year or so later. For the record, this is the only film in the top 10 I saw as a child.
Every so often I try to convince myself to work 'Raiders' down the list, but then I catch a few minutes on cable or I pop the DVD into the machine and I have such a visceral reaction that reminds me how much I freakin' love this film. 'Raiders'--along with 'Jaws' and 'Star Wars'--is the best possible summer blockbuster. It's got such a great balance of intelligence and a sense of fun. Sadly my reaction to 'Raiders' is so atavistic that I find it difficult to analyze the film. So I won't.
Directed by Steven Spielberg. Written by Lawrence Kasdan. Story by George Lucas and Philip Kaufman.
Starring Harrison Ford, Karen Allen, Paul Freeman, John Rhys-Davies, Ronald Lacey.
I have no memory of the first time I saw 'Raiders.' I was nine when this came out in the summer of 1981, so I could have seen this in the theater. My dad would definitely have taken me. However, I have a feeling I probably first saw it on cable a year or so later. For the record, this is the only film in the top 10 I saw as a child.
Every so often I try to convince myself to work 'Raiders' down the list, but then I catch a few minutes on cable or I pop the DVD into the machine and I have such a visceral reaction that reminds me how much I freakin' love this film. 'Raiders'--along with 'Jaws' and 'Star Wars'--is the best possible summer blockbuster. It's got such a great balance of intelligence and a sense of fun. Sadly my reaction to 'Raiders' is so atavistic that I find it difficult to analyze the film. So I won't.
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Still not reading 'Bleak House,' everyone.
While I'm avoiding 'Bleak House' I just finished 'Among Others' by Jo Walton. Loved, loved, loved it. Which is odd, because it's really slow and not a lot happens overall; and normally I hate that. In case neither of you has heard of it, 'Among Others' takes place in 1979-1980 and is the story of Mori--yeah, I see what I did there--a fifteen-year-old Welsh girl who gets sent to an English boarding school after her twin sister is killed and she, herself, is crippled. All of which happened when they stopped their mother, an evil witch, from taking over the world.
Relax, you two, these aren't spoilers. All this happens between the prologue and the start of the book proper. The novel is a series of Mori's journal entries in which she describes her life at school, her father whom she just met and her attempts at fitting in.
I guess I enjoyed this book so much because Walton makes Mori so utterly charming and lovable. Walton makes Mori's voice that of a whip-smart, terribly lonely fifteen year old, but that's just the half of it. Mori is so phlegmatic about her situation that one moment you marvel at how strong she is and the next you wonder how much of it is a front. Read it for yourself, it's outstanding.
Source: My local library.
Relax, you two, these aren't spoilers. All this happens between the prologue and the start of the book proper. The novel is a series of Mori's journal entries in which she describes her life at school, her father whom she just met and her attempts at fitting in.
I guess I enjoyed this book so much because Walton makes Mori so utterly charming and lovable. Walton makes Mori's voice that of a whip-smart, terribly lonely fifteen year old, but that's just the half of it. Mori is so phlegmatic about her situation that one moment you marvel at how strong she is and the next you wonder how much of it is a front. Read it for yourself, it's outstanding.
Source: My local library.
Tuesday, February 22, 2011
Wednesday, February 16, 2011
11-11-11 Challenge Update
I'm not saying that 'Bleak House' is kicking my ass, but I'm coming to the conclusion that this is a novel best suited for reading in installments like it was originally published. And then I read this article that confirmed my suspicions. So, I'm no longer ashamed to be taking my time with 'Bleak House.' I have time to catch up, he said airily.
I'm 118 pages in and not much is happening. We've caught barely a glimpse of the great and all-consuming lawsuit, Jarndyce and Jardyce, that is at the heart of the novel. I don't know if Dickens provides more details about the suit or if it's like the shark in 'Jaws:' the less we see of it, the scarier it is. So far, most of the story is centered on Esther Summerson, an almost impossibly good-natured orphan who is drawn into the world of the lawsuit as a 'Ward of Jardyce.' The purpose of these wards--Esther is one of three--is unknown at this point, but considering we've met an elderly former ward who's since gone mad, I'm not optimistic for Esther.
But I am optimistic that my perseverance will be rewarded.
Note to FTC fucks: 'Bleak House' is from my personal collection.
I'm 118 pages in and not much is happening. We've caught barely a glimpse of the great and all-consuming lawsuit, Jarndyce and Jardyce, that is at the heart of the novel. I don't know if Dickens provides more details about the suit or if it's like the shark in 'Jaws:' the less we see of it, the scarier it is. So far, most of the story is centered on Esther Summerson, an almost impossibly good-natured orphan who is drawn into the world of the lawsuit as a 'Ward of Jardyce.' The purpose of these wards--Esther is one of three--is unknown at this point, but considering we've met an elderly former ward who's since gone mad, I'm not optimistic for Esther.
But I am optimistic that my perseverance will be rewarded.
