tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-54371129124225173622024-03-14T15:34:13.505+13:00Booksmarta weblog by the sort of person who still says 'weblog'Stephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.comBlogger36125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5437112912422517362.post-46966159279192632642014-03-26T22:02:00.001+13:002014-03-27T11:16:19.154+13:00New post!By which I mean, <a href="http://cinemacope.blogspot.co.nz/" target="_blank">an entire new blog dedicated to film reviews</a> (and other cinema related stuff).<br />
<br />
The new blog is called Cinema cope (yes, Google tells me I'm the first person to come up with that one: you are welcome). It is, unsurprisingly, where I'll post film reviews. It's main focus will be, as the name suggests, movies I see at the cinema. <br />
<br />
I'll be putting my reflections on all the Wellington Film Society screenings I get to up on Cinema cope. I'll also comment - however briefly - on any other movies I see at the cinema (and maybe even the ones I watch on dvd or TV etc).<br />
<br />
Generally, I'll post there at least once a week. Usually on a Tuesday for film society screenings (i.e. the day after the screening), or Sunday for general screenings. Or both - if you're lucky.<br />
<br />
ETA: Actually, if you're really lucky, I might try to get to a general release movie on Thursday (the day they usually first hit the big screen) and review it that night. So ideally the posting schedule will be:<br />
<ul>
<li>Tuesday for a review of the previous day's film society screening,</li>
<li>Thursday evening for a review of a new release,</li>
<li>Sunday for, say, a review of a film that's been out for a while.</li>
</ul>
I'll generally try to post something on Sunday if I don't manage to make the Tuesday or Thursday postings.Stephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5437112912422517362.post-28247860198146088502012-10-23T00:05:00.000+13:002012-11-18T18:46:55.539+13:00Are you old enough?Recently, Philip Greatrex has written <a href="http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=10842037" target="_blank">this piece for the NZ Herald</a> in regard to lowering the voting age to 16 (drawn to my attention by <a href="https://twitter.com/jamessleep" target="_blank">James Sleep</a>). It reminded me of this <a href="http://norightturn.blogspot.co.nz/2007/06/lowering-voting-age.html" target="_blank">No Right Turn post from 2007</a> arguing in favour of extending the franchise.<br />
<br />
I agree, for the most part, with their arguments. I would like to see the voting age lowered to 16.<br />
<br />
As the commentor 'Mike' says on No Right Turn's post: "<span class="comment-body">The idea that someone can have a family, a
job, a house (unlikely, admittedly, but theoretically possible), be in
the military and not vote to get representation is ridiculous."</span><br />
<br />
<span class="comment-body"> (I'll note for the record Your Honour, it's weird reading a NRT post with comments allowed.)</span><br />
<br />
<span class="comment-body">Discussing this on Twitter, <a href="https://twitter.com/RachCarrell" target="_blank">Rachel Carrell</a> made these counter arguments:</span><br />
<br />
1) "16 seems very young. They haven't even finished high school. We knew nothing at 16<br />
<br />
2) "I'm Labour member but @ 16 would have definitely voted ACT - entranced by simple answer"<br />
<br />
Point 1 is the very generalisation that Philip Greatrex is trying to counter. I call this the 'Political Engagement' argument. I've known of well-informed 16 to 17 year-olds whose political opinions would be as valid as many an 'adult'. Also, I've known of ill-informed older people who I personally hope wouldn't exercise their franchise. <br />
<br />
I'd be surprised to find that the sort of 17-year-old who "knew nothing" would suddenly become politically engaged at 18. In any case, as a democracy, we don't stipulate that political engagement is a condition of being a voter. If you're over 18 we don't care how ignorant or foolish you are, you have a say in the government that represents you. I'm not convinced that 18 is a special age of general political engagement.<br />
<br />
As for Point 2, I wonder if this governs many people's view on this issue: "Shit, I would have made a dumb choice at 16!"<br />
<br />
But where does that slippery slope stop? Someone may consider (as I do) that their libertarian view at age 18 or 19 was evidence of their entrancement to simplistic answers. This might well be the case, but we aren't about to argue for the increase in the voting age to 20, are we? What is the age of political wisdom?<br />
<br />
I don't think lowering the voting age is a panacea, but I don't think it will be any kind of impediment to progressive politics.<br />
<br />
UPDATE: At the 2012 Labour Party conference, delegates supported a motion that if the party comes to power, it will lower the voting age by two years to 16. Stephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5437112912422517362.post-1828214694315353782012-06-07T19:35:00.001+12:002012-06-07T20:03:33.153+12:00Consequences: the Wellington Film Society March to April 2012<div class="MsoNormal">
About a third of the way into this year’s Wellington Film
Society schedule, and the selection almost seems themed, like some group art
exhibition at the public gallery. The tone has been fairly dark, and the themes
