The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

2.5/4 stars
Uneven film. Great to look at but too many cliches. Reminded me too much of Forrest Gump meets Titanic. I didn't like Cate Blanchett's character.
I liked the concept; I liked the idea of showing a main character whose existence is so far removed from everyone else's. I enjoyed the film on the level of a fable or metaphor. Jared Harris was good, he needs to be in more movies. In the end, the film was very sad, but not particularly uplifting.

Movie Update

Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl: 3/4 stars.
I saw this originally on DVD in January 2004. Unfortunately it was only a day or two after I saw "Master and Commander" for the first time. The flaws in POTC's logic, and its overall silliness really stood out in comparison. I watched it again on the recommendation of a friend and found that I liked it much better this second time round. The plot holes are still there, but it's also an entertaining and very fun, very watchable film. Good but not great.

Movie Update

Kicking and Screaming 2.5/4 stars.
Funny but benign Will Ferrell comedy. A good movie for kids, probably. I liked the fact that it wasn't filled with gross-out humor. This is probably also the most I've enjoyed Will Ferrell in a movie, and I laughed a fair number of times. That said it's totally formulaic and ultimately a little bit dull.

Interesting Photo

This is a picture of Jacob Lincoln (1815-1889). Jacob's father was Josiah Lincoln, brother of Thomas Lincoln, who was Abraham's father. So Jacob and Abraham were first cousins. The family resemblance is uncanny, isn't it? I found this on a website trying to disprove the rumor that Abraham Lincoln's real father wasn't Thomas Lincoln, but someone named Abraham Enloe, a man who Abe Lincoln's mother once worked for. Even presented as anecdotal evidence, this picture would seem to dispel any such notion.

Bad 70s Song Trivia Question

Listen to the following song. Actually, don't listen to all of it, just thirty seconds or so, otherwise your ears will start bleeding.



OK, bad song, bad hair, bad outfit, bad "dancing", right? Now skip ahead and listen to 2:21-2:29. Sound familiar?

The reader with the correct answer wins a new pair of hot pants.

Tinny Memories

During the 1993 holiday season I worked at the Toys R Us on Azusa Avenue near Arrow Highway in Covina, California. There's still a Toys R Us in that general area, but it's a different building than the one I worked in. The one that existed back in the '93 was a great bolshy, orange and brown monstrosity. When I walk into any Toys R Us now, I can't fully reckon with the fact that I used to work in one. Perhaps it's best that way. But I digress...

I worked the graveyard shift that season. And I also had another job working in a restaurant as a busboy/dishwasher/prep cook. My schedule was like this:

5pm- wake up.
5:30pm- go to restaurant job.
10:30pm- Leave restaurant job and head straight to Toys R Us (usually smelling like cooking grease)
11:00pm-7:00am- work at TRU.
7:30am- go to sleep.
Rinse and repeat

Fortunately I didn't do this for more than about two months. I think if I had I would have gotten really sick eventually.

Since this was the graveyard shift, the manager would turn the radio to Power 106, the disco station, and then broadcast it over the store's crappy intercom system. So, as a result I can't listen to any dance music from that era without being instantly transported to that time, that place. It's really eerie, but it gets me every time. Some examples:







and, of course:



The weird thing is, I've kind of grown to like all these songs. I don't normally like this kind of music and I don't exactly look back on that job fondly, but because they were such a constant presence I naturally grew fond of them.

Movie Update

Religulous: 1.5/4 stars. So-so documentary that claims to be about religion but is really about Bill Maher's view of religion. Even though I basically agree with most of Maher's points, I had some big problems with the film. For one, he only goes after the Abrahamic religions, doesn't touch Hinduism or Buddhism. Second, the film has an almost Tom Green-like confrontational style that I find uncomfortable to watch. Third, he talks to extremists, and spends almost no time talking to people who are more moderate in their religious beliefs, or who approach their faith with their intellect-- too much shooting fish in a barrel, not enough tackling the bigger questions and issues involved. Lastly, I'd compare making a film about how ridiculous relgion is to making a film about how ridiculous romantic relationships are. It's easy to make a lot of good, persuasive points, but the argument ignores something fundamental about the human condition. You can't really dismiss religion entirely, it's not going anywhere no matter how badly you want it to.

Barack Obama Does Not Care About White People

A picture from North Dakota.

You Know You're a Dork When

You do this.

One Trillion Dollars

What does one trillion dollars look like?

Bill Hicks on Jay Leno

Hits it right on the head:

Movin' on Up

The wife and I have left Manhattan for the slightly greener pastures of Western Westchester County. We know, however, that this was more of a transitional move than a permanent re-settlement. She eventually wants to settle in a small town like the one she grew up in, and I'd just as soon return to New England town life, and leave New York City and environs behind, keeping it as a memory of something cool and different I did for a couple of years.

We're looking to move within the next couple of years. We want to find a place where we can both get jobs, where we can afford to buy a house (eventually), and where we'd feel comfortable raising a family, should we decide to do so someday.

Here's where we're looking:

1. Further Upstate- We would stay in New York State, but basically just move further up the Hudson. Some of the communities we're considering are Hyde Park, Kinderhook, and Saratoga Springs. Each of these places are within an hour and a half of the Massachusetts Berkshires, where her parents will be living year-round. The area isn't prohibitively far from New York, should we want to go into the city for a weekend, and there are plenty of cultural offerings in the Berkshires. Staying in New York State would be easier for us in terms of our licenses. Unfortunately, the nearest big city for us would be Albany, which isn't that great a place.

2. Burlington, VT- I've never been there, but the wife has, and I'm eager to check it out. It's four hours from where her parents will be, but it's a college town, and Montreal is only two hours away, should we want a big city fix. It's supposed to be a nice place and it's right on a gigantic lake. It would be really cold in the winter though.

3. Greater Boston area- We're looking at Plymouth, the Lexington-Concord area, and the Newburyport-Amesbury area. The biggest drawback is that these aren't as affordable as some of the other places that we're considering, but they would provide very easy access to Boston. We both have family and friends in the area, too.

4. Portland, Maine- Portland is only about two hours from Boston, so it's close enough to go there in a day. It would also be about four hours from where the wife's parents would be. It would probably be similar to Burlington, only Portland is more of a city than a college town, though it's a nice one. Again, the weather would be cold, but I'd like living near the ocean.

We're planning to visit each of these places again, and then move maybe as soon as Summer of 2010.

Hello Americans, I'm Dead

Paul Harvey (1918-2009)

RIP

Academy Awards

My predictions were way off this year-- I only got 10 out of 24 right. My sister-in-law got 17. I bet on Benjamin Button winning all the small awards but it turns out Slumdog got most of those. I also thought Mickey Rourke was going to win, and I picked the other song from Slumdog to win Best Song.

A few observations:

Hugh Jackman was fine, I guess. I liked that they changed it up and had a non-comedian. Not as many smarmy one-liners and insults as in earlier years (read: Chris Rock). Jackman was good because I feel like I barely noticed him-- probably how a host should be.

Sean Penn's speech was annoying and all over the place.

The Pineapple Express bit with James Franco and Seth Rogen was lame.

