Alice In Wonderland. Viewers In Coma.

This past week I got around to seeing Tim Burton's incarnation of Alice In Wonderland. As a child I'd read the stories and found them a bit lacking. Maybe it was the female heroine. Maybe it was the goofy characters but I mainly felt they just weren't very interesting stories. More to the point I always wondered if they weren't the work of a very disturbed mind or possibly one in the depths of a serious drug-induced trip. Wonderland is, after all, a pretty twisted and evil place that no child would ever want to seriously visit.

I should say right off that I'm a Burton fan. Most of what he's given us I find incredibly fascinating and extremely entertaining. I look forward to his re-imagining of most anything. Given my flat support for Alice in book form I was curious to see what he would turn this all into.

The open moments had my complete attention as the look of the film is vintage Burton. He has a way of delivering visuals that seem as if they come with an extra sense of real flavor. It's as if you can taste and smell everything here.

If that's all there was to movie-making this would be up for an Oscar, and may still be for some visual award, but we do demand a story to go with it and here Alice fails miserably. Burton has presented us with a story that has taken both the original tale and its sequel and forced them together into one convoluted mess. In then end it barely resembles either story and, in fact, fails to measure up to either.

Most annoyingly the film not only plods along with a dull story but then devolves into a completely unnecessary action sequence that absolutely no one doubts the outcome of. It also felt as if the writer ran out of ideas and decided to borrow a laundry list of ideas from The Wizard Of Oz. Been there. Done that.

When the film ended people quietly got up and left without anyone really saying a word. Not a good sign. I find it also quite telling that here we have Johnny Depp in an entirely forgettable role. It's not that his Mad Hatter was bad. It's just that his talents are entirely wasted here. That's even more of a problem when you consider how much they expected Depp to carry this film. You know this to be true by just looking at the movie poster. Instead of Alice we get a shot of The Mad Hatter as if this weren't called Alice In Wonderland.

The rest of the cast was equally a bit wasted or ineffectual. Crispin Glover's character is simply annoying. Anne Hathaway's character should be interesting but is distractingly negative.

It won't be the worst film of the year and it's worth seeing for the visuals (on cable). I also wouldn't bring young children to see it as it's loaded with rather violent and haunting sequences that really shouldn't be taken in by kids.

Only In The Mind Of The Deranged

A funny thing happened while I was catching a bit of Glen Beck's Fox News show last night. As usual Beck was going on about the horrifying, permanently damaging, mind-altering nefarious plots of the evil Left Empire.

However, on this night it was a bit different. The imagery was more haunting. The verbiage was more cutting and the rhetoric was nearly inconceivable.

The audience was told about how liberals preferred Hitler, had secretly desired communism and welcomed Stalin with open arms and bent knees. (Remember the viewpoint that says the one who first invokes Hitler is the one to lose the debate.) The piece is so full of garbage that it's hard to focus on any one pile of refuse. For example, take his comment that it wasn't until Harry Truman took office that the situation with the Soviets started to sour. Anyone that knows anything about the era knows that Churchill and Roosevelt had massive issues with Stalin long before Truman took the reigns.

Anyway, all of this was bad enough but then I proceeded to see something I didn't think even Beck could contemplate: He launched into a segment about the apparently woefully misunderstood Senator Joe McCarthy and how this guy was a hero fighting the good fight and he'd have succeeded except that the satanic left had identified him as their chief opponent in their plot to brainwash us all and so they set out to strike him down at all costs.

This, I must say, is revisionist history of the highest order. Beck reduced McCarthy's witch-hunting that both directly and indirectly destroyed countless lives down to a single sentence: "McCarthy was eventually censured by the Senate in 1954." Of course he fails to point out that half the Republicans in the Senate supported the resolution.

This guy is certifiable at this point. His remaining advertisers (now down to innumerable gold schemers and gold diggers) need to jump ship before they end up with even less credibility than Beck. Conservative commentary often will point to those who deny the Holocaust as a sign of clear insanity. They wonder how such an altered reality can be possible. This is exactly how such things happen. An entire segment of our community will listen to this tripe and take it at face value because one of their own said it.

