May 22, 2004
Manchester Utd. 3, Millwall 0: Tim Howard became the first American ever to play for the winning side in the world's oldest soccer tournament, England's F.A. Cup, when he started in goal this afternoon for Man U. If I might use the logic of Quentin Tarantino, this means that all sports in the United States are a joke, since great soccer players always "get the hell out of the country" once they become stars.
May 19, 2004
Yet another high school classmate of mine does something noteworthy. Steven Brindle, then an exchange student who graduated with the rest of us in 1981, and now an historian employed by English Heritage, recently discovered a hitherto forgotten iron bridge over the Thames, encased within a rather shabby cement and brick overpass that was about to be demolished. As a result, a one-of-a-kind design by legendary engineer Isambard Kingdom Brunel (well, if you are really into 19th Century English architecture, he would be legendary) was preserved, and has been transported to a new location for restoration. Or to put it another way, it would be similar to one of Shakespeare's better plays being forgotten for several centuries, only to turn up in the back of some long-deceased Oxford don's linen closet. The BBC report on Dr. Brindle and the detective work leading up to his discovery, which is fascinating in its own right, can be found here.
May 18, 2004
May 17, 2004
For your amusement, the ten worst album covers of all time...numbers 5 and 6, in particular, would make a perfect X-mas purchase via E-Bay. [link via The Hamster]
From today's Kausfiles: "I guess Kerry really is writing off the South!... Hello? Do Americans want a first daughter who parades around in a dress Paris Hilton would be embarrassed to wear ? And shouldn't she have, you know, thought of that? Even if she looks good in it."
Short answer: Yes !!!!! Has Kaus completely lost his mind? Why do I have the impression that his screensaver is a fish tank or a da Vinci drawing? If seeing Alexandra Kerry for the next four years is the price we have to pay, then screw the crackers. As well as any other NASCAR-loving, Iraqi-torturing, "Left Behind"-reading, sponging-off-the-Blue-State-taxpayer-while-whining-about-federal-government-spending, Toby Keith-and-The Judds-listening redneck. If we allow some special interest or regional bloc to determine whether a Presidential candidate is allowed to have an attractive daughter, then the terrorists will have won.
Short answer: Yes !!!!! Has Kaus completely lost his mind? Why do I have the impression that his screensaver is a fish tank or a da Vinci drawing? If seeing Alexandra Kerry for the next four years is the price we have to pay, then screw the crackers. As well as any other NASCAR-loving, Iraqi-torturing, "Left Behind"-reading, sponging-off-the-Blue-State-taxpayer-while-whining-about-federal-government-spending, Toby Keith-and-The Judds-listening redneck. If we allow some special interest or regional bloc to determine whether a Presidential candidate is allowed to have an attractive daughter, then the terrorists will have won.
May 16, 2004
Conservative pundit Rich Lowry has some choice words for those who believe that Abu Ghraib is merely an aberration: take a look at our own prisons. [link via Cecile duBois] And Jonathan Last of the Weekly Standard writes that using the flip-flop issue against John Kerry is a case of the pot calling the kettle black.
May 15, 2004
Lots of bloggers talk about the Geneva Conventions, but no one ever links to them (and that's Conventions, plural; they encompass about a half-dozen different treaties and protocols enacted over the last 150 years, starting in 1864). Here's a good primer from two years ago on the history of international law, the development of the concept of "war crimes" and how they apply to the post-9/11 world, in Slate. Originally proposed by the International Red Cross and the Red Crescent in the mid-19th Century, and enacted by the U.S. Senate in the aftermath of the Civil War, its essence is empathatic: we treat enemy combatants in a manner we would demand that our own be treated, no matter how just our cause or how wicked our adversary. Unfortunately, the Geneva Conventions have always seemed to be adhered to only in the aftermath of war, and forgotten when the next conflict starts up. That may be an inevitable outcome of battle, but it is one that we should always keep in mind before the next war starts.