The cutting back and forth between Jennifer Aniston and Brangelina was pointless and in poor taste. Why was Jennifer Aniston there anyway? What movies has she been in the last few years, and how many of them were any good?

Why was Phillip Seymour Hoffman wearing a do-rag?

When Mickey Rooney saw the "In Remembrance" montage, did he think, "I'll probably be up there next year."

Bill Maher presenting for Best Documentary is a bit like Ronald McDonald being a judge on Top Chef.

Three Things

It seems to me that there are three things that are really most important to me. These are basically my long-term, short-term life goals. These are the desired end result of all my new years resolutions and any actions I take to better my life.

1. Have a happy home- I mean a place that's comfortable, where the people I live with are happy. I want to make sure my wife is happy with where she lives. I want to be able to feel good there too. I want to make sure that the place is clean and well kept-up, and that it's a place where I can actually feel at home.

2. I want to do my job well- I've never really given this one much thought prior to the recent past. I've always thought of jobs as a kind of necessary evil. Something you have to do to get money in order to live in this society. I still kind of feel that way. I'm not a big believer in all that "follow your bliss" stuff, (although I think if you really want to get into a particular profession you can, so long as you're willing to stick with it for a long time and be patient and persistent, but that's a different post). But doing my job well makes me feel better not only about my job, but it makes me feel better overall. Not doing my job well makes me feel awful, and I'd rather feel good than awful.

3. Be financially stable- If I ever become rich it will be by accident. I'm not concerned with being wealthy, but to not really have to worry about money (meaning, not having to worry about how I'm going to pay my bills, not having to worry about having enough money to meet my basic needs, etc.) The less I have to think about money the happier I seem to be.

These things are all tied in together. If one starts to fall apart it tends to affect the other two. And all three things, when it comes down to it, take work. Daily work and daily sacrifice. Even if it's taking the trash out, keeping up with all my paperwork, or budgeting our money for the month. None of it is hard work, it doesn't require an incredible amount of strength or intelligence, but it requires a kind of consistent, persistent work, a little bit each day-- doing things when you don't want to do them. This seems to be basically how one is rewarded in this life.

Norwegian Ancestry

I've always been a little bit obsessed with my genealogy. I'm not exactly sure why, but I imagine it has something to do with maybe not feeling at home with where I grew up. The general region as well as the actual physical house. I always knew that both my father and mother were of largely Irish ancestry, so to simplify things I thought of myself as typically Irish-American.

There was a problem with this though, in that I wasn't raised Catholic. Being on the East Coast, and having lived in Massachusetts for a couple of years, I realize that being Irish-American has all sorts of different connotations associated with it. Ironically, the most Irish-American person I knew was my stepfather's mother, who could trace all of her ancestry to the Emerald Isle. Her father spoke Gaelic, and she held a lot of the old Irish superstitions. Her father had actually grown up in the Five Points during the 1870s and 80s, so I'd heard about Paradise Square and the Old Brewery well before Scorsese's film. She was a window into a past which is as dead as she is now. Go raibh math agut.

My father's mother was of Finnish and Finnish-Swedish ancestry. She used to cure fish in her refrigerator bought from the Vietnamese markets in San Gabriel and serve it to me regularly. As a result I'm pretty sure I'm immune to any and all seafood-borne illnesses, and am usually able to eat all kinds of sushi that even seasoned purveyors of the dish are utterly horrifed by. Raw sea urchin, no problem. I've mentioned our linguistic adventures together in an earlier post. She hated Russians and used to put cardamom in desserts. I'm super-white but her influence is about as ethnic as I get. She's dead now too, and has been for many years.

I've found out over the years, from talking to relatives and doing my own research that I have ancestors who were born in and had relatives who came from the following places:

-England
-Ireland
-Scotland
-Wales
-Netherlands
-Sweden
-Finland
-Denmark
-Germany

Basically places where Celts and Germans (in the broad sense-- Germanic, Teutonic, Norse, whatever) live. Finns can claim some uniqueness because they speak a non-related language, but all the recent DNA analyses that have come out show that Finns and Swedes are bascially genetically indecipherable from one another.

Ancestry is a weird thing. If you go back to your great-great-great-great-great-grandparents, the generation likely born around the middle of the 18h century, contemporaries of Thomas Jefferson let's say, you'll find that you have 128 of them. It's hard to wrap your mind around a room full of 128 people. Ultimately, how much can you have inherited from any one of them?

All this investigating has also led me to wonder, what does it really mean to have Irish or Dutch ancestry? My mother's father was born in Germany but he wasn't ethincally German at all. His mother was Danish and his father was Dutch. I'm sure if you go back far enough none of them were from Denmark or the Netherlands either. Ultimately, all of our ancestors were from Africa. It's probably just as valid to say that I'm of 100% australopithecus afarensis ancestry as it is to say that I'm 3/8ths Irish, etc.

The one country in that corner of Northwestern Europe that was always missing from my ethnic makeup was Norway. But recently I found someone who eventually passed their genetic information on to me, that could claim that nation as their homeland. Someone with the last name Sommerfeldt who was born around 1820. I still find it interesting, but I guess I'm realizing, the closer I look, the less it really means anything. Perhaps Lincoln said it best when he said "I don't know who my grandfather was; I am much more concerned to know what his grandson will be." Yet somehow I can't help but think that finding out my great-grandmother was half Lapplander will help explain why I hate getting up early and why I get nervous around horses. Go figure.

Strawberry Fields, Whatever

I still work in New York two days a week, all on the Upper West Side. I have a few hours to kill between my late morning and early afternoon sessions, so I usually spend them walking around Central Park. For some reason I always end up around Strawberry Fields, near the Dakota around 72nd and Central Park West. Strawberry Fields has no strawberries and isn't a field. It's just a little section of the park, a walkway really, where they've built a mosaic that says "Imagine", in honor of John Lennon.

I used to work on 70th and Broadway, and when I walked home to the east side, I would always go through Strawberry Fields, just because it was the most direct route. Apparently I have a big sign over my head, only visible to foreign tourists that says "Directions" or "Ask me to take your picture", depending on the situation. Foreign tourists love to approach me in the city because: a) I generally look like I know where I'm going and b) unlike most New Yorkers, I'm not walking 25 miles per hour while swearing into a cell phone at the top of my lungs. So I'm more approachable than your average bear.

True story, for a while I kept getting approached by elderly German tourists, speaking to me in German. I know a little German, so I would often answer back to them in German, but usually they had no idea what I was saying and would move on. This started happening to me on a weekly basis, I kid you not. Confounded, I asked a German friend, who theorized that most of the Germans approaching me were probably from the old East Germany, so they never learned to speak English in school (they learned Russian instead). She (my German friend) didn't think they thought I was German, so much as I looked approachable and looked like I might possibly speak German, which was a better risk to take than on some random Puerto Rican family walking through the park. She also said that (former) East Germans (or any Germans, for that matter) aren't used to hearing German spoken in a heavy American-English accent (I didn't think my accent was THAT bad) which probably explains why they didn't understand me. Overall, I thought her reasoning explained so much, yet so little at the same time.

