Review: The Spirit (is not with us...)

After letting my viewing digest for a few days, I can now say I had major problems resolving the clash of the visual style and crappy dialogue of this movie. Having seen other Frank Miller offerings, I guess I don't know what I was expecting but I was unimpressed. While there are moments, there are not enough for me to recommend this film to anyone. I find it interesting that one medium is kneaded into be something it is not:

Dear Frank Miller,

Perhaps you should make your films animated instead of live-action-pretending-to-be-animation. Being forced to process two jarring elements (visuals versus dialog) is far too much to ask of an audience; I witnessed people getting up after the first 10 minutes - that can't be good. While you're at it, make sure the story is solid - no movie is worth watching if the story isn't good.

Sincerely,
A guy who really likes movies...

PS: Should I be asking you for a refund?

Back from an unintended hiatus...

Yep, I've been away... Not planned, just happened...

And speaking of happenings, a great many took place but just to name a few:

- The Philadelphia Phillies defeated the Tampa Bay Rays in the World Series

- Barack Obama became the first non-white President-Elect in the history of the United States

- Various nations are now actively involved in patrolling the waters off eastern Africa and the Arabian peninsula to ward off pirates (yes, I said pirates)

- The current economic downturn has exposed a massive fraud scheme that is now affecting endowments and charitable organizations

- Microsofty doesn't quite understand that marketing a product after its release may not help sales

And on and on...

Now that I have had time to grieve...

I offer a tip of my cap and congratulations to the Tampa Bay Rays who, for the first time in their 11-year franchise history, will represent the American League in the World Series against an arguably tough Philadelphia Phillies. How improbable is this? Before the season began, the Rays odds going to the World Series was 200 to 1.

200 to 1.

I think this is a great story no matter how you look at it because it is pure Americana - the underdog prevails. Think about this, the Rays had the worst record in baseball last year and started off playing strong this season and, still, no one gave them a chance even though they spent most of the season in first place. They persevered and when things looked like the momentum was swinging in favor of my beloved Boston Red Sox, they came out for Game 7 of the American League Championship Series and won. They did not falter. They did not crumble. They did not fade. They did not choke. They stood up and got to work and outplayed the Sox.

Again, no one gave them a chance.

Remind you of a certain presidential candidate?

Another Fall classic

And I had just finished telling some friends when Tampa scored the two runs in the seventh inning that this game was over...

Even if the Boston Red Sox do not advance to the World Series, this game was one to remember... Thank you, Red Sox!...

The wrong kind of influence...

In the above video, I believe the pastor is sincere in his beliefs but he is crossing a line and not just breaking Federal law - I think this is abuse of authority. Throughout history, leaders of religious entities have held political sway over their subjects and it doesn't take much to see the trail of devastation in its wake.

First, there is argument over what was meant by separation of church and state as it is never actually mentioned but implied in The Constitution of the United States:

"Article. VI. - Debts, Supremacy, Oaths (Paragraph 3)
The Senators and Representatives before mentioned, and the Members of the several State Legislatures, and all executive and judicial Officers, both of the United States and of the several States, shall be bound by Oath or Affirmation, to support this Constitution; but no religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States."

"Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

In both cases, the government's role is what is restricted. That being said, when religious groups attempt injection of their beliefs into legislation, they cross the line of constitutionality. Many religious groups often point out that this country was founded on the principle of religious freedom; that is not even close to being largely true - just read The Declaration of Independence.

Here is the first sentence:
"When in the Course of human events, it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation."

Then next part, the preamble, lays out the rights of the colonists to declare independence. It is the third section that outlines the grievances the Second Continental Congress has with England's King George III. The list is rather long so I will not present it here. What is of note is that there is no mention of religion or religious persecution as part of that list. There goes the founded-on-religious-freedom argument.

So why is it even mentioned in The Constitution? At that time, there was a high level of anti-Catholicism (a leftover of the internal religious strife of the previous 300 years in England's history) even to the point where many Catholics were forbidden to hold public office. Also, there were numerous sects of the predominantly Protestant faith - not everybody got along. So in order to be fair, there could be no preference to one. The framers also felt it would be embarrassing for anyone to leave because of religious persecution so best to keep government out of religion.

Second, my biggest concern is that inserting religious beliefs into election grossly simplifies the priorities electors must consider when choosing a candidate. This argument of choosing candidates based on moral values and religious principles goes against reason. I'm not saying you shouldn't consider it but it shouldn't be the only thing. When I hear people say, "he goes to church" or "she's a believer," it infuriates me because those personal qualities do not always translate into who the best qualified individual is. We are also so diverse in our beliefs so who gets to choose? We have spent the last seven years with a president who was elected, in part, with a manipulation of those parameters in mind and what does the United States have to show for it?