May 14, 2004
SMYTHE'S WORLD SCOOP: Apple Blythe?!?
UPDATE: At least we know where the name came from.
UPDATE [2]: Turns out I scooped the rest of the media by some ten hours on this story. I rule.
UPDATE: At least we know where the name came from.
UPDATE [2]: Turns out I scooped the rest of the media by some ten hours on this story. I rule.
May 13, 2004
The Very Ugly American: Apparently the ability to craft the hackneyed conventions of chop-socky and spaghetti-western dross into cinematic gold has not gone to the lanternine head of Quentin Tarantino, or at least not in such a way so that he would feel the need to show that he actually thinks before opening his mouth. Apparently threatened by the articulate actress seated next to him on the dais, he used the occasion of a press conference at the opening of the Cannes Film Festival to slight the British film industry. To wit,
Second, there is another rather obvious reason the U.K. lags behind the U.S. in filmmaking: both countries speak the same language. No matter how much of a movie geek you are, going to see a foreign language film can be disconcerting, and the barrier imposed does not provide the optimum filmgoing experience. It's one thing for America to export films to China and India, where English is spoken, if at all, as an elite language. It's another to export them to a country where the mother tongue is the same; it's much easier to draw the casual filmgoer into the multiplex if he knows he's not going to have to look at sub-titles for two hours.
The competition, therefore, isn't between Hollywood and "Bollywood" or Hong Kong; each territory is pretty much exclusive and is run as a de facto monopoly by the local studios. It's between the U.S. and any other English-speaking country, and when it comes to corporations, our economies of scale kick theirs in the ass every day of the week. At least Great Britain still generates some home-grown product (ie., "Bend It Like Beckham", "Calendar Girls", and "28 Days Later", all of which were released in the U.S. within the last year), and keeps some of their stars at home; in entertainment terms, Australia has pretty much become the San Pedro de Macoris of the American film industry, and New Zealand, South Africa and Canada, while producing plenty of talent, pretty much exist only as location shoots for American movies, as far as the "Industry" is concerned. As the corporations running the studios become larger and more multi-national, the power of this oligopoly will only increase.
So inevitably, then, British "stars" are going to go where the money is, and if they want to make the money that comes from appearing in movies, it means appearing in films made and distributed by American companies; that was as true eighty years ago as it is today. If they don't, they can always work on TV or the stage, both of which are vibrant and healthy in Great Britain, or appear in the odd British flic, and not need "get the hell out of there", to use Tarantino's unfortunate line. That choice has nothing to do with greed, any more then the recent decisions by Kevin Spacey and Gwyneth Paltrow to relocate to London in order to pursue stage careers is motivated by greed.
Swinton's point, then, is dead-on correct. The near-monopoly that Hollywood studios possess in the English-language film market is going to have consequences down the line, in the same way that American fast-food chains have, or WalMart has. Crowding out smaller businesses means limiting the options people have, and thus restricts our imagination of alternatives; the same is true in the cinema. Tarantino would be wise to show greater consideration of that point, since there is no reason that the same stranglehold can't be applied to choke off creativity in other parts of the world as well.
Tarantino, set on edge at a press conference by (Tilda) Swinton's cut-glass accent - she graduated from Cambridge in political sciences before making Wittgenstein with the late Derek Jarman - hit back acidly.First, lets give Tarantino his props for correctly observing that three of the largest film industries in the world are in China, India, and the US, although it shouldn't surprise anyone that the three most populous countries in the world, each with different primary languages, and with long cinematic traditions, have profitable film industries. That Great Britain does not have a film industry to rival the U.S. or, for that matter, two nations with over a billion people, is not much of a shock.
Why if Hollywood was such a "bad boy" monster, he wondered, did British actors "get the hell out of there" and head for Beverly Hills once they hit fame?
(snip)
Then, getting into his stride, he argued that despite all the money, direction, acting and scriptwriting that went into a film, the reality was that audiences "showed up" for one reason: to see "the stars". They paid for tickets to watch actors they knew and were comfortable with.
