I find it very odd that people are so wrapped up in...oh, I guess...for a lack of a better phrase..."Keeping up with the Jones's." I was watching Kira Phillips on CNN yesterday morning, and she was chatting with CNN London anchor Zain Verjee regarding Prince William and Kate Middleton's visit to the Wimbledon tennis championship.
Phillips mentioned that once Kate was shown on TV, her dress sold out in 30 minutes! Say what?!?! I just don't get it. Why do women around the world HAVE TO HAVE the same dress as a celebrity? Are they insecure, vapid, stupid or a combination of the three?
I remember channel surfing right after William and Kate's wedding and there was a news(?) piece about designer houses scrambling around, immediately creating (drawing and cutting) the same (I understand super secret) wedding dress that Middleton wore in order to sell them post haste. WTF? I wonder how many dresses were sold.
Don't these women have lives? They HAVE TO HAVE the same dress as Middleton?? Puh-Leeze...
Wednesday, June 29, 2011
Monday, June 20, 2011
TV Tubes? Say what?
I wrote this five years ago on the old TV Guide web site, where you could post your own personal thoughts. I thought I'd share it now on my own blog:
As a Baby Boomer, I get asked questions by those much younger than I that are quite bemusing. For example, where I work we have a few 18- and 19-year-olds around. One day, a group of us were talking about TV shows, and one of the 18-year-olds looked me directly in the eye, and, with all sincerity, asked me if there was TV way back when I was a young lad. Man…that one hurt! I pointed out to the “Whippersnapper” (not surprisingly, he didn’t understand that word) that not only did we have TV but we had the rotary telephone, too.
Now I admit that those early days could be considered the “Dark Ages” of TV viewing. If the reader of this Blog is over 40, the following adventure will be a trip down memory lane. If under 40 or thereabouts, keep in mind that we were the pioneers of this newfangled medium and please enjoy what we had to go through to watch our favorite programs. Also, this was very serious business back then…
There were two controls/knobs that were very important on the old black and white TVs. The first was the “Horizontal Hold.” Every now and then the picture would warp like you were looking at a person doing the hula in one direction through a Fun House Crazy Mirror. Bizarre! The “HH” would straighten it out with a little tweaking. The other knob was the “Vertical Hold.” The nightmare would begin with a solid black bar across the bottom of the screen slowly get fatter until suddenly it would flip up to the top of the screen. Soon it would flip faster and faster. This was known as the picture “rolling.” The “VH” helped stop that.
When neither knob would work, we had one last gasp to fix it before taking it to…“The TV Repairman.” We would have to check the tubes. That’s right…”tubes.” As in transparent glass cylinders of various sizes with weird wiring/plating inside and prongs poking out on the outside. Now tubes were used in TVs and Radios before integrated circuits and all sorts of other high tech electronics were even thought of. Unfortunately, they had this nasty tendency to burn out frequently. So when the TV began to appear as if looking through a Black and White kaleidoscope while peaking on one’s favorite drug, the family’s job was to find the “mysteriously malfunctioning tube.”
Our TV, like a lot of others, was a console as wide as a dresser and about thigh to waist high. To the right of the TV was the phonograph with our Frank Sinatra, Al Martino, Patty Page and Kaye Starr LP albums (large, plastic discs with a hole in the middle that played at 33 1/3 Revolutions per Minute) stored. To the left was the reel-to-reel tape player that had all our heavy (long hair) classical tapes. (A quick trivia question for the old-timers: how many grooves did the average LP have on one side? Answer below…)
So Dad and I lifted one side of the console and pulled it away from the wall. The back of the TV was covered with holed press-board secured by at least 100 screws. The butt of the picture tube protruded in the center.
After unscrewing all 100 screws, we then had access to the tubes seated on the socket board. Of course, the picture tube was also exposed. Now, all of us know thousands of words, but most of them we know not from where we learned them originally. There was one word, however, that every baby boomer first learned re the picture tube…and that word was “implode.” Dad would say, “Don’t mess with the picture tube, Dave, it might IMPLODE!”
“’Implode?’ What’s that?”
“Well, the picture tube has a vacuum…”
“Vacuum?? Isn’t that what Mom does to the fl-“
“Not that kind of vacuum. Oh, never mind. The tube collapses inward if broken or cracked.”
“I’m outta here! Later, Dad.”
“Yeah…right, son…Just don’t break the tube!”
“Oh…OK”
“Also, be especially careful not to touch the any of the wiring as it might electrocute you.”
“But it’s unplugged…do you mean if I –“
“DON’TTOUCHTHATITWILLKILLYOU!!!!!”
“Oh…ok.”
So now we have to pull all the tubes from the multi-socketed socket board (except the Picture Tube). If we were lucky, there was a diagram indicating which tube went to which socket. If not, we had to mark each socket with the number of the tube that went there.
So I had my White Owl cigar box of TV tubes and went to the Rexall’s Drug Store with Dad. Now back in those days you would enter the drug store and there was a counter in which the back wall was a huge multitude of boxes of new Sylvania TV tubes for sale. At the end of the counter was the dreaded “Tube Tester.” It was about chest high and had at least 7,239 different sized sockets on it.
In the back center was this speedometer-like needle with the left side all red and the right side all green. The trick was to look at the chart containing a list of thousands of tubes above the device for the number of the tube you were testing. It would then tell you which socket number to put it in. Once seated, you had to wait while the tube warmed up and then watch the needle s-l-o-w-l-y going from left to right, red to green. If it ended in the green area the tube was good, if it stayed in the red, it was bad. Of course, most of the time the needle landed right in the white in-between area so Dad and I would have endless debates on the tubes being good or bad.
So I put one tube in after another until finally, Murphy’s Law took over and, sure enough, I put the next to the last tube (the one that looked liked it had been tied on the end of a stick at a marshmallow roast) in socket #5,491, and, lo and behold, it didn’t get out of the red. Eureka! Bad, Bad Tube! Tube number S2485U. The clerk pulled the new tube out of the “Great Wall of Tubes” at the back of the counter, we paid for it and merrily went our way home.
We inserted all the tubes back in the socket board, carefully avoiding touching the “dreaded” TV Tube, and put the press-board backing on with only two screws (for quicker removal next burn out). We held our breath…and…Whoopee! “Bonanza” in all its pristine glory!
So I learned two things that day…the definition of “implode,” and electricity somehow leaps from the wall socket to the plug on the floor to electrocute you. Oh, and Little Joe’s mother died…
The trivia answer:
The average number of grooves on one side of an LP record is…..
One!
As a Baby Boomer, I get asked questions by those much younger than I that are quite bemusing. For example, where I work we have a few 18- and 19-year-olds around. One day, a group of us were talking about TV shows, and one of the 18-year-olds looked me directly in the eye, and, with all sincerity, asked me if there was TV way back when I was a young lad. Man…that one hurt! I pointed out to the “Whippersnapper” (not surprisingly, he didn’t understand that word) that not only did we have TV but we had the rotary telephone, too.
Now I admit that those early days could be considered the “Dark Ages” of TV viewing. If the reader of this Blog is over 40, the following adventure will be a trip down memory lane. If under 40 or thereabouts, keep in mind that we were the pioneers of this newfangled medium and please enjoy what we had to go through to watch our favorite programs. Also, this was very serious business back then…
There were two controls/knobs that were very important on the old black and white TVs. The first was the “Horizontal Hold.” Every now and then the picture would warp like you were looking at a person doing the hula in one direction through a Fun House Crazy Mirror. Bizarre! The “HH” would straighten it out with a little tweaking. The other knob was the “Vertical Hold.” The nightmare would begin with a solid black bar across the bottom of the screen slowly get fatter until suddenly it would flip up to the top of the screen. Soon it would flip faster and faster. This was known as the picture “rolling.” The “VH” helped stop that.