Note to FTC fucks: 'Bleak House' is from my personal collection.
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
I can't think of anything clever for Five
5. The Silence of the Lambs (1991)
Directed by Jonathan Demme. Written by Ted Tally.
Starring Jodie Foster, Anthony Hopkins, Scott Glenn, Ted Levine.
I am not a horror movie fan. As a result I've never seen a frame of any of the 'Friday the 13th' or 'Nightmare on Elm Street' franchises. Never had any desire to watch 'Scream,' or any of the various torture porn of the last decade or so. You get the point.
As a result I avoided 'Silence of the Lambs' for at least a year or so after it came out. I finally saw it on VHS after having it recommended to me for the umpteenth time and I really liked it. And over the intervening couple of decades this film kept sneaking up on me. I'd watch it on cable whenever I could, even badly censored for swear words. Eventually I bought it on DVD more of as an afterthought than anything else. Then I'd watch it at least once a year. Then I started a Flickchart account and it shot to #5 fairly rapidly. How often does one of your all-time favorite anythings just tip-toe up on you and nestle into your heart and mind? Not often enough in my book.
Directed by Jonathan Demme. Written by Ted Tally.
Starring Jodie Foster, Anthony Hopkins, Scott Glenn, Ted Levine.
I am not a horror movie fan. As a result I've never seen a frame of any of the 'Friday the 13th' or 'Nightmare on Elm Street' franchises. Never had any desire to watch 'Scream,' or any of the various torture porn of the last decade or so. You get the point.
As a result I avoided 'Silence of the Lambs' for at least a year or so after it came out. I finally saw it on VHS after having it recommended to me for the umpteenth time and I really liked it. And over the intervening couple of decades this film kept sneaking up on me. I'd watch it on cable whenever I could, even badly censored for swear words. Eventually I bought it on DVD more of as an afterthought than anything else. Then I'd watch it at least once a year. Then I started a Flickchart account and it shot to #5 fairly rapidly. How often does one of your all-time favorite anythings just tip-toe up on you and nestle into your heart and mind? Not often enough in my book.
Saturday, January 1, 2011
Six. Six? Six!
6. L.A. Confidential (1997)
Directed by Curtis Hanson. Written by Brian Helgeland.
Starring Kim Basinger, James Cromwell, Russell Crowe, Danny DeVito, Guy Pearce, Kevin Spacey.
I have a weakness for long films that aren't afraid to take their time. Ditto for films that have complex plots and loads of characters. That's 'L.A. Confidential' in a nutshell. I think it's because these type of films replicate the literary experience better than others and despite the amount of space I'm dedicating to movies, I am more of a book person. And most of my favorite films that fit this description are book adaptations: this film, The Lord of the Rings, Zodiac, The Green Mile, The Right Stuff etc. And even the ones that aren't adapted from books, such as Almost Famous or Love Actually*, feel literary.
*Yeah, yeah, I know. I've only encountered three romantic comedies that I truly enjoy: Love Actually, Four Weddings and a Funeral and When Harry Met Sally. I'm not apologizing, just explaining that rom-coms aren't usually my taste. But those three I really like.
Directed by Curtis Hanson. Written by Brian Helgeland.
Starring Kim Basinger, James Cromwell, Russell Crowe, Danny DeVito, Guy Pearce, Kevin Spacey.
I have a weakness for long films that aren't afraid to take their time. Ditto for films that have complex plots and loads of characters. That's 'L.A. Confidential' in a nutshell. I think it's because these type of films replicate the literary experience better than others and despite the amount of space I'm dedicating to movies, I am more of a book person. And most of my favorite films that fit this description are book adaptations: this film, The Lord of the Rings, Zodiac, The Green Mile, The Right Stuff etc. And even the ones that aren't adapted from books, such as Almost Famous or Love Actually*, feel literary.
*Yeah, yeah, I know. I've only encountered three romantic comedies that I truly enjoy: Love Actually, Four Weddings and a Funeral and When Harry Met Sally. I'm not apologizing, just explaining that rom-coms aren't usually my taste. But those three I really like.
Tuesday, December 28, 2010
The 11-11-11 Project Proceeds According to Plan
Well, my damn PC went down and I'm blogging in safe mode. Yeah, safe mode.
So, I'm going around my library selecting--on the fly--the tentative line-up for the 11-11-11 Project. It is composed of books I already own but have not yet read.
