Sunday!
Okay, maybe it’s not *THAT* good. Now that I think about it, it doesn’t exactly break any new ground. And, yeah, watching the trailer, I was able to say “Maribou would totally hate this movie” and, walking out, I knew that it was a good idea that I saw it rather than that we saw it.
Basic plot: Denzel Washington is an aging, but not grizzled, non-descript guy who works at a Ersatz Lowe’s/Home Depot with lots of acquaintances who look up to him and ask him for wisdom from time to time (which he delivers perfectly). He can’t sleep, though… so he goes to a local diner for a cuppa where he makes conversation with the locals (including a high class escort) and reads books from one of the “100 Novels Everyone Should Read” list.
Are you ready for this? Sit down. He’s reading “Old Man And The Sea.”
In any case, the escort comes in the next night with a black eye and this sets in motion a series of events that result in Denzel Washington taking down the Russian Mafia… one monologue at a time.
The movie is preposterous, silly, preachy, violent, and gratuitous. As I walked out, I thought “WOW! THAT WAS AWESOME!”
Now, there are two things about the movie that I think are worth noting. One problematic, one pretty good.
The problematic thing is that we have yet another movie where violence solves problems. Now, they do a magnificent job of cherry-picking the problems… like, the Russian Mafia. I don’t know that that particular problem could be resolved without violence, let alone whether it will be… but, wouldn’t you know it, Denzel solves his Mafia problem by killing people.
The good thing, however, is that we have yet another movie where it’s hammered out how very important it is for good people to fight against evil. This isn’t something for “the authorities” or “someone else” but for the individual who sees something going on. For the most part, I think it’s good that this message still gets thrown out there.
To be honest, when I went into the movie, I was expecting to compare it to Death Race insofar as it struck me as a movie that tells you, right in the title, that whether you think that you’re going to like this movie or whether you think that you’re going to hate this movie: you’re right. However, the craft involved in putting this movie together is so high that even folks who snort at the thought of seeing yet another Superhero Without Superpowers movie might find dissecting how this movie manipulates the audience to be a decent way to spend a couple of hours. (Those folks could probably wait for DVD, though.)
So… what are you reading and/or watching?
even though he thinks he’s doing things for justice
cartoon porn 49 today only at Amazon with free shipping
miranda lambert weight lossA Brief Gentleman’s Guide to Fashion Etiquette
I was reading Steve Sailer’s blog.
On his most recent post about Ferguson, there was a comment by former OT commenter Art Deco.
This afternoon I will be watching the Giants play the Cowboys, and depending on how tired I am, tonight I will be watching the 49ers play the Broncos.Report
The Blueprint: How the Democrats Won Colorado (and Why Republicans EVERYWHERE Should Care). Probably more interesting to me than to many, since I encountered quite a few of the principals during my three sessions working for the Colorado General Assembly. Written by an investigative journalist and a former Republican legislator, so there’s a bit of “they’re cheating!” rhetoric, but basically an assertion that the Democrats have found a more effective approach.Report
The “cheating” was in grabbing the competent Republicans, and convincing them to become Democrats. [by this, I mean the creative class.]Report
In this case, the “cheating” was mostly whining about the Dems finding deep-pocket donors who were willing to spend on state-level races (eg, Tim Gill). Overall, there were a number of things they did that were new — the Obama IT effort in 2008 was a scaled-up version of some of the things that the progressive “Gang of Four” in Colorado started in 2004.
The most interesting “conclusion” is, I think, in a couple of long quotes at the back of the book by Jon Caldera, who runs a Colorado-based libertarian/conservative think tank and is a generally bright fellow. He lists off the things the Republicans will have to fix about their big money donors: those donors wait until the last minute to give, they want to micromanage how their money is spent, and they get mesmerized by specific candidates.Report
Oh, and I also saw the most absurd trailer for what looks like an awesome movie coming out next week, looks like.