When neither knob would work, we had one last gasp to fix it before taking it to…“The TV Repairman.” We would have to check the tubes. That’s right…”tubes.” As in transparent glass cylinders of various sizes with weird wiring/plating inside and prongs poking out on the outside. Now tubes were used in TVs and Radios before integrated circuits and all sorts of other high tech electronics were even thought of. Unfortunately, they had this nasty tendency to burn out frequently. So when the TV began to appear as if looking through a Black and White kaleidoscope while peaking on one’s favorite drug, the family’s job was to find the “mysteriously malfunctioning tube.”
Our TV, like a lot of others, was a console as wide as a dresser and about thigh to waist high. To the right of the TV was the phonograph with our Frank Sinatra, Al Martino, Patty Page and Kaye Starr LP albums (large, plastic discs with a hole in the middle that played at 33 1/3 Revolutions per Minute) stored. To the left was the reel-to-reel tape player that had all our heavy (long hair) classical tapes. (A quick trivia question for the old-timers: how many grooves did the average LP have on one side? Answer below…)
So Dad and I lifted one side of the console and pulled it away from the wall. The back of the TV was covered with holed press-board secured by at least 100 screws. The butt of the picture tube protruded in the center.
After unscrewing all 100 screws, we then had access to the tubes seated on the socket board. Of course, the picture tube was also exposed. Now, all of us know thousands of words, but most of them we know not from where we learned them originally. There was one word, however, that every baby boomer first learned re the picture tube…and that word was “implode.” Dad would say, “Don’t mess with the picture tube, Dave, it might IMPLODE!”
“’Implode?’ What’s that?”
“Well, the picture tube has a vacuum…”
“Vacuum?? Isn’t that what Mom does to the fl-“
“Not that kind of vacuum. Oh, never mind. The tube collapses inward if broken or cracked.”
“I’m outta here! Later, Dad.”
“Yeah…right, son…Just don’t break the tube!”
“Oh…OK”
“Also, be especially careful not to touch the any of the wiring as it might electrocute you.”
“But it’s unplugged…do you mean if I –“
“DON’TTOUCHTHATITWILLKILLYOU!!!!!”
“Oh…ok.”
So now we have to pull all the tubes from the multi-socketed socket board (except the Picture Tube). If we were lucky, there was a diagram indicating which tube went to which socket. If not, we had to mark each socket with the number of the tube that went there.
So I had my White Owl cigar box of TV tubes and went to the Rexall’s Drug Store with Dad. Now back in those days you would enter the drug store and there was a counter in which the back wall was a huge multitude of boxes of new Sylvania TV tubes for sale. At the end of the counter was the dreaded “Tube Tester.” It was about chest high and had at least 7,239 different sized sockets on it.
In the back center was this speedometer-like needle with the left side all red and the right side all green. The trick was to look at the chart containing a list of thousands of tubes above the device for the number of the tube you were testing. It would then tell you which socket number to put it in. Once seated, you had to wait while the tube warmed up and then watch the needle s-l-o-w-l-y going from left to right, red to green. If it ended in the green area the tube was good, if it stayed in the red, it was bad. Of course, most of the time the needle landed right in the white in-between area so Dad and I would have endless debates on the tubes being good or bad.
So I put one tube in after another until finally, Murphy’s Law took over and, sure enough, I put the next to the last tube (the one that looked liked it had been tied on the end of a stick at a marshmallow roast) in socket #5,491, and, lo and behold, it didn’t get out of the red. Eureka! Bad, Bad Tube! Tube number S2485U. The clerk pulled the new tube out of the “Great Wall of Tubes” at the back of the counter, we paid for it and merrily went our way home.
We inserted all the tubes back in the socket board, carefully avoiding touching the “dreaded” TV Tube, and put the press-board backing on with only two screws (for quicker removal next burn out). We held our breath…and…Whoopee! “Bonanza” in all its pristine glory!
So I learned two things that day…the definition of “implode,” and electricity somehow leaps from the wall socket to the plug on the floor to electrocute you. Oh, and Little Joe’s mother died…
The trivia answer:
The average number of grooves on one side of an LP record is…..
One!
Monday, May 09, 2011
Lakers destroyed the "Magic" I felt for them
On Len Berman's "Top 5 Sports Stories" today, his number two, sadly, was something I unfortunately agree with:
I've been a Laker fan since the 60s. I've always loved them as the great players have come and gone. Yesterday's despicable performances by Lamar Odom and especially Andrew Bynum were absolutely mind-numbing for me.
Bynum's explanation?
So he was being "salty." Great. He could have destroyed J.J. Barea's career with that shot to the ribs. Oh, right, he was just being "salty." Pathetic.
Some of the Magic (pun intended) has been taken out of me re the Lakers. I'm not sure I'll ever appreciate the Lakers the way I had until yesterday. From class to classless. They say one major screw up will take away 20 "attaboys." The Lakers have a lot of "attaboys" (definitely more than twenty!) to get me back to the way I appreciated them before this egregious game.
They better trade Bynum and Odom pronto. Ron Artest can accompany them as well. I don't want thugs on my Laker team. I'd rather see them lose than play the game like yesterday. I want a team with class.
Whatever happened to that quaint word "Sportsmanship"?
2. Classless
Maybe the most embarrassing performance in Lakers history. Not only didn't they show up for game four against Dallas, then they turned into thugs. Back to back ejections in the fourth quarter. For years you always used the words Lakers and class in the same sentence. But I guess that only applies when a team is winning. There's such a thing as being a graceful loser. Not this bunch. They're just a bunch of losers. Good riddance.
I've been a Laker fan since the 60s. I've always loved them as the great players have come and gone. Yesterday's despicable performances by Lamar Odom and especially Andrew Bynum were absolutely mind-numbing for me.
Bynum's explanation?
"We were getting embarrassed, they were breaking us down. So I just fouled somebody," Bynum said after the game. "I was just kind of salty about being embarrassed. ... For me, it was embarrassing to have the smallest guy on the court keep running down the lane and making shots."
So he was being "salty." Great. He could have destroyed J.J. Barea's career with that shot to the ribs. Oh, right, he was just being "salty." Pathetic.
Some of the Magic (pun intended) has been taken out of me re the Lakers. I'm not sure I'll ever appreciate the Lakers the way I had until yesterday. From class to classless. They say one major screw up will take away 20 "attaboys." The Lakers have a lot of "attaboys" (definitely more than twenty!) to get me back to the way I appreciated them before this egregious game.
They better trade Bynum and Odom pronto. Ron Artest can accompany them as well. I don't want thugs on my Laker team. I'd rather see them lose than play the game like yesterday. I want a team with class.
Whatever happened to that quaint word "Sportsmanship"?
Monday, March 14, 2011
Battle: Los Angeles - a quick review
I saw "Battle: Los Angeles" last Friday. I have only three things to say about it:
1. Great Marine recruiting tool (I would love to see what kind of a bump in Marine recruits that will occur in the next couple of weeks). Hoorah!