Anyway, Stawberry Fields in Central Park is always covered with tourists, and I can't really figure out why. People are always getting their pictures taken in front of the mosaic, and I personally have taken at least 15 pictures of people in front of the 2'x 2' green NY parks sign that says "Strawberry Fields". John Lennon isn't buried there, and it's not even the same Strawberry Fields that the song was written about (which is somewhere in Liverpool, I think). It just happens to be sort of across the street from the building where Lennon lived and where he was shot. That's it. Nothing magical happens there, unless you count Beatles fan tourists congregating magical.

Recently they posted a sign near the mosaic that says "any items left on the mosaic will be considered abandoned, and will be removed", which is a nice way of saying "quit leaving crap here-- John's not going to get it anyway."

Standing by the mosaic, the windows of the Dakota are visible. I have to assume that Yoko Ono (who I know still lives in the Dakota) lives in one of those windows-- it would make sense that their apartment overlooked the spot where the mosaic was built, right? Apparently every year on John's birthday Yoko comes out and places flowers on the mosaic. I'm not sure when Lennon's birthday is, but I think it's in October. If I ever see her there I'm going to do my bad John Lennon accent for her and tell her that I'm Julian Lennon, John's son from his first marriage, and ask if I can borrow $100 million. All you need is love.

Rich Little Christmas Carol

This has to be seen to be believed. Rich Little doing impressions of actors doing performances of characters in A Christmas Carol. This was made in 1978, but even so, none of the imitations seem to be of people born after 1875.

Movie Update

The Dark Knight: 2/4 stars. I couldn't find much to like about this movie. Bruce Wayne was kind of a jerk. I didn't believe that two highly successful men would be fighting over Maggie Gylenhaal. Heath Ledger's performance was good but didn't blow me away or anything. The movie has no climax and no resolution which I found frustrating. The film is riddled with too many unbelievable situations as well. On top of that it's completely humorless. Was Nolan trying to channel Ang Lee?

The difference between this film and the movies from the earlier Batman series (none of which, granted, were all that good) is that there was a sense of playfulness and hero worship in the earlier ones. Silly rabbit, comic books are for kids. When all that youthful excitement is stripped away you're only left with pain and brooding. What's the difference between this movie and one of the Mission Impossible films? Nothing, so far as I can tell, except that it uses characters who dress up in funny outfits.

Movie Update

W. 2/4 stars. Not so much a movie as a two-hour message. The film carries out many probable half-truths to their extreme. It told me nothing I didn't already know. The performances are mostly bad imitations, except for James Cromwell as the elder Bush, who played the role the same way he's played every role I've ever seen him in. (I kept expecting him to tell George W. to look out for Rolo Tomasi.) Overall, well made and fairly entertaining, just not all that great.

How to Talk to Girls

Advice from a 9 year-old:

Best Irish Song

This should be the official theme song of St. Patrick's Day:

Har Kommer Pippi Langstrump, Tjolahopp, Tjolahej, Tjolahoppsanna...

On Bryan's advice I'm trying to become more proficient in a foreign language and I'm gravitating towards Swedish. About the only stuff I can really sort of follow are the things designed for really little kids. I was pleased to find Pippi Longstocking in the original Swedish on youtube. Alas, the more you start to understand of a foreign language, the more you come to realize that lame dialogue and ridiculous storylines are not an exclusively American or Anglophonic phenomenon. It seems to be a curse of the human condition.

The Most Annoying Thing Ever

The local AM station I listen to a lot while driving plays this commercial regularly. Whenever it comes on I have to turn the radio off, and I usually leave it off for at least 5 minutes, just to be absolutely certain that it's really over. Warning-- this will induce homicidal thoughts within the listener:

Late Night Talk Shows

I remember watching Johnny Carson before Jay Leno took over in 1992, when I was a junior in high school. What I'd forgotten was that after 1980 Carson only did the show four days a week, and that on Monday nights there was always a guest host. Leno got the replacement job because he was the permanent guest host from 1987 on. I liked Leno when he guest hosted but not once he started doing the show on his own. As for Carson, I never really got him. Must be a generational thing.

I remember Letterman when he was on NBC. I always thought he was much funnier than Carson. The show was pretty exciting and very funny to the little kid version of me. When Letterman moved to CBS he was still better than Leno but I always felt that something was lost in the move. Now Letterman is almost as lame as Leno. He needs to hire some new writers are something. He seems to be going out there every night with no material.

Conan's a funny guy. His show pretty much picked up where Letterman left off. Conan's is the funniest late night show on right now. Even so, it's not that great, but he himself is a pretty consistently funny guy.

Craig Kilborn made me laugh sometimes but I'm not surprised that his show didn't last. Craig Ferguson is funny and seems to be really good at the job. He's better than Kilborn but I'd still rather watch Conan.

Jimmy Kimmel is awful. He never looks right in that suit. His is a clone of every other show. When he was Jimmy the Sports Guy on Kevin and Bean he at least had some personality. I always thought Adam Carolla was the more talented of the two.

Carson Daly deserves to die a horrible death and Jimmy Fallon needs to be publicly executed before he's allowed to take over Late Night. I'm thinking something along the lines of the end scene in "Braveheart." I absolutely cannot stand him.

Happy Imbolc

Apparently it has pre-Celtic origins. Who knew this whole Groundhog thing actually has some ancient tradition behind it? Click Here

TV Killed the Radio Star

My stepfather is going to be 72 this year and my mom is going to be 64. The eight year difference between them has turned out to be significant in only one way-- in that my stepfather grew up listening to the radio and my mom grew up watching TV.

My stepfather watches lots of TV now that he's retired, especially shows like Jeopardy and anything involving Bill Moyers. When I was growing up though, he always had an aversion to passive TV watching, as though it wasn't hard-wired in him to relax in front of it. He basically grew up in the '40s and his family had one of those gigantic, tombstone-shaped radios in the living room. He would talk about listening to shows like "Blondie", "The Shadow", and "Mutt and Jeff", shows that sounded just as idiotic as the ones I grew up with, just with no video to accompany them. When my stepfather went off to college in 1955, he came back one weekend and his parents had bought a TV. By that point it was too late for him to develop a habit of vacantly staring at it every day for hours on end.

Not so for my mom though. Her parents got a TV in the early '50s when she was still in elementary school. She remembers watching "Howdy Doody", "Leave it Beaver", and "The Honeymooners", and all those old-timey shows. She developed a healthy TV-watching addiction that she happily passed on to her children.

Within a generation there will be no one around anymore who didn't grow up with television, and the facts that when I was little we had one TV that was in black and white, that we didn't get a TV with a remote control and a VCR until I was 10, and that we didn't get cable until I was in jr. high, will seem quaint and archaic.

The Day the Music Died

Tuesday's going to be the 50th anniversary of the plane crash that killed Buddy Holly, Ritchie Valens, and the Big Bopper. I actually only know this because I couldn't sleep on Friday night and was up listening to Coast to Coast AM, and they were talking about it. Coast to Coast is actually a pretty entertaining show when they aren't talking about Roswell, or any other conspiracy theory where there is incontrovertible evidence to prove that it is false, many times over.

