More Than Fine

Changing the Face of Christianity

2009-03-13T20:53:00.001-07:00

Sarah Palin Hurts My Brain

2008-09-06T14:16:00.000-07:00

That is all.

Do You Want To Write for This Blog?

2008-05-01T13:09:00.000-07:00

Hey guys...

it's been so freaking long since i've written an entry, I feel completely ashamed of myself. Here's the problem - there's way too much crap going on for me to devote the attention to this blog that it deserves. At the same time, the discussion on my last posts have been amazing and I don't want to just abandon this thing completely. And there has been SO much juicy stuff going on too! Reverand Wright/Obama in particular!

I need someone or someones to write for this thing if it's to become a thriving place of discussion we all know it can be. I can't offer people any money, but i can offer you two things: 1) A link to whatever personal site you want (within reason), and 2) The fact that some intelligent and opinionated people will read your writing (This blog still gets a few hundred hits per day consistently).

If you want to write for this blog, send me an e-mail (see my e-mail address at the right side) and give me 2 sample entries on how you would cover news as it relates with religion and Christianity. This is the last hope that this site has to stay alive. And yes it's sad, but if no one responds, maybe i'll be back again later, down the line, with a renewed commitment to keeping it real here.

-David

For No Reason At All

2008-03-30T21:29:00.000-07:00

Here's a video of a 2-year old reciting the Lord's prayer in song form. Why post it here? Because kids are just so darned adorable when they try to be religious:

Click here for the clip

How Jack Thompson Gives Christians a Bad Name

2008-03-30T09:22:00.000-07:00

Gamepolitics recently ran a series on the trial of Jack Thompson, in which they excerpted parts of the courtroom transcript for public consumption. For legal junkies such as myself, this offered a fascinating way to get a look at the (in)famous man leading the anti-videogame industry.

Thompson's inflammatory writing has always contained religious overtones, but it wasn't until I read his closing statement that I was struck with the immutable and troubling fact: Thompson is, in fact, explicitly doing this all in the name of God. Check out the following quotes:

I’m simply making the argument, Judge, that my motivations - which I have tried to make clear, maybe to the point of nausea - are religious and that my efforts against the distribution of adult material, pornographic material, violent material, adult rated material to children is violative of the law as well as violative of Scripture. I quoted the biblical passage where Jesus says, reportedly: “If any one of you should cause one of these little ones to stumble, it would be better that a millstone be tied around your neck and that you be cast in the uttermost depths of the sea.”

...As I recounted in my book… they found that Jack Thompson is perfectly sane… He doesn’t have brain damage and, in fact, he’s a Christian acting out his faith in this fashion. So they’re stuck with a formal document that they generated to the humiliation of me in my community that I’m simply a Christian acting out my faith when I do these things.

It makes me shudder to hear Jack Thompson quoting scripture. As a progressive Christian, let me just tell everyone who's reading this right now: This man does not represent my people, or at least, not most of them. Here are just a few reasons why.

He Wants To Legislate Morality

Thompson's world is one in which the government controls what you and your kids see, play, and watch. Although some believe that games rating system is broken, few people have a problem with games ratings categorically. But like the movie industry, we should try and let the games industry police itself (with hopefully more transparency than the MPAA uses).

Government legislation is not going to solve most of the issues that Thompson decries. It has to be done from the ground up, with parents getting more involved with their kids lives' and making sure they don't buy their 9-year old Grand Theft Auto IV when it comes out on April 29 (which by the way, I can't wait for. That doesn't mean that I'm going to let my kids play it though). Moral laws are necessary to keep our society functioning, but every theocracy in human history has ended in tragedy. The more Christians try to get the government to do what they think is God's will, the worse off it looks for all Christians, and the worse off we'll be as a society.

He Seeks To Divide, Not Unite

Thompson is opportunistic to a fault. There are ways to make the world change, but trotting yourself onto TV whenever there's a school shooting to blame videogames for all the world's ills is not one of them. Thompson consistently uses inflammatory language that's meant to polarize and divide, not to unite. He recently suggested that Destructoid should "molest a child directly, rather than through Rockstar." While sarcasm is fine if you're a blogger, it's a little bit unbecoming in this case, when you're a lawyer striving to be taken seriously regarding his Christian values. And when you're already not known for being very reasonable, it makes you into a pontificating and dismissive bastard.

He Uses Bad Science

Videogames certainly don't prevent violence but the evidence that they cause it is murky at best. There are plenty of other factors that might play into why a kid who is in a situation where he spends 6 hours on Doom or Counterstrike per day might want to shoot up a school. And that's assuming he even plays videogames at all (see the point below).

Christians already have a bad enough reputation regarding their relationship to science. We don't need another. But don't take my word for it. Check out the argument captured here:

He Deceives

To watch Thompson's performance in an interview with Chris Matthews is to see a deceiver exposed for what he really is (i.e. a man who grossly distorts the truth to prove his misguide point):

See Chris Matthews take on Jack Thompson by clicking here.

You can also see him blame the sniper attacks on Halo below:

But half-truths are only part of the problem. EA's withering statement of Thompson after he offered them his help with the Take-Two acquisition tells a whole other part of the story (i.e. the part where Thompson fabricates lies wholesale):

We have received your letter to EA's shareholder site. In response to your offer to assist in the proposed acquisition of Take-Two, we would strongly prefer that you not get involved in this matter. EA is a strong supporter of creative freedom for game developers. We feel that your past statements - including false claims about content
in our games - make any collaboration with you impossible.

If you're going to take on a controversial cause in the name of God, at least have the decency to ground your work on facts, please.

**

(For a pretty good list documenting the rest of Thompson's antics, see his Wikipedia page.)

The Christian message is about peace, unity, and love. Videogames can sometimes run counter to this message. There are bad videogames out there, games that may have a negative impact on how you perceive the world, games that make you think sad or violent thoughts. And this is not to mention how games can arguably cause you to be disengaged from the reality around you to begin with. But the way Christians should address these issues is not be standing on a soapbox, armed with a J.D., and trying to make it illegal. It should be to build relationships with those around us, trying our best to love them and address their needs.

So parents, pay attention to your kids and what they're playing with. And as for you, Thompson, here's hoping that your day is over soon.

Should This Woman Be Allowed To Kill Herself?

2008-03-19T13:58:00.001-07:00

[Again, apologies it's been so long since my last entry. I'll try to ramp it up! :) But please know that the more comments you guys leave here, the more motivation it will be for me to get my next entry out soon.]

Chantal Sebire used to look like you and me, but facial tumors (esthesioneuroblastoma) rendered her face disfigured. Over time, they will destroy her brain and kill her. Sebire speaks heart-breakingly of what she has had to go through:

In 2000, I lost the sense of smell and taste ... and I lost my sight in October 2007. One would not allow an animal to go through what I have endured.

Sebire recently appealed to a high court in Dijon, France, to be given the right to end her own life but was turned down. She's now appealing to President Sarkozy for a change in France's euthanasia laws.

Sebire's case presents one of the most troubling right-to-die cases in recent memory. Her disfigurement and pain is obvious to anyone who sees her photographs, and a restriction against killing herself is equivalent to a sentence of lifelong suffering.

In evaluating these cases from a Christian perspective in contemporary society, there are many conflicting values and norms that come into play. The first is the prohibition against suicide. Most often, people cite 1 Corinthians 6:19-20 to demonstrate unequivocally that God is against suicide:

Do you not know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit, who is in you, whom you have received from God? You are not your own, you were bought at a price. Therefore honor God with your body

It's clear that God values life in the Bible, but the Bible is strikingly unclear as to what level of existence qualifies as life. Would God prefer someone resigned to the abject pain and horrifying struggles of a daily struggle with only a future of slow and torturous death ahead of them, or would he prefer someone that celebrated their life for what it was shortly before taking it? This is the choice I think is offered by Sebire's situation.

One other thing to consider is the advancement of medical technology, which has made suicide an easy and painless procedure, but has also brought into existence life-prolonging drugs and equipment that might benefit the body but not the soul. People live longer today than they were meant to live according to "nature." A pastor who I recently spoke with opined to me that as a result of all this technology, people live longer than they're "supposed to." Maybe we're not supposed to live so far past the time when we still have the ability to feed ourselves, clothe ourselves, and use the bathroom ourselves. But society has deemed that because we can, we should.

But maybe in Sebire's case, keeping someone alive just for the sake of it says a lot more negative things about us as a human society than it does positive.

God Might Be Angry After All: Westboro Baptist Church Fined $5 Million, Appeal Declined

2008-02-25T07:54:00.000-08:00

Turns out God might be paying attention to the situation with the Westboro Baptist Church after all. This past week, a $10 million fine was handed down to Fred Phelps and his fun-loving congregation of gay-bashing America-haters. The church appealed this massive ruling but, thankfully, the Supreme Court declined to hear it. The appeal did get the fine reduced to a mere $5 million though (very thoughtful of him). According to the Baltimore Sun:

[Judge] Bennett affirmed the jury's verdict in favor of Snyder's father, who sued the church for emotional distress and invasion of his family's privacy after Westboro Baptist Church members waved signs decrying homosexuality at his son's funeral in March 2006. But the judge also reduced the $10.9 million award announced in October to $5 million, noting constitutional concerns of appropriateness. He held up the jury's compensatory damage award of $2.9 million but reduced the total punitive damages to $2.1.

From my understanding, this fine will essentially bankrupt the church completely. I would say "Let's hope they get the picture and decide to fade away completely," but we all know that that won't happen. So perhaps a better thing to say might be: May God throw up more bureaucratic obstacles to prevent them from wreaking further emotional havoc.

This is the best news I've read all week.

Changes Coming at "More Than Fine"

2008-02-25T06:13:00.000-08:00

(Photo by ladygoth, via CC)

Hey all,

So I've been doing a lot of thinking and I've decided that in order for this blog to live on and be useful, I'm going to have to do some refocusing. From this point on, "More Than Fine" will no longer be a general grab-bag of random topics that are of interest to me. I am going to be focusing more on Christianity and its relationship to politics and culture from here on out, and avoid the television and film aspects.

Many of you have subscribed to this blog after reading some of my film and TV-related articles, and for that I'm grateful. While those have obviously been my favorite articles, it's time for me to focus this particular blog on faith and on how it affects us all. I'll probably lose some of you after today but I hope to continue offering all of my readers a unique perspective on what's going on in the world today.

Thanks for tuning in as usual,
Dave

Tools

2008-02-16T07:47:00.000-08:00

(Photo by Docman, via CC)

When I was in high school, some technicians from Sears came over to fix the water heater in our basement. When they left, they took my dad's 108-piece toolset with them (which happened to be lying right next to the water heater). I remember wandering into the dining room one day while my dad was on the phone, arguing with the Sears people. Although dad was unflappable as always, I could tell that he was not happy with the situation. And who would be? Ultimately, the Sears people agreed to purchase my dad a new set of tools, albeit a crappier one. At the end of the whole ordeal, my dad said to me something along the lines of, "In all my time in America, I have never met anybody like this," referring to the toolman.

That's not to say that he hadn't, in his dealings, met any incompetent, inconsiderate or even cruel people. Rather, it was the gall with which these Sears technicians took his things, then lied to his face about it. Then, they didn't respond to his complaints with compassion, but with more obfuscation. And when they finally did make up for it, it was with useless half-measures.

I've been on the internet for a long time now (since AOL was a dial-up service!) and I've met a lot of pretty mean people. On this blog, I've been called a whole host of evil things, and occasionally I've been informed that I'm going to hell. Still, in all that time, I never thought I'd have to say what my dad said, about meeting someone that terrible, that inconsiderate, that cold, that calculating.

Until now.

I recently met someone online that epitomized all these above characteristics. This person lied to me and tried very hard to steal away my dignity. This person showed me the limits of friendship on the internet, and how ultimately, we can't really trust anyone. My anger burned against them for their deceit.

I've had some time to cool off, to realize that, in the end, no one's perfect. I've tried my best to realize that this person's crimes against me aren't that much more serious than my crimes against others. I'm reminded of a Bible verse that people don't really speak of that much these days:

You have heard that it was said, 'Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.' But I tell you, Do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. If someone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

These were the words of Jesus, thousands of years ago. Today it's much more politically fashionable to rail against abortion clinics and teen sex (although apparently, it's become less and less fashionable as each day passes by). But despite an encouraging surge in attention towards social justice, few people really talk about these verses anymore. Jesus led through an example of self-sacrifice, where revenge was noticeably absent. Righteous indignation is still okay, but punching someone's lights out after they piss you off is not.

We all meet these types of people in our lives. Every day we encounter them when they cut us off on the road, when they are curt to us in the supermarket line, when they tell you to "Shut the f**k up" at your team meeting (true story). May we show them the courtesy and respect they so completely fail to show us.

Writer's Block

2008-02-05T20:49:00.000-08:00

(Photo by Flickr user Thorinside via CC)

Despite a recent increase in the number of subscribers to this blog, I haven't even been able to keep up with even my pathetic "1 quality post per week" update schedule. The problem has been a recent spout of writer's block. It's not for a lack of topics either. Jozjozjoz at 8Asians recently wrote up a post about the racist superbowl ads and how they were actually created by a mentally deficient South Asian man who singlehandedly helped to set race relations back by a couple of decades. And on Digg today, this extremely provocative post written by an abortion doctor in which she describes the joy she takes in doing job.

There's so much to write about. So much to comment about. So much that needs to get done, that needs to get said. Yet here I sit, unable to take it all in and synthesize it in a way that is meaningful and entertaining for the rest of you. These are the horrors of writer's block.

I know that this is a phase. I know that this, too, shall pass sometime soon. But for now I feel as though my creative skills are completely inert. I feel temporarily directionless, with no sense of who I am or what I want to be, not only blog-wise, but life-wise. And while writing this helps me cope, it doesn't help me deal with the broader problems that threaten to consume my whole psyche.

Nonetheless, we've all dealt with these things before. There are times we struggle with an inability or lack of desire to write and in the end, many of us overcome these problems and are stronger writers because of them. It's been a crazy last 7 days and although the roller coaster of my life is far from over, I know there'll be a lull coming up in the near future. There has to be, right?

Thank you all for sitting tight and being patient. I plan on being back in the game soon.

Is The Era of Religion in Politics Over? According to Jim Wallis, "Yes."

2008-01-23T05:53:00.001-08:00

Jim Wallis was on "The Daily Show" recently and in the interview, he declared that the era of religion in politics is over:

Click here for the clip

Like it or not, Americans, as a whole, are religious. But as we've seen throughout history, and especially in the last few years, when you mix religion and politics, the result is usually tragedy. Politics is the rule of law over the people. Religion is the rule of God over man. But because God didn't make it 100% clear exactly what he wanted, differing interpretations, each of which is convinced of its own veracity, can lead to a great deal of strife. Your god may believe that I shouldn't be allowed to marry someone of the same sex, but my god does not. Your god may believe that I should be able determine what happens within my own body, but my god does not. And the beat goes on...

The religious right was the reason why John Kerry lost the election in 2004. It's why Huckabee won the caucus in Iowa. It's part of the reason why every single president we've ever had has been a believer, and will be for the foreseeable future.

So is the period of religion in politics over yet? I don't think so. But my hope is that the era of James Dobson and Pat Robertson is soon coming to a close, that Christian demogogy will soon be trumped by Christian compassion and progressivism. For the sake of our country, I pray it.

CNN Chooses Its Own Election Winner By Choosing Candidate Headshots

2008-01-16T11:15:00.000-08:00

Sorry guys, that Supreme Court post I promised is forthcoming, but in the meantime, thought I'd point out something I didn't see anywhere else.

I was checking out CNN's political coverage on its site (Didn't you hear? They have the best political team on television) on the night of the Michigan primary and I noticed that the candidates headshots were chosen in a very interesting way:

Clinton, Obama, and Edwards start cheery at the top, but by the time you get to Gravel, not only are you completely turned off, you're afraid for your life. Certainly this doesn't represent proof that CNN has a bias or preference towards certain candidates, although that phenomenon has been well documented in the past. But anyone that looks at this page is going to come away with a more favorable impression of Obama than of Dodd.

If CNN is so fair and impartial, why did they have to make the lesser candidates so completely unappealing and frightening?

This Bumper Sticker Speaks the Truth

2008-01-09T06:32:00.000-08:00

Welcome to my new subscribers!

I've been working on a post about the election as it relates to the Supreme Court, but that's still a few days away. In the meantime, thought I'd share this photo, which has a special place in my heart, with you guys:

From 2007: Five Movies That Prove MPAA Ratings Are Broken

2007-12-31T08:38:00.000-08:00

[You can digg this post by clicking here.]

In Kirby Dick’s film, “This Film Is Not Yet Rated,” Dick examines the MPAA ratings board members and explores the sketchy and seedy underbelly of our country’s ratings system. We learn that ratings, far from being an exact science, often leave people guessing as to what criteria are used when evaluating their films; that MPAA ratings amount to censorship; that raters are probably subject to the whims of studio pressure; and, ultimately, that the ratings board is completely unaccountable for its actions.

More than any year in recent memory, 2007 demonstrated that these assertions are true, through the preposterous ratings that have come out for some of the year’s most popular and/or highest grossing films. And while I will examine some of them during the course of this post, there are several premises that I base my arguments on, which will be important to understand before I get going:

Rating a movie with an R rating limits its reach, its audience, and potentially, its grosses – Since R is the only rating (other than NC-17) that actually prevents someone from being able to get into the theater, directors and studios will often bend over backwards to get the coveted PG-13 for an adult-themed movie. The reasons are obvious: PG-13 ratings open up the huge 12-16-year old market, and allows them to get into the theater unhindered (My local movie theater, for example, actually cards).

Parents trust film ratings as a guide to tell them whether or not they should take their children to see a film – Whether they are right to do so or not, the fact that they do remains a fact of life. And when parents take small children in to see a film that features dozens of maimings, impalings, and brutal murders because it’s only rated PG-13, you know that the system is broken somewhere.

Independent film studios hold less sway over the MPAA than big established studios – Paramount, Universal, and Disney have more money, more power, and more influence.

The MPAA has established itself as the de facto gatekeeper of who gets in and out of films. I don’t necessarily mind this, but if they’re going to do it, all I have to say is: don’t do such a crappy job of it. Without further ado, here are five films from 2007 that prove that the MPAA ratings system is unequivocally broken:

5. Once
What it was rated: R
What it should have been rated: Anything else less severe
Comments: One of the ratings rules that has actually become quite evident is the prohibition against the F-word. “Once,” winner and nominee of many awards (and listed by many critics as one of the best films of the year) is a completely innocuous, innocent, and sweet love story in which two people find a shared affection of music and for each other. But because the F-bomb is dropped a few times, the MPAA decided that it’s too extreme for your kids to watch. Also, in this slot, feel free to put in any other independent film this year (or any other year) that’s been dicked over by the MPAA’s shenanigans. While this example in and of itself is not enough to demonstrate the MPAA’s incompetence, the ones that follow show how ridiculous the “Once” rating decision truly was.