2. I HATE extreme closeups and the "shaky camera" technique throughout a movie. Is that supposed to be some kind of auteur film experience? For me, this definitely gets in the way of my film enjoyment. Bleh!
3. Too much haziness (i.e., smoke-filled scenes).
What with the unending "shake-and-haze," I felt I was being subjected to artsy-fartsy film making rather than a straightforward, fun SciFi movie.
1. Great Marine recruiting tool (I would love to see what kind of a bump in Marine recruits that will occur in the next couple of weeks). Hoorah!
2. I HATE extreme closeups and the "shaky camera" technique throughout a movie. Is that supposed to be some kind of auteur film experience? For me, this definitely gets in the way of my film enjoyment. Bleh!
3. Too much haziness (i.e., smoke-filled scenes).
What with the unending "shake-and-haze," I felt I was being subjected to artsy-fartsy film making rather than a straightforward, fun SciFi movie.
Sunday, February 20, 2011
Aging male stars get the young women
So I went to the first showing of Unknown starring Liam Neeson on Friday. Now I'm not here to give a review, though I did like it, but not as much as Neeson's Taken. I confess that my main interest in films these days is action/adventure, SciFi and the like, so I'm sure that I favor these types of films probably a lot more than the average film-goer.
What I want to bring up is the age difference between the male and female actors. I couldn't help but notice that both female leads were a lot younger than their male counterparts. I even went to the Internet Movie Database to check it out.
The top five male actors were all born earlier than 1963 ( Neeson - 1952, Aidan Quinn - 1959, Bruno Ganz - 1941, Frank Langella - 1948, and Sebastian Koch - 1962.
Both female leads were born in the 70s: Diane Kruger - 1976 and January Jones - 1978.
If ever this was an example of age discrimination for women, this is it. I mean really. 58-year-old Neeson "married" to 33-year-old Jones? That's a 25-year difference in age. You mean to tell me that there are no actresses much nearer to Neeson's age that could have played the role? I don't think so.
It seems the "ideal" lead roles are mid- to late-50s male actors and early to mid-30s females. Let me guess: the younger men will go to see the hottie 30s babes and the females will go to see the "rugged" manly males. If I looked hard enough (which I won't - it's too depressing), I would find movies in which the male leads are in their forties and the females in their mid 20s. Really sad.
Now I realize that this age discrimination has been around the movie industry practically since its inception. One can go back to Bogart (born 1899) and Bacall (born 1922), a difference of 23 years.
I'm sure one can go even further back, but I'll let the reader of this post research it, if he or she is of a mind.
I realize that in real life there are relationships that have such age differences. But I would bet that it's not the norm (which it is in Hollywood films). I would also hazard an educated guess that the percentage of the December/May "romances" are directly proportional to how wealthy the male is (Think Hugh Hefner, for example).
The sad part is I just don't see this going away. I really feel bad for those women actors who have cracked the forty years of age barrier. I can sure understand their fear of being marginalized in the film industry.
What I want to bring up is the age difference between the male and female actors. I couldn't help but notice that both female leads were a lot younger than their male counterparts. I even went to the Internet Movie Database to check it out.
The top five male actors were all born earlier than 1963 ( Neeson - 1952, Aidan Quinn - 1959, Bruno Ganz - 1941, Frank Langella - 1948, and Sebastian Koch - 1962.
Both female leads were born in the 70s: Diane Kruger - 1976 and January Jones - 1978.
If ever this was an example of age discrimination for women, this is it. I mean really. 58-year-old Neeson "married" to 33-year-old Jones? That's a 25-year difference in age. You mean to tell me that there are no actresses much nearer to Neeson's age that could have played the role? I don't think so.
It seems the "ideal" lead roles are mid- to late-50s male actors and early to mid-30s females. Let me guess: the younger men will go to see the hottie 30s babes and the females will go to see the "rugged" manly males. If I looked hard enough (which I won't - it's too depressing), I would find movies in which the male leads are in their forties and the females in their mid 20s. Really sad.
Now I realize that this age discrimination has been around the movie industry practically since its inception. One can go back to Bogart (born 1899) and Bacall (born 1922), a difference of 23 years.
I'm sure one can go even further back, but I'll let the reader of this post research it, if he or she is of a mind.
I realize that in real life there are relationships that have such age differences. But I would bet that it's not the norm (which it is in Hollywood films). I would also hazard an educated guess that the percentage of the December/May "romances" are directly proportional to how wealthy the male is (Think Hugh Hefner, for example).
The sad part is I just don't see this going away. I really feel bad for those women actors who have cracked the forty years of age barrier. I can sure understand their fear of being marginalized in the film industry.
Monday, January 31, 2011
I'm rooting (vainly, I know) for "Inception"
Of the ten Best Picture nominees, I have seen “Inception,” “The King’s Speech,” “The Social Network,” “True Grit” and “Winter’s Bone.” I have to say that the one I enjoyed most and believe to be the best is “Inception.”
For me, “Inception” had it all. It made me think, and I had to pay attention to the film just to keep the plot right in my head. Not too many films do that these days. I loved the special effects as well. I also enjoyed being kept off balance as to what is or is not reality. I plead guilty to being a Science Fiction fan as well.
Of the supposedly two frontrunners, “The King’s Speech” and “The Social Network,” I preferred the latter. I had a chance to see both within a 24-hour period, and I must say that I was enthralled with “The Social Network.” “The King’s Speech” is a terrific film, but I really got off on the snappy dialog and music in “The Social Network.” I really hope that Aaron Sorkin wins for Best Writing.
I am not weighing in on the historical accuracy of either production. I’m just looking at it from what I experienced. I do admit that my vocation is in computers so I did like the modest computer geek speak that “The Social Network” presented.
I liked "True Grit," but I didn’t see anything that warranted a Best Picture nomination. It’s a good film and I would recommend anyone to see it, but it just didn’t float my boat. I also enjoyed "Winter’s Bone," but that kind of story isn’t really my cup of tea.
I’m now down to seeing no-brainer action/chase films (“Red,” “The Mechanic,” “Taken,” etc.). I went through the serious film viewer stage many, many moons ago, but now I just want to go see a movie and forgo the serious stuff.
Believe me; I only went to see “Inception” because of the SciFi angle, and I do like Christopher Nolan’s earlier stuff (“The Prestige,” “The Dark Knight” and “Memento”).
What with “The King’s Speech” raking in the Producers Guild and Screen Actors Guild awards, one has to believe that the “Best Picture” award is in the can.
For me, “Inception” had it all. It made me think, and I had to pay attention to the film just to keep the plot right in my head. Not too many films do that these days. I loved the special effects as well. I also enjoyed being kept off balance as to what is or is not reality. I plead guilty to being a Science Fiction fan as well.
Of the supposedly two frontrunners, “The King’s Speech” and “The Social Network,” I preferred the latter. I had a chance to see both within a 24-hour period, and I must say that I was enthralled with “The Social Network.” “The King’s Speech” is a terrific film, but I really got off on the snappy dialog and music in “The Social Network.” I really hope that Aaron Sorkin wins for Best Writing.
I am not weighing in on the historical accuracy of either production. I’m just looking at it from what I experienced. I do admit that my vocation is in computers so I did like the modest computer geek speak that “The Social Network” presented.
I liked "True Grit," but I didn’t see anything that warranted a Best Picture nomination. It’s a good film and I would recommend anyone to see it, but it just didn’t float my boat. I also enjoyed "Winter’s Bone," but that kind of story isn’t really my cup of tea.