1. Bleak House by Charles Dickens; Classic Literature.
2. Scientist, Soldier, Statesman, Spy: Count Rumford by G.I. Brown, Historical Biography.
3. Arthur & George by Julian Barnes, Historical Fiction.
4. Annals of the Former World by John McPhee, Geology/Travel.
5. A Dark-Adapted Eye by Barbara Vine, Thriller.
6. The Age of Spiritual Machines by Ray Kurzweil, Science.
7. The Annotated Innocence of Father Brown by G.K. Chesterton ed. by Martin Gardner, Short Stories.
8. The Solitary Vice: Against Reading by Mikita Brottman, Current Events.
9. The Echo Maker by Richard Powers, Contemporary Fiction.
10. Money Mischief by Milton Friedman, Economics.
11. War For the Oaks by Emma Bull, Urban Fantasy.
As we see, I alternated between fiction and non-fiction. Also, only two of these--the Dickens and the McPhee--could be considered doorstoppers, the rest are of moderate length at most. I didn't do this on purpose; I just picked titles that looked interesting. This way I have more time to read all the other books in my collection that I haven't read yet. You don't think I'm only going to read these eleven books do you?
And I suppose you could argue that Dark-Adapted Eye and the Father Brown stories are both mysteries, but from reading Eye's blurb, it really seems that it's more of a suspense story than a whodunit. Besides, finding fiction of different genres was a lot harder than I thought, so I figured that a short story collection from a century ago would differ sufficiently from a psychological thriller from the eighties.
I, of course, reserve the right to alter the line-up if I feel like it.
Should be fun.
So, I'm going around my library selecting--on the fly--the tentative line-up for the 11-11-11 Project. It is composed of books I already own but have not yet read.
1. Bleak House by Charles Dickens; Classic Literature.
2. Scientist, Soldier, Statesman, Spy: Count Rumford by G.I. Brown, Historical Biography.
3. Arthur & George by Julian Barnes, Historical Fiction.
4. Annals of the Former World by John McPhee, Geology/Travel.
5. A Dark-Adapted Eye by Barbara Vine, Thriller.
6. The Age of Spiritual Machines by Ray Kurzweil, Science.
7. The Annotated Innocence of Father Brown by G.K. Chesterton ed. by Martin Gardner, Short Stories.
8. The Solitary Vice: Against Reading by Mikita Brottman, Current Events.
9. The Echo Maker by Richard Powers, Contemporary Fiction.
10. Money Mischief by Milton Friedman, Economics.
11. War For the Oaks by Emma Bull, Urban Fantasy.
As we see, I alternated between fiction and non-fiction. Also, only two of these--the Dickens and the McPhee--could be considered doorstoppers, the rest are of moderate length at most. I didn't do this on purpose; I just picked titles that looked interesting. This way I have more time to read all the other books in my collection that I haven't read yet. You don't think I'm only going to read these eleven books do you?
And I suppose you could argue that Dark-Adapted Eye and the Father Brown stories are both mysteries, but from reading Eye's blurb, it really seems that it's more of a suspense story than a whodunit. Besides, finding fiction of different genres was a lot harder than I thought, so I figured that a short story collection from a century ago would differ sufficiently from a psychological thriller from the eighties.
I, of course, reserve the right to alter the line-up if I feel like it.
Should be fun.
Monday, November 8, 2010
A challenge for 2011
While I'm getting off my ass and working on the next movie in the series, I came across this article. The writer, Laura Miller, references the 10/10/10 challenge: 10 books in 10 different categories by 10/10/10. Starting on January 1, I'll take the challenge to the next level and pledge to read 11 books in 11 categories by 11/11/11. My first challenge is to think of 11 distinct genres.
Let's give it a whirl: in fiction we have Mystery, Literary Fiction, Steampunk, Historical Fiction, Hard Science Fiction, Comedy, Young Adult, Sword and Sorcery Fantasy, Urban Fantasy, Crime Fiction, Legal Thriller, Horror, Chick Lit, Spy Thriller, Magical Realism, Political Thriller.
In non-fiction: Biography, History, Science, Sports, Religion, Inspiration, Self-Help, Psychology, Philosophy, Humor, Politics, Economics, Finance, Business
I guess it all comes down to how you break down your genres. By January 1, I hope to have the full list of books and the order I'm going to read them. I'm toying with alternating fiction and non-fiction, but we'll see how that goes.
Let's give it a whirl: in fiction we have Mystery, Literary Fiction, Steampunk, Historical Fiction, Hard Science Fiction, Comedy, Young Adult, Sword and Sorcery Fantasy, Urban Fantasy, Crime Fiction, Legal Thriller, Horror, Chick Lit, Spy Thriller, Magical Realism, Political Thriller.
In non-fiction: Biography, History, Science, Sports, Religion, Inspiration, Self-Help, Psychology, Philosophy, Humor, Politics, Economics, Finance, Business
I guess it all comes down to how you break down your genres. By January 1, I hope to have the full list of books and the order I'm going to read them. I'm toying with alternating fiction and non-fiction, but we'll see how that goes.
Saturday, October 2, 2010
It's Banned Books Week! Yay?
Over at the Guardian, author Lauren Myracle makes an eloquent plea to 'build bridges' with book banners. I have to admire her general reasonableness and willingness to connect with these horrid pinheads. As you'll see below, she's way more generous and turn-the-other-cheeky than I am and I admire her for that.