Here's a preview of "Once":

click here for the clip

4. Pirates of the Caribbean: At World’s End
What it was rated: PG-13
What it should have been rated: R
Comments: In an obvious display of Disney’s influence, this brutal film was given a PG-13, undoubtedly a fact that allowed it to rocket to an incredible box office take. The movie opens with the public hanging of a 10-year old boy, and features countless killings and maimings of pirates and soldiers, a couple scenes in which people are brutally burned by cannonball fire, an attempted rape, and in the most disturbing scene of the film, the complete annihilation of a man’s face with a Davy Jones’ tentacles. Not pleasant to watch and not appropriate for kids, despite its Disneyland ride pedigree.

Bonus video: See this spoiler-y video while it's still up and decide for yourself (fast forward to 6 minutes in to see what I think is the most gruesome death in the film):

3. Live Free or Die Hard
What it was rated: PG-13
What it should have been rated: R
Comments: The MPAA’s liberal stance on violence and conservativeness on foul language is fully on display here. It’s okay to show Bruce Willis graphically putting a gun into a wound in his shoulder and pulling the trigger, but having him say “Yipee Kay-yay Motherfucker,” as McClane’s character was meant to do is, of course, unacceptable. The film also featured a woman getting hit by a car, then plunging to a fiery death, dozens of graphic gunshot deaths, and a man getting ground up into a fine hamburger-y pulp. But no F-word and no sex means that kids are allowed to check this one out. Go here for the opposite perspective on this issue.

Bonus Video: Ignore the music and check out this summary of many of the film's killings (spoilers within):

Click here for the clip

2. Beowulf
What it was rated: PG-13
What it should have been rated: R
Comments: Despite being animated, this movie features an Angelina Jolie that’s basically naked, a hideous monster that murders - often brutally - dozens of townspeople (for example, he tore one in two and chewed off another one's head, slowly), several impalings, a graphic dislocation of an arm, a graphic severing of an arm, and lots of gore in the slaying of the monsters featured. One character's family is burned alive, although this is only implied off screen. I went to see it in IMAX 3d (a great experience, by any stretch of the imagination) but was disappointed to find out that several families had brought infants in with them to see the film. As I saw Grendel's horrific visage barrel onto the screen, a prelude to his murderous rampage, I myself was on the edge of my seat and just a little frightened. I can't imagine the mental scars that these kids in the audience would have to bear. Beowulf 3D is what little kids' nightmares are made of.

Bonus Video: Beowulf, rated PG-13, ironically has a red band trailer. Catch a glimpse of the gore here:

Click here for the clip
1. Taxi to the Dark Side
Comments: "Taxi to the Dark Side" is Alex Gibney's yet-to-be-released documentary looking at how our country slowly transformed, post-9/11, into one that tortures civillians and ignores the Geneva conventions. This top example on my list doesn’t concern the film’s rating as much as the MPAA’s preposterous decision to censor its poster, seen above (which, let’s all admit, is not so much inappropriate as it is shocking in its veracity). As Boing Boing put it, “MPAA message? Torture for entertainment is suitable for all ages. Torture examined in a documentary is not.” In a society in which the real-life torture of terrorists suspects is so salient to the American image in the world at large, the MPAA’s hampering of this movie’s messages strikes me as especially despicable.

**

Reading over this post again, I sound like a prude, but in fact, I'm not arguing against violence, sex, or language in movies. I am strongly against censorship in any form, whether that comes in the form of an NC-17 rating for movies or an AO rating for videogames. I'm arguing that the MPAA should either 1) Use clear, sensible standards that every movie can abide by, and/or 2) Be publicly accountable with the methodology it currently rates films. Usually the argument about parents taking children in to see adult films is that the parents should know better. But if the MPAA does such a horrendous job of informing them, then I think more of the blame should fall on the organization them than on the parents.

Shame on you, MPAA. Shame on you for censoring great indendent films, while simultaneously bending to the will of studios and using leniency on their ratings. Shame on you for all the kids you've scarred by allowing their uninformed parents to take them into see the atrocities in films like "Beowulf." And shame on you for using politics in a time when America needs more honesty and self-examination about its international activities, more than ever.

***

If you liked this article, you'll probably like these:

What Do Bioshock and The Incredibles Have In Common

The Top 5 Jason Bourne Improvised Weapons

Why Do Great Films Get Awful DVD Cover Art

***

Update 1: Added in the word "sensible" to 2nd to last paragraph

The Objectivist Implications of Ratatouille

2007-12-20T12:08:00.001-08:00

In my crapulence, I missed out on Ratatouille in theaters, despite the fact that Brad Bird is one of my favorite directors, and Pixar hasn't made a film I haven't liked yet (with the potential exception of "Cars"). In any case, I basically purchased a blu-ray player just so I could watch the film in high-def the first time. That's how certain I was that I would like it.

The film certainly delivered on all fronts. While some of the messages about dealing with prejudice and, separately, about rising above your humble beginnings were a bit lost in the mix, I was dazzled by the film's amazing animation, great voice acting (esp. by fellow nerd Patton Oswalt), and uplifting ending.

So how does it relate with my last post?

Between "The Incredibles" and "Ratatouille," I think Brad Bird has really come full circle. Cracked.com once described "The Incredibles" as an "Ayn Rand bedtime story" and I basically tried to prove as much in my last post. But the message of "Ratatouille" seems drastically different. The film chronicles the activities of Remy, a rat who has a keen sense of smell, a complete understanding of English, and a strong desire for delicious food. The problem is that his rat-like appearance poses problems whenever he tries to get into a kitchen for grub that compares favorably to his normal dumpster-diving fare.

One day while pawing through a kitchen for some foodstuffs, Remy encounters the work of master chef Auguste Gusteau, whose cooking skills and populist message ("Anyone Can Cook") resonate deeply with Remy.

Shortly afterwards, through a series of comedic and outlandish circumstances, Remy is marooned in Paris and figures out a mutually beneficial arrangement with a young boy named Alfred Linguini. They work out a system in which Remy pulls on his hair to control his hand movements, using him as a vessel to make divine culinary creations.

There's the standard bad guy and the obligatory love interest, but the heart of the story is Remy's break from his rat family and how he grapples with his role in the world. Does the world have a place for a chef from such humble beginnings? The end of the movie seems to offer an unequivocal and hopeful answer: Yes.

The thematic differences between "The Incredibles" and "Ratatouille" are quite stark. Whereas one argues that there are those among us who are inherently superior (and that's a good thing), the other argues that even the lowest of the low can achieve greatness. Whereas one argues that "special-ness" is something that is granted or inherited, the other shows that it must be worked at, in the midst of obstacles that risk even life and limb. Whereas one is a celebration of the superiority of others, the other is a celebration of egalitarianism, and the triumph of an indomitable will.

"Ratatouille" repudiates the message of "The Incredibles" and it does so in a way that only a genius like Brad Bird could. It is sweeping in its simple and profound message. It has characters that grow and change throughout the course of the film's running time. And it is deeply moving.

See it!

BONUS VIDEO: For longtime readers, you'll know what this is:

Click here for clip

The Trajan Invasion

2007-12-14T18:44:00.000-08:00

MAN, what a long week. I hope everyone out there is getting into the holiday spirit and not working yourselves to death. Cause I am.

Kirby over at Goodiebag.tv has posted up an insightful video about one design element (My DVD cover art post is referenced in his notes). Check it out:

click here for the video

Have a great weekend!

What Does Bioshock Have In Common With The Incredibles?

2007-12-06T15:04:00.001-08:00

vs.

Digg this post by clicking here.

[MAJOR SPOILERS for Bioshock and Incredibles to follow]

[This post has been updated to respond to comments left on the blog. Please see update at the bottom.]

On Thanksgiving Day, NBC broadcast the network premiere of "The Incredibles," allowing me to watch the film in HD - a pretty great experience since there's currently no other way to do so. I love the film, but every time I watch it, its overriding themes always bother me. Coincidentally, I also recently played and beat the wonderful "Bioshock," by Irrational Games, which is what led me to write this post.

Intentional or not , both of them derive strong inspirations from Ayn Rand's work. But where "Bioshock" illustrates the downfall of objectivism, "The Incredibles" spends most of its running time advocating it, to an extent that's fairly shocking for a mainstream film. This article will explore the similarities between the two works, but I will spend the bulk of the time interpreting their take on Rand's philosophies.

First, a quick tour of objectivism: Rand's philosophy, made evident in books like The Fountainhead and Atlas Shrugged essentially boils down to the notion that humans are self-interested and should be allowed to pursue their own happiness. In her own words,

My philosophy, in essence, is the concept of man as a heroic being, with his own happiness as the moral purpose of his life, with productive achievement as his noblest activity, and reason as his only absolute.

Those that are smarter, more talented, or just plain better should be allowed to pursue their own interests without interference from government, religion, or anyone/anything else. The societal consequences of this are, of course, unfettered laissez-faire capitalism. This, coincidentally, is the exact same principle that Andrew Ryan (whose name is a play on Rand's name), one of the main characters from Bioshock, lives by. The following clip from the game should give you a pretty good summary of it, while also demonstrating how awesome the game is:

Click here for the clip

In Bioshock, Ryan perfects the notion of objectivism in his underwater city but when scientists came up with plasmids and the devious Fontaine - more word play on Rand's The Fountainhead - cornered the market on them, things went horribly awry. Although we know that Ryan continued to have faith in free market capitalism ("Just design a better product!"), ultimately human nature took over. The power of plasmids was too hard to resist. And some, like Ryan and Fontaine, just became addicted to power:

click here for the clip

While Bioshock shows us the promise of objectivism, with its beautiful underwater city loaded with brilliant scientists and artists, it also shows us its downfall. What Ken Levine, the game's writer, seems to be saying is that human nature is incompatible with Rand's vision of the heroic person and that objectivism, noble and promising as it may be, is doomed to failure. Ugly, dystopian, freaky, frightening failure.

On the other hand, consider "The Incredibles."

In the opening scene of "The Incredibles," Mr. Incredible saves a suicidal building jumper, who in turns sues the daylights out of him. The "Supers" are then all forced into hiding by the government and the old-school film depicting the incident shows how they have now become everyday people:

Consider this piece of narration from the above section:

The supers will be granted amnesty from responsibility for past actions, in exchange for the promise to never again resume hero work. Where are they now? They are living among us. Average citizens, average heroes. Quietly and anonymously continuing to make the world a better place.

The world in the film is one that clearly glorifies normality and same-ness. And that fact is intended to frustrate the audience, especially given the acrobatics we've just witnessed in the opening scene. We want to see these super heroes doing what they love to do, what they were born to do. And we hate that it's been taken away from them.

Speaking of which, there is a clear delineation between the supers and "normals." The character Incrediboy/Syndrome/Buddy, played deliciously by Jason Lee, is one of the latter, and his affections for hero work are repeatedly rebuffed by Mr. Incredible. In the opening scene, Incredible heartlessly ejects him from his car after Incrediboy tries to tag along:

Mr. Incredible doesn't mind working with cohorts like Frozone and Elastigirl, but Incrediboy seems to be out of the running simply because he wasn't born with superpowers. Forget the fact that he has worked immensely hard and has single-handedly engineered incredible technology; in the opening scene, he is depicted as annoying, foolish, and almost responsible for destroying a train full of innocent bystanders:

The primary problem with Incrediboy is that he's not one of the "chosen" ones, he's not "incredible." And therefore, he shouldn't hinder the efforts of those that are "incredible." Of course, i can't continue without mentioning the (in)famous scene in which Mr. Incredible laments mediocrity:

Bob: It's not a graduation. He's moving from the fourth grade to
the fifth grade. It's psychotic! They keep creating new ways to celebrate
mediocrity but if someone is genuinely exceptional...
Helen: This is not about you, Bob. This is about Dash.
Bob: You want to do something for Dash? Then let him actually
compete. Let him go out for sports!
Helen: You know why we can't do that...
Bob: Because he'd be great!

Mediocrity should not be celebrated, Bob seems to be saying. Greatness should be. And greatness, in the realm of the movie, means having superpowers. Weren't born with them? Too bad, even if you have an intelligence that can only be described as monstrously large (e.g. Syndrome).

By the end of the film, Syndrome has transformed into an evil menace and the Incredibles are cheered for thwarting his plan, and eventually, for killing him. The message of the film seems clear: Those that hinder greatness will be destroyed. In the end, greatness reveals itself and triumphs over mediocrity. Pretty heady stuff, and actually a pretty horrifying message for a children's film.

Except for one last thing.

In the final scene, Dash is seen actually taking up sports, while his family cheers him on from the bleachers. But they don't tell him to use his gifts to their fullest extent. Instead, they scream at him to do just well enough to come in second place:

It's actually a poignant scene and funny scene. But what are we to take from all this? This last scene seems to confuse "the message" of the movie and it's not entirely clear what Brad Bird is trying to communicate here. Perhaps he is saying that everyone can co-exist peacefully, that being "incredible" isn't all that important, and that it's not necessarily exclusive of normality. If this is true, then I think it's a positive message, but certainly a contrast from the 1 hour and 45 minutes that have come before.

Although Bird has often stated that he didn't intend any of the Rand-ian parallels, they are often sometimes embedded even within the visuals of the film, such as during the climax when Mr. Incredible takes a pose that looks a heck of a lot like Atlas Shrugged:

Whether or not they were intentional, the parallels and messages are fairly clear.

My law professor once called "The Incredibles" a "Republican movie." There are those that are incredible, there are those that aren't incredible, and that's just the way life is. You have to just have "it" in you (i.e. in the "Republican" analogy, "it" would be wealth, power, or an overriding desire for those things) and if you don't, you're looked down upon. When I first heard him, I didn't really know what the hell he was talking about. But now, I think I've come to terms with it.

"Bioshock" and "The Incredibles" show two visions of objectivism. "Bioshock" glorifies this vision before burning it to the ground, and quite rapidly at that. "The Incredibles," on the other hand," simply glorifies it. Yet regardless of what these works have to say, they remain some of my favorites of all time, and I hope they will be for you too.

So what do you think?

Next Friday: The Objectivist Implications of Ratatouille

Update (11:00pm, 12/10/07): There's been lots of great discussion going on in the comment section, so I thought I should take some time to respond. I think that responding to Brock's points will help answer some challenges that you guys have posed to my theories.

Brock said:

As others have mentioned, Incrediboy was out of the running because he was a child without the training or skills to survive Hero work. Mr. Incredible said the exact same thing about his own children.

I don't recall when Mr. Incredible said this about his own children, but in any event, Incrediboy was not Bob's child, and therefore, he wouldnt' have felt as protective over him. I don't think it's outside the realm of possibility that Incrediboy could have been trained over time, in a Batman-and-Robin situation. Certainly that would have been preferable to rejecting a potential apprentice outright.

Brock said:

In the scene where Incrediboy's help is rejected, he hasn't done any of the times you've mentioned. If you're going to discuss movies, you NEED to keep your timelines straight.

Sorry, Brock. YOU need to get your timelines straight. In the opening scene, Incrediboy has already developed rocket shoes that allow him to fly...technology that we don't yet have today (in the real world). He definitely showed promise and when he shows up years later with zero-point energy, it's not a complete surprise because we've already seen his brilliance demonstrated at such a young age.

Brock said (I'm cutting and pasting his responses into one whole one):

I would have thought that 'the problem' with Incrediboy/Syndrome was that he was a psychotic murder. The message I got was: "Those who build giant killer-robots, murder people, and try to destroy whole cities, will be opposed by good people who have the power to do so." The other lesson I got was: "Just because someone was mean to you as a kid is no excuse for building giant killer-robots, murdering people, or trying to destroy whole cities."

What you don't fully take into account here is that the REASON Syndrome became a psychotic murderer was partially a result of his rejection by Mr. Incredible at the beginning. I don't disagree with you that he was a psychotic murderer (and should have been held to account for his actions) but if Incredible had said "Hey kid, you clearly are brilliant and have a lot of potential, despite your lack of super powers. I would like to train you as my successor," we can imagine the movie having a much different ending. It also would have been a much less exciting movie.

My problem is with Mr. Incredible's reason for not accepting Incrediboy, and I think it was primarily a result of his not having superpowers (and secondarily as a result of other reasons, e.g. he was annoying, he was young, he was inexperienced, etc.)

One last thing to consider before moving on from Syndrome. Consider this passage of dialogue from the film:

Oh, I'm real. Real enough to defeat you! And I did it
without your precious gifts, your oh-so-special powers. I'll give them heroics.
I'll give them the most spectacular heroics anyone's ever seen! And when I'm old and I've had my fun, I'll sell my inventions so that everyone can be superheroes. Everyone can be super. And when everyone's super...no one will be.

This last line is delivered ominously, and with scary music in the background to boot. The director is indicating to the audience that they should fear Syndrome's vision of the future, a future in which there is nothing remarkable about anyone, a future in which everyone can be super. And ultimately, for a children's movie, I think that's a shame. Despite his hyper-intelligence, at this point in the film Syndrome still represents mediocrity, sameness, and the status quo, which (as I've tried to point out) is what the film rails against.

Shifting gears to Bioshock: As for the notion that Andrew Ryan didn't truly exemplify Rand-ian ideals, I think user Edgeman says it best, when he's quoting user Brackhar:

"There's a large hole in your analysis regarding Bioshock though. In the end Rapture didn't collapse under the weight of its Randian ideals, but instead because Andrew Ryan betrayed those principles."

I was thinking, isn't this EXACTLY why Randian ideals always fail, and wasn't this the point the writer made about it. In my personal opinion, if you really think it through, pretty much ANY form of government would work perfectly fine if human beings weren't so...human. Randian philosophy fails exactly for this reason. It fails to see reality beyond the naive ideals, and fails to see that human beings are greedy and selfish.

For those that have read and taken my thoughts seriously, thank you. I have tried to do the same for yours. Even if you didn't agree, I hope you at least found the post thought-provoking. If more comments come in, I'll do another update (or if you feel your comment didn't get a fair shake, feel free to e-mail me and I'll try to write up a response).

Thanks for reading!

***

If You Liked This Article, You'll Probably Like These:

Stephen Colbert's Top 10 Funniest Correspondent Pieces

Demetri Martin: Spiritual Successor to Mitch Hedberg

The Top 5 Bourne-Improvised Weapons

What I'm Thankful For

2007-11-26T15:23:00.000-08:00

(photo by me)

Still here?

Sorry it's been so long since my last post. I've been inundated with work these past few weeks; I recently finished producing a 30-page report for my boss, which felt like giving birth to a 30-pound child (not that I'll ever know what that feels like, ladies). Then the Thanksgiving break, and now....is now. The run-up towards Christmas. I have a buttload of stuff to get done before the birth of our Lord, as I'm sure many of you do as well. Deadlines to meet. Presents to buy. Vacation to take. And hopefully, posts to write :) To those of you that still check back here every day for a new entry (I know you are out there), thank you so much. If it weren't for you, I wouldn't have the strength to keep writing, albeit infrequently.

Today, some words about Thanksgiving.