I’m now down to seeing no-brainer action/chase films (“Red,” “The Mechanic,” “Taken,” etc.). I went through the serious film viewer stage many, many moons ago, but now I just want to go see a movie and forgo the serious stuff.
Believe me; I only went to see “Inception” because of the SciFi angle, and I do like Christopher Nolan’s earlier stuff (“The Prestige,” “The Dark Knight” and “Memento”).
What with “The King’s Speech” raking in the Producers Guild and Screen Actors Guild awards, one has to believe that the “Best Picture” award is in the can.
Monday, December 20, 2010
Miniseries "State of Play" a keeper
I am currently in the middle of a terrific 2003 British TV series entitled "State of Play." I realize that in 2009 an American film was made, but I usually go to the source when remakes are created ("La Femme Nikita" over the American version "Point of No Return," same with Sweden's "Let the Right One In" in lieu of the "Let Me In" American remake). I inevitably watch the remakes, and I'm usually disappointed. But I digress...
This is one excellent political thriller! I just finished the first three episodes on DVD via Netflix and am mailing it back today. The bummer is I'm going out of town for the next two weeks, so I'm going to have to wait until the third of January to see the remaining three episodes.
Unfortunately, the series isn't available for streaming via Netflix. Ugh!
Oh, well...At least I have something to look forward to when I get back from Las Vegas. Anybody reading this, please check it out. Maybe make it a stocking stuffer for someone who loves political thrillers.
This is one excellent political thriller! I just finished the first three episodes on DVD via Netflix and am mailing it back today. The bummer is I'm going out of town for the next two weeks, so I'm going to have to wait until the third of January to see the remaining three episodes.
Unfortunately, the series isn't available for streaming via Netflix. Ugh!
Oh, well...At least I have something to look forward to when I get back from Las Vegas. Anybody reading this, please check it out. Maybe make it a stocking stuffer for someone who loves political thrillers.
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
A fun Thanksgiving
Just got back from Las Vegas. I spent the week there with family. I finally got to see Phantom of the Opera at the Venetian. That was a very enjoyable time. I really liked the music and the actors involved. There certainly were a lot of pyrotechnics involved. There was one blast of about five flames that rocketed about ten feet in the air. I was around fifteen rows from the stage, and I could definitely feel the heat emanating when those "geysers" went off. The presentation is an abridged version of the actual play. It runs under two hours and does not have an intermission.
I also saw Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows in IMAX as well. Great sound! It is my favorite of the Potter series. Of course, it's the only one I saw at the theater, so that may have been a factor. :-) Next up in the movie world is December 17 when Tron: Legacy premiers (in IMAX and 3D!). There was a trailer for it before the IMAX Potter movie, and it looks terrific!
The Tday feast included a "turducken" that was created by my cousin-in-law's gourmet chef brother. Now that was a treat! It's certainly a bit rich, and high in calories, but, boy, was it tasty!
All in all, a week of fun and frivolity. I hope everyone reading this had a great Thanksgiving holiday as well.
I also saw Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows in IMAX as well. Great sound! It is my favorite of the Potter series. Of course, it's the only one I saw at the theater, so that may have been a factor. :-) Next up in the movie world is December 17 when Tron: Legacy premiers (in IMAX and 3D!). There was a trailer for it before the IMAX Potter movie, and it looks terrific!
The Tday feast included a "turducken" that was created by my cousin-in-law's gourmet chef brother. Now that was a treat! It's certainly a bit rich, and high in calories, but, boy, was it tasty!
All in all, a week of fun and frivolity. I hope everyone reading this had a great Thanksgiving holiday as well.
Monday, October 04, 2010
Commitment vs. Marriage
I made this comment over at the Huffington Post regarding Susan Sarandon's comments on her "commitment" to Tim Robbins and the subsequent breakup. I thought I'd share it here on my blog:
"For me, marriage is an archaic ritual for state and church blessing. First conceived for property reasons. And why should the woman take the man's last name? Better to commit to each other and abide by that commitment. I feel the state should honor commitments equally as it does 'marriage.' As for the church, they shouldn't even be involved, unless it makes the couple feel better about things. After all, it is their commitment, and they should be free to legitimize that commitment any way they choose, and whatever the choice be blessed by the state."
"For me, marriage is an archaic ritual for state and church blessing. First conceived for property reasons. And why should the woman take the man's last name? Better to commit to each other and abide by that commitment. I feel the state should honor commitments equally as it does 'marriage.' As for the church, they shouldn't even be involved, unless it makes the couple feel better about things. After all, it is their commitment, and they should be free to legitimize that commitment any way they choose, and whatever the choice be blessed by the state."
Tuesday, September 07, 2010
Doctors: Saints they ain't
One of those little things that has bugged me all my life is how the word "doctor" is glorified in our society. I first noticed it with my mother. Every time she said "My doctor..." she uttered the word like he (or she) was an omnipotent human being. Maybe some sort of Patron Saint.
By her exalted usage, it made me more aware of the use of the word in our society. Especially in commercials. Think about it. Practically every prescription drug advertised has the word "doctor" in it, as if that officially legitimizes the drug and makes it a miracle worker. The drug would be totally useless without the sanction of "doctor."
Of course, the ultimate usage of the saintly word was, "My doctor said 'Mylanta.'" Now you can't raise the bar higher than that.
I first became skeptical of the "Power of Doctorhood" when I was in college. I woke up one day and couldn't breathe. I was huffing and puffing as fast as I could and I felt like I was suffocating. I went to the "doctor" to be cured. I mean, really, I can't breathe so fix it!
I loved his response to my woes. He said "Well, it appears to be an atypical pneumonia, so take this medication. If it's bacterial this will work, if it's viral it won't. Don't go to school for a week." Wait a minute. That's it? I'm sick, barely sucking in air, and you're by guessing and by gollying? Wow.
That certainly cured me of the "Doctors work miracles" mentality. They're just like you and me, throwing out SWAGs (Sophisticated Wild Ass Guess).
An excellent point about doctors not being omnipotent is Catherine Zeta Jones being "furious" that Michael Douglas didn't get an accurate diagnosis for months regarding his stage four throat cancer. Meaning they could have caught it before it went to stage four and had an even greater chance of eliminating it.
According to the article,
By her exalted usage, it made me more aware of the use of the word in our society. Especially in commercials. Think about it. Practically every prescription drug advertised has the word "doctor" in it, as if that officially legitimizes the drug and makes it a miracle worker. The drug would be totally useless without the sanction of "doctor."
Of course, the ultimate usage of the saintly word was, "My doctor said 'Mylanta.'" Now you can't raise the bar higher than that.
I first became skeptical of the "Power of Doctorhood" when I was in college. I woke up one day and couldn't breathe. I was huffing and puffing as fast as I could and I felt like I was suffocating. I went to the "doctor" to be cured. I mean, really, I can't breathe so fix it!
I loved his response to my woes. He said "Well, it appears to be an atypical pneumonia, so take this medication. If it's bacterial this will work, if it's viral it won't. Don't go to school for a week." Wait a minute. That's it? I'm sick, barely sucking in air, and you're by guessing and by gollying? Wow.
That certainly cured me of the "Doctors work miracles" mentality. They're just like you and me, throwing out SWAGs (Sophisticated Wild Ass Guess).