- A misguided police action (it's not a war if Congress doesn't declare it so) where resources were diverted away from where we should actually be - Afghanistan. We are no safer.
-An economy in peril thanks to deregulation chiefly supported by those of "good moral character" - I lost my job, my home and life savings but my elected official is against abortion, against gay marriage, supports prayer in school and an amendment to outlaw flag burning and that's really important to me. You may think God will provide for you but it didn't have to happen - that is my point.
- The criminal willingness of the current administration to circumvent its constitutional responsibility to all of its citizens nevermind The Constitution itself.
- Low standing in the international community. The terrorists and those who support them do not hate us for our freedoms. They hate us because we're sticking our nose in their business and arrogant to think we know best. We used to be known as a force for good but no more - we are reviled.

I can't stop you from making your choice based on whatever it is you base your decisions on. I only ask that you consider other factors. What follows will flip many of my friends who know me to be an atheist but I simply had to:

Gospel of Luke, Chapter 10, verses 25–37.
On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. "Teacher," he asked, "what must I do to inherit eternal life?" "What is written in the Law?" he replied. "How do you read it?" He answered: " 'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind'; and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'" "You have answered correctly," Jesus replied. "Do this and you will live." But he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, "And who is my neighbor?" In reply Jesus said, "A man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into the hands of robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead. A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side. So too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he traveled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, took him to an inn and took care of him. The next day he took out two silver coins and gave them to the innkeeper. 'Look after him,' he said, 'and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.' "Which of these three do you think was a neighbor to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?" The expert in the law replied, "The one who had mercy on him." Jesus told him, "Go and do likewise."

Sept. 27, 2008: News in the morning...

Paul Newman, Jan. 25, 1925 - Sep. 26, 2008
Thank you, you will be missed...


First 2008 Presidential Debate
I used to like John McCain... 'Nuf sed...


Congratulations Tampa Bay Rays, first American League East title in franchise history, good luck in the playoffs
I'll, of course, still be rooting for my Red Sox - GO SOX!...

And now an item that may have gotten lost with everything else going on here in the US...


Somali pirates take Ukrainian ship carrying 33 Russian T-72 tanks and other weapons this past Thursday
WTF?!...

Book recommendations

A while ago, someone I'm very fond of and very dear to me pressed me for a list of five books that I felt she should read. I present that list below along with others (and one she herself lent me)...

My top five recommendations:
The Hitchhiker's Guide To The Galaxy - Douglas Adams
Dune - Frank Herbert
A History of God - Karen Armstrong (this one's a tough read but worthy)
Rites of Spring: The Great War and the Birth of the Modern Age - Modris Eckstein
Dialogue Concerning The Two Chief World Systems - Galileo Galilei

Highly recommended reads:
The Shock Doctrine - Naomi Klein
Six Memos for the Next Millennium - Italo Calvino
Richard III and King Lear - William Shakespeare
On Death and Dying - Elisabeth Kübler-Ross, MD
The Wind Is My Mother: The Life and Teachings of a Native American Shaman - Bear Heart (w/ Molly Larkin)
The Constitution of the United States - yes, read it!

I realize book lists are incredibly subjective and there are other titles I could easily include but this list represents my essentials, my desert-island books...

September 11, 2008

There has been much talk about the delays at the World Trade Center site with regards to the new buildings and memorial. If the actions (or inaction) of the Bush administration weren't embarrassing enough, what should be an example of this country's ability to manifest the powers of the phoenix instead have tragically turned into showcases of ego, greed and ineptitude that are characteristics of the ever-so-hip disaster capitalism. Seven years later, and nobody knows when anything will be finished nevermind start.

For years, I've said the best thing that we can do with the site is to rebuild it - exactly as it was. And I know I'm not alone.

In the meantime, we have the poignant Tribute In Light installation. But for those of you who may not know, it has only been funded through 2008.

Living in New York City, it is difficult to ignore. Even I, who disagree with what I will refer to as the marketing of 9/11, can't help but pause when I see these columns of light - they are a proper tribute.

In a word, solemn.

From my front stoop:














From the Smith Ave./9th St. stop on the F line:

Gettin' constitutional on your...

Time: 00:40ish or so
Date: July 27, 2008
Place: Times Square subway station, Q train

Seen on the back of t-shirt:

Article II, Section 4
The President, Vice President and all civil Officers of the United States, shall be removed from Office on Impeachment for, and Conviction of, Treason, Bribery, or other high Crimes and Misdemeanors.

So good to 'read' from you...

I must confess that I find it humorous to respond with "So good to hear from you" when the situation did, in fact, not require use of my ears. Clearly, this is an immediate response in the same vein of "God bless you/bless you" when someone sneezes - we're simply used to it.

The most popular story of the origins of "bless you" lies in the belief that when one sneezed, part of your soul was expelled. But where does the "so good to hear from you" response come from?