Take out the gluttony and the dysfunctional family get-togethers. Take out the stress of cooking a huge family meal. Take out the monstrous Black Friday crowds. When you strip it all down, Thanksgiving is actually a damn fine holiday. It's not nearly as commercialized as Christmas, and the message is one that hasn't been as lost in the haze of fat men dressed in red suits and hideously decorated trees.

Give thanks.

And the follow-up question is simple: What are you thankful for? Really, if you're an American, the answer is so much. Way more than we deserve.

I went to go see Beowulf last week, in IMAX 3D. The friends I saw it with didn't like the film, but, at the very least, found it a fun ride. I actually genuinely enjoyed the film, with its bravura action sequences and its mature themes. But what struck me about the moviegoing experience wasn't the film or even the 3D glasses. Instead, it was the fact that a woman had passed out from the room's heat while waiting in line (the shows were all sold out). When I arrived at the theater, there was a fire truck, a police car, and an ambulance all there with a stretcher, making sure she was going to be okay. I wondered why a woman fainting warranted such extensive expenditure of resources, but since I live in a suburb, I decided that that was probably the most excitement the local hospital, fire, and police departments were going to have that night.

It's remarkable to me that in a world rife with death and inhumanity, that we for the most part live in a country where we can rely on a tremendously reliable public infrastructure. For most of the people that are reading this blog, we can be assured that when we pick up the phone to call 911, someone will be there to answer the phone. We know that when we go to our sink, drinkable water will come out. We know that food is just a few miles down the street at the local grocery store.

Give thanks.

In his 1941 State of the Union address, President Roosevelt spoke of the Four Freedoms, the freedoms that everyone in the world ought to have:

1. Freedom of speech and expression
2. Freedom of religion
3. Freedom from want
4. Freedom from fear

As Americans, we enjoy these freedoms but some of them are so subtle, we can't pull our minds out of our problems and be thankful for all the things we already do have. As the holiday season approaches, with its often immense ferocity, I pray that I'll have the solitude to understand how much we really have, how much I've personally been given. And I hope that I'll be in the frame of mind to remember who has given it all to me.

News roundup

2007-11-08T04:55:00.000-08:00

(Photo by me!)

Hey guys,

Sorry it's been quiet around here lately...I usually get off at least one substantial post per week but that hasn't happened recently just due to life circumstances. I will try to get back on track this weekend and next week. In the meantime, there's been a TON of stuff happening recently all over the news, much of it relating to religion. Here are some links for your pleasure:

More Evangelicals Concluding that God Is Green - After years of believing that the world is ours to do what we want and that "The Rapture is going to come any day now, so who the heck cares how much we pollute?", some Evangelicals are finally waking up to the notion that yes, our children might be the ones that have to shoulder the consequences of the disastrous violence we've inflicted upon the environment. About time.

Pat Robertson Back Giuliani - What?! Ultra-conservative Robertson backs a presidential candidate who has had three wives (one of which was his second cousin), who cross-dresses on occasion and is a supporter of gay and abortion rights?

It Will Take Us at least a Generation to Recover from the Bush administration - From the war to the disastrous tax cuts, this administration will leave a legacy that has an impact in all the wrong places. I fear for my children and their children if our next president doesn't recognize the problems and turn things around.

Obama Supporters Tried to Keep Stephen Colbert Off the Ballot - Because we could all afford to laugh a little less in this horrendous political climate, am I right guys? Seriously though, their actions were understandable but completely unnecessary.

That is plenty of reading for now. If you like this type of thing, maybe I'll try to do one of these a week, plus a post. Let me know, and thanks for reading!

In Honor of Colbert '08: Stephen Colbert's Top 10 Funniest Correspondent Pieces (From the Daily Show)

2007-10-27T14:33:00.000-07:00

[You can digg this post by clicking here]

Ostensibly launched as part of a marketing campaign for his new book, "I Am America (And So Can You!)" Stephen Colbert's presidential campaign is making a lot of waves, both on the internet and even in traditional news outlets. Shockingly, he has reached double digits in some polls, and his Facebook group shows no signs of slowing down, fueling speculation that he might run for real (although I highly doubt that will happen; in this interview, he stated emphatically that he doesn't want to be "part of the debate" that comprises our political discourse)

Comedy Central recently did the right thing by their viewers and their stars by making thousands of Daily Show clips available at a brand spanking new site. With this archive now open to the public, it's possible to look at the vast work of Colbert throughout the past 8 years and view and enjoy some of his best works. Here are the top 10 I think merit attention, in no particular order. If the response to this post is good, I'll do more of these for Ed Helms, Steve Carrell, and Mo Rocca:

[One word about the selection process: I have been watching the Daily Show consistently since 2000. This video is not just "The Top 10 Clips I Could Find In 15 Minutes" but rather a product of having watched and re-watched pretty much all of his reports and correspondent bits. I have given preference to making the clips as diverse as possible, so that should also help explain the selection, but I think they are his best. If you have more that you think deserve to be here, please comment and/or shoot me an e-mail. Thanks for reading!]

1. Colbert breaks character while reporting on gay scandal - In this classic clip, Colbert layers on the sexual innuendo until it's so thick and tumescent, it explodes onto the screen:

click here for the clip

2. Even Stevphen: Halloween - All of the Even Stevphens are amazing, but this one is particularly poignant, as Colbert stages a mock breakdown over a lost childhood:

click here for the clip

3. Abu Cribz - How do you make the discovery of an Iraqi bunker into comedic gold? Watch and learn:

click here for the clip

4. Red, Yellow, Blue, and Black Like Me - In this clip, Colbert both reveals the self-righteousness of the "colored" people and makes light of the situation by disrobing violently at the end. Clips like these show Colbert at his most audacious, and most willing to humiliate himself for a laugh. And for that, we can all be grateful.

click here for the clip

5. "My dad was a turd miner." - In this classic clip from the DNC episodes, Colbert is so funny he gets Stewart to almost break character:

click here for the clip

6. Drug-Testing Bridge players - One of the first clips I'd ever seen by Colbert, this Bridge clip has been held up as one of Colbert's quintessential pieces, a model for all the Daily Show pieces that came after it:

click here for the clip

7. George Bush jacks off a horse - Colbert and Stewart keep it real and show they're not serious about being a news show with this lowest-common-denominator and devastating clip:

click here for the clip

8. The most discriminated people in America - Masturbation. Hitler. Amusingly deluded interviewees. This clip has all the hallmarks of Classic Colbert:

click here for the clip

9. "Whatever happened to condemning the Jews?" - I'll admit it, this clip isn't necessarily the best, but it's one of the best "This Week in God" clips, which Colbert helped to pioneer. This clip is bursting with great lines, while still containing biting satire. Enjoy:

click here for the clip

10. Colbert visits an invention conference - This one's from the olden days, but it shows Colbert as his best, playing a doofus while questioning a plethora of "inventors":

click here for the clip

BONUS CLIPS I also love:

Colbert enjoys drugs and wife-swapping- In an amazing exercise of subtext and insinuation, Carrell and Colbert paint a sad picture of two buttoned-up guys gone out of control:

click here for the clip

"The joker in the race card deck" - For some reason I just really think this clip is genius, as Colbert ridicules CA's judicial system during the Michael Jackson trials:

click here for the clip

Why assault weapons are good for the economy - This clip shows Colbert most clearly preparing for his persona on "The Colbert Report," portraying the unflappable conservative against big government, despite his ridiculous ideas:

click here for the clip

***

Related Articles:

Demetri Martin: Spiritual Successor to Mitch Hedberg

The Top 5 Bourne-Improvised Weapons

Why Do DVD Covers Suck?

Demetri Martin: Spiritual Successor to Mitch Hedberg

2007-10-20T15:02:00.001-07:00

I recently heard an entertaining and informative interview with Demetri Martin on NPR the other day and I thought I'd do a quick write-up on him. Martin recently premiered an amusing comedy special on Comedy Central called "Person." He attended Yale and went to NYU law school (one of the country's best) for two years before dropping out and devoting his life to comedy. It takes balls to give up a sure thing for a shot at your dreams, and I salute Martin for trying. His success has yielded him a gig on the Daily Show and apparently there are talks for him to get his own series soon.

I wasn't always a fan of Martin; his style was a bit too aloof, a bit too smug for my tastes, and I questioned his use of musical instruments to his act. Does it really add that much? I, for one, am a bit of a purist when it comes to these things. If I'm going to see a comedy show, I expect one guy to talk for 90 minutes without the aid of props, damn it! But over time, Martin has found himself in my good graces; I now consider myself a mild fan.

Martin has a rapid-fire style of comedy that is very similar to a beloved, recently-deceased comedian called Mitch Hedberg. It's an observational humor, a blink-and-you'll-miss it type of humor that makes light of our every day conceptions and experiences. There's no other way to describe it other than to show you, so here's a clip:

Click here for the clip

What I like about Hedberg is that there's no pretension to his work. By all accounts, it's just a guy sharing about some hilarious things he's noticed during the course of his life. Here's another clip:

Click here for the clip

Martin has a similar style, but with an air of elitism that comes from a privileged background (and not one that was a result of a massive intake of drugs). Martin also infuses his character with a social awkwardness that belies his mastery of comedy and the crowds that he performs for. Check out this clip from his recent comedy special:

Click here for the clip

Am I just imagining things, or are their styles strikingly similar? Here's one more clip:

Click here for the clip

None of this is to complain. We could all used a bit more Mitch Hedberg in our lives and I feel like Demetri Martin provides it for us, in a slightly tweaked and personalized form. But the striking similarities suggest some degree of inspiration going on behind the scenes, and is definitely a fascinating process.

Welcome To The Turning of the Tide

2007-10-11T05:25:00.000-07:00

Alternet reports on a new study by the Barna group:

A study released last week by the Barna Group, a reputable Evangelical research and polling firm, found that under-30s -- both Christian and non-Christian -- are strikingly more critical of Christianity than their peers were just a decade ago. According to the summary report, Barna pollster David Kinnaman found that the opinions of non-Christians, in particular, had slid like a rock in that time frame. Ten years ago, "the vast majority" of non-Christians had generally favorable views of Christianity. Now, that number stands at just 16%. When asked specifically about Evangelicals, the number are even worse: only 3% of non-Christian Millennials have positive associations with Evangelicals. Among the Boomers, it's eight times higher.

What you reap is what you sow; we are finally beginning to see the deleterious effects of the Christian Right's misguided and self-defeating war on homosexuality. The anti-gay movement is not something that Jesus fought for, and it's probably something that Jesus would have fought against.

Addicted with power, conservatives like Dobson and Falwell knew they could use Christian's visceral homophobia as a way to galvanize a political movement. But what they failed to see, and what we're finally beginning to see now, is that such a movement was not sustainable in the face of progressive politics and culture, and that ultimately, a plan like this would lessen, not strengthen, the Christian political movement.

Young Evangelical Christians are the future face of the movement. I'm one of them. And we're all sick and fed up with what we see. It's time for a politics of peace, not a politics of hate. It's time for a change. Welcome to the turning of the tide.

The Wire's Fourth Season (Season 4) Is Coming To DVD; Release on December 4, 2007

2007-10-08T06:38:00.000-07:00

There are many people on the internets that hate me and think I'm a moron because of this Wire-related post I wrote about 8 months ago. Nonetheless, I stand by my points.

However, dozens of Google searches about the Wire's fourth season DVD have inexplicably brought people to this page. This post is for all of those people. It's finally official: The Wire Season 4 will be released on DVD on December 4, 2007, as originally predicted. I am almost certain that the new season will premiere shortly afterwards. The DVDs have never been exorbitant with their special features and have usually featured only a few commentaries. I don't expect this trend to change but hopefully they'll pull out the stops for this fifth and last season....

If you haven't seen "The Wire," you are doing yourself a disservice. Pick up the DVD sets now, seasons 1-4, (they are way cheap now and definitely worth the price) and catch up before the fifth season wraps up next year. I am not exaggerating when I say that "The Wire" is constantly in the process of making TV history in a good way, and will be until its eventual end.

Shooter Is Sniper Porn

2007-10-05T14:52:00.000-07:00

There are films that seem like they give you a glimpse into another world, films like "Babel," "Dark Days," "Amores Perros." Ostensibly, these films offer an unadulterated examination of the lives of people who you would never normally interact with. They are, in many ways, fascinating yet also to some degree pornographic. They rely heavily on the fact that they're showing you something new, something fresh, something unknown, in order to hold your attention. And while comparing "Babel" to a film like "Shooter" is a really bizarre thing to do in any circumstance, that's loosely what i'm doing today.

I saw shooter on DVD the other day and found it to be offensive, pointless, disgusting...yet somehow awesome. But the most fascinating part of the film is that it wants you to think it knows a lot about sniping. Take this bit of dialogue:

"Long shots generally go places you wouldn't want to go afterwards to confirm'em. Confirmation does pose a problem. You know what it takes to make a shot a that range? Everything comes into play that far. Humidity, elevation, temperature, wind, spin drift. There's a six to ten second flight time so you have to shoot it where the target's going to be. Even the Coriolis effect, the spin of the Earth comes into play. President will be wearin' body armor, that means a head shot, at over a mile? You believe there is a shooter involved capable of makin' this shot?"

"Yes."

"Then you got a real problem. You got to find the shooter."

A scene like this is really interesting to me. It makes one feel enlightened, yet at the same time probably does nothing to scratch the surface of what's really involved in being a good sniper. While educating, it also perpetuates our ignorance, allowing us to wallow in our minimal knowledge of a subject. And to a significant degree, that's what movies like shooters are all about: Giving you a glimpse into the unknown, but only enough that the unknown is sexy, unreal, and unattainable.

Mostly though, we just watch these movies to watch people killing other people. Expertly. To this extent, Shooter delivers (This is the movie's climax):

Click here for the clip

Dobson and Friends Show What's Most Important to Christians...Again.

2007-10-03T21:04:00.000-07:00

Every time the Christian Right makes political statements like the ones in the news recently, it not only displays its ignorance: it broadcasts it. According to the New York Times:

Alarmed at the possibility that the Republican Party might pick Rudolph W. Giuliani as its presidential nominee despite his support for abortion rights, a coalition of influential Christian conservatives is threatening to back a third-party candidate. The threat emerged from a group that broke away for separate discussions at a meeting Saturday in Salt Lake City of the Council for National Policy, a secretive conservative networking group. Almost everyone present at the smaller group’s meeting expressed support for a written resolution stating that “if the Republican Party nominates a pro-abortion candidate we will consider running a third-party candidate,” participants said.

This story sees the confluence of two hot-button issues: Right wing conspiracies and abortion. As with all stories of this nature, what really irritates me is that Christians are choosing this one issue as a catalyst for their vote, ignoring, at their peril, other equally important issues like poverty, health care, and education. It's nothing new, just the same ol' same ol'. And that's what keeps my anger flowing.

Ironically, the introduction of a third-party candidate may split the conservative vote, paving the way for Democratic victory. If that does happen, we'd certainly be left with the lesser of three evils. But don't thank the Christian Right; they won't have any idea what's going on.

The Virtuosity of Michel Camilo

2007-10-01T05:17:00.001-07:00

I saw something that blew me away over the weekend: Michel Camilo playing his self-written piece, "Caribe" on the piano. The level of talent on display, both in terms of technical skill and songwriting, left my jaw hanging and my heart beating. Camilo is apparently classically trained, in addition to being a jazz musician and I think those sensibilities show through. This Youtube video will give you some idea of how freaking amazing this man's hands were, as well as his ability to improvise at lightning-fast speed and still make it sound great:

Click here for the video

From the video's description:

June 18, 1993. From the 40th anniversary of the Newport Jazz Festival, held in a tent on the lawn of the White House. Bill Clinton is the one who starts the standing ovation at the end.

How I Learned To Stop Laughing And Hate Dane Cook

2007-09-22T11:47:00.001-07:00

Dane Cook burst onto the comedy scene a few years ago with "Harmful If Swallowed," what I thought was a rather hilarious album that riffed on observational humor and pop culture. I really enjoyed this album and it represents my fondest memories of the man. Here's a typical clip:

(Click here for the clip)

Cook's material felt fresh and his delivery was audacious. A few years later, he followed it up with the mega double-album, "Retaliation," a 2-disc behemoth that had 2 full albums of material, plus a bonus DVD. This was a weaker effort, but still worth a listen. However, Cook's "observations" started to get more and more obscure, and he began to revel more in his own delivery, rather than rely on his content. This was, in my opinion, the beginning of the end for Dane Cook. Here's a clip:

(Click here for the clip)

"Retaliation" became one of the best-selling comedy albums of all time and people took notice.
HBO signed him on for a documentary series called "Tourgasm," what was supposed to be a humorous examination of the lives of comics. Instead, it was a self-indulgent mess and featured much less of Cook than his other, less funny cohorts. Cook didn't realize that people enjoy watching comics when they're funny, not when they're doing taxes or arguing over petty issues:

(Click here for the clip)

This was right about the time when allegations of Cook stealing material started to surface. Specfically, Cook appeared to have pilfered material, wholesale and without attribution, from the great comedian Louis CK. This damning video shows lays out some evidence:

(Click here for video)

Just awful. Dane Cook, once ecstatic and hilarious, was now reduced to the same category as the talentless Carlos Mencia. In response to these allegations, Louis CK reportedly wrote the following on an internet message board:

I downloaded the bit off itunes. It's called "Struck by a Vehicle" It's very similar, part of it is, to my "guy on a bike" bit which is on my cd and I've been doing for about 15 years. he also has a bit on this cd called "Itchy Asshole" and I have a bit on my first CD called "Itchy Asshole" I downloaded the bit off itunes. It's called "Struck by a Vehicle" It's very similar, part of it is, to my "guy on a bike" bit which is on my cd and I've been doing for about 15 years. he also has a bit on this cd called "Itchy Asshole" and I have a bit on my first CD called "Itchy Asshole" I'm not going to court over a bit called "itchy asshole"

I don't know if he stole the vehicle bit from me but I do know that I've done mine on several tv shows and that i've done it at the laugh factory with him in the room. Oh well. Whatever.

Last night I complained that he often rudely bumps me when he comes in the Laugh Factory. I wouldn't be the first one to complain. he never asks when bumping and almost always runs way over his time. He generally shows zero courtesy or respect to other comedians on the same show as him. Oh well. Whatever.

And now...now come the movies. First there was the deplorable "Employee of the Month," and though every guy would love to star in a film with Jessica Simpson, starring in this cinematic abortion might not have been the best way to break out onto the movie scene. Despite this, Cook got other film deals, and is now currently in theaters with "Good Luck Chuck," starring aside the extremely attractive Jessica Alba.

But the worst thing of all? The most unforgivable thing? The thing that sent me over the edge of the abyss, from whose depths I shall never return? Simple. Steve Carrell's new film:

click here for the clip

In this movie, Cook's GIRLFRIEND is Juliette Binoche. Juliette Binoche. This is a woman of refinement, a sophisticated, unattainable woman.