On Friday night's show they had some music expert I'd never heard of, but then, (I thought this was the most interesting part) they talked to two women named Donna and Peggy Sue, who knew Holly and Valens in real life, and for whom two of their biggest respective hits were written.

What was interesting about what these women had to say was that both said they were very young at the time of the accident, that these men were their boyfriends, and that while they remembered the events surrounding the crash and finding out about it very well, they were also able to talk about it all very matter-of-factly. This was something that had happened a very long time ago, both women had had very full lives in the time since, and both hinted at the fact that when it came down to it, they didn't really know either of these men all that well. As if to say, how much can someone really be the love of your life when you're only 17, 18 years old? If both women had been 30 at the time I suspect the event would have been much harder to get over. I thought it was interesting anyway.

Incidentally, my own mom was a 13 year-old in West Covina, California when the crash happened. She said the only one she knew of at the time was Valens, who was kind of a local hero. My stepfather was 21 at the time and said he had only heard of the Big Bopper at the time.

My impression was that Valens was fairly well known at the time, because of the three hits he'd had, that Holly's star was rising in the U.S. but that he'd more of a name for himself in Europe up to that point. The Big Bopper had had a big hit with "Chantilly Lace" but that he was hardly a superstar or on his way to being one.

I think, had they lived, Valens and Holly probably would have had careers along the lines of someone like Jerry Lee Lewis or Roy Orbison, not so sure about The Big Bopper though.

Why I Don't Like Football

In honor of the much ado about nothing taking place tomorrow, I've decided to finally post on why I don't care for football. In no particular order:

1. It rewards being an agressive jerk. No other sport, not even boxing, relies on unchecked testosterone and agression more than football does. Football is, on its basest level, about knocking people down and then raising your arms up in celebration. Any football game, even touch or flag, played by a group of males over the age of three, rapidly degenerates into Lord of the Flies.

2. It makes fat guys think they're athletic. Big fat guys who are good at knocking down skinny, high-center-of-gravity guys (like I was when I was in high school) love to suck in their stomachs and act like they're world class jocks (especially in P.E. class) when they're playing football. I always wanted to tell these guys that in any real sport being 100 pounds overweight and having over 60% body fat is not usually an advantage. But I kept my mouth shut because I didn't want to get knocked over again.

3. It's a cold, industrial, blue collar sport. Not to sound like a class snob, but I'm a dorky, educated kind of guy, not a guy who belongs to a union and carries a metal lunch box to work every day. Also, after I'm done drinking a beer I don't drop it on the floor and then beat my wife if she doesn't pick it up. My name isn't Gus, I don't belong to a bowling league, and I didn't grow up in a factory town in the Rust Belt or the Upper Midwest. I don't work with machines and don't like sports where men are treated and valued as machines.

4. I didn't grow up with it. What can I say? When I was little there were two pro teams in LA, but now there are none. Remember when the Raiders were going to move to Irwindale? What kind of a traffic nightmare on weekends would that have been?

5. I don't know what's going on half the time. Football's never really made any sense to me. Even rugby makes a lot more sense and the big joke about rugby is that one time I went to go see a riot and in the middle of it a rugby game broke out. Football is organized chaos as far as I'm concerned. Football has all sorts of weird plays, first, second, third downs, touchdowns, touchbacks, extra points, interceptions. Whatever. I can never figure out what's happening. For example, what the hell is a 'blitz'?

6. There are too many players. Guys on special teams, what makes them special? Do I want to know? Guys who come out for three seconds once a week just to knock over other guys who come out for three seconds once a week-- what am I supposed to like in all of this?

7. There aren't enough games. At least in football and baseball and, dare I say it, hockey, there are a decent enough number of games in a season where one individual game doesn't necessarily matter so much as the cummulative efforts put forth over the course of many months. Kind of like how life is. In football a bad day from a key player can mean not making the playoffs. As a result, luck becomes more of a factor than skill, so I may as well spend my time watching "Deal or No Deal".

8. Professional football players are the biggest jerks in the world. Keep in mind, this includes a world with professional basketball players in it. Pro football has produced so many thugs and murderers, and guys who shoot themselves in the leg at clubs. When was the last time you saw a football player make a touchdown and not dance around for five minutes, acting like he was the most awesome thing ever? When was the last time you saw a pro football player exude a shed of humility or quiet strength? Football players are supposed to be embodiments of the ultimate in manliness, yet none of them seem to possess any of the traditional qualities associated with manhood. If I want to watch a bunch of 12 year olds puffing their chests and knocking each other over I'll hang out at the gym at the local jr. high. Until then I'll pass on watching any football.

Movie Update

Milk: 2.5/4 stars. Gandhi for gay people. Takes a not particularly significant individual and inflates his importance to a level way beyond what it was in real life. Maybe 'Michael Collins' is a better analogy in this regard. Drags on and on. We know what's going to happen, and at the 1:20 mark I started hoping it would cut to the chase already. That said, Sean Penn's performance is very good, although there were a couple of scenes where he seemed to be channeling his "I Am Sam" character. In terms of craftsmanship, this is a better performance than Mickey Rourke's in "The Wrestler". The latter is more just a case where the actor and the role match up perfectly.

At the very least, the film doesn't shy away from the fact that the characters are gay, and shows the random hook ups and psychological anguish that fills the lives of real gay people (unlike, say, every other gay character in every movie or TV show ever, which is usually a variation of some sort on Jack from 'Will and Grace'). My take on the guy was that he was a local politician and gay activist who had limited influence beyond his district in San Francisco, but the movie almost treats him as though he was the first gay president. I also always got the impression that he really only became a gay hero after he died.

Famous People Who Look Like Me

James Joyce:



Though in all fairness, I'm usually not this well groomed.


Napoleon Dynamite:



Uncanny resemblance to me, circa 1990.


Vincent Van Gogh:



I think I look like a pretty good cross between what he really looked like and how he painted himself.





The Guy in the Fake 9/11 Rooftop Photo:



I had to tell my friends and family that I was alive and well after this photo started circulating around the internet.

My New Future Wife

My wife has decided that she's going to dump me and marry the kid with the goofy hair from the movie "Twilight", even though he's about 10 years younger than she is. So, to counter her plans, I've decided who I'm going to pursue:



Her name is Sara LaFountain. She's half Finnish and half French. She was born in Santa Barbara and raised in Finland. She's also a popular TV chef in Europe. We haven't set a date yet but you're all invited.

Movie Update

The Wrestler: 3/4 stars. The trailer made me think this would be a total cliche-fest and, sure enough, it is. It's also a good movie though. I found myself really drawn in and I thought Mickey Rourke did a good job with the character. The sub-plot with the daughter doesn't totally work, and I have to admit, I was expecting a little more overall from Aranofsky. Marissa Tomei is fine but not amazing or anything, and maybe seeing this on a snowy Sunday afternoon in the Northeast didn't help me to feel much affection for its setting. It's more a film you admire than a film you love and I can guarantee I'll probably never want to watch it again even though I'd recommend it to anyone interested in seeing it.

