Rewind?

Jack Black's films either work, or they bomb. This one didn't work.

Ebert: It's the kind of amusing film you can wait to see on DVD. I wonder if it will come out on VHS?

Wait only if you have time to waste. I'm sorry I wasted mine.

Social network

I don't get it: the movie was lauded, Ebert included (he gave it 4 stars), and I didn't much like it. Yes, the protagonist is a spark of a social revolution, amoral, very smart, and the movie captures his development of a computerized environment that has become a social phenomenon – as well as his absolute lack of scruples, loyalty, or values. Yes, this is a modern phenomenon, and the film captures it. Yet in the end the film is an old-fashioned morality tale told in a modern way, and not much more. Fine enough – certainly better than a lot of other stuff. (See above).

Big Rig

Interesting look at truckers, who indeed move much of what we use in every-day life: produce, manufactured goods, cars, gasoline, packaged goods, food of all sorts. Some of the views expressed are as questionable as one will hear anywhere. Almost all seem to have the same accent; does that come from hearing the same music, eating in the same places?

Honeydripper

A John Sayles work. Worked nicely. Stacey Keach played a racist sheriff who was not an ogre, yet enough of a son-of-a-bitch to seem real. Ebert writes about it with praise.

http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080117/PEOPLE/648662905/1023

Silver City

Cooper fairly well executes a W. Bush satire; he excels at such roles. His character's name is Pilager (as in pillage). Ebert (who gave the film 3½ stars): The movie centers on the campaign of Dickie Pilager (Chris Cooper), who is running for governor of Colorado with the backing of his father (Michael Murphy), the state's senior senator. Dickie is the creature of industrial interests who want to roll back pollution controls and penalties, but as the movie opens, he's dressed like an L.L. Bean model as he stands in front of a lake and repeats, or tries to repeat, platitudes about the environment. Cooper deliberately makes him sound as much like George II as possible.

George the 2nd; cute. Anyway ... Pillager's campaign manager is Chuck Raven (get it? Raven)  (Richard Dreyfuss), a Karl Rove type who tells him what to say and how to say it. There's not always time to explain why to say it. 

The best of the supporting characters is Madeleine Pilager, Dickie's renegade sister, played by Daryl Hannah with audacious boldness. She likes to shock, she likes to upset people, she detests Dickie, and she provides an unexpected connection between the private eye and the campaign manager. Those connections beneath the surface, between people whose lives in theory should not cross, is the organizing principle of Sayles' screenplay; one of the reasons his film is more sad than indignant is that it recognizes how people may be ideologically opposed and yet share unworthy common interests.

I didn't much care for the character; thought her superfluous.

Sayles' wisdom of linking a murder mystery to a political satire seems questionable at first, until we see how Sayles uses it, and why. One of his strengths as a writer-director is his willingness to allow uncertainties into his plots. A Sayles movie is not a well-oiled machine rolling inexorably toward its conclusion, but a series of dashes in various directions, as if the plot is trying to find a way to escape a preordained conclusion.

Precisely so: the movie seems to meander, to make parenthetical remarks, to take turns where a straightaway is expected.


The movie's strength, then, is not in its outrage, but in its cynicism and resignation. There is something honest and a little brave about the way Sayles refuses to provide closure at the end of his movie. Virtue is not rewarded, crime is not punished, morality lies outside the rules of the game, and because the system is rotten, no one who plays in it can be entirely untouched. Some characters are better than others, some are not positively bad, but their options are limited, and their will is fading. Thackeray described Vanity Fair as "a novel without a hero." Sayles has made this film in the same spirit -- so much so, that I'm reminded of the title of another Victorian novel, The Way We Live Now.

It is not a typical Hollywood film, for sure, which is a strength, and, concurrently, a weakness. Rotten Tomatoes critics gave it 48%, and its audience 33%, reminding me of H.L. Mencken aphorism.

For what?

What an unadulterated piece of mierda. I hate myself in the morning for having watched it.

Justice for all

Newton, Jim. (2006). Justice for all : Earl Warren and the nation he made. New York: Riverhead Books.

A superb book about a superb American. Earl Warren was California personified: born in LA, he grew up in Bakersfield, his father a union man who suffered at the hands of capital. EW grew up wanting to go to law school, and did, attending Berkeley's law school after graduating from it. Inspired by Hiram Johnson, he entered politics, and rose from Alameda County assistant DA to California DA, then California governor.

EW supported Japanese internment, and could never bring himself to admit it a mistake. Otherwise, he carved a middle-of-the-road stance in most, almost all, political issues. He supported education, imposed a gasoline tax to help develop a top-tier road system, and fought entrenched interests.

Deweys' VP candidate in 1948, he was California's favorite son in the 1952 convention (which Taft entered as a favorite; Taft opposed aid to Britain during WW II, and voted against NATO). Whether Eisenhower made a deal with Warren for California's votes at the convention is unclear; what is clear is the bad blood between Warren and Nixon.

“We have a traitor in our delegation. It’s Nixon.” (248)

Warren accepted Eisenhower's offer to become Solicitor General, contingent on his getting the first Supreme Court vacancy. When Chief Justice Vinson died, Warren pressed for the spot; Eisenhower resisted, but gave in to Warren. He would long after say his two worst mistakes were to appoint Warren and Brennan. As is so often the case, I utterly disagree: those were two of the best acts he ever undertook as President.

Newton's narrative flows easily, and for a reader who enjoys history, this is a superb book.

The brothers Bloom

Ebert gave it 2½ stars, and that is just about right.

At a certain point, we think we're in on the moves of the con, and then we think we're not, and then we're not sure, and then we're wrong, and then we're right, and then we're wrong again, and we're entertained up to another certain point, and then we vote with Bloom: The game gets old. Or is it Stephen who finds that out? Bloom complains, "I'm tired of living a scripted life." We're tired on his behalf. And on our own.

 The problem with the movie is that the cons have too many encores and curtain calls. We tire of being (rhymes with perked) off. When an exercise seems to continue for its own sake, it should sense it has lost its audience, take a bow and sit down. And even then "The Brothers Bloom" has another twist that might actually be moving, if we weren't by this time so paranoid. As George Burns once said, "Sincerity is everything. If you can fake that, you've got it made." A splendid statement, and I know it applies to this movie, but I'm not quite sure how.