The French Meryl Streep. The woman who ripped out your heart in Kryzstof Kieslowswki's "Bleu." The woman who you could never in a million years dream of being with because her tastes are so much more refined than yours. And now she's Dane Cook's girlfriend in a Steve Carrell vehicle? As one film critic put it:

She is immune from my hate. If I found out Juliette Binoche firebombed an orphanage, I'd figure she had her reasons. But firebombing an orphanage is nothing compared to this. What kind of monster casts Binoche to play Dane Cook's girlfriend? That's like ripping "Starry Night" off the wall at MOMA, slashing it to pieces, and replacing it with the DVD cover art for Encino Man. This is egregious. And this will not go unpunished.

No, it will not go unpunished. Dane Cook's career started off like any comedian dreams of. We had some good laughs together; I shared in his fandom. But now Cook has done something that's unforgivable. He has sullied his name with accusations of thievery and most importantly, he has sullied the name of Juliette Binoche merely by association with him. And if he still had original, un-purloined material that was hilarious, this might all be accepted, if not condoned. But it's not.

I hate you Dane Cook.

Man Sues God, Gets Response

2007-09-22T08:42:00.000-07:00

(photo by Flickr user papalars, via CC)

A story in CNN shows what happens when you try and talk back to God, legally:

State Sen. Ernie Chambers of Omaha sued God last week, seeking a permanent injunction against the Almighty for making terroristic threats, inspiring fear and causing "widespread death, destruction and terrorization of millions upon millions of the Earth's inhabitants."

Not so, says "God." One of two court filings from "God" came Wednesday under otherworldly circumstances, according to John Friend, clerk of the Douglas County District Court in Omaha. His response argues that the defendant is immune from some earthly laws and the court lacks jurisdiction. It adds that blaming God for human oppression and suffering misses an important point. "I created man and woman with free will and next to the promise of immortal life, free will is my greatest gift to you," according to the response, as read by Friend.

It's a funny little story and reminds me of another story in the Bible that was not so funny. At the end of that one, God's response was a little less playful:

"Who is this that darkens my counsel
with words without knowledge?
Brace yourself like a man;
I will question you,
and you shall answer me.
"Where were you when I laid the earth's foundation?
Tell me, if you understand.
Who marked off its dimensions? Surely you know!
Who stretched a measuring line across it?
On what were its footings set,
or who laid its cornerstone-
while the morning stars sang together
and all the angels [ag] shouted for joy?
"Who shut up the sea behind doors
when it burst forth from the womb,
when I made the clouds its garment
and wrapped it in thick darkness,
when I fixed limits for it
and set its doors and bars in place,
when I said, 'This far you may come and no farther;
here is where your proud waves halt'?
"Have you ever given orders to the morning,
or shown the dawn its place,
that it might take the earth by the edges
and shake the wicked out of it? (Job 38)

The moral of the story is: Don't question God. He's better than you and sometimes, He'll let you know it.

Weekend Web Finds: The Work of Richard Kelly

2007-09-21T20:21:00.000-07:00

The trailer for Richard Kelly's "Southland Tales" premiered online recently:

RSS Readers: click here for video

The movie got absolutely destroyed at Cannes, something that was baffling to me and other fans of Kelly's first effort, Donnie Darko. I'm a huge fan of Darko; Kelly established himself as a major talent, using very limited resources. These scenes from the film are classic:

Slow motion intro to all major characters in school, to Tears for Fears:

RSS Readers: Click here for video.

The Film's Ending, hauntingly set to a cover of "Mad World":

RSS Readers: Click here for video

The trailer for Southland Tales looks great, especially with the new edit and the added special effects. Here's hoping that Kelly pulled it together and that we have a great fall film in the pipeline to look forward to.

Fox's Shamelessness

2007-09-19T08:31:00.000-07:00

At the Emmy awards the other night, Fox's Family Guy characters performed an admittedly funny and witty song:

RSS readers: Click here for the video

Fox's broadcast was shameful for two reasons. First of all, typically the network that hosts the Emmys doesn't participate in bashing shows from other networks, as a courtesy. This was particularly ironic given Fox's history of lowest-common-denominator television. And has anyone even watched "Family Guy" recently? That show has gone rapidly downhill since its return.

Second of all, Fox famously censored Sally Field's anti-war statements during her acceptance speech:

RSS readers: Click here for the video

Fox has never been particularly fair and balanced in its news coverage or its programming, but this recent moves takes it down to a new low.

Matt Withers Commentary on "The Fountain" Is Dead Wrong

2007-09-15T14:39:00.000-07:00

[This post will not make much sense unless you've seen The Fountain. Sorry about that. Spoilers ahead, so beware.]

Roger Ebert recently wrote a review of Darron Aronofsky's wonderful film, "The Fountain," and published a commentary by Joblo's Matt Withers. A few paragraphs into the commentary and I already knew that I would vehemently disagree with this man. Withers writes:

Given that Tomas is a fictional character in the universe of the film, we must now turn our attention to both present day Tom (Tom 1), and Spaceman Tom (Tom 2). It is made clear that both these men are in some fashion the same man. While the evidence could take up pages to list, it is enough to recognize that they have the same name, the same tattoo of a wedding band on their ring finger, and the same memories of Izzy. While it may seem tricky to establish if Tom 2 is actually Tom 1, somehow still alive 500 years in the future, or some other fiction, fear not for the answer is actually quite simple.

Tom 2's journey is clearly the final chapter of Izzy's book, the chapter she asked Tom 1 to finish for her as she lay on her deathbed. In it we find the Spaceman transporting the Tree that seems to contain the spirit of both his beloved Izzy and Queen Isabella to a dying nebula. In Tom 2's journey lie all the elements we would expect a grieving husband, a man who is a scientist not a writer, to present when finishing a story he did not start. It is his love letter to his dead wife.

Withers goes on to describe why Tom 2 is different than Tom 1 but completely ignores all the evidence that indicates they are the same person. They have the same markings, including the mark on Tom's finger, although Withers does give this lip service. More importantly, Tom 2 has been hearing Lizzy asking him to "Finish It" throughout the whole movie, an indication that he has not yet finished writing the last chapter in her book (Withers thinks he has, and that he IS the last chapter, which makes even less sense than the explanation I am positing).

The point of the movie is that Tom 1 (who is the same person as Tom 2) is in a constant struggle against death. This is evident in the way he fights to save Lizzy's life. He lacks an acceptance of her death even as she has already come to one. His endless pursuit of continuing life and his inability to finish the story only comes to an end hundreds of years later in the depths of space.

The most epic stories we've ever been told in our lives are those of (literally) insane love, of intense stubbornness that can only be sated by tremendous, far-reaching acts. The battle of Troy was launched over one woman. Romeo and Juliet made the ultimate sacrifice, their lives, for their love. And Tommy from "The Fountain" took a spaceship bubble into the depths of space in a dramatic attempt at thwarting death.

Tom 2's appearance in the old Spanish conquistador story at the end of the movie indicates that he is now writing the story, and his ending concludes with the conquistador not living forever, but dying and contributing to the circle of life, which coincides with Tom 2's fate as well, whose involvement with the exploding star redistributes his biological material throughout the galaxy. In the end, he finishes the story (we hear an imagined Tom whispering to Lizzy, "I finished it")...and we SAW how he finished it too.

Aronofsky has made clear his intentions that the movie was meant to be a science fiction epic. If Tom 2 was merely imagined, that would subvert the entire reality of the movie. Furthermore, interviews with Aronofsky and Weisz (who are married), in which they expound on the cyclical nature of life and death, reveal this interpretation to be accurate.

All told, although I'm sure Withers is a great guy and apparently a very good writer, he's dead wrong on this interpretation and it's unfortunate that Ebert would defer to this single perspective as the correct one. My emotional attachment and appreciation for the film compelled me to briefly try and explain why I feel this way.

Weekend Web Finds: Random Stuff

2007-09-14T23:07:00.000-07:00

Hey Readers,

Sorry about the slowness in updates recently. I won't give too many excuses, since that would be boring; the short version is that work is getting much busier. I'll keep trying to plug away at the entries, if you guys will keep reading. In the meantime, some videos to pass the time away:

Guy with Death Wish Lives:

RSS Readers: Click here for video

People That Can Change Clothes Faster Than You:

RSS Readers: Click here for video

The Fargo Yeah Edit:

RSS Readers: Click here for video

For some reason, this warms my heart:

RSS Readers: Click here

Fundamentalist Mormonism = Worse than Fundamentalist Christianity?

2007-09-11T17:30:00.001-07:00

(From Flickr user paulsid, via CC)

Sorry for the lack of updates recently folks. Work has been destroying me, but I had a window tonight to write some, so here I am.

Several stories have surfaced in the news recently that paint a disturbing portrait of fundamentalist Mormonism. In the New York Times, there was a heartbreaking story of boys cast out of Warren Jeffs' polygamist camp:

When his parents discovered his secret stash of DVDs, including the “Die Hard” series and comedies, they burned them and gave him an ultimatum. Stop watching movies, they said, or leave the family and church for good. With television and the Internet also banned as wicked, along with short-sleeve shirts — a sign of immodesty — and staring at girls, let alone dating them, Woodrow made the wrenching decision to go. And so 10 months ago, with only a seventh-grade education and a suitcase of clothes, he was thrown into an unfamiliar world he had been taught to fear.

Then, on CNN today, this story from the flipside, of a girl who fled because she feared being promised to a stranger:

Sara Hammon saw some of her sisters pulled out of school to be married to men they didn't know. She dreaded a similar fate. And so, she ran away from home before she was old enough to drive legally. She left behind 19 mothers, 74 siblings, and a father she says could never remember her name, even though he repeatedly molested her. And, she left behind a culture she says was oppressive for young women.

Fundamentalism presents a great challenge to modernity. It claims to know the truth in a world of relativism. It insists on separating itself from the rest of society. And ultimately, it is viewed with disdain by mass-culture as oppressive and backwards. What's interesting is that this is true of Fundamentalist Christianity as well as Fundamentalist Mormonism.

I think it's too easy for Christians to read these stories and look down on Mormons. It's easy for Christians to think to ourselves, "Well, they obviously have no idea what the hell they're talking about." But in reality, Fundamentalist Christianity also takes the Christian message and basically destroys it, stripping away grace and putting in its place wrath. That's not the message of Jesus Christ.

Jesus said we should be in and not of the world. Too many people forget the first part.

Weekend Web Finds: Internet People

2007-09-07T22:27:00.000-07:00

I'm no stranger to the phenomenon of viral videos, but even I was truly impressed with this piece of work. Enjoy:

Internet People - Watch more free videos

The Humanity of Larry Craig

2007-09-05T19:56:00.001-07:00

By now, almost all of you have probably read about Larry Craig's unfortunate misdeeds:

This incident was discussed by several, very intelligent panelists on "Meet the Press":

I was really struck by what James Carville had to say about the subject (4 minutes into the video), which is that Craig was completely hung out to dry...by everyone! By his friends, by his enemies...everyone.

To solicit sex with a stranger in a public restroom is a disgusting thing. To solicit gay sex in a public restroom is an act that is outright revolting to many right-wing conservatives and Christians. This explains, but does not condone, the words that have been spoken about Larry Craig since these accusations first came to light.

Larry Craig is, ultimately, a human. He has a family. He has served Idaho for the last 24-years of his life, but this is the single thing he will be remembered for. They won't remember how he fought for immigrants rights. They won't remember how he exposed Bill Clinton's arms shipments to Bosnia. They'll remember his wide stance, and how he tried to have gay sex in an airport bathroom with an undercover police officer.

His political career is basically over, despite his attempts at trying to resuscitate it. His wife and children have been disgraced. And at the end of the day, Larry Craig is just a human being like you and me. He's probably a little bit confused about himself (which is why he overcompensated his public image by being so politically anti-gay), but he feels shame, he feels guilt, he feels sorrow, he's a person, just like you and me.

Try to treat him like one.

1up

2007-09-03T16:19:00.000-07:00

1UP Yours PAX 08 Live 1/2

The Top 10 John Woo Shootouts

2007-08-29T22:52:00.000-07:00

[Please Digg this post by clicking here!]

In a week, filmmaker John Woo's first ever videogame, "Stranglehold," will be released...and I couldn't be more excited:

Although the trailer makes the game look schlocky, the game gives everyone an opportunity to do what John Woo fans have always dreamed of: To play the role of hard-Boiled cop, Tequila.

I grew up watching John Woo's films and I'm one of his biggest fans. Sure, he uses the same old tricks over and over and over and over again (Doves, guns pointing across from each other, jumping/flipping while shooting guns with both hands, excessive slow motion). But I can still eat up a good John Woo film like it's nobody's business. Almost every one of them is a well-choreographed ballet of violence, a visual representation of the intense and eternal struggle between good and evil.

In celebration of the game's release, here are the John Woo's Top 10 most intense shootouts, in no particular order:

The Killer - Opening shootout - Let's start with something light; the opening scene for "The Killer." It's just a plain ol' execution of a target (plus all the guys in the room). Still, it's done with amazing style. Observe:

Hard Boiled - Teahouse shootout - A perfect opening for Woo's action extravaganza, this scene has a lot of memorable moments (the part when Tequila smashes open the birdcage is unforgettable). Coupled with the messy editing and the final, cold-hearted murder, this scene deftly paints a picture of Tequila as an uncontrollable, unstable cop you don't want to mess with.

The Killer - Apartment shootout - Chow Yun Fat has it tough in this movie. Right when he is starting to come to grips with his friend's betrayal, that's when a cadre of henchmen come in to miss his s**t up. Just remember when you watch Chow whip that gun out of his sleeve: Before "Desperado," there was "The Killer."

The Killer - Church shootout - John Woo's darkest film contains one of the most hyper-stylized action sequences ever shot in a church. This scene is vicious, insanely long, and basically a work of art, an excellent culmination for the brooding film that's just come before it.

(Fast forward past first 2 minutes to get to the action)

A Better Tomorrow 2 - Final Shootout - This film was mostly crap, save for this one scene at the end where Chow Yun Fat and two dudes absolutely mess up the bad guys. My favorite sequence is the mutual gun-slide at the end (which by the way, makes absolutely no sense), a new addition to the Woo canon at this point:

Face/Off- Hangar shootout - Woo's best American film also has many of the elements of his Asian films. Namely, conflict between two charismatic main characters and a hell of a lot of bullets. However, the Hollywood budget lets Woo play with planes and humvees too. For that, we can all be grateful.

Hard Boiled - Warehouse shootout - The violence in Woo's movies is so over-the-top, it borders on comical. This is the warehouse shootout, but it's more appropriately called the warehouse massacre. First all the bad guys come in and massacre the rival gangsters. Then Tequila comes in BY HIMSELF and single-handedly massacres the entire warehouse full of guys. The ending is classic.
Part 1:

(ignore the awful spanish dub)
Part 2:

(ignore the awful spanish dub)

Face/Off - Somewhere Over The Rainbow shootout - Violence in Woo's film never really feels like violence (not like it does in, say, the Bourne films). You really feel as though every single movement, every gunshot, every bullet wound has been planned. No scene captures this feel better than this wonderful pairing of "Somewhere over the rainbow" with some shootout carnage in "Face/Off":

The Killer - House shootout - Chow Yun Fat and his buddy take out fifty guys as they storm the house. There's really nothing else more to say:

Hard Boiled - Hospital shootout - It wasn't enough for John Woo to open the movie with a shootout, then shove in a couple more shootouts in the middle. He had to end "Hard Boiled" with one of the longest, uninterrupted streams of violence ever filmed. The hospital shootout is an absolute classic and cannot be missed by any serious action fan, or certainly, any fan of John Woo. Here are some excerpts:

(ignore the awful English dub)

***

If you liked this article, then you'll probably like these:

The Top 5 Bourne-Improvised Weapons

Why Do Great Movies Get Terrible DVD Cover Art

The Difference Between the UK Office and the US Office Explained in Two Videos

From Evangelical to Orthodox?

2007-08-27T16:11:00.000-07:00

(From Flickr user Bjarne via CC)

Jason Zengerle from the New Republic has written up a very interesting piece about the Orthodox Church, and how Evangelicals (including, most notably, Pastor Wilbur Ellsworth) have converted in recent days. It seems like the main reason why people are leaving Evangelical churches is because of intellectual bankruptcy and a lack of respect for history and for the sacred. I found the following quote by Ellsworth very profound:

"Evangelical theology is rooted in only the last twenty-five percent of the history of the church, the post-Reformation period. Orthodoxy goes back to the church father; it goes back to the roots and the first seventy-five percent of church history. There is a very real sense of continuity.

Worship has now basically been reduced to entertainment. That carries people for two years, and then they start looking for something with more depth. Those are the people who we pick up: serious Christians who are hungry for more."

It's a tough balance to strike, between applicability in the modern world and a reverence for God that translates into our worship services. But it's a balance that I think is worth striking.
It's a balance that hopefully keeps Christianity relevant but deep, accessible but profound, modern but hallowed.

Thoughts? Have your worship service become entertainments? Or do they remain a reliable way to commune with God and fellow Christians?

God and Hitler: The Problems of Christian Attribution

2007-08-23T05:23:00.000-07:00

I heard a sermon last Sunday that troubled me greatly. The sermon was on the age old question: "If God is good, why is there so much evil in the world?" For the most part, the sermon went okay. The pastor started off with the assumptions that Harold Kushner used in his classic book, "When Bad Things Happen to Good People":

1) God is good
2) God is all-powerful
3) Evil exists

The idea behind this list is that all three of these assumptions cannot be true. And since we know that evil exists, God must either not be all good or all-powerful. The pastor's answer to this was to list a 4th assumption:

4) Therefore, God sent His son.

You can probably guess where it went after that.

It was a typical sermon about the subject with nothing really earth-shattering or particularly revelatory. But about 2/3rds of way through, the pastor said something that ground my mental gears to a halt and made me almost walk out. He said that some people ask the question, "Why didn't God stop Hitler?" The pastor's answer? "People don't realize that God DID stop Hitler. Hitler died a horrible death!"

Whoa, stop right there. That's a huge claim to make. In that instance, the pastor's question and answer encapsulates one of the greatest and most frustrating problems of modern Evangelical Christianity: The problem of Christian attribution.

There are two basic problems with this whole line of thinking that I think non-Christians simply find literally incredible: 1) The fact that Christians attribute only the good things to God and all the bad things to human evil, and 2) The fact that we must try to extract meaning out of every event.

With regards to the first point, I'm getting to the point where I'd rather just believe that we can't know what God does. Did God make me lose my keys today? Did he give me that promotion? Did he cause my grandmother to die of cancer? Typically, Christians attribute the good things to God and don't attribute the bad things to Him. However, they certainly believe that God allowed the bad things to happen; so how is that different than being responsible for them? Rather than spend copious amounts of my time contemplating what God is responsible for or not, I'd rather enjoy the life I have and feel blessed. Because ultimately, how can we really know?