He said that this was why America, India and Hong Kong - and not Britain - managed to sustain a flourishing domestic film industry.
Swinton, noted for art films such as The Deep End, said that she was not especially anxious to disagree with the jury president, but the "Hollywood product" was not the only one on the cinematic map.
"I speak as someone who comes from a country, which like so many others, is experiencing the loud voice of the multiplexes, which outnumber art cinemas, ten to one. It is jolly difficult for audiences looking for another kind of cinema, and very difficult for filmmakers and critics to have the confidence to look for another kind of cinema, and have the confidence to make another cinema.
Second, there is another rather obvious reason the U.K. lags behind the U.S. in filmmaking: both countries speak the same language. No matter how much of a movie geek you are, going to see a foreign language film can be disconcerting, and the barrier imposed does not provide the optimum filmgoing experience. It's one thing for America to export films to China and India, where English is spoken, if at all, as an elite language. It's another to export them to a country where the mother tongue is the same; it's much easier to draw the casual filmgoer into the multiplex if he knows he's not going to have to look at sub-titles for two hours.
The competition, therefore, isn't between Hollywood and "Bollywood" or Hong Kong; each territory is pretty much exclusive and is run as a de facto monopoly by the local studios. It's between the U.S. and any other English-speaking country, and when it comes to corporations, our economies of scale kick theirs in the ass every day of the week. At least Great Britain still generates some home-grown product (ie., "Bend It Like Beckham", "Calendar Girls", and "28 Days Later", all of which were released in the U.S. within the last year), and keeps some of their stars at home; in entertainment terms, Australia has pretty much become the San Pedro de Macoris of the American film industry, and New Zealand, South Africa and Canada, while producing plenty of talent, pretty much exist only as location shoots for American movies, as far as the "Industry" is concerned. As the corporations running the studios become larger and more multi-national, the power of this oligopoly will only increase.
So inevitably, then, British "stars" are going to go where the money is, and if they want to make the money that comes from appearing in movies, it means appearing in films made and distributed by American companies; that was as true eighty years ago as it is today. If they don't, they can always work on TV or the stage, both of which are vibrant and healthy in Great Britain, or appear in the odd British flic, and not need "get the hell out of there", to use Tarantino's unfortunate line. That choice has nothing to do with greed, any more then the recent decisions by Kevin Spacey and Gwyneth Paltrow to relocate to London in order to pursue stage careers is motivated by greed.
Swinton's point, then, is dead-on correct. The near-monopoly that Hollywood studios possess in the English-language film market is going to have consequences down the line, in the same way that American fast-food chains have, or WalMart has. Crowding out smaller businesses means limiting the options people have, and thus restricts our imagination of alternatives; the same is true in the cinema. Tarantino would be wise to show greater consideration of that point, since there is no reason that the same stranglehold can't be applied to choke off creativity in other parts of the world as well.
May 12, 2004
May 11, 2004
May 10, 2004
Truth be told, one of the reasons why Abu Ghraib has already become such a dark page in American history is that public sentiment had already begun to turn against the war, in particular the question as to whether the U.S. was justified in starting this adventure. If Americans no longer overwhelmingly believed in The Cause, it stands to reason that actions which are the inevitable by-product of a war (including the abuse and dehumanization of the enemy) would be less tolerated. Still, the belief by some that the captives at Abu Ghraib represented the most malignant of the former allies of Saddam has been used to rationalize the behavior of their guards; surely, no one would weep if G.I.'s had treated captured members of the S.S. the same way after WW2, or if Bin Laden and friends were similarly humiliated.
That's why this story is all the more important. Between 70 and 80% of all Iraqis captured during the war were arrested by mistake, according to the Red Cross' report, and were treated in a manner that violated the Geneva Convention. The pictures we are now seeing have shown Americans an ugly side to our nature, a side that believes that because we are more powerful than our adversaries our actions must, inevitably, be morally correct. Abu Ghraib was only the tip of that iceberg; considering the way in which we treated Native Americans and the descendents of slaves, it is the flip side to an American exceptionalism which characterizes so much of the foulest aspects of our political culture.