are frequently to do with consequences of your actions. There were three
classic American noir films, where people getting what’s coming to them is
often a feature. Nicolas Roeg’s bleak outback adventure <i>Walkabout </i>displays results
of societal pressures of many kinds, and the two European films, <i>The Skin I
Live In</i> and <i>The Consequences of Love</i> feature plenty of, well, consequences. In
order of screening, here are the Film Society’s 2012 offerings from March and
April, with my brief comments.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
[Sans comments for two: I missed <i>Wake In Fright</i>, and
I will review <i>The Consequences of Love</i> in a post of its own.]</div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: black;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="background-color: white; color: black;">
<img alt="http://www.atthecinema.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/The-Skin-that-I-Inhabit.jpg" src="http://www.atthecinema.net/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/The-Skin-that-I-Inhabit.jpg" /><b><span style="font-size: small;"><span style="color: black;"> </span></span></b></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="color: #073763;">The Skin I live In</b><span style="color: #073763;"> </span>(La piel que habito) <span style="font-size: small;">Spain 2011</span></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;">
<i>Antonio Banderas plays a brilliant plastic surgeon haunted by
his past. Many of his achievements are a result of the experiments he conducts
on Vera (Elena Anaya), a mysterious, beautiful woman held captive in his
mansion.</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal" style="color: black;">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
By many accounts, Pedro Almodovar’s previous film, Broken
Embraces, was a disappointment. I haven’t seen it, but if that’s right, he’s
well and truly back on track with this gorgeous, kitschy yet unsettling surgical
horror film. Almodovar’s usual concerns are on display again here, and his
melodramatic and slightly surreal style is both immersive and sometimes a tad
daft. The explanation for these proceedings is suitably deranged, and delivered
not as a ‘gotcha’ twist at the end, but revealed like the unfurling of a bandage
through the story’s middle act, allowing the audience to dwell on the events
and the madness.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="color: #073763;">Mildred Pierce</b> USA
1945</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>Mildred Pierce (Joan Crawford, in an excellent “comeback”
performance) runs from a beach-front house after shots are fired and her
estranged husband is murdered. Flashback shows how Mildred came to be in this
position, after leaving her previous cheating husband and trying to raise her
daughters on her own. (Based on the novel by James Cain.)</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Underrated film noir that stands up to contemporary viewing
better than the next two examples. While it has an essentially conservative
outlook, the social anxieties of the time are nicely laid bare. It features an
effectively contemptuous performance from Ann Blyth as Veda – one of the most
grating spoiled brats ever put to the screen.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="color: #073763;">Wake In Fright</b><b style="color: #0b5394;"> </b>
Australia 1971</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
I didn’t see this one, <a href="http://www.cinephilia.net.au/show_review.php?reviewid=3956&movieid=1457" target="_blank">but it sounds pretty good</a>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="color: #073763;">The Postman Always Rings Twice</b> USA 1946</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>A drifter (John Garfield) arrives at diner owned by a genial,
older man and his beautiful wife (Lana Turner). They fall in love and together
they plot the murder of the husband.</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Another
good film noir based on a James M. Cain novel, although
this one doesn’t hold up as well to modern viewing as Mildred Pierce.
(It’s still better than the
1981 remake.) There’s a vulnerability to both leads, and a
precariousness to
their criminal plotting, that lends the movie an odd kind of
authenticity. Despite that, there are also a few ‘Why did they do that?
Why don’t they just do this?’ moments. It features good performances all
round,
especially from Turner and Hume Cronyn, whose devious defence lawyer may
be my
favourite part of the movie. There’s a
good, thorough commentary from Nick Davis <a href="http://www.nicksflickpicks.com/posalw46.html" target="_blank">here</a>.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="color: #073763;">The Asphalt Jungle</b>
USA 1950</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>A criminal genius gets out of prison and plans one last
heist. He gathers together the necessary team (safe cracker, tough guy, money
man, driver), and everything goes according to plan. Except, not quite.</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
A very influential, archetypal crime caper movie, The
Asphalt Jungle is probably a must watch for cineasts. So I’m glad that they
played it, although it did have a slight sensation of being a chore. It’s got
an effective atmosphere, and the untangling of the heist is nicely understated.