Relatedly, regarding the second point, sometimes, stuff just happens. Tectonic plates shift on this planet. Rain falls. And people die. And even though Romans 8:28 says God will work all things for good, that doesn't mean WE have to try to work them for good. The insistence that we can derive meaning or pull something, anything out of tragedy can be blatantly offensive. Sometimes, there are no answers; only questions. To suggest otherwise is an act of sheer arrogance.

As for Hitler, what exactly was God doing before Hitler died? Biding his time while Hitler killed over 5 million people? And furthermore, isn't it easier and perhaps more respectful to just conclude that the death of those millions was evil and senseless, and not try to derive a deeper meaning from that fact (other than, of course, not allowing such a thing to happen again)?

Sermons like the one I heard make atheism seem appetizing.

Sex, Drugs, and Rock and Roll

2007-08-21T07:25:00.000-07:00

Billboard has a review of Ex-Korn guitarist Brian Welch's book, "Save Me From Myself." I remember first laughing when I heard that a member of Korn had accepted Jesus Christ as his personal savior, because I had heard their music and recognized the sense of darkness that came from it. But I guess in the end, it's the people whose lives have been most destroyed by sex, drugs and rock and roll that might feel the need for God the most.

From the review:

One refreshing piece of Welch's tale is that he doesn't claim life became perfect when he was saved. He has still drifted, trying to determine his path as he sought spiritual mentors, donated to charity, sued his band over money before making peace with them, battled another crippling depression and had a crisis of faith. He will also perk ears with his belief that "All of the man-made religion crap in this world has to die . . . All that prideful, controlling religious crap is what drives young people away from churches." That message might convince the rebel crowd that he's not a holy roller out to shove doctrines down their throat.

I think the Korn story is a powerful one because, like many rock band redemption stories, it brings into stark relief the potential relevance that a life of faith can still have in today's culture. It's a great encouragement to have high-profile stories of transformative faith, because it's a sign that maybe, maybe God can still changes lives in our secularized, sex-saturated culture.

Welcome, "The Age" Readers!

2007-08-18T20:51:00.000-07:00

My Bourne Ultimatum Weapons post was recently chosen to be published in Australia's broadsheet newspaper, "The Age." The reference to my blog can be found here.

Greetings to all "The Age," readers! If you're interested in some of my other posts, please feel free to browse the following:

The Top 5 Viral Videos That Changed Someone's Life For the Worse

The Romeo and Juliet Effect: Why Christians Keep Having Sex Before Marriage

Why Do Great Movies Get Terrible DVD Cover Art?

Why Asians Are Better At Math

If you'd like to read more, you can subscribe to my blog using this link with your feedreader. My udpate schedule is here.

**

Weekend Web Finds: Sabra Johnson - Winner of "So You Think You Can Dance"

2007-08-17T07:07:00.000-07:00

I've never seen "So You Think You Can Dance" in my life, ever, but in honor of the fact that Sabra Johnson recently won the competition, here are a couple of videos of her doing her thing:

RSS Readers: Click here for video

RSS Readers: Click here for video

RSS Readers: Click here for video

Weekend Web Finds: Amazing Asian Acrobats

2007-08-17T05:55:00.000-07:00

A neat trick, but how did they figure out they could do this? And how did they decide that the girl on the bottom had the strongest left arm?

RSS Readers: Click here for video.

Peep Show: "Seinfeld" Meets "The Office" Meets "Being John Malkovich"

2007-08-15T09:16:00.000-07:00

On the recommendation of some friends from San Francisco, I added this BBC Comedy to my Netflix queue. My life has never been the same. I honestly think this show is as brilliant as "Seinfeld" or "The Office," and I now feel obligated to tell everyone about it.

The premise is simple. Mark works at a credit agency and his friend, Jeremy ("Jez") leeches off his resources. Together, they embark on the exciting adventures of near-middle-aged single men (i.e. constantly trying to have sex with the women around them) but are continuously frustrated by their own insecurities and, inevitably, doomed to stay unhappy. The show's unique conceit is that every single episode is shot in first-person perspective of the characters' while the audience hears that character's inner monologue. At its best, it offers a troubling, insightful window into the darkness of the male mind.

Like "Seinfeld," one of the show's overall messages that of modern sexual alienation. But the situations and thoughts that the character's get themselves in are so relatable that the ensuing disasters are nothing short of hilarious.

This scene should give you a good idea. Enjoy:

RSS Readers: Click here to view the video

The first season is available from Amazon here.

High Point Church Finds Out War Vet Is Gay, Cancels Memorial, Gets Flayed By the Media

2007-08-13T06:03:00.000-07:00

I'm not one to defend churches very often, but today a line has to be drawn. On the front page of Reddit Saturday morning was this story about High Point Church:

A megachurch canceled a memorial service for a Navy veteran 24 hours before it was to start because the deceased was gay. Officials at the nondenominational High Point Church knew that Cecil Howard Sinclair was gay when they offered to host his service, said his sister, Kathleen Wright. But after his obituary listed his life partner as one of his survivors, she said, it was called off.

So at first I'm reading this, and I'm thinking "Terrible! Yet another example of Christian intolerance laid out for all the world to see. How awful an example this High Point Church has set for everyone."

But look closer.

The church’s pastor, the Rev. Gary Simons, said no one knew Sinclair, who was not a church member, was gay until the day before the Thursday service, when staff members putting together his video tribute saw pictures of men “engaging in clear affection, kissing and embracing.”

Simons said the decision had nothing to do with the obituary. He said the church offered to pay for another site for the service, made the video and provided food for more than 100 relatives and friends.

In other words , the church went above and beyond to call of duty (no pun intended) to provide services for the funeral of this person who was not a church member. All they asked for was that the funeral not take place on the church. For their kindness and their beliefs, they get a flaying from the media.

His sister, Kathleen Wright, had the following inflammatory remarks to say about the situation:

“It’s a slap in the face. It’s like, ’Oh, we’re sorry he died, but he’s gay so we can’t help you,”’ she said Friday

Liberals are often confused at why conservative Christians think believe themselves to be victimized when the Republicans have ruled for so long. One answer? Ridiculous articles like this. All this church wanted to do was to advocate its beliefs in the privacy of its own congregation. It treated the deceased veteran with care and respect, but declined to host the funeral. Its only crime was defending and sticking by its own ethics. The Associated Press and Kathleen Wright should be ashamed of themselves.

Also, I say this completely unironically: You never hear about the Christian churches that DO graciously host funerals for gay people. Only the ones that cancel them. The media has all sorts of biases but portraying the church in a positive light is not one of them.

***
Related articles:

The Romeo and Juliet Effect

Premarital Sex: Where Christians Get It Wrong

More Thoughts on Abortion

***

Weekend Web Finds: Bibleman: The Videogame

2007-08-12T11:46:00.000-07:00

If you thought Left Behind was amazing, you'll love Bibleman:

It's a sad day for Christians everywhere. I think this trailer makes baby Jesus cry.

[Via Kotaku]

Weekend Web Finds: Bratz Is a War Crime

2007-08-10T17:10:00.000-07:00

Here's the trailer for the film Bratz, which I think comes out today. Relive every single mind-scarring stereotype from high school all over again:

RSS readers: Click here for the video.

Why am I posting this here? Because this movie's sheer awfulness warrants, at the very least, a reaction of disgust to demonstrate one's good taste, nay, one's humanity. WARNING: I am not responsible for any brain damage or self-induced injuries that result from viewing this clip.

Weekend Web Finds: Adidas Ad - "Pink"

2007-08-10T14:08:00.000-07:00

Today we have a very troubling and creepy ad, apparently for Adidas:

RSS Readers: Click here for video.

On the "F'ed Up" scale, I'd say this ranks right up there with Sony's, "This is Living," ads:

RSS Readers: Click here for video.

Amazing imagery and great direction...but do they make you want to buy shoes/PS3s? I haven't decided yet but I'm leaning towards no.

On the other hand, this DOES make me want to buy a Honda:

RSS Readers: Click here for video.

God DOESN'T Hate Fags, Fred Phelps. He Really Doesn't

2007-08-09T18:15:00.000-07:00

I can't believe I've written this many blog posts without giving a shoutout to Fred Phelps. According to the Minnesota Monitor:

The Westboro Baptist Church of Topeka, Kan., plans to stage protests at funerals of victims of the 35W bridge collapse to state that God made the bridge fall because he hates America, and especially Minnesota, because of its tolerance of homosexuality.

Here's the thing: Fred Phelps isn't completely useless as a human being. In fact, I believe he contributes to public discourse on religion in America by challenging the very notion of Christianity to its very core. Here is a man who goes after people in their most vulnerable, their most hurt, their most grief-stricken states and pickets them with grotesquely offensive signs and messages, accusing them of things that they're not even necessarily responsible for (i.e. tolerating homosexuality). It's absolutely disgusting. And he does it all in the name of God.

One is left with many, many questions. My own personal questions? How can someone take God's message so wrong. And if there is a God, why does He allow this to happen?

The thing that I'm left grasping for is...if there is a God, He doesn't hate homosexuals. I don't think so anyway. All I can think of is Psalm 119. Reflect on these words from the Bible that Phelps so hatefully misuses:

For you created my inmost being;
you knit me together in my mother's womb.
I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made;
your works are wonderful,
I know that full well.
My frame was not hidden from you
when I was made in the secret place.
When I was woven together in the depths of the earth,
your eyes saw my unformed body.
All the days ordained for me
were written in your book
before one of them came to be.
How precious to me are your thoughts, O God!
How vast is the sum of them!
Were I to count them,
they would outnumber the grains of sand.
When I awake,
I am still with you.
If only you would slay the wicked, O God!
Away from me, you bloodthirsty men!
They speak of you with evil intent;
your adversaries misuse your name.
Do I not hate those who hate you, O LORD,
and abhor those who rise up against you?
I have nothing but hatred for them;
I count them my enemies.
Search me, O God, and know my heart;
test me and know my anxious thoughts.
See if there is any offensive way in me,
and lead me in the way everlasting.

The truth of the matter is, God made each and every one of us. And although there are so many flaws and so much evil that we're capable of, every one of us is still, in some deep, imperceptible, yet profound way, beautiful.

DVD Cover Ruination: Zodiac DVD Cover Smothered With Floating Heads

2007-08-08T21:31:00.000-07:00

[This post is part of a weekly series. Click here to see the rest of the series. Click here to see my original rant against DVD cover art.]

One of my favorite directors of all time is David Fincher and one of my favorite films of the past year was "Zodiac." Not content with being just an ordinary serial killer thriller, "Zodiac" reached for much higher goals and ended up being a masterpiece about obsession and the need to know. I just wish that David Fincher would make some more movies; though I love each and every one of his films (even "Panic Room" has its pleasures, although I wasn't as much a fan of "Alien 3,") he is not what you would call prolific.

Check out "Zodiac's" great poster art:
It's mysterious - a simple, a foggy shot of the Golden Gate with a delicious punny tagline: "There's more than one way to lose your life to a killer."

Now comes the floating head DVD cover art:

Although they've retained a different angle of the original shot, it has now been plastered with the zombie-like heads of the stars, a one-liner review from Peter Travers, and a headline informing us that it's by "the Director of Seven and Panic Room," which replaces the original tagline.

It's a thinking person's film. Why not retain the more elegant cover art rather than shoot, yet again, for the lowest common denominator?

P.S. If you're thinking about getting the DVD, don't yet. There's a huge special edition coming out next year.

Half a Million

2007-08-07T15:00:00.000-07:00

I typically don't indulge in self-promotion or self-recognition, but I'm going to just this once because this issue has been a longtime goal for me.

This past weekend, "More Than Fine" surpassed an important milestone (in my mind): This blog received its 500,000th visitor.

I first started this blog about 8 months ago on a whim and a prayer. It started with a post about The Wire, which, in general, was poorly received because many people violently disagreed with me. But that post basically set the tone for what I was shooting for: A unique point of view that probably disagrees with you, but that's unabashedly presented anyway. Since then, this blog has been featured in a wide variety of exotic locales, such as Digg, Neatorama, and even Defamer(!) recently.

Blogs like Gizmodo get several times 500,000 users every single day. I don't anticipate I'll ever reach anything close to that number but it's just one of the most gratifying things in the world to be able to write and to have people read and reflect on what you have to say. What else is blogging for?

Thanks so much to all of you, my readers, for making this possible. I'll keep doing this as long as people keep reading; it is you guys who make this blog possible.

Weekend Web Finds: This Guy Really Doesn't Like Door-To-Door Mormons

2007-08-05T21:59:00.001-07:00

I can't tell whether to make this guy my enemy or my hero...that's how awesome he is:

Door To Door Atheists Bother Mormons - Watch more free videos

Weekend Web Finds: The Bourne Ultimatum, Starring Guillermo

2007-08-05T10:15:00.000-07:00

It's good to know that with all his success, Matt Damon still can take time out of his schedule to shoot something like this and make fun of himself a little bit:

RSS Readers: click here for the video

The Top 5 Jason-Bourne-Improvised Weapons

2007-08-03T14:35:00.000-07:00

I have waited a year and a half for this day - The day The Bourne Ultimatum comes out. A fitting conclusion for the film series that kicked the spy genre in the balls and kept on kicking until it keeled over and gave painful birth to the wonderful "Casino Royale."

One of the best things about the Bourne films is the way that Bourne uses whatever random items that are at his disposal to serve his own ends. But unlike Jackie Chan, who does the same thing in a comical fashion, Bourne's ingenuity usually doesn't provoke laughter; it provokes a fear that would shake you to your core if you were a rival henchman/assassin. Here are the top 5 Jason-Bourne-improvised weapons:

1) Hardcover Book - (Bourne Ultimatum)

(photo by Rupert Jetson, via CC)

Just because you can use a book to educate yourself doesn't mean you can't use it to brutally injure someone. For obvious reasons, I don't have a video or screen grab of this one yet, but you can catch a glimpse of this bit in the trailer for the film:

Update: footage of fight scene found! Here you go:

The Bourne Ultimatum - Bourne And Desh Fight

2) Pen - (Bourne Identity)

(photo by realblades, via CC)

Picture this scene: You've lost your memory and you're visiting your posh apartment with a quasi-cute girl. All of a sudden, a trained assassin rappels through the window with an automatic weapon and starts shooting the shit out of everything. What do you do?

If you're like me, you'd cower in a corner and wet yourself, waiting for your inevitable demise. But if you're Jason Bourne, you grab a bic and cram it into the guy's fist. Because nothing says "deadly weapon" like a $.07 bic pen:

(To get to the fight scene, fast forward past the first 7 minutes of this video)

3) Magazine - (Bourne Supremacy)

(photo by ktpupp, via CC)

I never thought I would see a magazine used as a weapon in a fight scene, but Bourne doesn't just use it to beat the guy senseless: He also uses the magazine to blow up the guy's house afterwards. I pray that the real CIA trains our assassins to be this creative.

4) Electrical Cord - (Bourne Supremacy)

(photo by pollas, via CC)

(Same scene/video as above) After a brutal, messy, magazined fight, Bourne barely pulls off the win by grabbing a nearby electrical cord and depriving his enemy of life-giving oxygen. Good thing IKEA makes those lamp cords durable.

5) Vodka - (Bourne Supremacy)

(photo by notfilc, via CC)

Few people remember that before partaking in one of the most memorable car chase scenes in the last decade, Jason Bourne utilized a bottle of vodka to do two things: 1) Disinfect a gunshot wound, and 2) temporarily blind a Russian policeman, right before taking out the guy's partner with some martial arts. Badass.

Update: The comments on this post have been great and greatly appreciated. In light of the interest this post has generated, I thought I'd throw up the following:

Honorable mentions - items that Bourne used creatively, but not as actual weapons

Nondescript aerosol can - (Bourne Ultimatum)

(Photo by chuckumentary, via CC)

So a whole fleet of policemen are after you as you're walking through a crowded marketplace. If you're Bourne, it ain't no problem. Just grab a can off of a table and use that "Contents under pressure" label to your advantage.

Guy's Carcass - (Bourne Identity)

(Photo by Free Sample, via CC)

When you're taking out secret agents in a manner that forces you to fall several stories , there's nothing quite like a guy's chest cavity to shield you from the impact. Thanks Anonymous commenter!

Oscillating Fan and Flashlight - (Bourne Ultimatum)

(Photo by feaverish, via CC)

(Photo by something in my eye, via CC)

If you've seen Ultimatum, you know how awesome this scene is. If you haven't, then I don't want to spoil the surprise.

Towel and candlestick - (Bourne Ultimatum)

(Photo by YivaS via CC)

(photo by Kreg, via CC)

From the now-famous fight scene with "asset" Desh, Bourne uses these items to temporarily help him against his Blackbriar super agent nemesis. But honestly, the book was really the most painful of them all; the packed crowd that I saw the film with collectively cringed every time he shoved that thing into Desh's neck. Brutal.

[Update: This post has been mentioned on several sites, including Gorillamask, Digg, Neatorama, and Defamer - Thanks to everyone for visiting! Here are a couple of more clips to get you in the mood for "The Bourne Ultimatum," or if you've already seen it, to remind you how awesome this whole series is:

Bourne escapes:

Bourne takes down consulate rep and hacks his phone:

Bourne Identity Car Chase:

**

Related Articles:

The Bourne Ultimatum, starring Guillermo

The Difference Between The UK Office and the US Office Explained In Two Videos

How To Fix 24

Why Do Great Movies Get Terrible DVD Cover Art

**
[Note: All photos are from Flickr, via Creative Commons, and link back to their original photo pages]

The Minneapolis Bridge Collapse and the Pornography of Destruction

2007-08-02T11:48:00.001-07:00

(Photo by benalkaline3, via CC)

[No photos or videos of yesterday's bridge disaster will be included in today's post]

According to Merriam-Webster's dictionary, the word "pornography" has several definitions. One of the less-often referred to ones:

"the depiction of acts in a sensational manner so as to arouse a quick intense emotional reaction"

Around 6 p.m., local time, yesterday, the highway bridge that ran over the Mississippi River in Minneapolis collapsed. Nobody could have predicted this, but what was far more predictable was the media feeding frenzy that this event has spawned:

(screenshots altered to remove photos)

The New York Times, CNN.com, and many others offer up a full buffet of heart-wrenching photography, and allow you to stream devastating videos of the incident from the comfort of your own home. In today's world, the dissemination of information, images, and video is as immediate as it is informative. But it is also pornographic.

The human psyche is excited by these images of destruction. We saw this when the television shows repeatedly played footage of the two towers collapsing on September 11th. Again and again, they showed that footage and we looked on, as we would towards brutal train wreck or car accident. Did we realize we were watching people die? Did we even think about it? (The film "Why We Fight" has one father's heart-breaking testimony of how he insisted they stop showing footage of those towers collapsing - his son died in one of them).

The heartrate quickens, the eye twitches, and the arms get goosebumps. Millions are made at the box office every week by films that promise to vicariously give us the thrill of death, of destruction, of insane action. But I would argue, today, that for real life we should try and have a little respect.