Keanu Reeves has a puppy that bounces as it walks. He takes it for drives in his awesome car. While filling up his car, a mafia guy asks “how much for the car?” Keanu says “It’s not for sale.” Minor Chords play. The mafia guys break into his house. Next scene shows Keanu burying the dog and saying “That dog was a last gift from my dying wife.” THE REST OF THE TRAILER SHOWS KEANU SHOOTING PEOPLE WITH SHOTGUNS.
I AM SO THERE.Report
Report
Clancy theoretically starts work tomorrow, so I should start getting back into TV again. When I paused, I was working through Continuum, with Suits coming up after.Report
I think I’m gonna finish Berberian Sound Studio tonight if I can stay awake.
If you have any interest in Giallo films, BBC Radiophonic Workshop/hauntology (or just sound equipment porn), or David Lynch circa Eraserhead (particularly the unsettling sound editing and unfocused dread), this might be a movie for you. On Netflix streaming.Report
@glyph bait:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/when-iggy-pop-cant-live-off-his-art-what-chance-do-the-rest-have/article21154663/Report
I love the Iggster, but he may not be the best representative of this argument. Conceded arguendo* that the bottom has fallen out of the market for recorded music in the digital age, Iggy has co-writing and/or performing credits on at least two bonafide radio hits (“China Girl”, and “Candy”); while the Stooges didn’t sell by the truckload in the band’s liftetime, their back catalog sold respectably through the 70’s, 80’s and (especially) 90’s, and their songs have been licensed for film/TV/commercials etc. He’s also acted here and there.
What I’m getting at is that even if the tap for recorded music has completely cut off today, I’m not sure that Iggy, specifically, would be in a different position if it hadn’t. He should have had money in the bank at one time. If ‘computers’ completely go away tomorrow, Bill Gates is still richer than Croesus. Pop never sold at anywhere near Bowie levels, but he did respectably, all things considered.
I think Iggy probably spent the money that he had, the iron’s not hot anymore, and now he can’t sell anything new except performance.
That might’ve happened anyway – Iggy wouldn’t be the first artist to have fallen from the public’s favor, and/or memory. He DID spend quite a bit of time as a drug addict, an avocation that often rather famously eats into one’s nest egg. I think you can find other musicians of roughly his age and cultural penetration, who are living quite comfortably on their past accomplishments/investments (how’s Gary Numan doing these days?) and others, who are broke or dead.
If we really want to help young rockers, we should hook them up with investment planners and IRA’s, so they can make hay while the sun shines and still rock comfortably on their porches later.
*I think this is somewhat debatable, assuming an established artist has a built-in fanbase like Iggy does AND IF Iggy also were currently putting out product that people wanted. But it’s a question of levels. I have no idea how well he lives, but I get the impression someone like Lloyd Cole sells his records (many in digital format) basically to Lloyd Cole fans, and that’s just how he makes his living. He was never a superstar, he’s not a superstar, he’ll never be a superstar; he’s just a working musician.
He was probably never as ‘rich’ as Iggy was (on paper, anyway), and he’s probably never been as poor either.Report
I am reading Butcher’s Crossing by John Williams. I like deconstructed Westerns. Also Albion: The Roots of English Imagination by Peter Acroyd.Report
Is it more deconstructed than True Grit? Because that was some deconstruction there, Boyo.Report
Yes.Report
Ah, Williams is excellent (have you read Stoner or Augustus?). I assume you’ve read McCarthy. If not, and you appreciate Butcher’s Crossing and the whole “brutality of the naked West” thing, the Border Trilogy is going to be a treat for you, particularly The Crossing.Report
You mean to tell me that you like Westerns that show nature as dangerous, dirty and lawless? You don’t say! 😉Report
I’m reading Midnight’s Children by Salman Rushdie. It’s about children who were born at the moment of Indian independence and partition, in particularly one of them (the narrator) and his family history. The kids develop superpowers.
The writing style is fantastic and I’m really enjoying it, despite the fact that I’m 84 pages in and the protagonist hasn’t been born yet.