Academy Award Nominations

The Academy Awards are a strange thing. When I was little I used to assume that the movies nominated were the very best movies made that year, since they're selected by people in the movie industry, and people in the movie industry presumably know a lot more about movies than the average person. Now I realize that they're more or less a reflection of how Hollywood sees itself at the time, and what it feels it should be striving for. I haven't seen any of the nominated movies yet (in the big categories, anyway) but plan on seeing as many as I reasonably can (which will probably be one or two) before the ceremony.

Here's my thoroughly uninformed take on the nominees. For the purposes of this post I'm only going to bother with the Best Picture, Best Actor, and Best Actress categories for now.

Best Picture:

Benjamin Button- I've heard mixed things about this one. It seems that the people who don't like it tend to have a fundamental problem with the premise. I've also heard criticisms that Brad Pitt is unable to convey much emotion as an actor. The counter-argument is that since he's playing a character who is so detached from his own experience, Pitt is actually perfectly cast. Also, part of the counter-argument is that the character the audience is supposed to relate to and empathize with is actually Cate Blanchett. Kind of like how "Julius Ceasar" is really about Brutus, not Ceasar.

Frost/Nixon- I'm sure it's good, but was this really a particularly significant event in our history? Isn't there something a little pretentious about this being made into a film?

Milk- I suspect this will end up winning. It sounds incredibly boring to me, for the same reasons Frost/Nixon does, but I'll still probably end up seeing it because the wife wants to so badly.

The Reader- I've heard this one actually isn't all that good. A lot of critics were surprised that it got nominated.

Slumdog Millionaire- I've heard this is very entertaining, a real crowd favorite, but that there isn't a whole lot beneath the surface, and it doesn't benefit from multiple viewings.

Best Actor:

Richard Jenkins- Nominated for "The Visitor" not "Stepbrothers" though his performance in the latter was perfectly fine as far as I'm concerned. The wife saw and liked "The Visitor" and said his performance was good but she thinks that people fell more for the character and the transformation he undergoes, rather than for the performance itself. She also said that there are no moments where his acting jumps out (no tantrums or crying jags) but also no moments where he has to convey any subtletly.

Frank Langella (Frost/Nixon)- From the clips I've seen I think his performance is ridiculous. He gives Nixon this crazy monster voice. I heard an interview with him on NPR and the guy seemed like such a blowhard. He was comparing playing Nixon to playing King Lear.

Sean Penn- (Milk)-From what I hear his performance is the best. He's always solid.

Brad Pitt- Hmm, I'm skeptical. Pitt's always a little boring as far as I'm concerned.

Mickey Rourke- (The Wrestler) Hollywood loves people who were once great, fell on hard times and then make a comeback, so Rourke will probably win. The movie looks completely unoriginal, cliched, and silly, as Bryan pointed out a few months ago when the trailer came out. Aranofsky (sp?) however, is a pretty incredible director, so, I don't know. I liked Rourke in "Diner" which is pretty high on my list of all-time faves. It's hard to reckon with the fact that the two roles are played by the same actor since Rourke looks so different now.

Best Actress:

Anne Hathaway- (Rachel Getting Married) Her performance is supposed to be the best. The wife saw this film and said Hathaway was very good, very effective. She mentions one particular scene where Hathaway is giving a speech at her sister's rehearsal dinner, and my wife had to look away from the screen because she was so embarassed for the character.

Angelina Jolie- (The Changeling) Puh-leez, why is she even on this list?

Melissa Leo- (Frozen River)- who? No, seriously, who? And they say there aren't any good roles for women. They have to find one we've never heard of, in a movie we've never heard of, to have five in the category. I guess "New in Town" didn't come out soon enough for Rene Zellweger to get a nod.

Meryl Strep- (Doubt)- I'm sure Meryl Streep is very good in this one and that she finds a difficult, somewhat unnecessary accent to perfect in her performance, but ads for this movie make me laugh out loud. It looks like a costume party. The word seems to be that the acting in this film is very good but the writing isn't at as high a level.

Kate Winslet- (The Reader) She will probably win because this is "her year" with this one and "Revolutionary Road". I don't dare say a bad word about her, knowing full well that I'll eventually have to answer about it to Bryan.

Worst Commercial Ever

Sorry Mike, this one's worse:



For a while they were showing this one all the time. It got to the point where I couldn't watch TV for a while, for fear that this commercial would come on.

Alton Brown Before He Started Cooking

Not really. I remember these commericals from when I was in high school. I so wanted to punch this kid in the face:

God's Angry Man

When nothing else was on TV, I could always find entertainment in watching Dr. Gene Scott. One of his more inspired, if surreal moments:

Not Meant to Be Bilingual

I'd love to be bilingual, but I just don't think it's in the cards for me at this point, unless I end up moving to a foreign country in the future. A few years ago I would have said, "unless I end up marrying someone who is from a different country or speaks a different language", but as it turns out my wife is just as blandly White American as I am, possibly even more so.

This is sad and ironic for someone like me who has essentially made their life's work studying and working with language. Although I deal more specifically with langauge handicap rather than individual languages, but even so.

My parents both spoke nothing but English. My paternal grandmother knew Finnish and Swedish as a child but didn't really use them much past the age of 18. She made a few half-hearted attempts to teach me a few Swedish words, counting to ten, that sort of thing, and she did the same with Finnish.

Swedish is a Germanic language and somewhat related to English, so a lot of basic words are easy to remember--katt, bok, hatt, kaffe, that sort of thing. This is not the case with Finnish however, where statments like "how are you?" translate into something along the lines of "Koskimaavariuu pu vaaritanianienen koski alla komovallahalla kokamensauri o?" Finnish is also a highly inflected language, which means that a word is spelled and pronounced differently depending on what part of speech it's being used as. Latin is similar, but as far as I know Latin has something like six or seven basic declensions: object, direct object, possessive, agent of an action, etc. Finnish, I'm not kidding, literally has something like 23 basic declensions. So the word for 'cat', depending on how it's used could be something like 'kissa', 'kisso', kissom', 'kissavo', 'kissari', etc. My grandmother always stressed how important it was to get the declension right, otherwise people will think you're an idiot and not be able to understand you correctly.

Even more frustrating about Finnish is that there are many, many different dialects of the language, depending on which part of the country, or even what town you're in. There is a standard dialect but--get this, no one actually speaks it at home, it's only used for official governmental purposes. Also, the population of Finland is about 5 million and save for a few small communities in the Midwest that I'm not likely to ever go to, no one else in the world speaks Finnish. "Yksi, kaksi, kolme"... "One, two, three"-- is more than half of the Finnish I still know.

When I took German in school, my familiarity with Swedish helped, but I had a bad tendency in class to start saying something in German and then unintentionally throw in a Swedish or Swedish-sounding word, thus confusing everyone, including my teacher. "Ich heiBe John, und mein storsyster heter.. I mean, meine alter Schwester heist..." and so on.

I took Spanish in school but that was a joke. I think I (not so) secretly resented having to take Spanish because bascially every kid I went to school with spoke Spanish at home except me, and I felt I had an unfair disadvantage as a result. I was also burdened with (and I don't think I'm being unfair here) two horrible Spanish teachers in junior high and high school. Just through exposure and hanging out at friends' houses I know a lot of words and basic phrases, but I can't put together a real sentence in Spanish to save my life.