People died horrible deaths yesterday. They were, mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, sons, daughters. They didn't know they would die. The bridge collapse was swift and brutal. They had dreams, they had hopes, they had careers. They were just trying to get home during rush hour traffic when their lives were torn from them brutally. They were, in short, just like you and me.

So today, I guess what I'd ask my readers is: try not to look at the images. Look away. Sate your morbid curiosity and get your thrills from something other than the death of others. I'm not saying it's easy for me...as a photographer, I'm fascinated by such images of destruction and a part of me almost wishes that I was there to visually document the event. There is something enthralling about such a massive architectural undertaking failing so spectacularly, so suddenly, and with such disastrous results.

But just for today, I'm going to try not to look.

DVD Cover Ruination: Last Mimzy DVD Cover Destroyed

2007-08-02T09:38:00.000-07:00

[This post is part of a weekly series. Click here to see the rest of the series. Click here to see my original rant against DVD cover art.]

Floating head posters are the worst, but at least I understand why they're sometimes necessary: Sometimes you need to rely on your stars to sell the movie more than you can rely on conceptual or abstract artwork.

That being said, let's take a look at today's selection, "The Last Mimzy." First, the movie poster:

Nothing too spectacular, but at the very least, mildly intriguing and mysterious. Now witness the vomit-inducing DVD cover:

Instead of retaining the original DVD artwork, they have replaced it with this unsightly shot of two of the stars, with a color scheme that looks like a faded, ugly, and sad dime-store children's picture book. Why plaster the stars onto the cover if they are child actors that are mostly unknown to the DVD-renting public?! It's not like I'm going to see Chris O'Neil on the cover and think "That's a Must-See!" Sheesh...

Religious Doctors Not More Likely To Treat The Poor Than Non-Religious Doctors

2007-08-01T14:12:00.001-07:00

(photo by farshad5475, via CC)

The book of Matthew (chapter 25) says the following:

"When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.

"Then the King will say to those on his right, 'Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.'

"Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'

"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'

"Then he will say to those on his left, 'Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.'

"They also will answer, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?'

"He will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.'

"Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life."

Jesus'/God's compassion for the poor is evident in this passage, as in many others. What, then, to make of the report in today's news about how religious doctors aren't any more likely to treat poor people than any other doctors?

U.S. physicians who identify themselves as religious are no more likely to care for poor, underserved patients than those who have no religious affiliation, researchers have found.

Being a doctor in America is not an easy thing. Years of pre-med classes followed by years of medical school, followed by sleepless residency and hundreds of thousands of dollars in crushing debt. It's no wonder why doctors, on the whole, choose a path that's more financially rewarding. It's not only understandable, it's something that should be condoned given the tough circumstances our society puts doctors in. (By the way, if you haven't yet, make sure you watch "Sicko" for a unique view on the subject)

Yet at the same time, I feel that with great power comes great responsibility, and deep down inside I wish that those in our society that are given the gift, the privilege, the responsibility of administering medicine would make choices that would be more selfless, especially if they ascribe to a faith that advocates complete and utter sacrifice for the glory of something greater. As missionary and martyr James Elliot once said, "He is no fool who gives up what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose."

God Answers Prayer of Paralyzed Little Boy

2007-07-31T13:47:00.001-07:00

Found this old gem from Reddit (I think) today. It was written 9 years ago, yet somehow, still seems just as biting today:

God Answers Prayers Of Paralyzed Little Boy

SAN FRANCISCO-Timmy Yu's dream came true Monday, when the Lord responded to his plea with a resounding no.

The story is about how God answered the prayers of a paralyzed boy, who asked to be healed and walk again. His answer? "No."

The story is characteristically heartbreaking and over the top:

"I knew that if I just prayed hard enough, God would hear me," said the joyful Timmy, surrounded by stuffed animals sent by well-wishing Christians from around the globe, as he sat in the wheelchair to which he will be confined for the rest of his life. "And now my prayer has been answered. I haven't been this happy since before the accident, when I could walk and play with the other children like a normal boy."

I'm not exactly sure what the article is satirizing. Christians unshakable belief in the power of prayer? Belief in the fact that God will answer prayer? Or maybe just the belief that God has compassion on children in pain?

Of course, the veracity of these beliefs has and always will be questioned. But the fact of the matter is that God doesn't heal a lot of helpless kids who ask for it. Is this evidence that there is no God? I don't think so. But neither do I think that the fact that some kids are randomly "healed" indicates that God does exist. I disagree with those that suggest that prayer can heal all things, all diseases...or at least, that we can know when it has. There is so much good in the world and so much bad; I give God credit for all or none of it, but not just the good.

The Onion is one of those newspapers that could make you laugh...if you weren't crying.

Wrist Pain

2007-07-31T06:33:00.000-07:00

My wrist - photo by me.

Hey all,

Just wanted to let you know why no updates: I've been experiencing a lot of wrist pain in my left wrist lately and I'm getting worried it might be serious. I'm trying to take a couple of days off from typing but hopefully things will be back to normal soon. If not, I'll have to make an appointment with my doctor or something.

Expect DVD Cover Ruination and Weekend Web Finds by the end of the week. More before then, if I feel up for it. My normal schedule should resume next week, if there's no snags.

As always, thanks for reading.

-Dave

Weekend Web Finds: Babies eating lemons

2007-07-27T05:07:00.000-07:00

The Nature vs. Nurture argument is one that will continue forever, but it's undeniable that there are certain things we humans all possess from birth that are not taught to us, but rather are ingrained in our anatomy and our DNA. Witness exhibit 1: Babies eating lemons. Because watching babies making scrunched up faces is far more entertaining than watching grown-ups do the same.

RSS Readers: Click here for the video

CNN = Master of Language

2007-07-26T17:02:00.001-07:00

Saw this screenshot on CNN.com this afternoon:

For some reason, the headling "Tubby? Maybe your fat friends are to blame" just seemed a little bit insensitive to me. Two politically incorrect words in one headline! Good job, CNN. Not the first time either...

At least they're still holding on to those terrifying zombie Netflix ads.

The Difference Between The UK Office and the US Office Explained In Two Videos

2007-07-26T14:58:00.000-07:00

I finished watching the UK version of the Office recently and I would highly recommend it. Both hilarious and profoundly moving.

I'm not going to get into some silly argument about which one is better but certainly it's not a crime to point out the differences in the two. There have been many comparisons made between the US Office and the UK Office. I for one think that both are totally brilliant, with the UK one emphasizing a dark tone of desperation in the modern workplace, while the US one is more silly and laugh-out-loud funny than it is cringe-worthy.

That being said, I thought that there were two scenes that, when compared, show this contrast rather clearly.

Part 1:

RSS Readers: Click here to see this video

Gervais is a great performer, but when he does the dance as Brent, combined with the environment and situation, it reeks of desperation. He's trying to prove that he's a better than his supervisor, Neil, for the purposes of a charity donation and he does so with disastrous results. It's pathetic and just a bit sad, even though you're laughing like crazy.

Part 2:

RSS Readers: Click here to see this video

Meanwhile, Carrell's dance happens on the "Booze Cruise" and instead of trying to prove he's better than someone, he's just trying to get everyone into the mood...again with disastrous results. But unlike Gervais, you can completely tell that Carrell is having a ball while doing it (Gervais is probably having fun too, but the mood is just different). And therein lies the crucial difference: The knowledge of their self-awareness, not perceivable, though probably present, in the British version but there in spades for the American version.

DVD Cover Ruination: Perfume DVD Cover

2007-07-25T07:31:00.001-07:00

[This post is now part of a weekly series. Click here to see the rest of the series]

Thomas Tykwer's "Perfume" was released to great internet excitement and mild acclaim. I, for one, am a huge fan of "Run Lola Run" and I can't wait to catch this flick when it comes out on DVD.

Check out some of the original movie poster art for "Perfume":

Artistic, sexy, seductive, erotic...whatever adjective you want to put here, the poster art was fantastic.

Witness now, its DVD cover:

"Hey guys, I have an idea; for the DVD cover, why don't we take the original, fantastic poster art, butcher it, shrink it, and then paste a bunch of giant apathetic heads at the top?"

That's the ticket. Terrible.

Is It Okay To Ask For Wedding Money From Your Parents?

2007-07-24T19:17:00.000-07:00

(Photo by me! Please give me attribution and link to CC if you reproduce it)

I've aroused a lot of anger and disdain for my entry on the wedding industrial complex; if I had to do it over again, I'd probably phrase it differently but my message would probably remain the same. But today I wanted to point you (my readers) to some more that's been written about the matter.

First of all, let me just say that advice columnist Cary Tennis is a genius. The way he plays with words is beyond compare; he makes reading advice columns a mental exercise, instead of a prurient one. If you ask me, he blows away "Dear Prudence" over at Slate.com.

Tennis recently wrote a column about wedding money that I thought was rather poignant (most of his columns are). In the column, a woman asks for advice on whether she should ask her mother for wedding money to use on a down payment for a house instead. His response, reads, in part:

Do ask your mother for help. Yes, ask her for money. But do not tread on her dreams. Think of it this way. Say she has some gold. She has made the gold into a statue. The statue gleams in the sun. One day she plans to give it to you. It represents her hopes and dreams for you. It represents her ideal. So say you come to her and you say, I'd like a chunk of that statue for a down payment on a house. I'm not really into the statue, per se, but I could use a chunk of it for my own purposes. Or say you're thinking you'd like to just melt down the whole statue, convert it to dollars and invest it.

Click here to read the whole thing.

My Take On That Chickenhawk Video

2007-07-20T23:12:00.000-07:00

Over the weekend, the following video was posted on the Huffington Post, and subsequently exploded:

Young Republicans are notorious for their lavish, excessive parties and are generally not people I'd want my daughter to be hanging around. This video tries to demonstrate this notion.

So what do I think? I'm not one to pull my punches with Republicans or with Christians, but this video is 50% interesting and 50% travesty. The biggest selling point of the video lies in the fact that he asked a bunch of people why they don't go and fight in the war. While some of them beg off with lousy reasons (embarrassingly lousy, and rightfully so), several of them actually appear to have medical issues, and seem like they genuinely want to serve their country in this way. This seems to be lost on the interviewer/blogger, who casts these situations as spurious. Despite the interesting points he could have made, in the end, the interviewer comes off as more of a jerk than anything else.

As for the Christians made to look like idiots, I can't really say anything in their defense...

Weekend Web Finds: Entire Phillipine Prison Re-Enacts Thriller Video

2007-07-20T05:21:00.000-07:00

I caught this video of a prison population re-enacting "Thriller," with tremendous results. I think you'll agree, this film contributes greatly to the pantheon of "dances in prison" videos that you've also seen in such films as...."The Shawshank Redemption"...or "West Side Story." Anyway, just watch:

RSS Readers: Click here for video.

Here's the original, classic Thriller for comparison. Remember when Michael Jackson was "normal"? Here, he is actually seen on a date with a woman, albeit fictional:

RSS Readers: Click here for video

The Bridge - a Portrait of Suicide and Death

2007-07-18T14:37:00.000-07:00

After visiting San Francisco and the beautiful Golden Gate Bridge, I talked with a few of my friends about the film, "The Bridge." I saw it this past weekend.

Given that the Golden Gate Bridge is the single place where the most people in the world come to commit suicide, "The Bridge" isn't what I expected it to be. It isn't a gripping political expose of the problems with Golden Gate Bridge policies (or lack thereof). Instead, filmmaker Eric Steel filmed the bridge for a whole year, where he captured many of the dozens of suicides that took place on camera, and then talked with some of the people that witnessed the plunge, or who were related to the deceased. Each person's story is different and together, they represent a patchwork of the mindset of a suicidal human being.

RSS Readers: To see the trailer, click here.

Some of the stories are haunting, while others are told as nonchalantly as though they were any other anecdote. Every one of the victims approached death differently, as did every one of their families. The film is well-made from a documentary standpoint; despite its low budget, it doesn't look like it was made on a shoestring, and Steel is decidedly a good photographer. Perhaps the film's greatest strength is that in the end, it leaves you to decide completely how to feel about the deaths: compassionate, angry, or detached.

See it if you want to see into the eyes of someone who's about to kill themselves. But beware; it will leave you slightly different than when you started watching.

DVD Cover Ruination: The Premonition DVD Cover

2007-07-17T04:23:00.001-07:00

[This post is now part of a weekly series. Click here to see the rest of the series]

Sandra Bullock's "Premonition" was not Oscar-worthy material. Still, it had one of the better movie posters of the year, a curious clump of trees that formed what looks like Sandra Bullock's face:

Classy, eye-catching, and not-a-little creepy. It really demonstrates how powerful just a simple image can be. Imagine my surprise, then, when they decided to ruin the one good thing the film had going for it. I saw the DVD cover today. It's like the movie poster, only someone has stolen its soul and replaced it with pure evil. It seriously frightened me:
Sandra Bullock's an attractive woman, but this cover is ugliness epitomized. See my rant about DVD covers at this link.

Sexual Abuse Cases in LA Reach Settlement

2007-07-16T04:28:00.000-07:00

According to the New York Times, the massive church sex abuse case in Los Angeles is finally coming to an end:

Lawyers for more than 500 people who say they were abused by Roman Catholic clergy members said last night that they had settled their lawsuits against the Archdiocese of Los Angeles for $660 million. If approved, it will be by far the largest payout made by any single diocese since the clergy sexual abuse scandals first became public in Boston in 2002. It will dwarf the $85 million paid for 552 claims by the Archdiocese of Boston.

Later in the day, Cardinal Mahony apologized to people for the Catholic Church's crimes:

"There really is no way to go back and give them the innocence that was taken from them ... The one thing I wish I could give the victims, I cannot -- and that is a restoration to where they were originally."

Words escape me when I try to express the horror I feel at such a thing. More than 500 people filed lawsuits. That's 500 lives that were unspeakably impacted by the sick minds and crimes of others. Five hundred lives whose minds will be forever changed, who will never live a normal, unfettered life. Five hundred stories of heartbreak, anger, and despair. And that's just the people who filed a lawsuit. And that's just in Los Angeles.

Someone on Digg pointed out something obvious that I didn't really think of: None of that money is coming from the Vatican; instead it's coming from people's donations, their tithes. This is assuredly not what God had in mind when he asked us to give a tenth of what we earn to further His kingdom.

What drives a priest to molest a child? What drives his superiors, presumably men of God, to cover up the crimes? I don't really have a good answer for the second one, but in answer to the first one, to paraphrase a radio DJ I once heard, this seems like a possible expected outcome when you tell people not to have sex and stick them in a small room all the time where other people are forced to tell them their deepest darkest sins and secrets.

In Mark chapter 9, Jesus says the following:

And if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone tied around his neck.

Amen to that. Amen to that...

Weekend Web Finds: Pete the Porno Puppet + Ron Jeremy = Unholy Marriage?

2007-07-15T04:52:00.001-07:00

If there's anything this video tells us, it's that famous porn star Ron Jeremy is the perfect person you want to use in your service announcement when discouraging kids from viewing porn. Right? Right?

RSS Readers: Click here for the video.

If you have never heard of XXXChurch, go check them out here. At some point I have to do an entry on them. It is mandatory.

Weekend Web Finds: WTF?

2007-07-12T19:26:00.000-07:00

Someone please tell me what this ad is selling...because I don't want it.

RSS Readers: Click here for video.

Coming To Terms - Why The Shield Makes All Other Shows Look Bad

2007-07-11T21:24:00.000-07:00

[This is part 3 of a 3-part series. Go here for part 2 on the sopranos and here for part 1 on 24.]

This is a LONG overdue post about Season 6 of the Shield. But hey, I had to show some love to my favorite show on TV (other than maybe the Wire).

Awhile back, I read Heather Havrilesky's fantastic write-up of the finale of "The Shield." She puts it ever-so-eloquently, as usual, when she writes:

If "The Wire" is a symphony and "The Sopranos" is a haunting blues refrain, then "The Shield" is a gangsta rap with a beat so infectious it makes you get up and dance in spite of its filthy lyrics. Surveying Mackey's shiny, bald head and his merciless grimace, we don't know why we love the bastard. All we know is that when he asks, "Are you ready for this?" the answer is unquestionably, "Hell yes!"

I've been watching "The Shield" since its debut season on F/X, when Michael Chiklis revitalized his career with his breakout performance as supercop Vic Mackey. Since then, the show has explored a wide range of issues relating to the police force, from unnecessary brutality to homosexuality; from intra-office romance to planting evidence. And every single week, those crimes...those horrific, terrible, worse-than-your nightmare crimes that Claudette and Dutch would solve, not to mention the gang wars that Vic would mediate. There was the sadomasochistic couple that cut off an innocent girl's arm (while she was alive). The mouth-raping Hispanic gangster that would eventually get a skull-full of iron in prison. And the child-molesting rapist father. The audacity of those crimes allows you to experience vicarious excitement when their perpetrators are brought to justice. And boy, is it ever satisfying.

Here's the thing: I thought Season 5 was amazing. Forrest Whitaker should have taken home an Emmy for his performance; instead he got an Oscar for "Last King of Scotland." Fair trade, I guess.

But Season 6, remarkably, was even better. How they did this, I don't know. But "The Shield" is a show that seems to have mastered the art of storytelling, in its own little way. Plotlines are in the process of being expertly tied up, and Shawn Ryan (the show's creator), seems to have complete control over what's happening (unlike on a show like, say, "Lost" or even "24"). Character development that's been in place for years has finally paid off; the tender kiss between Dutch and Danny serves as a shining example of capitalizing on the groundwork the show has already established going back to season 1(!).

And week to week, always...the crimes continue. Somebody has to stop them. But it's okay. I know a guy:

[WARNING: The video (link here) is VERY Graphic]

Amazing Life-Altering Financial Advice

2007-07-09T14:11:00.000-07:00

After reading about how $50 billion worth of adjustable rate mortgages will be jacked up very soon, I reflected on how we, as America, got into this financial mess. The answer is quite simple: People want to buy things NOW. How much of a mess could have been avoided if we had just followed Chris Parnell's revolutionary financial advice....

Snl_dontbuystuff
Uploaded by shosterman

Weekend Web Finds - Fantastic Commercial

2007-07-08T12:51:00.000-07:00

Hilarious (yet deep?). You decide.

RSS Readers: Click here to go to the youtube video.

Weekend Web Finds: Amazing Samsung Dance

2007-07-08T11:32:00.000-07:00

When humans come together and work towards a common cause, there's no limit to what we can do. Perhaps in time, if enough of us band together with a common vision, we can cure world hunger, poverty, and establish peace through all the nations.

In the meantime, here's an incredible dance that must have taken ages to choreograph. I think the results speak for themselves.

Weekend Web Finds: Independence Day Edition

2007-07-06T16:57:00.001-07:00

Hey readers,

Sorry it's been slow to update lately. Things have been pretty crazy and my life circumstances have changed dramatically over the past week or so. But you probably don't want to hear about that.

For this weekend, I leave you with a 10-minute long, Dare-I-say "Edward R. Murrow-esque" attack on President Bush.

RSS Readers: Click here to go to the video.