I tried researching this as most can find references of other phrases (i.e.: "the whole nine yards", "that ball had a lot of English on it", etc.), but I found nothing. So I offer to you my thoughts...

We take it for granted that most people know how to read. But if you were to travel back over a hundred years, literacy throughout the world was not common; it is thought that nearly 20% or less of the world's population achieved a literacy rate of 70% or higher - over 50%, the literacy rate was 30% or less. So the way we learned of news of family, friends, jobs, scandals, and political unrest was to 'listen' to a town crier or someone who could read letters and what not. So, yes, news broadcasts before radio and television - we spent more time in conversation as it was the primary method of communication.

But what of the usage of the phrase itself? Well, it probably just stuck like anything else. Going back to "bless you, " we've never stopped saying it (for my part, I say "gesundheit" which is German for to your health or good health). It imparts a personal warmth that a phrase like "so good to read about you" or "so good to read from you" does not convey. Listening is polite and proper. Seeing or hearing someone is a connection.

I'm not saying the written word has no merit. The volume of literature at our disposal dismisses that notion but how often have you wondered about being at a place described, or being a character or even conversing with the author? The written word almost gets us there.

So the next time someone drops you a line or two, give them a call and chat.

I'm available most nights after 9pm and weekends...

A Midsummer Night's Dream at the Old Stone House in Park Slope

I just got home from catching Shakespeare's "A Midsummer Night's Dream" put on by Piper Theatre. Performed under the stars (if you squint, you can see them through the ever present glow of New York City) at J.J. Byrne Park in the Park Slope section of Brooklyn, my neighborhood, I only have one word for this production: fun.










Even with a cast that included children, this show did not shy from innuendo and even took liberties. Speaking for myself, Titania was simply seductive and the ladies playing Hermia and Helena were fun to watch when they were allowed to go to the edge. The players were also fun to watch reminding me of 1930's screwball comedies. I was a little puzzled at first with the ongoing undressing of Lysander, Hermia, Demetrius, and Helen as their evening played out in the forest and yet it made sense - I will not attempt to put in to words my theory, but if you happen to be in town and wish to ply me with single-malt Scotch whisky, you can ask me.

The kid who played Puck was pretty good. I particularly enjoyed the sequences of the characters, who when enchanted by Oberon's magic, awoke seeing the objects of their manipulated affection to the opening strains of Marvin Gaye's "Let's Get It On." The cast looked like they were having fun and the audience clearly enjoyed it.

As I said, fun...

Major League Baseball and instant replay (BTW: Happy Birthday, USA)

I begin by, first, saying, "Happy Birthday, United States of America!" - now that that's out of the way...

I was lucky enough to be able to attend today's Boston Red Sox/ New York Yankees game at Yankee Stadium.  July 4th is meaningful in Yankee Stadium history: Lou Gehrig gave his farewell speech in 1939 and Dave Righetti threw a no-hitter against my beloved Red Sox in 1983. Today was like any other game except that this is the last Fourth of July game to be hosted in the "House that Ruth Built."

However, I digress...

For me, I'll remember this game as the last day I opposed instant replay in Major League Baseball.

It's the bottom of the ninth inning with the Yankees trailing the Red Sox 6-3. With two outs, sitting at second base is Brett Gardner and at the plate, Derek Jeter. Jeter hits a drive out to center field where Boston's Coco Crisp came on hard and fast to make a fantastic diving catch to end the game. 

Oh, wait a minute...

Third base umpire Wally Bell ruled that the ball was trapped instead of caught allowing a run to score and Jeter ends up at the recently vacated second base with an RBI* double. It also gave the Yankees an opportunity as the tieing run came to the plate (Abreu flew out to center, Sox win 6-4). 

The game should have ended there.  But it didn't - thanks to a bad call by an umpire. This season alone, home runs have either been awarded or stripped because of errant officiating. The talk to bring instant replay to baseball is far greater this year than at any other time in history and now, I'm on board. 

If instant replay was made available back in 1996, the 'home run' that Derek Jeter hit during the playoffs would have instead been ruled fan interference. Same thing with the Cubs in their post-season appearance back in 2003 - the umpire ruled there was no fan interference. Is it a home run? Was the runner safe? And now Crisp's amazing catch will now be remembered as the catch that wasn't. If instant replay was available, the umpires would know that Crisp indeed made the catch, an amazing catch - game over.

I've always been a big fan of keeping baseball pure even if that meant that a call would go against my team. Some refer to it as the human element. I think of baseball as an allegory for life but the games do matter to the teams playing them. it also means even more during the post-season. We need to make sure the right calls are being made. 

I can no longer in good conscience stand in the way: Bring instant replay to baseball.

'Nuf sed...

 

*For you non-baseball types, Run Batted In...