Where Myralce and I part company is near the end of her article, when she raises an objection to someone calling book-banners "prudish, small-minded, and self-righteous." Isn't this like not wanting to label NBA all-stars as "tall and athletically inclined"? Aren't censors prudish, small-minded and at least a little self-righteous by definition? Are there any would-be book-banners running around who are libertine, cosmopolitan and humble? If you know any--or are one--please let me know.
She concludes her article with:
I disagree, however, with the notion that we have to respect their opinions. I absolutely respect their right to hold their cancerous, life-denying opinions, but the opinion itself? Never. The very idea of "I don't like it, so you can't have it" is toxic and stupid and needs to go the way of "Hey, let's own those guys and make them work our fields" and "My god wants me to be your king."
It's one thing to want to keep your child from certain books. (I'm still not sure that we ever have to protect kids from words and ideas, but as a parent that's absolutely your prerogative.) But the instant you try to tell someone else what they can read you've crossed the line. And that's the line we have to hold because if we give tiny-minded parochial types an atom of power over what we read, they'll try to take it all.
Where Myralce and I part company is near the end of her article, when she raises an objection to someone calling book-banners "prudish, small-minded, and self-righteous." Isn't this like not wanting to label NBA all-stars as "tall and athletically inclined"? Aren't censors prudish, small-minded and at least a little self-righteous by definition? Are there any would-be book-banners running around who are libertine, cosmopolitan and humble? If you know any--or are one--please let me know.
She concludes her article with:
If you want to join the conversation, do this: read one of the titles on the current list of most frequently-challenged books. Then pass the book along to someone else, whether that someone is an adult or a kid. Then, together, talk about the book openly and with mutual respect for each other's opinions. Do that, and you will have made the world a better place.I love the idea of sharing books and opinions with our intellectual enemies. After all, it'd be pretty hypocritical to try to shout them down or, worse, force them to abide by civil discourse. Great idea, I just wish I were more optimistic about it.
I disagree, however, with the notion that we have to respect their opinions. I absolutely respect their right to hold their cancerous, life-denying opinions, but the opinion itself? Never. The very idea of "I don't like it, so you can't have it" is toxic and stupid and needs to go the way of "Hey, let's own those guys and make them work our fields" and "My god wants me to be your king."
It's one thing to want to keep your child from certain books. (I'm still not sure that we ever have to protect kids from words and ideas, but as a parent that's absolutely your prerogative.) But the instant you try to tell someone else what they can read you've crossed the line. And that's the line we have to hold because if we give tiny-minded parochial types an atom of power over what we read, they'll try to take it all.
Sunday, September 12, 2010
Seven! --What's in the box?!?
7. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004)
Directed by Michel Gondry. Written by Charlie Kauffman.
Starring Jim Carey, Kate Winslet, Kirsten Dunst, Mark Ruffalo, Tom Wilkinson, Elijah Wood.
I can't remember another film that broke my heart as much as this one, yet I had the biggest smile on my face when I left the theater. This is one of the films I break out whenever someone starts saying that they don't make them like they used to, as if it were automatically a bad thing. I don't know if you could have made 'Eternal Sunshine...' in 1955, say, without audiences having infarctions right there in their seats.
Or I could be full of crap. I think today's average moviegoer is more sophisticated in the sense that we've seen more filmmakers' tricks than our ancestors. Today's filmgoers, however, are probably not better at critical thinking. No worse, maybe, but certainly not better. The question is, apparently, would a film that demands and rewards our attention as 'Eternal Sunshine...' does have been commercially viable 40, 50, 60 years ago? Or am I shortchanging both yesterday's film fans and filmmakers?
Another thing.... I don't cry at movies because it's not, well, real. I'm sorry, but even the most skillful make-believe just doesn't do it for me. This film, however, is on the short list of ones that might do the trick if I weren't, you know, dead inside.
Trivia moment: Elijah Wood is one of only two actors to star in two of my top ten films. You've met the other guy and I'll reveal who it is when the time comes.
Directed by Michel Gondry. Written by Charlie Kauffman.
Starring Jim Carey, Kate Winslet, Kirsten Dunst, Mark Ruffalo, Tom Wilkinson, Elijah Wood.
I can't remember another film that broke my heart as much as this one, yet I had the biggest smile on my face when I left the theater. This is one of the films I break out whenever someone starts saying that they don't make them like they used to, as if it were automatically a bad thing. I don't know if you could have made 'Eternal Sunshine...' in 1955, say, without audiences having infarctions right there in their seats.
Or I could be full of crap. I think today's average moviegoer is more sophisticated in the sense that we've seen more filmmakers' tricks than our ancestors. Today's filmgoers, however, are probably not better at critical thinking. No worse, maybe, but certainly not better. The question is, apparently, would a film that demands and rewards our attention as 'Eternal Sunshine...' does have been commercially viable 40, 50, 60 years ago? Or am I shortchanging both yesterday's film fans and filmmakers?