And for no reason at all, here's another political video. This one's slightly more disturbing.

Live From Congress: Rep. Ingersoll's Murder of a Hobo

Most Incredible Breakdancing Video Ever

2007-07-03T06:14:00.001-07:00

Sorry guys, I don't usually just post videos, but I could not pass this one up. This is footage from a "handicap dance competition" in which people with walking aids battle it out on the dance floor.

Incredible stuff and oddly inspiring.

Handicap Dance Competition - Watch more free videos

RSS readers, if you can't see the video, click on this link.

The Decline of the Recording Industry

2007-07-02T07:03:00.000-07:00

(Photo by yanec, via CC)

Rolling Stone has a fantastic piece summarizing all the major developments over the last decade or so that have contributed to the Recording Industry's decline. The critical moment the RIAA could have stopped this entire ordeal is identified very clearly in the article:

"The record companies have created this situation themselves," says Simon Wright, CEO of Virgin Entertainment Group, which operates Virgin Megastores. While there are factors outside of the labels' control -- from the rise of the Internet to the popularity of video games and DVDs -- many in the industry see the last seven years as a series of botched opportunities. And among the biggest, they say, was the labels' failure to address online piracy at the beginning by making peace with the first file-sharing service, Napster. "They left billions and billions of dollars on the table by suing Napster -- that was the moment that the labels killed themselves," says Jeff Kwatinetz, CEO of management company the Firm.

Overall, the article is a cautionary tale about survival of the fittest and failure to adapt.

The article is especially interesting in light of Universal's recent tussle with Apple about iTunes pricing. One thing that's proven true time and time again: From suing Napster to suing their own (poorest and innocent and dead) customers, the recording industry has shown that they know how to destroy good things when they see them.

Weekend Web Finds: In Honor of iPhone Day

2007-06-30T05:38:00.000-07:00

"The iPhone will do for phones what the iPod did for pods."

Classic Conan:

Super Deluxe:

College Humor's Take on Visual Voicemail:

College Humor's Take on the forthcoming Nuclear Holocaust:

NOT a parody - Guy Attempts to Steal iPhone, Gets Microphone Instead:

The Most Entertaining Digg Thread Ever.

2007-06-27T21:35:00.000-07:00

[UPDATE: This post has been featured in webpronews! Thanks to writer Jason Lee Miller for bringing more attention to this blog, and to the unfortunate problem of ESL spammers. Also, the original thread on Digg has been removed, presumably because it violated Digg's TOS. All that remains of it is this screenshot above, and the quotes from the thread below. Enjoy.]

This morning, I was feeling curious so I started looking through other blogspot blogs that have been on Digg (using their search function). I noticed that ambatchmasterpublisher.blogspot.com had been submitted quite a few times.

Then I happened upon it. Possibly the most entertaining Digg thread ever.

This is what happens when a blogger gets too overzealous in promoting their blog on Digg. What apparently occurred is that the guy that runs ambatchmasterpublisher (a name so comically long and incomprehensible that I am shocked I myself can actually type the whole thing out) dugg one of his posts, then created dozens of accounts (or told his friends to create dozens of accounts), dugg himself in an attempt at making the front page, then left comments praising himself on the Digg thread.

There are a number of hilarious things about this situation, as well as one important lesson. First, the hilarity:

The various ways in which the guy tries to disguise that he is not the person (or behind the person) making the comments. The wide variety of screennames is very impressive; I don't even think I could think up that many if I tried.
The submitter's broken English leads to comments as diverse and amazing as:

"absolutely on dot ... perfect http://ambatchmasterpublisheryoutubevideo.blogspot.com/"
"Excellent"
"lovely and extra ordinary site ... gr8 work"
" GAF id is ggopi" [?????]
"Hello How are you, Good design Sir"
"This site looks cool and informative,Thanks for my friend to show the way..Cheers!"
"This site made me puzzle at first.But when I came to know the depth meaning, I have become surprised with joy and thought how great it is. I well come the the "del.icio.us" site. All the best."

The fact that the website itself has its own unweildy name plastered all over it...with links to itself. For seemingly no reason.

Anyway, the ultimate lesson in all of this? Don't try to game Digg, especially if you're doing it by yourself and in such an obvious way. It won't work, and you'll just end up humiliating yourself (also, you'll end up with a lot of worthless Digg accounts, not to mention the corresponding e-mail addresses that go along with each account).

Why Won't God Heal Amputees - The Most Important Question Ever?

2007-06-24T20:51:00.000-07:00

I stumbled upon this site from doing some technorati searches. At first, I thought the site and its title were a bit ridiculous, but the more I read, the more I was intrigued and disquieted. I thought I'd re-post a video from them here:

Some of you may remember I made my own attempt at posing some questions awhile back, that was poorly received and, to some extent, not very well done. One day soon, I hope to be able to post a follow up that will be deeper, more meaningful, and more challenging.

In the meantime, with regards to this site and with the 10 questions here, as a Christian, I think about 7 of these issues 10 can be addressed without doing too much "rationalizing." Concordantly, I also think that about 70% of the site is not an accurate representation of what Christians believe, or at least that it doesn't adequately or accurately convey what we believe about prayer and about God.

But ultimately, the one question that I can't answer, the one question that is most troubling to me, the one thing they chose to name the site after (i.e. the other 30% that I do agree with), is what haunts me now: Why won't God heal amputees?

Although the site uses pages and pages to explain and elaborate on its point, the simple and inexorable logic is as follows: Many times, people pray over the sick and they are healed. Credit for these "miracles" is given to God, in spite of the fact that other explanations might also be plausible (e.g. perhaps medicine/chemo cured the cancer, and not God). So, if God can be claimed to heal the sick, why hasn't he ever healed amputees and regenerated their limbs? Either He specifically does not like amputees, or He is unable to help amputees specifically, or, as the author's logic goes, God is imaginary.

Not only can I not answer the question, I'm incredibly disturbed by the fact that I can't answer it. I've always been frustrated by people that give credit to God for only the good things, but not the bad things. I don't mind saying that God was NOT responsible for giving so-and-so cancer or leukemia, but that is only if we don't give God credit for healing that person as well.

Anyway, a lot of food for thought. What are your thoughts? Read here and challenge your faith.

The Top 5 Uncomfortable Viral Videos Featuring 2008 Presidential Candidates

2007-06-24T08:59:00.001-07:00

I've written about the power of viral videos in the past but there's been so much more material even just between then and now that it warrants another post.

In the internet age, footage of presidential candiates can often come back to haunt them, or alternatively, can be remixed in ways that can be disquieting. In some instances, even videos the candidates approved of or produced themselves can fall into this category. Here are, in my opinion, the most disturbing, hilarious, uncomfortable internet videos featuring 2008 Presidential Candidates:

Mike Gravel's 2008 Campaign Video - In this movie, Mike Gravel stares frighteningly into the camera for a full minute, then throws a rock into a pond and walks away in the distance. To quote Jon Stewart, the message of this video is not so much "Vote for Mike Gravel," but rather, "After watching this movie, you will die in seven days."

Obama Girl - There's a popular adage is that voting is like masturbating: They're both best done alone. But with the Obama Girl video, these two famous pasttimes can now be combined.

The content of this video isn't as disturbing as the concept, in which an extremely beautiful woman sings of her undying love for Obama. Had this been done from scratch by a deliriously insane fan of Obama, it would be truly pertubing. However, the fact that it was conceived by an advertising executive makes it slightly more palatable. Nonetheless, we aren't used to seeing our presidents as sex objects, although it's been tried with mixed results in the past.

Hillary Clinton's Southern Accent - This cringe-inducing video made its rounds on the internet and on television. In it, Hillary is speaking at a church in Selma, Alabama and tries to adopt the tone of the author she's reading. The results were, at best, mixed. I defy you not to be uncomfortable when watching it:

Jon McCain sings Barbara Streisand - In a hilarious SNL sketch from 2002, McCain tries to perform some covers of Streisand's greatest hits. The results will haunt your dreams:

Rudy Giuliani in Drag - One of the men in this video wants to be your president. The other one makes more money in a day than you do in a year. I don't know why but every time I watch this, it sends a chill down my spine:

Can you think of any more? E-mail me at Davechensblog (at) Gmail and include the video, some back story, and your website (so I can link to you) and I'll update this post with the new video.

Updates are Coming

2007-06-23T23:44:00.000-07:00

Hey all,

Sorry for the non-update update, but just wanted to do a quick post and let you know that updates are coming soon! Wireless internet access has been spotty so I haven't been able to post as often as I'd like to. I'll be finishing up my trip across America series this week and then try to get down with some politics and religion, as always. And of course, any time I have a few minutes between now and then, I'll try put up some videos and other things that come to mind.

Thanks for checking in!

-Dave

Nifong Disbarred; Media Leaves Duke Lacrosse Story, Misses Amazing Opportunity To Improve Public Discourse

2007-06-18T09:15:00.001-07:00

(From Flickr user digital image fan via CC)

The backlash against Mike Nifong, the DA in the Duke Lacrosse Case, has started in earnest...and WHAT a backlash it is. According to the Associated Press:

Nifong was disbarred Saturday, a ruling that came one day after he stunned his staff and own attorneys by announcing through tears he planned to resign as Durham County's district attorney. In imposing punishment, a disciplinary committee called Nifong's prosecution of Dave Evans, Collin Finnerty and Reade Seligmann a politically motivated "fiasco." The five-day ethics trial ended Nifong's three-decade legal career, which he spent entirely as a prosecutor in Durham County. He was generally viewed as an honest lawyer...

The list of misdeeds that Nifong has been accused of (and undoubtedly actually did) is long and shocking. He withheld exculpatory evidence. He made inappropriate statements to the public about the case. He pressed on with the case even when he knew that there was no way he could win a conviction. And that's just off the top of my head (Go to Nifong's wikipedia page for some more details).

Part of me feels for this man, whose career has now ended in a spectacular flameout. However, a part of me also knows that the men who were accused of the rape have had a bad enough time these past few years that Nifong's disgrace is probably nothing in comparison. It's both refreshing and terrifying that we live in a country where being accused of being a rapist can be almost as bad as being convicted of the same thing.

Now ABC reports that, with regards to the case, the media is packing up its bags and moving on:

The word on the street around Duke University is that the Duke lacrosse story has outlived its shelf life...Despite interest in the story, it looks like the media parade is leaving. "The high intensity moments are over," Setrakian said. Edmisten said the chairman of the hearing in the case referred to the events as a dangerous soap opera. So, while further legal movement in the case may be in store, at least for the residents of Durham, this show is fading to black.

Here's why this gets me: By packing up leaving in the aftermath right now, at this critical moment when Nifong is finally being punished for his crimes, the media demonstrates yet again how it is beholden to sensationalism, and ultimately, to profit. To many of you (and even to me), this is old news. But I couldn't resist bringing it up anyway.

Not only that, but the media is missing an amazing opportunity to engage in public discourse about the litany of deeper issues underlying the Duke case. The reason they latched onto the rape case in the first place was because it was a spectacular attention-grabber: three white preppy, elite lacross players (a sport which seems to epitomize the upper class) from a top-tier university brutally assaulted a black, lower-class single mom who went to a state school. There were a lot of issues this case brought up, and a lot of fires that it stoked. It was a case that brought up struggles and conflicts that have haunted us throughout our country's history: namely, the conflict of the upper class against the lower class, the race issues between whites and blacks, and, to tie it all together, the destructive psychological devastation of rape.

But now that the case is over, there are different questions that we should be asking. Questions like why do we live in a society where being accused of rape is as bad as being convicted (i.e. where the media has grossly asymmetric rules about who it can name and who it can't)? Where the media (even the New York Times) can actively and powerfully propagate such destructive misinformation and get away with it without being held to account? Where lawyers yield such tremendous power over all of us in the form of prosecutorial discretion?

Unfortunately, the media won't be asking those questions, not to any meaningful extent anyway. The reasons for this are legion, but up at the top of the list I'm sure are both a lack of desire to criticize itself and the endless and self-defeating quest for ratings. To ask these questions would require an informed dialogue and citizenry, a level of public discourse that challenges deeply held assumptions and uses logic and reason behind its arguments. And really, if they did address these issues on TV, is there really anyone who would watch?

[Note: To paraphrase Sideshow Bob, I'm aware of the irony of using an article on ABC News reporting on the media in order to report about the media, so don't bother pointing that out]

Tony Snow Is a Liar

2007-06-14T20:00:00.000-07:00

I usually don't just put up posts with Daily Show videos but I figure since I already made a road trip post, it's no big deal.

The reason I'm posting these vids is because for some reason I just thought last night's Daily Show was hilarious, even moreso than usual. Stewart continually proves that he can pull off not only political satire, but plain old screwball comedy. Watch, and be amazed.

Note: These vids (and this post) will be taken down when the vids expire.

CNN Wallows In Its Own Stupidity, Covers Paris Hilton Ad Nauseum

2007-06-13T23:55:00.000-07:00

I love it when Jon Stewart takes the media to school on its own crapulence:

Jon, you are my hero. You say it much better than I ever could.

Coming To Terms - On The Sopranos Finale, and Beliving the Sopranos is Overrated

2007-06-11T05:58:00.001-07:00

[This blog post is part 2 of a 3-part series. Go here for part 1 about "24"]

In Hans Christen Andersen’s fable, “The Emperor’s New Clothes,” the emperor’s subjects and the townspeople are all terrified of telling the emperor that he’s actually wearing no clothes, for fear of appearing stupid (or perhaps, of being summarily executed). It finally takes a child to point out, “he’s wearing no clothes!” before people finally snap out of their delusional trance.

As people who read this blog know, I can be quite a child sometimes. And today, I’m going to try to be just that.

Despite the fact that I’m driving across the country, I still had a chance to stop off and catch the Sopranos Series Finale this Sunday night. It’s a compelling show that I’ve committed to watching, even if I’ve been disparaging of it in the past.

My views on the Sopranos have been made clear for some time. While I can rehearse the oft-repeated sentiment that “The Sopranos” is better than 99% of what’s on television (and I do believe this to be true), I still think that “The Sopranos” is overrated and is NOT one of the greatest dramas of all time (that honor would belong to a show like “The Wire”). Last night’s episode did nothing to change my mind.

To be fair, this season has been pretty great, with some tremendous performances by all the lead actors. In particular, James Gandolfini’s therapy sessions have been deeper and more textured than before, revealing to us not just the depths of Tony Soprano but the depth of Gandolfini’s acting ability.

For the series finale, there was no way that they were going to be able to tie up all the loose ends in the series in one episode. And sure enough, they didn’t even come close. Paulie is given a few reflective moments with Tony. Junior remains submerged in his mental illness. Janice keeps doing what she’s doing. Meadow seems destined for the same fate as her mom, and AJ’s newly found apathy is strikingly familiar. Melfi’s 180 turnaround regarding therapy that happened OVER THE COURSE OF ONE EPISODE seemed to continue unabated. And that was it.

Leaving open plotlines and open questions is fine when it all serves the storytelling. But the way in which “The Sopranos” does it often appears clumsy. Think of the structure of the entire series: One or two bad apples is whacked every season, until the final season when a whole ton of killing and random deaths occur. To me, it felt as though Chase suddenly realized he was running out of time and had to kill off a whole lot of characters; that is, the deaths did not feel organic to the storyline (particularly Christopher’s). Yet when it finally came to do the final deed (i.e. do away with Tony Soprano), Chase left the issue delightfully unresolved.

“The Sopranos” direction and acting have always been phenomenal. The cinematography has always wowed me. But this is not a show that displays the masterful storytelling found elsewhere. It is self-indulgent, wildly uneven, and most annoyingly of all, grossly overrated. No one is willing to call the finale and most of the series crap, because no one wants to look like a moron. As I’ve demonstrated time and time again, this is not a fear that I possess.

So to all those who ever watched "The Sopranos" and thought to yourself, "Why do people think this show is so good?" my only encouragement to you all is that you're right. And while it may be light years ahead of a great deal of everything else on TV, that doesn't mean it merits the preposterous accolades that have been heaped upon it.

Despite all of this, the final scene…unforgettable. A ultra-tense scene with pitch-perfect music that dared to subvert all expectations that rabid fans of the show had going in. Rather than get frustrated with this ending, I thought it was incredibly well-done, the perfect conclusion to the television series that, frustratingly and unskillfully, never resolves anything.

Atlantic City Beach

2007-06-09T07:22:00.000-07:00

(Click for bigger size. Photo by me. Reproduce using CC)

Day 1 - Atlantic City. The drive through George Washington Bridge was horrendously traffick-y. The dichotomy between rich and poor in this city is remarkable. DC in 4 hours, and lots of photos from there by the end of the weekend.

Web Finds: What Happens When You Drive a Truck 100mph And Fire A Ball Out The Back At 100 mph?

2007-06-07T06:06:00.000-07:00

The answer may surprise you:

(via Reddit)

Lessons Learned from the Syriana DVD Contest

2007-06-06T18:47:00.001-07:00

Hey all,

The Syriana DVD contest is over! The winner has been contacted and the DVD has been sent.

Two important lessons I learned during the course of this contest:

1) Subscription e-mails will include posts that have been published AND UPDATED by me. This means that many of you got some really old posts in your e-mail subscriptions (due to the fact that I updated a bunch of my old posts recently). If this happened to you, please accept my sincerest apologies, but there's nothing I can do about this.

2) If you want to entice people to subscribe to your blog using a contest, give away something more valuable than a Syriana DVD.

All that being said, thanks to everyone who participated. Next time, I'll give away something more valuable (and don't worry, having won once doesn't invalidate you from winning again down the line, so feel free to stay subscribed if you like the blog).

As always, I appreciate your readership.

-Dave

Coming To Terms – Dealing With The Worst Season Finale of 24 Ever

2007-06-06T05:07:00.000-07:00

[This article is part of a three-part series. Go here for part 2 on The Sopranos]

[Again, much inspiration, as well as some of the videos, were drawn from this Progressive Boink article]

SPOILERS AHEAD FOR 24 SEASON SIX

In the season finale of 24, Karen Hayes, Bill Buchanan, and Jack Bauer risked everything to save…Jack’s supposed nephew. There was no nuke, no biological weapon, no assassination attempt; just a blond whiny kid with a rice bowl haircut. After they were done with this ridiculous and unsatisfying storyline, Jack headed over to Heller’s house (conveniently just a few minutes away) to chew him out about his insouciance from earlier. In the show’s final scene, Jack looks out at the waves, reflecting on the sociopath he’s become and his own mess of a personal life. The audience wept, but not out of sadness for Jack; rather, for the 24 hours we knew we would never get back.

This was the worst season of 24 ever, often painful to watch. Even the President of Fox thought so. I’ve already written at length about why this season was awful and I stand by my points. But rather than rail endlessly about how bad it’s become (although that will happen during this post), I thought I’d channel my energy into thinking about five things that can make the show better next season. In no particular order, they are:

1) Don’t Set It In Los Angeles – In Season 1, the possibility that presidential candidate David Palmer might be in LA for the day was extremely plausible. In Season 2, the possibility that terrorists might try to nuke LA was vaguely believable. By Season 3, the idea that LA would be the place where terrorists would want to launch a biological attack began to make LA seem like one of the unluckiest places on Earth. And by Season 4-6, the idea of using LA again just made our eyes glaze over in disbelief.