My stepfather's mother knew some Gaelic because her father spoke it, but to me it was always more of an academic curiousity than something worth learning for any practical reasons. I still know a few words and phrases that she taught me, but I've never encountered anyone else in my entire life who knows how to say anything in Gaelic, including people I met when I was in Ireland.

I also took a semester of Japanese when I was in college. What a nightmare that was. I remember how to say "How are you, my name is John, pleased to meet you"--"Hajimemashite, wastashiwa John desu, dozo yoroshiku" and that's it. I remember we spent almost the entire semester learning how to write in katakana and hiragana, which are two of their writing systems. I imagine some of it might come back to me if I picked it up again, but off the top of my head I remember just about none of it.

So my best bet at this point would probably be to learn Spanish, but unfortunately the interest just isn't there. After that would be Swedish and German, and most likely German would be the sensible choice between those two. So maybe I'll work on being more proficient in German, but to what end? What's my goal? When I went to Germany I tried to practice my German but everyone's English there was better than my German so every conversation ended up being carrying out in English. Do I really care about being able to read Hesse in the original, or listen to Mozart's operas without having to read a translated libretto? Maybe I do care a little bit, but maybe I don't really care that much.

The Weight

When I graduated from high school I weighed 151 lbs. For some reason, right around the time I turned 21 I put on a quick 15 lbs. (junior 15?) and spent most of my early 20s hovering around the 165 lb. mark. I spent most of my late 20s hovering around the 175 lb. mark, thanks in part to In N Out, Baja Fresh, and Sam Adams.

When I moved to the East Coast in 2004 I initially lost a little bit of weight, but then quickly gained about 20 lbs. within what seemed like just a few months. I think a big part of this weight gain had to do with moving in with my wife who happens to be a very good cook. Though obviously it's not her fault that I gained so much weight; she didn't actually force the food down my throat.

During the summer of 2007 I got up to about 205 lbs., which is the most I've ever weighed, and I have to admit, I was definitely looking portly. I'm just north of six feet tall, so while I'm not gigantic, I'm definitely not short, and I can generally hold weight pretty well, but 205 was just too much for my frame.

I've lost a little weight since then, and now I'm down to 192 as of yesterday. Ideally I'd like to get down around 185 which I think is realistic for my age. I doubt it would even be a good idea for me to try and get down to what I weighed when I was 25. I don't claim to be very informed on the subject of weight loss, but, based on my own experiences here's what I hold to be true:

1. I'm sure exercise is really good for your body, but just exercising doesn't really help you lose weight. You could argue that it speeds up your metabolism, but you could then counter-argue that all that exercise will increase your appetite.

2. The single most effective way to lose weight is to simply eat less. I don't think it's all about smaller portions as far as everyone's concerned, but I think smaller portions will go a long way for most people trying to lose weight. This is the only thing that has ever, personally, caused me to lose any weight.

3. I think because people don't want to eat less they want to bypass the process by focusing on what they're eating instead of how much, as though this somehow provides a way around the total caloric intake issue.

4. A few words about Atkins and Taubes-- basically I'm skeptical. I'm sure there are some good points to be made, especially about how certain kinds of carbohydrates aren't good for you, but Taubes's book smacks too much of an "everything you know is wrong" manifesto. Though I personally know people who have lost a lot of weight on Atkins, it doesn't seem like a plausible long-term diet plan for either keeping weight off or staying healthy. Again, the focus of this approach is more on what you eat than how much you eat. And this leads to my next point:

5. There is (naturally) a big difference between eating to lose weight and eating to be healthy. It makes sense that eating no carbohydrates and lots of animal protein would cause you to lose weight initially, but is that really a healthy way to eat, day-to-day, every day? It seems logical that eating to be healthy is more important, since if you're eating to be healthy, whatever your weight is once you've reached your optimal level of health doesn't really matter, because by default it's a healthy weight for you.

6. I'll say it again, I think eating less is really what it all comes down to as far as weight loss is concerned. As far as eating healthy I don't really know, but I'm not convinced that anyone really does.

Book Update

I started reading Sarum by Edward Rutherfurd. It's a grand, sweeping, epic novel about the history of Salisbury and environs, and in the process also ends up being a history of Britain. Rutherfurd has been called a Michener disciple, but he seems more like a Michener clone, which is a very good thing as far as I'm concerned. The first chapter has my attention already. It opens up around 7500 BC and talks about Upper Paleolithic hunters meeting up with Mesolithic hunters, and what the differences between the two are. Fun fact: What was the population of the entire island of Britain 9,500 years ago? Answer: About 5,000.

20 Year Mystery Solved

In the REM performance video Tourfilm, right before they perform "These Days" Michael Stipe recties a poem that goes something like:

Hey Man, I'm making moves
And I am so much stronger than you.
I am so much stronger.
I am so much stronger than you.
Everybody thinks the way that we thought.
We thought ahead and look what we got...etc.

I always wondered where that was from. Now we know:



I vaguely remember Syd Straw and her solo album that came out around 1989. I think it was called "Surprise" or something like that. I guess she and Stipe had done some work together with Golden Palominos, and it's him singing back-up on this song.

Alert the presses, I know, but the lyrics ring a bell, don't they?

You Are What You Is

Does Frank Zappa's music suck? Probably. But then how come I haven't been able to get this song out of my head for the past 25 years?

My Top Three Favorite Films

I've decided what my three favorite films of all time, at the moment, are. These aren't necessarily what I think are the best movies of all time, but personally, I get an awful lot out of each of these every time I watch them.

In no particular order:


Jungfrukallan (The Virgin Spring): My favorite Bergman film. I love the authentic-looking and feeling medieval setting. I love the struggle between the two sisters. Max Von Sydow is awesome and imposing. I love the contrast between Christianity and Norse paganism. I love the redemptive power in the final minutes that still hits me like a ton of bricks.

Walkabout: Being drawn into this film is almost like experiencing an altered state of consciousness. I love the realtionships that develop between the three characters. The scenery is beautiful but not romanticized in any way. I love how the film asks us how well we can ever really know anyone. I also love the commentary the film makes at the very end about the loss of youth and how nostalgia can alter our perception of things.

Master and Commander: People may be surprised that I've added this one to my list, but I can't tell you how much I absolutely adore this movie. The two lead characters, especially Stephen Maturin (Paul Bettany) represent everything that I wish I could be as a man. I love the fact that the characters are English. I love the fact that it, again, is an authentic-feeling period piece. I love the fact that it so immerses you into the world of these men that you feel you've spent time on the H.M.S. Surprise and feel a part of the crew by the end of it.

So that's it for right now. This list is highly subject to change throughout the years.

Book Update

I started reading Boy: Tales of Childhood by Roald Dahl. It's Dahl's autobiography from the time he was born until about the age of 20 when he joined the military. It's interesting to learn more about the man behind the stories I loved so much as a kid. So far I've learned that he grew up in Wales to Norwegian parents, and that his father was an ambitious self-made successful businessman with one arm who died when Roald was only three. Should make for an intresting read.