An excellent point about doctors not being omnipotent is Catherine Zeta Jones being "furious" that Michael Douglas didn't get an accurate diagnosis for months regarding his stage four throat cancer. Meaning they could have caught it before it went to stage four and had an even greater chance of eliminating it.
According to the article,
"It makes me furious they didn't detect it earlier," Zeta-Jones told People. "He sought every option and nothing was found."Of course, I like the thought that the person who placed last in medical school is still called doctor. That sort of brings it down to earth doesn't it?
Monday, August 16, 2010
Siskel & Ebert: I'll miss you
I was surfing through the schedule on my TV Guide last night in order to see what I might record overnight. Lo and behold, I saw a new episode of At the Movies at 11:35 on one of my local stations. A "new" episode on a Sunday night at 11:30. How's that for a graveyard slot?
Of course, I had heard that the series had been canceled, and when I saw that part of the show would be a history of Siskel and Ebert, I figured this might be the last "new" episode. Well, I decided to record it.
I watched it this morning and sure enough, it was the final episode. I did get a little maudlin about it. I mean, I started watching the show the first time it aired 35 years ago. I was a faithful devotee of it for 30 years. I admit that when Gene died in 1999, I slowly started to wean off of the show.
I got really nostalgic when the final critics ran the opening of the first show...Gene and Roger finishing up work at their respective newspapers, hitting the streets, seeing their names on the newspaper trucks and finally entering the theater to tape the show. With that oh, so recognizable theme song playing in the background.
For the record, I found Roger more agreeable to my taste for films than Gene. I always felt Gene was a bit elitist in his reviews, for lack of a better word. Roger would rate a movie based on its intent and whether it succeeded in achieving that or not. If it was supposed to be a popcorn movie and it worked, then it was a "Thumb's up!" I always felt Gene was comparing films to the standard of "Citizen Kane" and the like. At least, that's how I saw him.
Now it's gone. Another long-term memory of my life put into the dustbin of history (bad cliche, I know). It's just another reminder of how life is passing and the great memories slowly fade away.
I loved those guys, and I wish Roger a long, long life ahead.
Of course, I had heard that the series had been canceled, and when I saw that part of the show would be a history of Siskel and Ebert, I figured this might be the last "new" episode. Well, I decided to record it.
I watched it this morning and sure enough, it was the final episode. I did get a little maudlin about it. I mean, I started watching the show the first time it aired 35 years ago. I was a faithful devotee of it for 30 years. I admit that when Gene died in 1999, I slowly started to wean off of the show.
I got really nostalgic when the final critics ran the opening of the first show...Gene and Roger finishing up work at their respective newspapers, hitting the streets, seeing their names on the newspaper trucks and finally entering the theater to tape the show. With that oh, so recognizable theme song playing in the background.
For the record, I found Roger more agreeable to my taste for films than Gene. I always felt Gene was a bit elitist in his reviews, for lack of a better word. Roger would rate a movie based on its intent and whether it succeeded in achieving that or not. If it was supposed to be a popcorn movie and it worked, then it was a "Thumb's up!" I always felt Gene was comparing films to the standard of "Citizen Kane" and the like. At least, that's how I saw him.
Now it's gone. Another long-term memory of my life put into the dustbin of history (bad cliche, I know). It's just another reminder of how life is passing and the great memories slowly fade away.
I loved those guys, and I wish Roger a long, long life ahead.
Sunday, August 15, 2010
"The Expendables" is a fun ride
I went to see The Expendables on opening day Friday. Definitely not a chick flick. I enjoyed it, and if one is just into no-brain action, blood and guts machismo, this is right up that alley.
I do agree with Scott Mendelson's post over at the Huffington Post that this is not really the "all the action stars of the 80s and 90s" that entertainment pundits keep throwing out on news shows. As he puts it,
Missing are "Harrison Ford..., Mel Gibson..., Chuck Norris..., Jean Claude Van Damme..., and Steven Seagal." There is a scene featuring cameo appearances by Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger. A nice line is thrown out by Stallone as the Governator is leaving, but it does break the "fourth wall." By that I mean that the line takes you out of the film and into reality. But, I guess that's all right in the long term since the film is about having fun.
I just read that the movie is on track to make about $35 million in its first weekend, and it's going to beat out the chick flick Eat Pray Love by over ten million. I would hazard a guess that a sequel is definitely going to be in theaters down the road.
The good news about a sequel is that according to the Internet Movie Database, Sandra Bullock might be interested in joining the cast. Now that would be fun!
As a final thought, I saw the trailer for the new film Jackass 3D. Now I'm not a fan of dumb comedy films. Just not my thing, but I have to admit there is a sight gag about high-fiving that blew me (and the audience) away. Very funny! I'm still not going to see it though. The rest of the trailer didn't float my boat.
I do agree with Scott Mendelson's post over at the Huffington Post that this is not really the "all the action stars of the 80s and 90s" that entertainment pundits keep throwing out on news shows. As he puts it,
At best you have Stallone, an 80s cult figure (Dolph Lundgren), and two genuine action stars (Jet Li and Jason Statham) who are a generation or two removed from the kind of films that The Expendables is trying to harken back to.
Missing are "Harrison Ford..., Mel Gibson..., Chuck Norris..., Jean Claude Van Damme..., and Steven Seagal." There is a scene featuring cameo appearances by Bruce Willis and Arnold Schwarzenegger. A nice line is thrown out by Stallone as the Governator is leaving, but it does break the "fourth wall." By that I mean that the line takes you out of the film and into reality. But, I guess that's all right in the long term since the film is about having fun.
I just read that the movie is on track to make about $35 million in its first weekend, and it's going to beat out the chick flick Eat Pray Love by over ten million. I would hazard a guess that a sequel is definitely going to be in theaters down the road.
The good news about a sequel is that according to the Internet Movie Database, Sandra Bullock might be interested in joining the cast. Now that would be fun!
As a final thought, I saw the trailer for the new film Jackass 3D. Now I'm not a fan of dumb comedy films. Just not my thing, but I have to admit there is a sight gag about high-fiving that blew me (and the audience) away. Very funny! I'm still not going to see it though. The rest of the trailer didn't float my boat.
Sunday, August 08, 2010
A Day at the Races
Well, I went to the race track last Wednesday for the first time in about 40 years. I was not impressed. The site was the Del Mar Race Track ("Where the turf meets the surf"), and I must say I really don't see the attraction.
You've got anywhere from six to about 12 horses racing against each other, and I swear, if you don't have a clue about the horses, you might as well forget making any kind of money. They betting goes from the basic who will win to the more exotic exactas, quinellas, pick sixes, etc. Each race, you can pick from one to four finishers. If you pick the four in order, you get a pay out of anywhere between 1,000 to 2,000 dollars, depending on the odds of the winning horses crossing the finish line.
For fun (and to keep busy during the time between races), I played on paper and picked the first four finishes of each race. I had no idea what I was doing, so I bet on one of the top three or four favorites. In the end, had I just bet on the first place horse for all eight races, I would have ended up about four bucks ahead. If I had gone with any of the other exotic bets, I would have lost my shirt! I never picked a one-two finish, let alone a four-pick. I didn't pick any two winning horses back-to-back, so the Daily Double would have killed me.
What was really funny is that in the racing form, they had the winning percentages of the race track "experts" who pick the races daily, and the leader to date had a 25% winning pick! That's it! Their best guy could only garner a one out of four record...and he's published!
In my mind you have to be an idiot to bet on that "sport," especially if you're looking to make a profit. If the record of the experts is so bad, what chance does the layman have? Heck, there are betting games in casinos that give you much better odds than that.
Even though I had no stake in the races, I did find the finishes quite exciting. So I guess if one has a goodly sum of money riding on the outcome, it's got to be quite an adrenalin pumper. What was really neat was the animated tote board keeping everyone apprised of the current places of the horses as they ran around the race track.
I will the say that the ambiance was terrific. It was a great day, mild weather, and you just barely see the Pacific Ocean from where I was sitting. Of course, that was it. Inside the grandstands was a huge open area for the bettors to line up at the windows, and about four or five eat and drink places that had outrageous prices.
I did run across some Damon Runyonesque characters. Now that was interesting. It's a whole subculture in the Horse Racing world. A lot of attendees were retired people. At least I assumed they were retired. Oddly enough, there were a lot of young people (even children) there as well. And boy, they were all busily working the betting lines in the program...excepting the kids, of course. The adults were placing bets for the kids, however.
I suppose, if you're looking for a relaxing day in the summer and can afford to lose money (which you will...at least 99% of you - there are those lucky ones like lottery winners), it's not a bad place to while away the time. Heck, just treat the loss of money as if you were spending a night on the town, and I guess it could be fun.
For me, though, not really my thing...
You've got anywhere from six to about 12 horses racing against each other, and I swear, if you don't have a clue about the horses, you might as well forget making any kind of money. They betting goes from the basic who will win to the more exotic exactas, quinellas, pick sixes, etc. Each race, you can pick from one to four finishers. If you pick the four in order, you get a pay out of anywhere between 1,000 to 2,000 dollars, depending on the odds of the winning horses crossing the finish line.
For fun (and to keep busy during the time between races), I played on paper and picked the first four finishes of each race. I had no idea what I was doing, so I bet on one of the top three or four favorites. In the end, had I just bet on the first place horse for all eight races, I would have ended up about four bucks ahead. If I had gone with any of the other exotic bets, I would have lost my shirt! I never picked a one-two finish, let alone a four-pick. I didn't pick any two winning horses back-to-back, so the Daily Double would have killed me.
What was really funny is that in the racing form, they had the winning percentages of the race track "experts" who pick the races daily, and the leader to date had a 25% winning pick! That's it! Their best guy could only garner a one out of four record...and he's published!
In my mind you have to be an idiot to bet on that "sport," especially if you're looking to make a profit. If the record of the experts is so bad, what chance does the layman have? Heck, there are betting games in casinos that give you much better odds than that.
Even though I had no stake in the races, I did find the finishes quite exciting. So I guess if one has a goodly sum of money riding on the outcome, it's got to be quite an adrenalin pumper. What was really neat was the animated tote board keeping everyone apprised of the current places of the horses as they ran around the race track.
I will the say that the ambiance was terrific. It was a great day, mild weather, and you just barely see the Pacific Ocean from where I was sitting. Of course, that was it. Inside the grandstands was a huge open area for the bettors to line up at the windows, and about four or five eat and drink places that had outrageous prices.
I did run across some Damon Runyonesque characters. Now that was interesting. It's a whole subculture in the Horse Racing world. A lot of attendees were retired people. At least I assumed they were retired. Oddly enough, there were a lot of young people (even children) there as well. And boy, they were all busily working the betting lines in the program...excepting the kids, of course. The adults were placing bets for the kids, however.
I suppose, if you're looking for a relaxing day in the summer and can afford to lose money (which you will...at least 99% of you - there are those lucky ones like lottery winners), it's not a bad place to while away the time. Heck, just treat the loss of money as if you were spending a night on the town, and I guess it could be fun.
For me, though, not really my thing...
Sunday, August 01, 2010
Bottom's Up!
Well, I had my first colonoscopy yesterday (Sat.). Boy was that a trip-and-a-half. Nothing like getting a firehose shoved up the wazoo.
I have to say the worse part of the ordeal was the preliminary stuff. I had to starve myself for two days. My sister said she only had to fast for one day. When I asked the nurse why the difference, she said that only one day fasting results in more failures because the fecal material sometimes doesn't clear, thus resulting in the patient having to do it all over again. I'll take the two days.
So, once having starved myself, I then had to take a laxative the evening before. I love the name of the laxative: "GoLytely." Believe me, there was nothing light about it. I started drinking a gallon(!) of the cruddy stuff at 5pm and didn't finish drinking the whole thing until 11pm. I proceeded to visit Mrs. Murphy (for those of you old enough to remember that phrase) continuously until 1:30 in the morning.
I watched Eraser and The Negotiator on AMC in between the bathroom visits. No-brain movies...perfect. Fortunately I had seen both several times so I didn't miss anything as I sat on the pot.
Saturday morning comes the moment of truth. I'm lying on the gurney and the nurse is prepping me. My blood pressure is 159 (I wonder why?) and I have no idea what to expect. She tells me that I'm getting the Big C instead of a sphygmoidoscopy because I had "occult blood" in my stool sample. "Occult" meaning it can't be seen by the naked eye. Now THAT'S comforting!
Next the poor nurse couldn't find a vein to insert the medication needle, so she had to get another nurse to try. She couldn't find one at first, but on the third try...success! Now I'm cruising with bruising at three places on my right arm. Bleh!
So off I go into the main event. The doctor proceeds to tell me about all the horrible things that can go wrong (e.g., rupturing the intestine), then a hearty, "Sign here!" Followed by a "State your name, social security and the procedure your about to have." Ah, we're being taped. Great... I thought about throwing out a few F-bombs for G.P., but decided against it.
They were really nice people. The anesthetist was a gorgeous blond (Her name was Amanda), fortunately, she didn't have an up-close and personal view of what I was going through, so that saved me. I still had a chance to be suave and debonair with her, even though my hairy ass was hanging out (where she couldn't see it).
The doctor's assistant looked like Wolverine from the X-men. I could barely see his face with all the hair he was sporting. The words "sanitary environment" came to mind.
But to business. I turned on my left side and got to enjoy a TV showing of my innermost being. Sure was clean (Thank you two-day starvation!). Keen.
The first part of the joy ride was a bit uncomfortable, but all-in-all not that bad. And I now have ten pictures of my innards for my scrapbook. There was only one little thing that they took a biopsy of, but it looks good for me for another ten years. Yippee!
What the nurse told me was that the occult blood probably came from hemorrhoids. She also said that everybody has hemorrhoids of one kind or another. I didn't know that. Maybe she was just shining me on.
Funny enough, I never felt drugged up. Good job by the gorgeous anesthetist. Too bad she's about twenty years younger than me...and married...we could have had beautiful children together. Hmmm...maybe I was drugged up...
Colonoscopy: A lovely experience that I'm glad I don't have to endure again for ten years. Excepting of course the results of the biopsy. The one thing that makes me feel good is that I know I won't have colon cancer surprisingly rearing up its ugly head and killing me. That alone was worth the journey, and I recommend it for everyone whom doctors feel should get one. It will allay a lot of fear.
I have to say the worse part of the ordeal was the preliminary stuff. I had to starve myself for two days. My sister said she only had to fast for one day. When I asked the nurse why the difference, she said that only one day fasting results in more failures because the fecal material sometimes doesn't clear, thus resulting in the patient having to do it all over again. I'll take the two days.