As this article by Cracked can attest to, it’s no real mystery why they set the series in LA. But it’s killing the series, taxing our suspension of disbelief to the breaking point, and basically disrespecting the audience to an astonishing degree.

(From Flickr user Kaptain Krispy Kreme via CC)

To paraphrase Seinfeld, it's flattering to think that your city is bomb-able. But we've had enough of Hollywood's self-indulgence in this matter.

2) No More Office Romance – The last compelling office romance in 24 was in Season 2, between Tony and Michelle (do we even want to remember Kim and Chase’s baby adventures in Season 3?). Since then, office romances have been a waste of time, reaching their nadir this season with the insufferable Milo and the witless Nadia (and to a lesser degree, with Morris and Chloe). When Tony and Michelle worked at CTU, you rooted for them because they were really good at their jobs and they fought for the right thing (i.e. Jack Bauer).

Nobody cared about what happened to the characters this season because more often than not, they were shown to be incompetent, bickering, and petty, to an extent never before seen even for 24. There was no reason to care why they got together or not because most of the time, they pissed you off more than they endeared themselves to you.

Witness the painful awkwardness of this scene:

3) No more CTU – Every year it's a target for hostile takeover by Division or Homeland Security. Also, it's full of moles.

Every single season of 24 has involved the same premise; either Jack is the head of CTU, leading a team from CTU, or is made to lead a team from CTU after he proves his competence.

I understand the need for Jack to use CTU; it allows him access to government-grade weapons and gives him the opportunity to continually bark “I need that information NOW” over the phone. But it’s become clear that CTU, plot-wise, has become an encumbrance to the series, with its bureaucratic redtape, its murky and sketchy superiors from “Division,” and its tedious personnel disputes.

(From Flickr user Phantasmak via CC)

Get rid of CTU next season (from the plotline, at least). Please.

4) Stop Killing Characters…Or Do It Better – This season saw the loss of President Logan and Curtis (not to mention Kumar from “Harold and Kumar”!). It seems as though just as we’re beginning to care about someone, 24’s writers take great pleasure in killing them off for us. As I’ve written before, when you do this respectfully, it pays great dividends; when you do it like 24 does it, it makes the deaths seem senseless and wasteful.

For example, what was the point of this:

or this:

And from this season, what, for the love of god, was the point of this?:

Although it gave him a nice story arc, Curtis was basically black Jack Bauer. By killing off Curtis, unceremoniously, the writers of the show killed off a lot of fans' good will. And by having Jack recover from it almost instantly (despite a 2-minute cry) is another example of the writers' continuing disdain for the emotional intelligence of its audience.

Look to Season 3 for a character's death done right:

(And Chappelle wasn't even a character we cared that much about!)

5) Bring Back Jack – Jack Bauer is the reason we watch this show. Season 6 introduced a bunch of new characters, including a potential Jack Bauer replacement (Doyle), then asked us to be emotionally invested in them without telling us why. But really, the only one person we care about on the show is Jack Bauer and he was getting crowded out (screentime-wise) by all of these nobodies.

Whether Jack is being a detective, doing some plain old killing, or physically and mentally torturing suspects, Kiefer’s performance is a joy to watch:

Proof positive - One of this season's most intense, amazing scenes was this climactic fight between Bauer and Fayed:

Even when Kiefer is showing his weaker side, Bauer remains an extremely compelling character. See the end of Season 3, when Bauer breaks down (something we should have seen slightly more of this season):

The problem was, Season Six didn't give us nearly enough of any of this.

Please give us more of Jack doing what he does best. As intense as ex-Scrubs nurse Doyle is, he can’t hold a candle to Bauer.

**

I’ve recently finished re-watching Season 2 of 24 on DVD and the difference was palpable. Despite Kim’s antics, Season 2 was one taut, nerve-jangling season (and as much as I hate to admit it, even the various situations Kim found herself in were directed with skill and intensity). There were suspenseful situations in which the split screen and real-time conceit were used to great effect. There were fantastically evil and chilling villains. And there were touching moments like this one:

NONE OF THESE ELEMENTS WERE PRESENT IN SEASON 6. [For any fan, I’d urge you to go back and watch Season 2 again; it will remind you why you fell in love with this show.]

The series needs a reboot in the way “Casino Royale” kicked the 007 series back into high gear. Hopefully they’ll surprise us with something completely new. Otherwise, I’m really going to have to stop watching, which makes me sad because the Jack Bauer Power Hour used to be one of my favorite weekly events back in the day. It looks like Executive Producer Howard Gordon has already gotten the message; let's hope he brings it home for Season Seven.

[Edit: Changed some of the language/videos in the "Bring Back Jack" section]

Weekend Web Finds - The History of Video Games in Four Minutes

2007-06-02T21:37:00.001-07:00

Back from LA! It was great, but a bit smoggy.

I took time on the plane to write this week's posts, and I'm kind of excited about them; as usual, they'll be going up throughout the week.

In the meantime, here's a video game compilation: The History of Video Games (in 4 minutes). If you're a geek like me, you'll recognize 80-100% of these games. Good times...

Song used: "Love Hurts" by Incubus

I enjoyed it so much that I downloaded it (legally) after watching this video. Proof (from me) that freely distributed music like this will increase, and not hurt, sales.

Dave Chen Is Going to Los Angeles!

2007-05-31T09:55:00.000-07:00

(From Flickr user Kaptain Krispy Kreme via CC)

Hello readers,

Looks like I'm going to be in Los Angeles for a few days, so I don't think I'll be able to update until next week. Sorry!

However, I'll have my laptop and if I can get a wireless connection, I may have time to throw up a quick entry or two. Who knows.

Next week undoubtedly will be a good week of cultural essays and I'll finally be doing my write-up of the 24 Season Finale.

If you're in Los Angeles, drop me a line or something.

-Dave

John Edwards Is Creepy

2007-05-31T06:39:00.000-07:00

Time Magazine has a fascinating excerpt from Robert Shrum's new book, No Excuses. In it, Shrum details the decision-making that went behind John Kerry's decision of John Edwards as his runningmate, and how in retrospect, hindsight is 20/20 (i.e. Kerry should not have picked Edwards and should have "gone with his gut").

But of particular interest to me was the following passage:

Kerry talked with several potential picks, including Gephardt and Edwards. He was comfortable after his conversations with Gephardt, but even queasier about Edwards after they met. Edwards had told Kerry he was going to share a story with him that he'd never told anyone else—that after his son Wade had been killed, he climbed onto the slab at the funeral home, laid there and hugged his body, and promised that he'd do all he could to make life better for people, to live up to Wade's ideals of service. Kerry was stunned, not moved, because, as he told me later, Edwards had recounted the same exact story to him, almost in the exact same words, a year or two before—and with the same preface, that he'd never shared the memory with anyone else. Kerry said he found it chilling, and he decided he couldn't pick Edwards unless he met with him again. When they did, Kerry tried to get a better personal feel for his potential number two; as rivals for national office since 2000, shortly after Edwards had entered the Senate, the two men hadn't spent a lot of time together. Kerry also wanted a specific reassurance. He asked Edwards for a commitment that if he was chosen and the ticket lost, Edwards wouldn't run against him in 2008. Edwards agreed "absolutely," as Kerry recalled him saying. If Kerry had shared this at the time, I would have told him what I did later: it was naive to think he could rely on a promise like that.

Lessons learned:

1) Politics is cut-throat (not really learned, just reaffirmed)
2) John Edwards is creepy

Evangelical Teens MORE Likely To Have Lost Virginity Than Either Mainline Protestants or Catholics

2007-05-31T04:47:00.000-07:00

Today, two of my favorite writing topics infiltrate this blog yet again: Sex and religion.

This morning, Slate has a new book review of Forbidden Fruit: Sex & Religion in the Lives of American Teenagers by Mark Regnerus. Essentially, the book argues that teens who identify themselves as "evangelical" and "born again" are more likely than those from Mainline Protestants or Catholics to have had sex. Hanna Rosin writes:

Evangelical teens are actually more likely to have lost their virginity than either mainline Protestants or Catholics. They tend to lose their virginity at a slightly younger age—16.3, compared with 16.7 for the other two faiths. And they are much more likely to have had three or more sexual partners by age 17: Regnerus reports that 13.7 percent of evangelicals have, compared with 8.9 percent for mainline Protestants.

This is attributed to two reasons:
1) The explosion of the Evangelical church, with mega churches and the like, that have dramatically lowered "barriers to entry" for any prospective believers, and
2) It's difficult to be a teenager in America and not have sex in a sex-saturated society:

"Be in the world, but not of it," is the standard Christian formula for how to engage with mainstream culture. But in a world hypersaturated with information, this is difficult for tech-savvy teenagers to pull off. There are no specific instructions in the Bible on how to avoid a Beyoncé video or Scarlett Johansson's lips calling to you from YouTube, not to mention the ubiquitous porn sites. For evangelicals, sex is a "symbolic boundary" marking a good Christian from a bad one, but in reality, the kids are always "sneaking across enemy lines," Regnerus argues.

Other interesting statistics from the book/book review:

Religiosity determines sexual activity more than religion - 16 percent of American teens who describe religions as "extremely important" are less likely to break a pledge of abstinence
84 percent of Asian-American church-goers are virgins.
Mormons are extremely unlikely to have had sex before marriage and if they have, they are unlikely to repeat the experience.
30 percent of Catholics/Mainline protestants have had sex before marriage
17.6 percent of Jews have had sex before marriage, but Jews are more likely to say that sex is pleasurable.

As readers of this blog know, this is a topic I've written about before and that's near and dear to my heart. I hope Regnerus' book serves as a wakeup call not just to the Evangelical church, but to the Christian church as a whole.

The Church needs to confront the growing reality that what it's doing right now and the way it's educating kids about sex simply isn't working. Not only that, it makes our teens physically and emotionally worse off than they would be otherwise.

Evidence that this will not happen: Did you guys see this? We, as Christians, can't even seem to confront scientific realities and confirmed facts; how will we address something much more serious (for our lives, anyway) and much more disputed?

Related Articles:
-The Romeo and Juliet Effect
-Premarital Sex: Where Christians Get It Wrong

Missing Girl's Parents Get To Meet The Pope - Millions of Other Aggrieved Parents Get Nothing

2007-05-30T00:01:00.000-07:00

According to "America: The Book" (the foremost reference on these sorts of subjects), this is the Body Count Conversion rate that the American Media uses, when determining how important news is:

2,000 Massacred Congolese = 500 Drowned Bangladeshis = 45 Fire-bombed Iraqis = 12 Car-bombed Europeans = 1 Snipered American

Or in this case, 1 missing white girl.

By now you've probably heard of the tragic story of Madeline McCann, the girl who disappeared from the family's hotel room while her parents were in Portugal. New developments - now, according to CNN:

The parents of a four-year-old British girl who disappeared while on a vacation with her family in Portugal will be presented to Pope Benedict XVI at the pontiff's weekly general audience Wednesday. Vatican officials said on Monday that the McCann family would be among those brought up to greet the pope during his weekly audience with faithful in St. Peter's Square. The presentation of VIPs and of others who have won permission from the Vatican to personally greet the pope traditionally takes place at the end of the audience, following the pope's homily to the faithful.

The family of that missing girl has won an audience with the pope, undoubtedly due in no small part to the media's faithful coverage of their situation. Amazing...

There are many factors that went into making this happen. 1) The parents of Madeline are incredibly media savvy, and knew exactly how to get the word out about their daughter, 2) Madeline is a white girl, and 3) The American media thrives too much on spectacle and "human interest" stories that make no difference on the world stage. Take away one of these three things and the story becomes on a non-story.

It's a tragedy whenever any child anywhere goes missing. But let me put this in perspective. TODAY ALONE, 24,000 people will die of hunger. Eight thousand people will die of AIDS. Today, 1.1 billion people don't have access to clean water. Forty-five (estimated) people will be murdered in America. Untold thousands will die in Darfur today.

And believe it or not: For most of these stats, there are clear, definite things America can do to make the numbers lower! But we don't. The outcry isn't heard. And the media insists on continuing to waste our time telling us about this missing white girl.

As I've mentioned before, Time Magazine's naming of "You" as the person of the year only cemented in popular opinion that traditional media has abdicated its responsibility as a caretaker of information. Coverage of the McCann story demonstrates that this shows no signs of letting up. Whenever I see the media covering these sorts of things, instead of bringing us news that might actually make a difference in our lives, it really gets my blood boiling. It's a misuse of power at the most high, and an affront to those of us that believe the media should be used responsibly as a force of good in this world.

So what should good journalism be like, these days? I'm not sure, but maybe this list would be a good start.

[Update: My brother wrote to me in response to say that the Natalee Holloway story is a better example of the madness described here. I tried to ignore any and all mentions of this in the news when it was happening, and in case you did the same, here's the Wikipedia article to give you an idea of how much time and energy was expended into the search and media coverage.]

[Update 2: There've been some great comments to this post, so let me try and respond:

1) Several have brought up the issue of the corporatization of the media and I wholeheartedly agree; today, news doesn't only provide us with information in a neutral fashion, it is meant to generate profit for companies. The high ratings that these types of stories get feed into the neverending quest for more ratings and more profit. I vote with my eyes and choose not to watch when this type of stuff comes on.

2) There's been criticism about how the phenomenon I'm describing isn't uniquely American. My first reaction is: Just omit all mentions of "US" and "American" from my post; the criticism still stands.

My second reaction is: Perhaps you are all right and all news all around the world is always like this, but for my money, I'd trust the BBC news over CNN any day. Also, I'd be interested in what people have to say about this and also about this.]

[Update 3: For more relevant opinions on the subject, please see this recent post with video included: Jon Stewart Interviews Al Gore.]

The Importance of Being Bruno

2007-05-29T07:50:00.000-07:00

In "Da Ali G Show," Sacha Baron Cohen deftly portrays three completely different characters: 1) Ali G, a white "gangster" from the suburb of Staines that thinks he's black, 2) Borat Sagdiyev, a journalist from Kazakhstan, and 3) Bruno, a gay Austrian fashion caricature. His chameleon-like transformation into each of these personas is a marvel to watch in every episode of the show.

Yet whenever you hear these three characters mentioned, Bruno is always the one that people take a crap on (metaphorically). Whether I'm talking with people at work or reading a review online, everyone is always careful to mention how awesome Borat and Ali G are while saying that Bruno is the character that is the least interesting and/or most unbearable.

Borat and Ali G are brilliant because they demonstrate how vastly different people, from antique store owners to United States Congressmen, struggle to communicate with someone that's so far removed from our culture (and apparently, our level of intelligence). Bruno is ostensibly supposed to reveal to us how shallow the fashion industry is:

Yet while these clips are mildly amusing, it is the way Sacha Baron Cohen takes on gay stereotypes that makes Bruno the most socially trenchant character. Essentially, Bruno's schtick consists of interviewing conservative figures and playing up his "gay" attributes to make both interviewer and interviewee incredibly uncomfortable. Here are the best examples:

Bruno at a gun show:

Bruno interviews Pastor Quinn:

Bruno at a football game in Alabama:

In an interview with Terry Gross on Fresh Air, Cohen commented on this last scene, saying that he felt his life was in danger with thousands of fans booing him and many of them ready to go out and literally give him a brutal beating. In this way, Cohen said, the scene revealed how anti-homosexual tendencies are actually one of the last remaining widely-accepted forms of bigotry in our society. By allowing us to see this, Cohen's Bruno character rips many of us out of our progressive, liberal cocoon and plants us, front and center, in a strange and foreign place where tolerance and acceptance have yet to take root. It forces us to stare at the visceral fear and (sometimes) hate that still pervades much of the country surrounding homosexuality. And perhaps, just a little, it has the potential to challenge us to revisit our own deeply-held stereotypes.

Despite what some people say, I still think it's a message that needs to be heard, and one that's not heard often enough.

But of course if you're not buying any of this at all, Bruno's still just really good at making people look like morons:

[Update: More audacious Bruno clips -

"Do you wish her a benign tumor or a malignant tumor?":

Bruno on Spring Break in Daytona Beach:

Abortion film wins top prize at Cannes

2007-05-27T19:46:00.000-07:00

CNN is reporting that the top prize at Cannes this year is going to an abortion-related film. From CNN's article:

Romanian director Cristian Mungiu won the Cannes Film Festival's top prize Sunday with "4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days," a harrowing portrait of an illegal abortion in communist-era Romania. The low-budget, naturalistic film about a student who goes through horrors to ensure that her friend can have a secret abortion beat out 21 other movies in competition for the Riviera festival's top prize, the Palme d'Or -- including films by well-known directors like Quentin Tarantino, the Coen brothers and Wong Kar-wai.

This seems like an important film that people should see, especially if they have an active voice in the abortion debate. Illegal abortions are a horrific phenomenonn that visit violence upon the women that partake in them. Before people make a judgment about whether or not abortions should be legal, they should at least see the visual and circumstantial reality of illegal abortion. Obviously the film will have a bias, an opinion on the matter, but then again, most of the best films do.

As a side note, it's too damn hard to see these films. Hopefully a US Distributor will pick it up and we'll see it on DVD; otherwise, we'll be forced to resort to imports....

Related posts:
-A new breed of evangelicals
-More thoughts on abortion

Win a copy of "Syriana" on DVD!

2007-05-25T21:18:00.000-07:00

[Update: This contest has ended. Keep an eye out for more contests in the future.]

Hey all,

Thought I'd try an experiment today.

A few people have been starting to read this blog regularly, so I thought I'd try to reward you for doing so. I have in my possession an unopened copy of "Syriana" on DVD (Widescreen, of course) that I would like to give away. For those of you that don't know, "Syriana" is Stephen Gaghan's "Traffic"-like examination of the oil industry. Interested?

If so, use my new "Subscribe via e-mail" feature on the right sidebar, to subscribe to my Feedburner Feed. This will enter you into the drawing to receive this DVD. By subscribing, know that you will only receive e-mail updates to my blog on days that I update.

I'll let this run for until 11:59pm on June 7th and we'll see what happens. To be in the drawing, you must remain subscribed to my blog through this date. The winner will be randomly selected; if you've won, I'll notify you by e-mail so I can get a mailing address and ship the thing out (FYI, I will probably only notify the person that won). If the response to this is good, then I'll do more contests like this again somewhere down the line.

As always, thanks for reading!
-Dave

Jon Stewart Interviews Al Gore

2007-05-25T21:07:00.000-07:00

Comedy Central: Why do you torture me (and everyone else) with time limits on your videos? By doing so, you have prevented thousands upon thousands of people from seeing your programs through sites like mine. Mini-rant over.

Anyway, I thought this was a great interview that had as much insight into Jon Stewart's work, as it did into Al Gore's: