AMONG THE TWENTY COOLEST THINGS I'VE EVER SEEN: The WWE has signed a one-legged wrestler. Fo' shizzle. See footage of Zachary "Tenacious Z" Gowen giving a one-legged ass-kicking here and here.
Really, does InstaPundit give you anything like this on a Friday afternoon?
Friday, February 14, 2003
THE NEAR-GREAT MOVIES: Roger Ebert can cover The Great Movies -- I'd like to start spending some time each week to cover some of the near-greats, movies that were pretty damn good but never found the audience they deserved.
This series starts today with Mike Nichols' Primary Colors, a 1998 movie that dared to be about something -- the conflict between ends and means, and how one goes about being an ethical person in a world where others aren't going to bother.
And, yes, the movie's also about Bill Clinton. Or, at least, the underlying novel by Joe Klein would neither have been written nor much noticed without the obvious real-life parallels between the Clintons and their team and the fictionalized Stantons.
Indeed, it was those parallels which sunk the movie after its March 1998 release, limiting its total U.S. box office to under $40 million. After all, who needed to see a movie about the fake Clintons when the real ones were knee-deep in early Lewinsky?
Five years later, though, we can stop looking for parallels and evaluation John Travolta's Bill Clinton impersonation, and instead gaze with fresh eyes at the movie. And it's great.
For a detailed plot synopsis, go here -- no need to be redundant. All that you need to know is that we're dealing with a young political operative who gets sucked into to the Presidential primary campaign of a charismatic governor of a small southern state, and who becomes involved in various moral, ethical and strategic issues along the way.
And now here's what makes the movie work: there are no "bad guys" in the movie, no easy foils advancing obviously false propositions. Arguments are raised and debated passionately, and are resolved insofar as the plot necessitates moving forward -- but they aren't resolved as moral propositions. There are no answers here, and no One True Viewpoint artificially imposed by the filmmakers, only smart people raising good questions.
For example: one of the running debates in the movie is whether it's proper for a campaign to tar an opponent with sleazy episodes from his past -- not Keating Five-like episodes of fraudulent or unethical conduct, mind you, but very sad, very human behavior of people at their weakest. Well, if you assume that rivals from the other political party will find and use such information in the future, aren't you obligated to use it yourself during the primaries so that the party has a better chance of winning?
The movie posits a self-perpetuating downwards spiral of pessimism -- assume the worst of your foes' ethics, assume the worst of the media, assume that the public will respond to the lowest common denominator and only become engaged by scandal and muck -- and soon enough, even candidates dedicated to elevating public discourse feel compelled to engage in the same low tactics which provoke even more cynicism and pessimism.
Which is a shame. Because as the movie points out, the world of politics is still inhabited by a fair contigent of idealists and dreamers, people who desperately want to believe in their leaders and the possibility of real good to emerge from public office. But can you be an idealistic politician, an morally pure campaigner, and win? If you don't win, does it matter how ethically the campaign behaved? And can a man who sleeps with every woman he can (except his wife) in his private life neverthless be admirable in his public life?
Good questions, all, and unlike shallow political movies like The American President or Dave which pretend to raise lofty issues (the personal privacy of political figures and the need for "ordinary people" in Washington) yet resolve them in a facile, simplistic, "of course Richard Dreyfuss is a weenie!" manner, Primary Colors provides the viewer with no easy enemies to hate and all of the nuances and complexities of the real world.
The movie is well-cast and well-acted. Travolta's solid, Kathy Bates is incredible, Billy Bob Thornton is the only Jim Carville clone you'll ever need to see, and Maura Tierney is . . . well, at least it made it amusing last night to see her in a supporting role, because we were flipping back between Primary Colors and ER during the commercial breaks. Plus you've got Larry Hagman as Gov. Fred Picker, a pseudo-Perot, and it's a nice little performance from an underappreciated veteran actor.