One of the most famous quotes about McCarthy was presented by famed journalist Edward R. Murrow who said, "His primary achievement has been in confusing the public mind, as between the internal and the external threats of Communism. We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty. We must remember always that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law. We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men."

"We proclaim ourselves, as indeed we are, the defenders of freedom, wherever it continues to exist in the world, but we cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home. The actions of the junior Senator from Wisconsin have caused alarm and dismay amongst our allies abroad, and given considerable comfort to our enemies. And whose fault is that? Not really his. He didn't create this situation of fear; he merely exploited it and rather successfully."

Now think of that as if it were being said of Beck and replace communism with liberalism. This man is a blight on this country. What he's espousing is the worst form of propaganda and it's high time we held him accountable for it.

Rove Is Charlatan

Karl Rove is affectionately and pointedly referred to as "The Architect" whenever he appears on Fox News and most other outlets (though he rarely leaves the safety of Fox).

The continual fawning over this guy that's done by virtually anyone on Fox is a complete joke. Nothing about this man is balanced. He's treated as if he's a completely non-partisan by-stander to all things politics when every single comment out of his mouth is calculated for maximum political effect. I have no doubt that every pundit on Fox and conservative radio knows it and plays to it purposely.

Rove has said that the divide between President Obama and congressional Republicans is "a shocking failure." He went on to say that this is Obama's fault as he campaigned as a centrist but then moved hard to the left once he got into office. When asked if President Bush did the same thing in 2000 (campaigned as a centrist but then moved to the right) Rove disagrees.

How anyone who was there can state that with a straight face is only a mystery to those not paying attention. Then Governor Bush ran as, in his own words, "a uniter". He made a huge deal out of his "proven ability" to work with both sides of the aisle and bring everyone together for a common good. Instead, once in office none of that materialized. It ushered in the beginning of the greatest political divide we've ever seen. To suggest that what President Obama is experiencing is wholly of his own making exposes Rove as the charlatan that he is and always has been on these issues.

I listen to him give interviews on conservative talk shows and callers chime in afterwards at how fair he is and how non-partisan his views are. Only a zealot could listen to this guy and qualify his comments as non-partisan.

Rove has lied repeatedly about past events and continues to do so at every turn. Just recently he was on with Matt Lauer denying that he had anything to do with the Valerie Plame situation and never provided her name to anyone. Scott McClellan, Bush's then Press Secretary went before the press on three occasions at the time to deny Rove had anything to do with it after receiving assurances directly from he and President Bush that Rove had nothing to do with it. Lauer asked Rove if he owed McClellan an apology and Rove said absolutely not. That's interesting and telling because McClellan points out that Rove not only apologized to him for this in person but then later did so in front of the entire senior staff and later still sent a hand-written note apologizing once again.

What does it say about someone that apologizes privately to someone three times about something but then, when it matters most, refuses to do so on the record?

Exposing The Ghost Writer

My best friend suggested we see something other than the big movie of the week and so we headed off to see The Ghost Writer. The reviews were all pretty glowing and it sounded like a curiously delicious film.

The Ghost Writer stars Ewan McGregor as a successful (but unknown) ghost writer who's given a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to complete the memoirs of a recent British Prime Minister (played perfectly by Pierce Brosnan). Of course the opportunity comes with a number of concerns. Chief among them is that the previous ghost writer appears to have suddenly killed himself under extremely questionable circumstances.

The film is loaded with brilliant performers and performances including a few "is that really?" ones. The first is a key executive at the publishing house played by a freshly-bald Jim Belushi. We also get to see Timothy Hutton playing the lawyer for the Prime Minister even though we only see him sparingly. Another wonderful, albeit brief, performance is given by the always-reliable Tom Wilkinson during a scene that's mentally haunting from start to finish. We even get a great scene with the amazing Eli Wallach that had me thinking, "I thought he died years ago."

The meatiest moments take place between McGregor and the women surrounding the Prime Minister. These include Olivia Williams playing his apparently long-suffering wife and, in the biggest shocker of all, Kim Cattrall playing the PM's assistant and, with heavy suggestion, a past/possibly-current lover.