Another thing.... I don't cry at movies because it's not, well, real. I'm sorry, but even the most skillful make-believe just doesn't do it for me. This film, however, is on the short list of ones that might do the trick if I weren't, you know, dead inside.
Trivia moment: Elijah Wood is one of only two actors to star in two of my top ten films. You've met the other guy and I'll reveal who it is when the time comes.
Tuesday, September 7, 2010
Eight is not Enough
Sorry, you two. I've been moving and been without intertubes access for a week. I'll try to make up for it with a second post later this week.
8. Vertigo (1958)
Directed by Alfred Hitchcock. Written by Alec Coppel and Samuel A. Taylor.
Starring Jimmy Stewart, Kim Novak, Barbara Bel Geddes, Tom Helmore.
Warning! This post contains spoilers for Vertigo. If neither of you has seen Vertigo, watch it before reading this. Everybody deserves to see Vertigo unspoiled.
Kim Novak's performance as Madeline/Judy might be the best I've ever seen. For a long time I lamented that Hitchcock couldn't use Grace Kelly, my favorite actress, in the role because she was off princessing (yeah, I just verbed it). But then I realized that while Kelly could play Madeline Elster in her sleep (Regal, icy, self-possessed. Check, check, and check.) I'm less sure about her ability to play Judy Barton (earthy, small-town, easily swayed). And after another, more recent viewing I concluded that Kim Novak was perfect. In the scene at the mission just before Madeline's death, she tells Scottie "it's too late" as she's pulling away from him. We think that Madeline means that the spirit of Carlotta Veldes is compelling her and that it's too late to stop her. As we find out later, that's actually Judy speaking, telling Scottie that despite her burgeoning feelings for him it's too late for her to back out of Gavin Elster's plot. And if you go back and look, you can see Judy peeking out from behind her Madeline mask as she struggles in Scottie's embrace.
Vertigo is one of many films to receive mixed reviews at the time of release--such as 'The Night of the Hunter' or 'Duck Soup' or 'Bonnie and Clyde'--but has grown into a classic. Why is that? Are some films just so far ahead of their time that they cannot be appreciated fully in their own? Or is something else going on? I wonder if any underappreciated films of the last ten years will be regarded as classics. I think that will be the subject of an upcoming post.
8. Vertigo (1958)
Directed by Alfred Hitchcock. Written by Alec Coppel and Samuel A. Taylor.
Starring Jimmy Stewart, Kim Novak, Barbara Bel Geddes, Tom Helmore.
Warning! This post contains spoilers for Vertigo. If neither of you has seen Vertigo, watch it before reading this. Everybody deserves to see Vertigo unspoiled.
Kim Novak's performance as Madeline/Judy might be the best I've ever seen. For a long time I lamented that Hitchcock couldn't use Grace Kelly, my favorite actress, in the role because she was off princessing (yeah, I just verbed it). But then I realized that while Kelly could play Madeline Elster in her sleep (Regal, icy, self-possessed. Check, check, and check.) I'm less sure about her ability to play Judy Barton (earthy, small-town, easily swayed). And after another, more recent viewing I concluded that Kim Novak was perfect. In the scene at the mission just before Madeline's death, she tells Scottie "it's too late" as she's pulling away from him. We think that Madeline means that the spirit of Carlotta Veldes is compelling her and that it's too late to stop her. As we find out later, that's actually Judy speaking, telling Scottie that despite her burgeoning feelings for him it's too late for her to back out of Gavin Elster's plot. And if you go back and look, you can see Judy peeking out from behind her Madeline mask as she struggles in Scottie's embrace.
Vertigo is one of many films to receive mixed reviews at the time of release--such as 'The Night of the Hunter' or 'Duck Soup' or 'Bonnie and Clyde'--but has grown into a classic. Why is that? Are some films just so far ahead of their time that they cannot be appreciated fully in their own? Or is something else going on? I wonder if any underappreciated films of the last ten years will be regarded as classics. I think that will be the subject of an upcoming post.
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Number Nine, Number Nine Number Nine...
The second in a series of what Flickchart says my top ten films are.
9. The Lord of the Rings (2001, 2002, 2003)
Directed by Peter Jackson. Written by Peter Jackson, Fran Walsh, Philipa Boyens and Stephen Sinclair [Two Towers only].
Starring Sean Astin, Sean Bean, Cate Blanchett, Orlando Bloom, Billy Boyd, Christopher Lee, Ian McKellen, Dominic Monaghan, Viggo Mortensen, John Rhys-Davies, Andy Serkis, Liv Tyler, Elijah Wood.
Yeah, I know. Flickchart has this as three films, but I count this as one giant film dispersed over a two-year stretch. Mostly because it's one giant story that had to be segmented because a ten-hour film wouldn't be commercially viable. It's okay if you don't consider it one film, though. I don't mind.