Finally, Primary Colors is a movie about falling in love -- with a politician, that is. It's about the yearning so many of us have to want to believe in something larger than ourselves, and someone capable of putting those beliefs into action. And like love itself, sometimes we're disappointed in what we find when we peer too closely at the object of our affections, and it forces us to make hard choices: Do we just give up on the object of our affections? Do we become cynical about the prospects for ever achieving pure love, and give up on ever finding it? Or do we accept that we are dealing in the land of humans, not angels, and admit that something compromised might still be the best we are able to find?
This is the world of Primary Colors, and it is well worth your time to rent and enjoy.
This series starts today with Mike Nichols' Primary Colors, a 1998 movie that dared to be about something -- the conflict between ends and means, and how one goes about being an ethical person in a world where others aren't going to bother.
And, yes, the movie's also about Bill Clinton. Or, at least, the underlying novel by Joe Klein would neither have been written nor much noticed without the obvious real-life parallels between the Clintons and their team and the fictionalized Stantons.
Indeed, it was those parallels which sunk the movie after its March 1998 release, limiting its total U.S. box office to under $40 million. After all, who needed to see a movie about the fake Clintons when the real ones were knee-deep in early Lewinsky?
Five years later, though, we can stop looking for parallels and evaluation John Travolta's Bill Clinton impersonation, and instead gaze with fresh eyes at the movie. And it's great.
For a detailed plot synopsis, go here -- no need to be redundant. All that you need to know is that we're dealing with a young political operative who gets sucked into to the Presidential primary campaign of a charismatic governor of a small southern state, and who becomes involved in various moral, ethical and strategic issues along the way.
And now here's what makes the movie work: there are no "bad guys" in the movie, no easy foils advancing obviously false propositions. Arguments are raised and debated passionately, and are resolved insofar as the plot necessitates moving forward -- but they aren't resolved as moral propositions. There are no answers here, and no One True Viewpoint artificially imposed by the filmmakers, only smart people raising good questions.
For example: one of the running debates in the movie is whether it's proper for a campaign to tar an opponent with sleazy episodes from his past -- not Keating Five-like episodes of fraudulent or unethical conduct, mind you, but very sad, very human behavior of people at their weakest. Well, if you assume that rivals from the other political party will find and use such information in the future, aren't you obligated to use it yourself during the primaries so that the party has a better chance of winning?
The movie posits a self-perpetuating downwards spiral of pessimism -- assume the worst of your foes' ethics, assume the worst of the media, assume that the public will respond to the lowest common denominator and only become engaged by scandal and muck -- and soon enough, even candidates dedicated to elevating public discourse feel compelled to engage in the same low tactics which provoke even more cynicism and pessimism.
Which is a shame. Because as the movie points out, the world of politics is still inhabited by a fair contigent of idealists and dreamers, people who desperately want to believe in their leaders and the possibility of real good to emerge from public office. But can you be an idealistic politician, an morally pure campaigner, and win? If you don't win, does it matter how ethically the campaign behaved? And can a man who sleeps with every woman he can (except his wife) in his private life neverthless be admirable in his public life?
Good questions, all, and unlike shallow political movies like The American President or Dave which pretend to raise lofty issues (the personal privacy of political figures and the need for "ordinary people" in Washington) yet resolve them in a facile, simplistic, "of course Richard Dreyfuss is a weenie!" manner, Primary Colors provides the viewer with no easy enemies to hate and all of the nuances and complexities of the real world.
The movie is well-cast and well-acted. Travolta's solid, Kathy Bates is incredible, Billy Bob Thornton is the only Jim Carville clone you'll ever need to see, and Maura Tierney is . . . well, at least it made it amusing last night to see her in a supporting role, because we were flipping back between Primary Colors and ER during the commercial breaks. Plus you've got Larry Hagman as Gov. Fred Picker, a pseudo-Perot, and it's a nice little performance from an underappreciated veteran actor.
Finally, Primary Colors is a movie about falling in love -- with a politician, that is. It's about the yearning so many of us have to want to believe in something larger than ourselves, and someone capable of putting those beliefs into action. And like love itself, sometimes we're disappointed in what we find when we peer too closely at the object of our affections, and it forces us to make hard choices: Do we just give up on the object of our affections? Do we become cynical about the prospects for ever achieving pure love, and give up on ever finding it? Or do we accept that we are dealing in the land of humans, not angels, and admit that something compromised might still be the best we are able to find?