I also went to see Gone Girl which I found incredible creepy. Whether intentionally or not, it felt like a raving misogynist’s view of what women are like. Between this and The Social Network, which also had its share of sexism issues, I think I’ll avoid Fincher’s movies in future.Report
I’ll not tell you to ignore those two and see “Panic Room” because I don’t know if that’ll change your opinion. “Fight Club” won’t, that’s for sure.
Midnight’s Children shows up on most of the “100 Novels” lists I googled that didn’t have “Old Man And The Sea” on them. If you finish it, please let me know if I need to read it as much as, say, Satanic Verses (which, to this day, sticks to my ribs).Report
I loved Fight Club. Absolutely, it was 100% about men and masculinity issues, but it did a great job of that. The amount of shirtless Brad Pitt didn’t hurt either.
It’s at the top of my list of “movies that could never be made today” due to the ending scene.
Midnight’s Children won the Booker of Bookers award for the best-ever book to win the Booker Prize, which makes it pretty much the critics’ selection for “best novel of the 20th century”.Report
Or at least the second half of it.
I suspect a book starting with the letter U would beat it out if we looked at the whole century.
Also, this is the first year that an author I was already a fan of has won, which made me very happy.Report
@jaybird and I watched The Lincoln Lawyer, which was pretty good. Pleased I made an exception to my “read the book first” rule. (My officemate has a “see the movie first” rule…)
I’ve been reading a crapload of comics lately. Also, Scott Westerfeld’s Afterworlds, which was a lot of fun.
And I’m in the very middle of Echopraxia ( @glyph @chris ). So far it’s quite splendidly readable, but I’m not really sure how well it holds together… I’ll wait until I finish it to decide.Report
When you finish I definitely want to hear about it. In the AMA about the new book, Watts talked about how he consciously tried to ‘fix’ things that he thought were maybe problematic in Blindsight (specifically, he tried to make it less ‘talky’ and more action-packed) ; but those things, to me, were not necessarily problematic, so the ‘fixes’ were at best unnecessary IMO (and at worst subtracted from my enjoyment).
And there’s one bit (not crucial, but a tiny plot sorta-hole) that he admits was in there originally but got lost somewhere in editing.
He also talks explicitly about something I had speculated about – that to write a Singularity story, you can’t make the motivations of the post-human intelligences apparent; if the reader (or the baseline human characters) can suss them out with any degree of certainty, then they are not so smart after all.
This of course presents real problems in trying to write drama, which comes from understanding conflicting agendas and viewpoints. (But it still works fine for paranoia.)Report
@glyph I did finish it. It held together pretty well although I found myself somewhat unsatisfied by the ending (as I often am with Watts’ books, especially the first time through). I don’t mind plot holes – I mean, I notice them but then I block them out? – so I remember that I blocked something out, not sure what it was anymore though :D. It felt like… this giant tumbling fractal cascade of ideas, be they character ideas or plot ideas or worldbuilding/science ideas – more than like one, relatively linear, carefully crafted story. (That linear story was in there, it just didn’t feel very important.) If it were anyone but Watts, it might not have worked for me; as it was, it did. Voice and … directed interest? … carry me a long way with writers, and his have always done it for me.Report
@chris Just tagging you ’cause I don’t think the tag worked the first time.
Oh, and @glyph – would love to know what the (spoilered) plot hole actually was, as well as any other spoilery or nonspoilery thoughts you have on the book…Report
OK, I should probably read it. I revisited Blindsight a few weeks ago, and found the confusion less confusing. Maybe this one won’t throw me off as much as that one did.Report
I have a short fuse for remakes. I loved the original Equalizer on TV, and I can’t see a need to remake it. (I’m not sure the original would still hold up, but I thought it was great at the time.) I’ll probably see the Denzel version in five years on TV and not give it a chance.Report
They do it right. There are still Equalizer stories to be told.Report
They should be told in the mid-1980’s, a period when neither Jaguars nor hope were often seen in New York City.Report