Oddly enough, this is the only real nerdtastic entry in my top 10 (with the possible exception of number 4, stay tuned....), but it's got enough nerditude for at least ten films. I remember waiting for this to come out and almost dreading it because I was afraid it would fail to live up to my expectations. And Roger Ebert's lackluster 3-star review didn't help. It took about ten minutes to quell any misgivings I had. And that includes eight minutes of prologue, which I think is unnecessary but still beautiful to watch. According to the DVD commentary track by Jackson, Walsh and Boyens, prologue was at one point mandated by the studio because the suits were afraid general audiences would be lost from the beginning and would be playing catch up when they should have been watching the movie. This is a real concern, but I think the prologue is a mistake because it puts the audience ahead of *every other character* in the film. After that eight minutes no character knows as much as any given viewer, and this robbed us of--among other things--the pleasure of sharing an "Oh, shit" moment with Frodo Baggins as he realizes that he possesses the most sought-after item in the entire world. Move the exposition in the prologue to the scene in which Gandalf sits down with Frodo at Bag-End, and everything works.
Despite the amount of space I'm dedicating to this complaint, it's just a quibble. I love this film unabashedly and I could easily watch the whole thing every six months and not get tired of it. I don't do this, of course, because I'm afraid I'll get tired of it.
Here's a thought. Is the 'Lord of the Rings' the best film ever made in which the fate of the world is at stake? Not that it has much competition. 'Dr. Strangelove,' maybe? Look at the Sight and Sound Polls or Ebert's Great Movies or The Spectator's 50 Essential Movies or a dozen other 'Best Of' lists and you'll see a paucity of worlds in peril. Coincidence? I don't think so, but I'm not sure why.
9. The Lord of the Rings (2001, 2002, 2003)
Directed by Peter Jackson. Written by Peter Jackson, Fran Walsh, Philipa Boyens and Stephen Sinclair [Two Towers only].
Starring Sean Astin, Sean Bean, Cate Blanchett, Orlando Bloom, Billy Boyd, Christopher Lee, Ian McKellen, Dominic Monaghan, Viggo Mortensen, John Rhys-Davies, Andy Serkis, Liv Tyler, Elijah Wood.
Yeah, I know. Flickchart has this as three films, but I count this as one giant film dispersed over a two-year stretch. Mostly because it's one giant story that had to be segmented because a ten-hour film wouldn't be commercially viable. It's okay if you don't consider it one film, though. I don't mind.
Oddly enough, this is the only real nerdtastic entry in my top 10 (with the possible exception of number 4, stay tuned....), but it's got enough nerditude for at least ten films. I remember waiting for this to come out and almost dreading it because I was afraid it would fail to live up to my expectations. And Roger Ebert's lackluster 3-star review didn't help. It took about ten minutes to quell any misgivings I had. And that includes eight minutes of prologue, which I think is unnecessary but still beautiful to watch. According to the DVD commentary track by Jackson, Walsh and Boyens, prologue was at one point mandated by the studio because the suits were afraid general audiences would be lost from the beginning and would be playing catch up when they should have been watching the movie. This is a real concern, but I think the prologue is a mistake because it puts the audience ahead of *every other character* in the film. After that eight minutes no character knows as much as any given viewer, and this robbed us of--among other things--the pleasure of sharing an "Oh, shit" moment with Frodo Baggins as he realizes that he possesses the most sought-after item in the entire world. Move the exposition in the prologue to the scene in which Gandalf sits down with Frodo at Bag-End, and everything works.
Despite the amount of space I'm dedicating to this complaint, it's just a quibble. I love this film unabashedly and I could easily watch the whole thing every six months and not get tired of it. I don't do this, of course, because I'm afraid I'll get tired of it.
Here's a thought. Is the 'Lord of the Rings' the best film ever made in which the fate of the world is at stake? Not that it has much competition. 'Dr. Strangelove,' maybe? Look at the Sight and Sound Polls or Ebert's Great Movies or The Spectator's 50 Essential Movies or a dozen other 'Best Of' lists and you'll see a paucity of worlds in peril. Coincidence? I don't think so, but I'm not sure why.
Wednesday, August 18, 2010
Movies, movies, movies...
I started this blog back in January as a way to keep my writing skills sharp. In the meantime, I've been writing other stuff and been neglecting my faithful readers. (Note: I have no idea if I have any readers, but I'm pretending I have at least two.)
A few months ago I signed up for Flickchart and discovered it to be a fun way to simultaneously catalog my movies and rank them in order of my favorites. And considering how long it's been since my last post, I think I now have an excuse to write some more and Flickchart is my springboard. I'm going to blog about my top ten films, at least one a week starting with....
10. Notorious (1946)
Directed by Alfred Hitchcock. Written by Ben Hecht.
Starring Ingrid Bergman, Cary Grant, Claude Rains, Leopoldine Konstantin.