Cattrall's performance is shocking for a few reasons. Chief among them is that after years of being type-cast as Samantha in Sex and the City we're used to seeing her as a vivacious and timeless sexpot. Here she's so normal and almost plain that it took more than a few scenes to realize it was even her. We also get to see that she has immense talent that's been wasted with the Samantha character. I must say I was shocked to see her looking this normal and, frankly, old. However, I must also say that after I got over the initial shock her strikingly good looks even at her age managed to shine through without the need for all the flair.

The main story opens up into a full-blown thriller by the end of the movie but be very prepared to wait for it. 90 minutes into the movie we were asking ourselves if the film had any point at all. I was fearing yet another bland movie filled with great acting. Those always leave me feeling cold and bored. Suffice to say that the last 40 minutes makes it all worth it.

Most obviously much effort appears to have gone into making this feel like a biopic. We're given the impression that Brosnan's character is a paper-thin representation of real ex-British PM Tony Blair replete with all the same issues. He's being hounded as a possible war criminal for supporting illegal torture of terrorists during his tenure and his opponents hate him for his rubber-stamp approval of anything that came out of Washington during his term. Sound familiar?

In the end it all just works and the pay-off is a powerful one that will keep you thinking about it for quite some time afterwards. Could it happen? Did it happen? Will it happen? This movie will get you wondering.

Just When You Think You've Heard It All....

So I'm reading the news and I come across the story of Chelsea King, a 17 year-old high school student who disappeared Thursday in San Diego. Police there say they found evidence linking a previous sex offender, John Gardner, to the crime though they didn't say what that evidence was. Gardner was previously jailed for molesting a 13 year-old girl in May of 2000.

This is the part I couldn't believe: Apparently Gardener lured the 13 year-old to his home with an offer to watch the 1998 movie Patch Adams.

If you're not familiar with the film it stars Robin Williams playing the real Patch Adams. The film focuses on Adams' medical schooling and his various antics and novel approach to practicing medicine. The story includes the sexual molestation and killing of Adams' girlfriend by a disturbed patient of Adams.

What sort of monster not only does this sort of thing but has the gall to top it all off by wooing their victim with a film of such poignant irony?

Here's hoping that his latest victim is found alive though it certainly doesn't seem all that likely.

Neverending Unemployment?

Several media outlets are up in arms over Senator Jim Bunning's tactics in the Senate today blocking voting on a bill that would extend eligibility for "enhanced" unemployment benefits for another 30 days. The bill would also subsidize health insurance for many laid-off workers.

Understand that I believe in social programs. I like being an idealist and think that if we do live in the greatest country and richest country in the world (as we keep being told we do and are) then I also believe it behooves us to be number one in compassion and empathy when it comes to those of us who have fallen on hard times--many without any wrongdoing on their part. I personally believe Social Security as a concept is one of the most magnanimous gestures a people can impart on others.

I will never argue that such systems have been a shining example of how best to manage such endeavors. However, the unemployment situation is quite a quandary and it's one I'm not sure I can support as is.

I've always been entrepreneurial in my life. Most of my vocational life has been spent working for myself or for other entrepreneurs as a key component. It's been risky and I've found myself out of work more often than most. However, I also often didn't collect unemployment when I was within my rights to do so. I didn't feel the need to burden a system unnecessarily.

This past year I was laid off from work after an accident with a drunk driver left me unable to travel. In this case I could have used unemployment and went to collect. Due to some odd way in which they calculate your eligibility I was told I couldn't collect until July of this year (something to do with part of my income being 1099 work).

Meanwhile I know several people who've been collecting unemployment now for more than two straight years. A couple of them aren't even bothering to look for work. I'm not sure I see the benefit of this benefit any longer. We can't just keep giving people money simply because they don't have a job. It's just not sustainable but many in Congress on both sides seem blinded to this reality. None of them want to have to go to the polls having been responsible for stopping the checks of countless of their constituents.

So while the press is embarking on an all-out attack on Senator Bunning--a Senator I have lots of disagreement with--I think I have to support him on this one. We simply cannot afford to keep doling out checks to everyone indefinitely.

My Ticket To Shutter Island

I've had mixed feelings about Martin Scorsese's films. Most recently we were offered The Departed and while much of it was clearly brilliant the plot had holes big enough to fly an airship through them.