That's why this story is all the more important. Between 70 and 80% of all Iraqis captured during the war were arrested by mistake, according to the Red Cross' report, and were treated in a manner that violated the Geneva Convention. The pictures we are now seeing have shown Americans an ugly side to our nature, a side that believes that because we are more powerful than our adversaries our actions must, inevitably, be morally correct. Abu Ghraib was only the tip of that iceberg; considering the way in which we treated Native Americans and the descendents of slaves, it is the flip side to an American exceptionalism which characterizes so much of the foulest aspects of our political culture.
May 09, 2004
Pulitzer Watch: The Los Angeles Times is reporting that actor Corbin Bernson [L.A. Law, (1986-93); Celebrity Mole (2004)] and his wife, Amanda Pays [some movie with Rob Lowe twenty years ago] have remodeled their home, and intend to put it on the market for $1.5 million. Natch...Brian and Laurie Czamecki of Troop Real Estate have the listing. The same article hints that LA Dodger middle reliever Tom Martin and his wife may soon lease a townhome in Manhatten Beach, thanks to the efforts of Phyllis Cohen-Edwards of Shorewood Realtors.
May 08, 2004
The chickenhawks reap the whirlwind:
From tomorrow's Washington Post:
From tomorrow's Washington Post:
Tolerance of the situation in Iraq also appears to be declining within the U.S. military. Especially among career Army officers, an extraordinary anger is building at Rumsfeld and his top advisers. "Like a lot of senior Army guys, I'm quite angry" with Rumsfeld and the rest of the Bush administration, the young general said. He listed two reasons. "One is, I think they are going to break the Army." But what really incites him, he said, is, "I don't think they care." Jeff Smith, a former general counsel of the CIA who has close ties to many senior officers, said, "Some of my friends in the military are exceedingly angry." In the Army, he said, "It's pretty bitter."I dunno, Paul, it may have something to do with the fact that they're over there fighting, while you sit comfortably behind a desk.
"The people in the military are mad as hell," said retired Army Col. Robert Killebrew, a frequent Pentagon consultant. He said that the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, should be fired. A spokesman for Myers declined to comment. A Special Forces officer aimed higher, saying that, "Rumsfeld needs to go, as does Wolfowitz."
Asked about such antagonism, Wolfowitz said, "I wish they'd have the -- whatever it takes -- to come tell me to my face."[emphasis added]
Idiot son update: After spending his first eight months with Serie A also-ran Perugia on the bench, including a three-month stint in the doghouse for failing a drug test, Saadi Ghadafi, son of the Libyan strongman and U.S. ally in the War on Terror, finally made his debut in Italian soccer, playing 15 minutes as a substitute in his team's 1-0 upset victory over Juventus. His coach, Serse Cosmi, explained later that "Gaddafi came on because he is a player and not because any one of us wanted to go into history as the one who first played the son of a head of state in the Italian championship".
May 07, 2004
I've never been one to compare Bush with Hitler, but his apologists continued use of the line that "if Bush had known about what was happening at Abu Ghraib, he would have stopped it", is really starting to creep me out.
Gore's worst decision:
In his questioning of the panel, Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman contrasted the U.S. response to the abuse scandal and terrorist responses to acts perpetrated against Americans. He noted that American leaders apologized to the Iraqi people for the outrages in Abu Ghraib, but he hasn't heard anyone apologize for the 3,000 Americans killed in the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, or an apology for the hundreds of Americans killed in liberating Iraq or an apology for the killing and desecration of four security persons in Fallujah.Perhaps he should take that issue up with the President; certainly, the blood of any American killed in Iraq is as much on Lieberman as anyone else in our government. In the meantime, we have to find a primary challenger (or better yet, an independent), who will challenge this asshole in '06.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)