This is the world of Primary Colors, and it is well worth your time to rent and enjoy.
"I AM VERY DISAPPOINTED IN THE SHOW": Today's Howard University Hilltop (registration required) features an exclusive interview with Howard senior Frenchelle "Frenchie" Davis, regarding her ouster from American Idol. Among the highlights:
The full article is available here.
It was a past the producers were told about back in November before she made finals, Davis claims.
"I was open with the information from the very beginning,'' Davis said. "There was no outside pressure for me to tell them, and my involvement with the website didn't even show up in the background check they did on all of the contestants."
...
"I am very disappointed in the show," Davis, a Los Angeles native, said. "It is my belief that any woman who could endure what I have endured, and still hold her head high and fight to make something of herself, is worthy of being called an idol."
...
"I was 18 years old at the time and 3,000 miles away from home," she said. "But I simply refused to go back home without a college degree and at the time it seemed like the best way to earn the money I needed to continue my education. Everyone knows why I did it."
Davis also said the site was under different ownership when she was working there, and the allegations that the site contained child pornography are untrue.
"I just want people to know the site was not a child pornography site when I worked there," Davis said. "And I have never been involved in anyway with the abuse of children, which is what child pornography is."
...
"All I know is I believe I could have won and I also believe someone else thought that too and that's why it happened,'' Davis said.
Of course, the controversy surrounding Davis has fueled many offers from labels, but she says she is still looking over all of them. In the meantime she only has two definite plans.
"I'm definitely planning on coming back to Howard in the fall to get my degree,'' she said. "But during my free time now I'm going to be studying for the LSAT which I'll take in June."
...
"I'm not going to discourage anyone from supporting me in any way," Davis said. "The fans of the show have all the power because they choose who the next 'American Idol' is, and they can make me a star anyway. Their anger helps me vent."
The full article is available here.
Thursday, February 13, 2003
NEW ADDITION: Unlike a lot of blogs, I'm trying to keep my level of blogrolling to a minimum, and only direct you to those sites which will actively, consistently merit your attention.
One such site, which I should've linked since day one, is Greg Beato's Soundbitten. The site focuses on pop-cultural issues as much as on the political scene in a smart and engaging way, and it is well worth your repeated visits. (Where are all the pop culture blogs, anyway?)
Check out his recent post on America's Beef Producers' efforts to market to teenage girls for a sample, and visit him often.
One such site, which I should've linked since day one, is Greg Beato's Soundbitten. The site focuses on pop-cultural issues as much as on the political scene in a smart and engaging way, and it is well worth your repeated visits. (Where are all the pop culture blogs, anyway?)
Check out his recent post on America's Beef Producers' efforts to market to teenage girls for a sample, and visit him often.
FRENCHIE UPDATE: The Washington Post's Lisa de Moraes has the definitive take this morning. As her article notes:
Sign the petition.
It's okay for a contestant on Fox's "American Idol" to have worked as a stripper, as had Nikki McKibbin, who made it to the final three on the reality series's first edition. And it's peachy if a contestant on the network's "Joe Millionaire" has dressed up as a high school cheerleader in bondage and fetish flicks -- like finalist Sarah Kozer.
But it is absolutely unacceptable for a contestant on the current edition of "American Idol" to have appeared on a porn site four years ago. Ask Frenchie Davis, who got booted off the show for just that. . . .
According to a source, the parties determined that it's one thing to perform in a strip club and another to pose on a Web site geared toward male fantasies about underage girls. So if you are thinking you might want to be a contestant on a Fox reality TV show in the future, confine your extracurricular activities to stripping or appearing on adult Web sites that cater to male fantasies about of-age women. (Apparently Kozer was portraying a very mature cheerleader in bondage.) This is good information to know.
Sign the petition.
Wednesday, February 12, 2003
D'OH! Slate's Chris Suellentrop, on the decline of The Simpsons:
The entire article is available here.