Now, let's talk McGuffins. If you like McGuffins as much as I like McGuffins (hell, I even like typing the word 'McGuffin') then this is the film for you. What's a McGuffin, you ask? A McGuffin is anything in a story that drives the plot and it doesn't matter what it is. If you need an example, look no farther than the uranium ore from Notorious. You know, the stuff in the wine bottles? I don't blame you for forgetting, in fact, if you get to that scene and you actually care what's in the bottles, you're missing the point.
This is but one of my theories about what separates good filmmakers from bad ones. It's a complex issue, but it boils down to this: The bad filmmakers try to make you care about the uranium ore, while the good ones know that it's about Alicia and Devlin and Alex and Alex's creepy mother.
I could go on and I probably should, but what else remains to be said about this film? The three minute kiss that really isn't. Cary Grant as his most ambiguously slimy/charming (sorry, 'Suspicion'). The unbearable tension at the bottom of a cup of coffee.
See you next week for number 9.
A few months ago I signed up for Flickchart and discovered it to be a fun way to simultaneously catalog my movies and rank them in order of my favorites. And considering how long it's been since my last post, I think I now have an excuse to write some more and Flickchart is my springboard. I'm going to blog about my top ten films, at least one a week starting with....
10. Notorious (1946)
Directed by Alfred Hitchcock. Written by Ben Hecht.
Starring Ingrid Bergman, Cary Grant, Claude Rains, Leopoldine Konstantin.
Now, let's talk McGuffins. If you like McGuffins as much as I like McGuffins (hell, I even like typing the word 'McGuffin') then this is the film for you. What's a McGuffin, you ask? A McGuffin is anything in a story that drives the plot and it doesn't matter what it is. If you need an example, look no farther than the uranium ore from Notorious. You know, the stuff in the wine bottles? I don't blame you for forgetting, in fact, if you get to that scene and you actually care what's in the bottles, you're missing the point.
This is but one of my theories about what separates good filmmakers from bad ones. It's a complex issue, but it boils down to this: The bad filmmakers try to make you care about the uranium ore, while the good ones know that it's about Alicia and Devlin and Alex and Alex's creepy mother.
I could go on and I probably should, but what else remains to be said about this film? The three minute kiss that really isn't. Cary Grant as his most ambiguously slimy/charming (sorry, 'Suspicion'). The unbearable tension at the bottom of a cup of coffee.
See you next week for number 9.
Thursday, April 1, 2010
Keeping the Top Ten Ball Aloft
Tyler Cowen started this a couple weeks ago, listing the 10 books that influenced him the most. And he asked other bloggers to join in. So here goes (not necessarily in any order):
1. Ain't Nobody's Business if You Do: The Absurdity of Consensual Crimes in a Free Society by Peter McWilliams.
This book changed everything for me after I read it in my early twenties. I'm not going into much detail because the title speaks for itself, I think. I am the cranky libertarian I am today thanks to McWilliams's book.
2. Men at Work: The Craft of Baseball by George F. Will.
This book made me a baseball fan.Before reading this, I had never thought of sport as being a cerebral endeavor. I started to see baseball as something I can think about. And I never stopped thanks to....
3. The Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract by Bill James.
I became a sabermetrian after reading this and I never looked back.Thinking critically about baseball has made it so much more fun for me, that I pity those who just don't get that. It's a version of the rainbow problem; some believe that knowing that they're 'just' refracted light a couple feet in front of you makes it impossible to appreciate the beauty of a rainbow. Not me. Knowing more about something allows me to enjoy it more. And Bill James's great writing helped show me that.
4. The Hound of the Baskervilles by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.
This is the first classic I ever read that I actually liked. (Full disclosure: I have since gone back and reread many books I was forced to read in school and enjoyed many of them.) Thanks to Conan Doyle and Sherlock Holmes, I learned to appreciate classic literature.
5. Atheism: The Case Against God by George H. Smith.
I grew up in a Catholic household and was never encouraged to think about my religion, but that didn't stop me. When I was 18 I stopped going to church, and then 2 years later, I realized that I did not believe in the supernatural and let it all go.This book didn't make me an atheist, but this make me feel a little less alone about being an atheist by helping me realize that I could use reason to fill the hole that was once filled with superstition.
6. Kingdom Come by Mark Waid, Alex Ross and Todd Klein.
I was a big ol' comic book nerd in my youth and I quit sometime around 1987 because they stopped being fun and I was getting too old (or so I thought). About 10 years later a buddy of mine lent me his copy of Kingdom Come and I realized how fun and cool and grown-up comics could be. And I'm back to being a big ol' comics nerd.
7. Asimov's Guide to Shakespeare by Isaac Asimov.
I'd read Shakespeare before (for school), but was never a huge fan. I was, however, a huge fan of Isaac Asimov (see below) and the completist in me jumped at the chance to buy this book. And I have never read the bard the same way again. Every Shakespeare play or film I've seen since is informed by Asimov's analysis.