Clockwork Revisited

The wife and I got to talking about the movie "A Clockwork Orange" last night and she suggested we watch it again. I hadn't seen it in a few years, but watched it probably 20 or 30 times between 1992 and 1997. Women, as a rule, hate this movie, but she for some reason doesn't. She doesn't think it's a great movie or anything, but she likes the fact that it's thought-provoking and appreciates a lot of the black humor.

Rewatching it, I still think it's a pretty good movie, but it's hard to believe that it was once probably my favorite movie. I find the violent parts harder to watch than I did when I was younger. I was never excited by them before or anything, just kind of indifferent, but now they do affect me more negatively.

And there is a lot of gratuitous sex and violence in it. I think I always knew that but didn't care or really think about it. It stands out more, for some reason, and it makes the film seem a little cheaper in some respects, more manipulative, trying harder to get a reaction out the viewer than it should need to.

As I said, it's hard to deny that it's good movie. It's a good story and it explores a very interesting, very basic human theme. I attribute this part of its success to Anthony Burgess. The fact that it's compelling to look I attribute to Kubrick. I don't think any of the acting is that fantastic but Malcolm McDowell is certainly good for the role. It may have been a case of really good casting more than anything. Another quality that makes the film good and often gets overlooked is its soundtrack. There's almost always something interesting to listen to in the background.

Whatever personal connection I made to the film that made me not only think it was good, but also made it one of my favorties, has obviously dwindled over the years. I never felt a personal connection to the main character but perhaps the fact that he's a young guy who is both driven by and repulsed by the darker elements of his nature might have had something to do with why I was so drawn to it initially.

Donovan

I rarely subject others to my singing, but I when I do I can be kind of obnoxious about it. I tend to be one of those people who thinks he can sing, but truth is, I really can't. It's not that I have a bad voice or that I can't carry a tune-- I actually think I have slightly above average musical abilities overall. I could never make a living at it, but I have a better aptitude for it than, I'd say, 60-70% of the population.

The problem with my voice is that I have absolutely no range. When I sing I have a natural tendency to mimic the performer. For most male tenor singers I have to go higher than my normal range to match them, and the result is always strained. I can hit lower notes easier than high ones, but my voice doesn't resonate well in the lower range for some reason. So I can sing along to Johnny Cash but my voice kind of gets swallowed up somewhere between my larynx and lips.

So I'm better in the middle ranges. If I could sing and had any range at all I'd most likely be your basic baritone.

There is one singer, however, who I have no problem matching for some reason, and that's Donovan. I can sing most of his songs, match his voice and it feels totally natural, not strained at all. So this leads me to believe that whatever key he sings in is what I should sing in. Also, I'd venture to guess, our phonatory systems are a similar size and shape. Too bad he's a brilliant musical genius and I'm not. See if you can match these too:

Choosing My Religion

I've spent most of my life areligious. My mother grew up with a father who was a Unitarian minister, but she herself had (and still has) little use for organized religion. There was a Unitarian church somewhere in Pasadena that we used to go to when I was little. I think Unitarians are fine, but I tend to think of them as akin to agnostics. It's taking a position on religion without really taking a position on religion. Unitarianism is more of a hobby than a religion, I've always felt. My mother's mother was also a Unitarian, and her own father was a Unitarian minister as well. See a pattern?

My Unitarian minister grandfather was actually himself raised a Lutheran, as all old school Scandinavians were required by law to be. Lutherans are fine, I suppose. They remind me of Episcopalians in the sense that they're basically Catholics who just kind of took a different path a few hundred years ago. I actually admire Luther a lot for what he did, and how he attempted to bring what was then a very corrupt church (ahem, ahem) back to its basics, and made the emphasis the relationship between the individual and God, without all the horse and pony shows getting in the way.

My paternal grandmother was a Quaker and she took me to a meetinghouse in the San Gabriel area (Temple City?) a few times when I was little. I always liked the testimonies of simplicity and humility that Quakers adhere to, and the stripped-down stillness of unprogrammed worship has always been consistent with my personality. When forced to, I've often told people that I'm a Quaker, and they usually give me a perplexed look in return because they think I've just told them that I'm Amish. Anabaptist, sure. Amish, not quite.

My paternal grandfather and my stepfather's mother were both raised Catholic (as anyone born before 1950 who had a drop of Irish blood was required by law to be). My stepfather's mother (who I called Grammie) was a wonderful, strong woman who I have nothing but respect for and postive memories of. But she believed in fairies and thought that our pet cat was going to 'steal the breath' (a literal translation of a Gaelic phrase, apparently) from my younger brother when he was an infant (cue coo-coo clock noise). That has nothing to do with being Catholic, I realize, but furthers my argument that Irish Catholics tend to have one foot in Rome and one foot in pre-6th century Ireland when it comes to their belief systems.

I have great respect for Judaism but after living in New York for a few years I've come to the realization that culturally, I have nothing in common with American Jews and could never really feel a part of that community.

I have great respect for Islam in principle, but I don't have much use for the Islamic world. In order to get excited about a faith I have to look at its members and find something to admire. Most of the Islamic world seems hot, dusty, and angry. Also, extremists are in power in most Muslim-majority countries and I can't get around the fact that if you're a woman in an Islamic country your life just must be awful.

I have great respect for Buddhism and Hinduism on the surface, but once you dig a little deeper they both get very strange, especially Hinduism. In the same vein, I think Taosim has a lot of great principles but, at its core, seems better suited to a Chinese peasant living in the year 500, than it does for a Westerner living in the year 2009. Especially when that Westerner has already been exposed to concepts like "objective reality" and "goals".

I don't want to call myself an agnostic because I really hate the wishy-washy-ness that term implies. I don't want to call myself an atheist either, because I do believe in God, and I think there's something implicity antagonistic and anti-religious about the word.

I've called myself Protestant in the past, but, again, that has a stigma too. Put the word "non-denominational" in front of that and people assume you're a born-again.

So I guess I'll just keep calling myself Quaker and keep having people tell me that they didn't think there were any of us around anymore. So long as I don't run into any Quakers who actually attend services I should be fine.

Islam, Cat Stevens Style

Interesting but kind of odd interview with Cat Stevens (now Yusuf Islam) about being and becoming Muslim. Reminds me a lot of something you'd see on any Christian station broadcast, except with different clothes and Muhammad substituted for Jesus.

The man seems articulate though, and happy with the decisions he's made. This must be a British show that caters to the Muslim community. Part 1 of 3, I'm not bothering to post the other two segments. They're on Youtube if you really want to see the rest of the interview:

The High-Schooler is Father to the Man

I posted about high school memories earlier, and since I'm reading and just watched "Election" I've been thinking about my own high school experience a lot lately-- something I don't normally spend much time doing, believe it or not.

The Wife asked me what I was like in high school and I told her a few of my anecdotes and gave her a thumbnail sketch. She laughed and said, "I probably could have figured all that out."

It occured to me that the block of cement that is my personality probably finished drying sometime around 1992. Anything I've done with my life should come as no surprise to anyone astute enough who knew me back then. Some things never change:

1. I was definitely a smartass. Not in a class clown kind of way, but in more of a quiet, sardonic way.

2. I was not a hard-worker but would do well in classes where I either found the subject matter interesting or I liked the teacher.