[W]atching The Simpsons chase Ozzie & Harriet's record for the longest-running sitcom has been like watching the late-career Pete Rose: There's still greatness there, and you get to see a home run now and then, but mostly it's a halo of reflected glory.
The entire article is available here.
"I WAS LIKE...": Like clockwork, just as pitchers and catchers set to report to spring training, the Village Voice has now published its 29th (or 30th) Annual Pazz & Jop Music Critics Poll, compiling the best of music in 2002.
Sure, the voting is interesting (top album: Wilco's Yankee Hotel Foxtrot; top single: Missy Elliot's "Work It", in a landslide), but as with their movie critics' poll, it's the extensive comments section on the year in music that make it such compelling reading. Here's a sample:
As I said, there's good reading to be had, and this is just a small sample. Enjoy.
Sure, the voting is interesting (top album: Wilco's Yankee Hotel Foxtrot; top single: Missy Elliot's "Work It", in a landslide), but as with their movie critics' poll, it's the extensive comments section on the year in music that make it such compelling reading. Here's a sample:
"Work It"'s heroic weirdness leaves me awestruck. It's hard to know where to begin trying to unravel it, other than to observe that all the backwards looping and oh-yessa-massas ("NO!") and gadunka-dunk-dunks/toing-tanga-tang-tangs share with mid-'60s Dylan a supreme confidence that amounts to getting away with anything and everything you care to try.
Phil Dellio
Toronto, Canada
Best opening gambit had to be "I was like" from "Hot in Herre"—turning everyday IM parlance into an invite to a sweaty, neverending party.
Maura Johnston
Astoria, New York
Dumbest controversy of the year: Avril Lavigne isn't really a punk. What? Next you're gonna tell me Tobey Maguire can't shoot webs out of his wrists.
Keith Harris
Chicago, Illinois
"Like I Love You" was, among other things, a triumph of syntactic ambiguity: Does Justin, like, love her? Does he feel something approximating love? Is he just being sarcastic? The song's a perfect textual depiction of the Neptunes' indecisive Sweet Tart shuffle: Is it pop? Is it r&b? Is it just being sarcastic?
Mikael Wood
Manhattan
Is Ja Rule still alive? Doesn't calling DMX a bitch on the radio precipitate some kind of ensanguined death by pit bull in the Streets of Harlem? I mean, who's going to back Ja up? Ashanti? Mary J. Blige? Charli Baltimore? Steven Segal?
Joseph Patel
Manhattan
The worst musical trend of the year had to be those innumerable permutations of Ashanti, Ja Rule, J Lo, Fat Joe, J Rule, Ja Joe, and Fat Lo. All these songs trade on the same gimmick—girly-girl singer paired with manly-man rapper. The result is an unintentional parody of gender panic, where Ja seems to fear if he ever rises above a monotone, it must mean he's a fag, while any girl who fails to outsource her rapping to a guy with big pecs has to be a closet dyke.
Ted Friedman
Decatur, Georgia
Eminem gets more mileage out of being poor than being white. Pink cleans her own closet with a "Family Portrait." Justin chats up his modest background. J.Lo is still Jenny from the block. And young white rock stars everywhere say they're just trying to get by. Growing up lower-middle class is the new suburban street cred.
Bret McCabe
Baltimore, Maryland
The most fascinating thing about Michael Jackson is his faculty for outsizing his own irony, on levels of disbelief Voltaire, Swift, or Thompson would be hard-pressed to suspend. The plot twists are too bizarre to be calculated and at the same time too peculiar to be mere happenstance. The tragic thing is the attention this draws from media cynics and a populace with a predilection for red meat. After all, it's not like Jackson is evil, a bin Laden or a Papa Doc or a Ferdinand Marcos or the cowards who shot Jam Master Jay or a Henry Kissinger or a Sotheby's/Tyco/ Enron/Adelphia/WorldCom/ImClone CEO or a Clear Channel or a Newt Gingrich or a Dick Cheney or a Strom Thurmond. This is Shakespearean tragedy cloaked as Twainian farce directed by Spike Jonze.
Darrell McNeil
Brooklyn, New York
As I said, there's good reading to be had, and this is just a small sample. Enjoy.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)