8. On Writing Well by William Zinsser.
This was the first great book I ever read about the craft of writing. (Don't blame Zinsser for any missteps I've made in this post.) Since then, I keep the lessons from this book in mind every time I sit down to write. I've read many other books on writing since, and some, like Strunk and White may do a better job. But Zinsser was first.
9. Labyrinths of Reason: Paradox, Puzzles, and the Frailty of Knowledge by William Poundstone.
I read this in college, when I was, basically, still learning how to think. Poundstone introduced me to many intellectual concepts--the use of paradox, induction vs. deduction, what it means to know something etc.--that are still in my toolbox. And it's a great read.
10. Isaac Asimov's Essay Collections.
Not a single book, but a series of sorts. I read a ton of these essays as a kid and from these I learned to love reason and logic (Hello? The name of the blog?). I learned to love science. I learned to love great writing. These are mostly science essays, but their subjects are all over the place, history, literature, etymology, politics.... Much of the science is dated by now, but I don't care; the writing is as crisp and lively as ever and Asimov manages to explain tricky concepts without being condescending or going over the reader's head. But more important, he infuses his topics with such humanity that it made me want to learn as much as I could. And I've never stopped. Thanks, Isaac.
1. Ain't Nobody's Business if You Do: The Absurdity of Consensual Crimes in a Free Society by Peter McWilliams.
This book changed everything for me after I read it in my early twenties. I'm not going into much detail because the title speaks for itself, I think. I am the cranky libertarian I am today thanks to McWilliams's book.
2. Men at Work: The Craft of Baseball by George F. Will.
This book made me a baseball fan.Before reading this, I had never thought of sport as being a cerebral endeavor. I started to see baseball as something I can think about. And I never stopped thanks to....
3. The Bill James Historical Baseball Abstract by Bill James.
I became a sabermetrian after reading this and I never looked back.Thinking critically about baseball has made it so much more fun for me, that I pity those who just don't get that. It's a version of the rainbow problem; some believe that knowing that they're 'just' refracted light a couple feet in front of you makes it impossible to appreciate the beauty of a rainbow. Not me. Knowing more about something allows me to enjoy it more. And Bill James's great writing helped show me that.
4. The Hound of the Baskervilles by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle.
This is the first classic I ever read that I actually liked. (Full disclosure: I have since gone back and reread many books I was forced to read in school and enjoyed many of them.) Thanks to Conan Doyle and Sherlock Holmes, I learned to appreciate classic literature.
5. Atheism: The Case Against God by George H. Smith.
I grew up in a Catholic household and was never encouraged to think about my religion, but that didn't stop me. When I was 18 I stopped going to church, and then 2 years later, I realized that I did not believe in the supernatural and let it all go.This book didn't make me an atheist, but this make me feel a little less alone about being an atheist by helping me realize that I could use reason to fill the hole that was once filled with superstition.
6. Kingdom Come by Mark Waid, Alex Ross and Todd Klein.
I was a big ol' comic book nerd in my youth and I quit sometime around 1987 because they stopped being fun and I was getting too old (or so I thought). About 10 years later a buddy of mine lent me his copy of Kingdom Come and I realized how fun and cool and grown-up comics could be. And I'm back to being a big ol' comics nerd.
7. Asimov's Guide to Shakespeare by Isaac Asimov.
I'd read Shakespeare before (for school), but was never a huge fan. I was, however, a huge fan of Isaac Asimov (see below) and the completist in me jumped at the chance to buy this book. And I have never read the bard the same way again. Every Shakespeare play or film I've seen since is informed by Asimov's analysis.
8. On Writing Well by William Zinsser.
This was the first great book I ever read about the craft of writing. (Don't blame Zinsser for any missteps I've made in this post.) Since then, I keep the lessons from this book in mind every time I sit down to write. I've read many other books on writing since, and some, like Strunk and White may do a better job. But Zinsser was first.
9. Labyrinths of Reason: Paradox, Puzzles, and the Frailty of Knowledge by William Poundstone.
I read this in college, when I was, basically, still learning how to think. Poundstone introduced me to many intellectual concepts--the use of paradox, induction vs. deduction, what it means to know something etc.--that are still in my toolbox. And it's a great read.
10. Isaac Asimov's Essay Collections.
Not a single book, but a series of sorts. I read a ton of these essays as a kid and from these I learned to love reason and logic (Hello? The name of the blog?). I learned to love science. I learned to love great writing. These are mostly science essays, but their subjects are all over the place, history, literature, etymology, politics.... Much of the science is dated by now, but I don't care; the writing is as crisp and lively as ever and Asimov manages to explain tricky concepts without being condescending or going over the reader's head. But more important, he infuses his topics with such humanity that it made me want to learn as much as I could. And I've never stopped. Thanks, Isaac.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)