3. Nothing came easy, except getting Bs.

4. I was horrible at math and science classes and didn't even bother to take any math after trig. I got a D in Chemistry.

5. I somehow ended up taking a "class" where I worked in the office for 1st period, junior year. It was an easy "A" and an easy 3 credits. My duties included getting coffee for a couple of the secretaries. This caused a minor controversy because I had to go into the teacher's lounge to get the coffee and one time Coach Porter saw me in there and got very upset that there was a student in the teacher's lounge. He complained to the principal and after that I was no longer allowed to get coffee for the secretaries. Completely true story.

6. In Journalism I made minor contributions here and there by writing humor pieces and music reviews for albums I never even listened to. If you added up all the time I spent working on them over the course of my whole senior year, it would probably come out to well over 15 minutes. The journalism teacher was also the head of the show choir and basically could have cared less about the school newspaper and devoted all his time and energy to the show choir. One day after class he asked me if I knew how to operate a video camera. I was worried that my life was suddenly going to turn into an episode of "Diff'rent Strokes", when he asked if I would be willing to videotape the show choir's performance that night. I said 'sure' and ended up taping all their shows that year. As a result, I got an "A" in journalism and the teacher offered to write me a letter of recommendation for college. Being nice and reliable enough to perform a not-very-demanding task proved to be what earned me the greatest amount of respect and appreciation from an adult during my entire high school career.

7. I was horrible at P.E. I was the kind of kid who never dressed and spent time hanging out on the bleachers when I should have been out there Greco-Roman wrestling out on the football field. Despite this I joined the track team and made varisty my sophomore year. Despite this I spent most of my time on the track team trying to impress the girl high jumpers by jumping up and hanging on to the football goal posts.

8. The only classes I excelled at were Typing and German. I have no idea why I was good at either one because I have poor hand-eye coordination (suck at video games) and I was horrible at Spanish.

9. I was also horrible at Accounting.

10. I felt school was just a chore, something I needed to do. If I was really interested in something it was automatically relegated to place that existed well outside of and apart from the world of school.

11. After he graduates from law school, Bryan's first case is going to be to bring suit against the makers of "Napoleon Dynamite", for likeness rights on my account.

Movie/Book Update

Election (film): 4/4 stars.
The wife got me a copy of this DVD for Christmas and I watched it again after not having seen it for a number of years. I watched the commentary with the director, Alexander Payne, also. An interesting thing about the commentary is how clearly it comes across that Payne detests movie cliches. A few he mentions are: a person being hung up on and there's an instant dial-tone, the fact that most people in movies live in houses that are much nicer and larger than they'd ever possibly live in in real life, and how cars in movies are always spotless, especially period cars, when in real life most cars are always a little bit dirty.

He doesn't make mention of this in his commentary, but I have a feeling he carried this idea too far in one regard, that makes the film less believable than it would have otherwise. The actresses who play Matthew Broderick's wife and her friend who he ends up having an affair with simply aren't attractive enough. I have a feeling he purposely didn't cast really good looking actresses for these parts because he probably feels people in movies are too good looking. Here's why it doesn't work fo me:

1) Matthew Broderick is a good looking guy. Even if someone wasn't famous and was just a suburban high school teacher, if he looked exactly like Matthew Broderick he'd still end up marrying someone who was more attractive than the woman who plays his wife in the film.

2) If we're to believe that he's willing to cheat on his wife with another woman, we have to find the woman attractive too. The woman who plays the role in the film isn't unattractive, but she's not nearly good looking enough to have us believe that he'd be willing to risk his marriage for the chance to sleep with her.

If this opinion sounds male-biased, I'll have you know that my wife agreed with me 100% on this one.

I'm also reading the novel that the movie was based on. It was published in 1998, I bought it in 2002, and I'm just reading it now. So far it's good. As is always the case, it differs from the movie somewhat. One unique thing about the book is that it's broken down into short 'chapters' each a couple of pages long, that are told from the point of view of one of the characters. So, for example, there are two pages written in the first person by Mr. McAllister, then two pages written from the perspective of Paul Metzler, etc. I'm about halfway done.

Subways and Public Transportation

A few I've been on:

Los Angeles:
Has a subway that's always been completely empty whenever I've been on it. The Metrolink is a convenient way to get into Downtown, I suppose, but it's still easier just to drive in. Biggest problem with the subway: it doesn't take you anywhere worth going. Every bus ride I've ever taken in Los Angeles has been a Kafkaesque nightmare. Still a car town, and there's really nothing wrong with that.

San Francisco:
BART is a good system but not real comprehensive. On the east side of the bay the stops are really far apart and when it crosses into San Fran it makes a weird diagonal of the city that makes it hard to access the northwest (around Golden Gate Park) and southeastern (whatever's down there) parts of the city. The buses are fine though. San Fran itself is small like New York but all those damn hills make it hard to walk around. There are about three taxis in the entire city of San Francisco and they're always occupied. I've never been on the cable cars but I've always assumed they're more for tourists and have limited practicality.

San Diego:
The light rail that takes you into Downtown is nice. It even has a stop at Petco. As of five years ago, however, wasn't comprehensive at all.

Seattle:
Has a tourist monorail that goes back and forth within locations downtown. The buses are fine.

Chicago:
The L or "el", however you spell it, is pretty good. The buses are fine too. I had no problem getting back and forth between my friend's place near Northwestern and Downtown, via subway, bus, or taxi.

Washington D.C.
Good subway. Clean, comprehensive, easy to use. One of the better urban subway systems in the U.S. Unusual feature: really far underground.

Boston:
The T is pretty good. Not a super-extensive system but covers the city and a few surrounding towns pretty well. The cars are old and noisy, that's about it.

New York:
Incredibly comprehensive system but the cars themselves can be kind of nasty. Not a nice way to get around but a very convenient way. Am currently using it five days a week. Buses are about the same.

London:
Cleaner and more pleasant subways than the one in New York, and just as comprehensive. The red double-decker buses are fun to ride in because they make you feel like you're in a Beatles documentary.

Paris:
Once I figured out how to use the Metro I found it very convenient. The cars (as of 10 years ago) were green and I remember that as a passenger you could manually open the doors. The buses were fine but I could never figure out how much I was supposed to pay.

Amsterdam:
Light rail system that I had no clue how to buy tickets for. I took a few free rides. I don't remember it going much further out than around the center of the city and I think the route I took from my hotel to the train station I could walk in about 10 minutes (as opposed to 5 minutes on the light rail).

Philadelphia:
Forgot about this one. Took some kind of a train from the airport to the city center, but not sure if it was really a subway. Also, the most terrifying, frightening bus ride of my life was out of Philadelphia and through Camden, New Jersey.

Movie Update

Man on Wire: 3.5/4 stars. Very good but not great documentary about an amazing undertaking. The feat itself is so impressive that any competently-made documentary on the subject should be entertaining and watchable. The film itself doesn't add much, which is sometimes a good thing-- Petit is portrayed as neither kook nor god-- though it might have been nice to get more information on his background and how on earth he was able to finance all his endeavors.