So, once having starved myself, I then had to take a laxative the evening before. I love the name of the laxative: "GoLytely." Believe me, there was nothing light about it. I started drinking a gallon(!) of the cruddy stuff at 5pm and didn't finish drinking the whole thing until 11pm. I proceeded to visit Mrs. Murphy (for those of you old enough to remember that phrase) continuously until 1:30 in the morning.
I watched Eraser and The Negotiator on AMC in between the bathroom visits. No-brain movies...perfect. Fortunately I had seen both several times so I didn't miss anything as I sat on the pot.
Saturday morning comes the moment of truth. I'm lying on the gurney and the nurse is prepping me. My blood pressure is 159 (I wonder why?) and I have no idea what to expect. She tells me that I'm getting the Big C instead of a sphygmoidoscopy because I had "occult blood" in my stool sample. "Occult" meaning it can't be seen by the naked eye. Now THAT'S comforting!
Next the poor nurse couldn't find a vein to insert the medication needle, so she had to get another nurse to try. She couldn't find one at first, but on the third try...success! Now I'm cruising with bruising at three places on my right arm. Bleh!
So off I go into the main event. The doctor proceeds to tell me about all the horrible things that can go wrong (e.g., rupturing the intestine), then a hearty, "Sign here!" Followed by a "State your name, social security and the procedure your about to have." Ah, we're being taped. Great... I thought about throwing out a few F-bombs for G.P., but decided against it.
They were really nice people. The anesthetist was a gorgeous blond (Her name was Amanda), fortunately, she didn't have an up-close and personal view of what I was going through, so that saved me. I still had a chance to be suave and debonair with her, even though my hairy ass was hanging out (where she couldn't see it).
The doctor's assistant looked like Wolverine from the X-men. I could barely see his face with all the hair he was sporting. The words "sanitary environment" came to mind.
But to business. I turned on my left side and got to enjoy a TV showing of my innermost being. Sure was clean (Thank you two-day starvation!). Keen.
The first part of the joy ride was a bit uncomfortable, but all-in-all not that bad. And I now have ten pictures of my innards for my scrapbook. There was only one little thing that they took a biopsy of, but it looks good for me for another ten years. Yippee!
What the nurse told me was that the occult blood probably came from hemorrhoids. She also said that everybody has hemorrhoids of one kind or another. I didn't know that. Maybe she was just shining me on.
Funny enough, I never felt drugged up. Good job by the gorgeous anesthetist. Too bad she's about twenty years younger than me...and married...we could have had beautiful children together. Hmmm...maybe I was drugged up...
Colonoscopy: A lovely experience that I'm glad I don't have to endure again for ten years. Excepting of course the results of the biopsy. The one thing that makes me feel good is that I know I won't have colon cancer surprisingly rearing up its ugly head and killing me. That alone was worth the journey, and I recommend it for everyone whom doctors feel should get one. It will allay a lot of fear.
Monday, July 26, 2010
This is really weird. I started this blog over four years ago, my last post was in 2006, and I had totally forgotten about it. Yet somehow even with a new email address the folks at blogspot have developed a way to hook it to my new user name and new blog name. I've been running another blog for almost two years now, and suddenly, out of nowhere, up pops this blog site in my blogger dashboard. As I said...Weird.
Though it does give me an opportunity to write about things other than politics (which is what I write about in my other blog). So, I thought I'd write about a great movie.
I admit that my taste in films have undergone a dramatic change as I've gotten older. My main interest now is no-brain action/adventure. However, I did see Inception last week, and that film is about as far from "no-brain" as one can get. It's definitely an action film, but, boy, you really have to be on top of this movie throughout or you will get horribly lost.
After viewing it, I knew that this is one that I have to see over again to pick up all the things I missed the first time around. It's definitely on my watch list.What did help was Salon.com ran an article by Sam Adams that gives a detailed breakdown of the plot line. That helped me fill in the parts that slipped by me on the first viewing. I won't go into the plot whatsoever so that anyone reading this (Hah!) gets a whiff of what it's about. I really appreciated the fact that I went into the theatre absolutely cold about the plot. For me, that made it all the more fun. I know I really like a movie when I have a wide grin through the film.
What's really great is that a lot of movie goers are enjoying just as much as I. The Internet Movie Database fans (71,248 as of this writing) have rated this film 9.1 out of 10 tying it for for first in the all-time top 250 list in just two weeks! I realize the caveat here in that a lot of fans of the director, Christopher Nolan, went immediately to see this as it first came out, so there is definitely a positive skew initially. But for me it is a terrific film and I recommend it highly. FWIW, Roger Ebert, whom I admire and respect as a film critic gives it four stars.
So, go give your mind a nice workout and see this fine film.
Though it does give me an opportunity to write about things other than politics (which is what I write about in my other blog). So, I thought I'd write about a great movie.
I admit that my taste in films have undergone a dramatic change as I've gotten older. My main interest now is no-brain action/adventure. However, I did see Inception last week, and that film is about as far from "no-brain" as one can get. It's definitely an action film, but, boy, you really have to be on top of this movie throughout or you will get horribly lost.
After viewing it, I knew that this is one that I have to see over again to pick up all the things I missed the first time around. It's definitely on my watch list.What did help was Salon.com ran an article by Sam Adams that gives a detailed breakdown of the plot line. That helped me fill in the parts that slipped by me on the first viewing. I won't go into the plot whatsoever so that anyone reading this (Hah!) gets a whiff of what it's about. I really appreciated the fact that I went into the theatre absolutely cold about the plot. For me, that made it all the more fun. I know I really like a movie when I have a wide grin through the film.
What's really great is that a lot of movie goers are enjoying just as much as I. The Internet Movie Database fans (71,248 as of this writing) have rated this film 9.1 out of 10 tying it for for first in the all-time top 250 list in just two weeks! I realize the caveat here in that a lot of fans of the director, Christopher Nolan, went immediately to see this as it first came out, so there is definitely a positive skew initially. But for me it is a terrific film and I recommend it highly. FWIW, Roger Ebert, whom I admire and respect as a film critic gives it four stars.
So, go give your mind a nice workout and see this fine film.
Monday, October 04, 2004
What the F***???
I just finished watching "Pitch Black" on the SciFi channel. The "f" word was said several times, but SciFi dutifully blanked out the word so our virgin ears would not be contaminated. Of course, they were OK showing human victims being torn in half at the torso and having the top half of the torso being winged away by the creatures. What is this??? It's OK for children to see violent, tortuous acts be done to the human body, but NO, NO, NO...keep the poor children from hearing those heinous words!!!
Why is it that violence is all right with the family watching, but foul language is not? George Carlin in one of his first albums said (I'm paraphrasing here) that he would rather have his children watching two people making love than violent acts. I agree.
Here's another good one. ABC put a graphic before "Boston Legal" Sunday night that said partial nudity might offend viewers. The "partial nudity" was a character who came into the office without his pants, so we saw his buttocks. Let's see...I have a butt...you have a butt...children have butts...what is the problem here?
In the early days of TV, married couples could not be seen in bed together, thus twin beds. Toilets were verboten. We have come a long way; however, we still have a long way to go.
BTW - If it's OK to write four letter words at this site, please let me know!
Why is it that violence is all right with the family watching, but foul language is not? George Carlin in one of his first albums said (I'm paraphrasing here) that he would rather have his children watching two people making love than violent acts. I agree.