Seeing previews of Shutter Island made me think quite a bit about his past efforts and how many of them seem to fail to fully impress me. Goodfellas was fantastic but I can't even think about Gangs of New York without laughing out loud.

But in the end it's Scorsese and it's hard to be a fan of movies and not see what one of its noted masters has produced so off I went.

The movie started out a bit jarringly with Leonardo DiCaprio sporting an accent that took me a good 10 minutes to ignore. However, aside from that it managed to take hold and not let up.

Scorsese does a wonderful job of telling this story and using everything he's learned to maximum effect. Every scene drips with realism. We get acting of the highest caliber from everyone involved. The look of every scene is just superb. Effects are applied not for the sake of the effect but to heighten the storyline with extreme precision. The first shot of the island itself underscores the attention to detail. Every nuance of the island is just what's called for. It's haunting just sitting there and shot from the right angles.

I also realized early on that this will be a film that demands subsequent viewings as Scorsese has managed to hide a litany of key plot elements throughout the film. The most popular example is a scene involving the questioning of female patient on the island. Upon receiving a requested glass of water we see her take a drink but the shot clearly shows no glass in her hand. The next shot, however, shows her sitting the glass down onto the table with the expected clunk sound fully intact. Was it just a continuity error? No way. It's all part of the experience. Scorsese wants us to feel off-balance here and the effect works. We question what we see and that's the point.

I rarely notice music in a film especially when it's not intricately essential to the plot of the movie like famous classic rock tunes in Pirate Radio. However, here the music deserves a mention. It's pitch-perfect throughout. Every scene seems to have been matched with the most optimal score possible. Whoever was responsible deserves an Oscar mention.

The biggest issues I have with the film is that I figured out the puzzle way too soon and that made the rest of the film drag a bit. I noted that those who didn't figure it out loved it from start to finish. Regardless this is definitely a thinking person's film. Go in prepared to be challenged and keep your guard up at all times. You'll be rewarded for a discriminating eye.

When Coincidence Gets Too Close

So I went to a friend's birthday party on Friday. The friend happens to be gay which is important to the story but you'll have to wait for it.

It was a large gathering of people so discussions were somewhat segmented into sections of the table. The bulk of the group was made up of friends who met at a social gaming group I'm affiliated with.

During the evening's discussions we got to talking about seemingly strange oddities and I mentioned one I'd heard that I found compelling. Ask someone the following questions:

"What's 5 + 1?"

"What's 4 + 2?"

"What's 3 + 3?"

"What's 2 + 4?"

"What's 1 + 5?"

After each response the respondent should, of course, say "six". Then ask:

"What's the first vegetable that comes to mind?"

I've found that about 80% of the time the answer will be "carrot".

We talked about this a bit and then wondered what the response would be if you ignored the first part and just jumped right to the final question. Would people still say "carrot" just as often?

So now the fun part. I like polls. I like being called for surveys. I like doing them in malls. It's my way of feeling like I take part in things and maybe, just maybe, things will trend towards my view of things since I added to the mix. Related to this interest is my membership in a polling service called Polling Point. Every so often they send me an e-mail asking me to take another poll. Most of the time it's about politics. When it's not it's about brands.

They'd sent me one about a week ago and I was too busy to get to it so I finally decided to give them 10 minutes and answer it. The first question was curious. They wanted to know if I play games and, if so, what kinds? Interesting. All these years and they've never asked about games. Cool.

Then the next question floors me. It states, and I'm not joking, "Before we begin, please think of a vegetable. Just write down the name of whatever vegetable first comes to mind."

What?! So I get asked about gaming and then this, out of nowhere, pops up? I continue on with the survey and it never mentions games or the relevance of the vegetable question again. Instead is asks about chefs and various prepared dishes showing pictures of them and asking me to identify the food by the picture.

Then it informs me it's almost done but there's just one more question. They want to know if I know any gay or lesbian people personally.

So, just like that, Polling Point wants to know about games, the first vegetable that comes to mind and if I know any gay or lesbian people personally and this happens just three days after a get-together of gamers where we ask the same question at the party of a gay friend of ours.

Maybe I should play the lottery today?