Here's another good one. ABC put a graphic before "Boston Legal" Sunday night that said partial nudity might offend viewers. The "partial nudity" was a character who came into the office without his pants, so we saw his buttocks. Let's see...I have a butt...you have a butt...children have butts...what is the problem here?
In the early days of TV, married couples could not be seen in bed together, thus twin beds. Toilets were verboten. We have come a long way; however, we still have a long way to go.
BTW - If it's OK to write four letter words at this site, please let me know!
Sunday, October 03, 2004
More Musings...
1. I am a life-long Dodger fan. I admit that in the last few years I have not really followed them like I used to during the 60's and 70's. I also have to admit that yesterday's comeback in the bottom of the ninth to win the division was really spectacular! Go Dodgers!
2. It's good to know know that the pundits agree with what I said yesterday that Bush was not that sharp a tack in the debate. Hopefully, it will be enough. This coming Friday's debate, based on a town hall meeting format, should be really telling. I don't expect him to come through, but we'll see.
3. I think that Scott Peterson is guilty of murdering his wife Laci; however, as far as I can tell from the prosecution's evidence, I think he will be found not guilty by reasonable doubt due to lack of any hard core evidence. I hope I am wrong. Shades of O.J.!
2. It's good to know know that the pundits agree with what I said yesterday that Bush was not that sharp a tack in the debate. Hopefully, it will be enough. This coming Friday's debate, based on a town hall meeting format, should be really telling. I don't expect him to come through, but we'll see.
3. I think that Scott Peterson is guilty of murdering his wife Laci; however, as far as I can tell from the prosecution's evidence, I think he will be found not guilty by reasonable doubt due to lack of any hard core evidence. I hope I am wrong. Shades of O.J.!
Saturday, October 02, 2004
Ponderings...
1. Congratulations to Ichiro Suzuki of the Seattle Mariners for besting George Sisler's single season hits. Beating an 84-year-old record is quite an achievement. It was a nice touch that Sisler's daughter and family members were there. During the 70's a friend, cousin and I would play Sports Illustrated's All Time-All Star baseball game (used dice). When picking the players for our team we always fought for George Sisler. He was one of the best in the game. I wish it was still around. It was a great game!
2. As I said at the first post, I am a liberal, but I have to say that Bush dropped the ball on the debate. He looked like he wanted to be anywhere but there. His "um's" and "er's" really didn't do him well. I'm not saying that Kerry hit a home run; however, he held his own and looked a lot more polished than Bush. For the record, I will vote for Kerry, because I feel Bush is real trouble for our country if he is re-elected.
3. I lived in Las Vegas, NV when the 2000 Presidential election occurred. At that time, Bush came into Nevada and was asked about the Yucca Mountain Nuclear Storage facility. He said at the time that he would wait for the scientific evidence before making a decision whether to give the go ahead or not. My friends and I were aghast that Nevadans bought that line of feces from a male bovine. Sure enough, he arbitrarily gave the go ahead to make it a nuclear dump without waiting for the scientific results. Now I'm told that Nevada is a "swing state." What???? Bush jobs the state and the populace, endangering them without waiting for the final scientific results, and there is still enough forgiving that he might carry the state? Shame on Nevadans for even THINKING about voting for him after he lied about his decision-making!
2. As I said at the first post, I am a liberal, but I have to say that Bush dropped the ball on the debate. He looked like he wanted to be anywhere but there. His "um's" and "er's" really didn't do him well. I'm not saying that Kerry hit a home run; however, he held his own and looked a lot more polished than Bush. For the record, I will vote for Kerry, because I feel Bush is real trouble for our country if he is re-elected.
3. I lived in Las Vegas, NV when the 2000 Presidential election occurred. At that time, Bush came into Nevada and was asked about the Yucca Mountain Nuclear Storage facility. He said at the time that he would wait for the scientific evidence before making a decision whether to give the go ahead or not. My friends and I were aghast that Nevadans bought that line of feces from a male bovine. Sure enough, he arbitrarily gave the go ahead to make it a nuclear dump without waiting for the scientific results. Now I'm told that Nevada is a "swing state." What???? Bush jobs the state and the populace, endangering them without waiting for the final scientific results, and there is still enough forgiving that he might carry the state? Shame on Nevadans for even THINKING about voting for him after he lied about his decision-making!
Thursday, September 30, 2004
On the QT
I just saw "Kill Bill Vol. 1" and I must say that Quentin Tarantino has done it again. This guy is a wonderful, innovative filmmaker serving up a story with style and panache. I first disovered him when I saw "Reservoir Dogs" so many years ago. I still can't hear "Stuck in the Middle With You" by Stealers Wheels without seeing that torture scene with Michael Madsen in my mind.
The anime was a very cool touch, even though Roger Ebert pointed out it was rather a necessity. I look so forward to the next Volume!
A great homage to spaghetti westerns and Japanese films...a great filmaker...
The anime was a very cool touch, even though Roger Ebert pointed out it was rather a necessity. I look so forward to the next Volume!
A great homage to spaghetti westerns and Japanese films...a great filmaker...
Wednesday, September 29, 2004
Cable News Beef
I love to watch cabel news in order to keep up on the latest developments; however, it really bugs me that the same news is played over and over, day after day on all three cable networks. I would guess that 30 minutes per hour (Approx. 20 min. devoted to commercials) are devoted to two subjects: Iraq (Here is a prediction...a bomb via car or sucide will go off tomorrow in Iraq) and the Pesidential Election (Currently, they've now added extensive coverage on the debate coming up tomorrow and hammering it over and over and over...). I know these are extremely important issues (And if something major happens, of course it should be extensively covered), and I'm not trying to trivialize them, but must we hammer them to death on a daily basis? There are other very important things going on in the world and U.S. (An example: In the words of James Carvell - "It's the economy, stupid!)!
The networks then leave about 10 minutes for "Oh, by the way, here is other news..." And that means it's Laci Peterson time! What gives????
Also, whenever the President speaks (I'm generic about this...nonpartisan), all three networks cover his speech from beginning to end. Most of the time he speaks platitudes relating to the people he is addressing. Why not either rotate the coverage or just not show every speech but tape it, and if he has anything important to say at the time, the networks can then cut to the speech.
The two shows I watch that somewhat get away from this is Dan Abrams' "Abrams Report" and Keith Olberman's "Countdown." They devote a smaller portion of time regarding these issues.
I just saw a ratings poll for the cable news networks this morning. Fox has more ratings than the others combined! It would seem to me that the other news channels might want to be a bit more daring and innovative in their news coverage instead of plodding along behind Fox and doing the same thing Fox is doing. They can't lose much more than they already have!
The networks then leave about 10 minutes for "Oh, by the way, here is other news..." And that means it's Laci Peterson time! What gives????
Also, whenever the President speaks (I'm generic about this...nonpartisan), all three networks cover his speech from beginning to end. Most of the time he speaks platitudes relating to the people he is addressing. Why not either rotate the coverage or just not show every speech but tape it, and if he has anything important to say at the time, the networks can then cut to the speech.
The two shows I watch that somewhat get away from this is Dan Abrams' "Abrams Report" and Keith Olberman's "Countdown." They devote a smaller portion of time regarding these issues.
I just saw a ratings poll for the cable news networks this morning. Fox has more ratings than the others combined! It would seem to me that the other news channels might want to be a bit more daring and innovative in their news coverage instead of plodding along behind Fox and doing the same thing Fox is doing. They can't lose much more than they already have!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)