It’s once again conservative in outlook, but engenders a degree of sympathy
with the characters. However, it seems at times even more preachy than the
other noirs shown so far. Relatedly, perhaps, it feels the most dated.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="color: #073763;">Walkabout</b> Australia
1971</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>After their father has a breakdown, a teenage girl and her
younger brother are left stranded in the Australian outback. They eventually
meet and receive assistance from an aboriginal boy on his ‘walkabout’ (a rite
of passage where he spends some time separated from his tribe).</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
Walkabout is a fascinating, often misunderstood, slightly
naive coming of age adventure. Jenny Agutter (most recently seen as a SHIELD
council member in The Avengers) gives a strong performance, nicely balancing
stoicism and vulnerability. The film seems to suggest mostly a strong element
of cultural <a href="http://www.australianreview.net/digest/2003/03/crowder.html" target="_blank">incommensurability</a>, but also a hint of shared humanity, or at least
parallels in, for example, matters confronting those “coming of age”.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This nuanced portrayal is to its credit, but it juggles its
themes clumsily at times, coming across a bit ANTH 101. For example, in the
first meeting between Agutter’s character and the aborigine (David Gulpilil)
sees her trying thick-headedly to ask for water: “Water! ... You must understand ‘water’!” she repeats to
the uncomprehending aborigine. Then her brother mimes a drinking action and gets
the point across. Agutter’s
character wasn’t portrayed as ignorant or dim-witted in most of the film, but
we’re supposed to believe that she thinks he simply must understand “water”,
and it wouldn’t occur to her to mime the act of drinking.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<a href="http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/19970413/REVIEWS08/401010372/1023" target="_blank">Roger Ebert says</a> the film is about “The mystery of
communication”, and that’s true to a point. But ham-fisted scenes like this one
make it almost feel didactic, rather than mysterious. And some of the stylistic
editing just seems pretentious.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
But mostly I agree with Ebert. Walkabout is mostly a nuanced
film about culture and communication. Like The Consequences of Love, it’s able
to say a lot without having characters that speak a lot. Walkabout is for the most part poetic, subtle, visually
strong, and not a simplistic “noble savage good; modern life hollow” tale
that some think.</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<b style="color: #073763;">The Consequences of Love</b> (Le conseguenze dell'amore)
Italy 2004</div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<i>Titta lives in a Hotel in Lugano, Switzerland. He’s been
there almost ten years, spending his days drinking alone, occasionally playing
cards, and waiting for a mysterious delivery, which in turn triggers a dash to
the bank. Ten years of living an inscrutable life, one day he decides to offer
a barmaid a smile.</i></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
<br /></div>
<div class="MsoNormal">
This will get its own post soon. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R_Kxf6SZCPY" target="_blank">In the meantime, watch the beginning, with music by Lali Puna.</a><br />
<br />
[This review was originally posted on <a href="http://poplitiko.blogspot.co.nz/" target="_blank">Poplitiko</a>.] </div>Stephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5437112912422517362.post-58394398118686245422012-03-03T20:17:00.000+13:002012-03-03T21:54:20.953+13:00The Pirates of Hollywood<span style="font-size: x-small;">[Sorry, this post has been edited a tad.]</span><br />
<br />
As we all know, Kim Dotcom and other <strike>Masters of Evil</strike> Megaupload staff have been arrested, and are subject to proceedings to extradite them to the USA for trial.<br />
<br />
With the Kim Dotcom/Megaupload affair being played out in New Zealand's legal system at the moment, I'll exercise the blog by linking to some essential reading.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.paralegal.net/hypocrisy-in-hollywood/" target="_blank">Hypocrisy in Hollywood</a>.<br />
<br />
**** <br />
<br />
Oh, and while I'm at it, I'll admit to having a soft spot for this song. RIP Davy.<br />
<br />
<iframe allowfullscreen="" frameborder="0" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/nU615FaODCg" width="420"></iframe>Stephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5437112912422517362.post-33252617469604140902011-09-08T23:19:00.000+12:002011-09-09T00:11:10.109+12:00Ask the peopleWatching <a href="http://tvnz.co.nz/back-benches">Back Benches</a> last night, I was puzzled by <a href="http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/MPP/MPs/MPs/5/3/2/49MP169831-Katene-Rahui.htm">Rahui Katene</a>'s view on the situation in Fiji.<br />
<br />
"What's so great about democracy?" she asked fellow bencher <a href="http://www.parliament.nz/en-NZ/MPP/MPs/MPs/a/f/b/49MP127041-Nash-Stuart.htm">Stuart Nash</a>, as she made the case that democracy wasn't necessarily the right system for every nation, and we shouldn't try to impose it on Fiji as that would be bullying.<br />
<br />
Katene did, however, think that the Fijians should be asked what they wanted. Presumably she thinks the whole adult population should be asked, and have an equal say. After all, if you only ask a limited segment, such as the group currently in charge or a specified ethnic group, then you're already prejudging how things should be run, which is what you want to avoid.<br />
<br />
Perhaps Katene has in mind only a one-off consultation of the people,
and thereafter they're stuck with whatever form of government and group
of people they choose to run the place. But it would be an odd notion to value the view of the people only on a onetime basis, thereafter locking in whatever decision they made, even to later generations, no matter how the people they chose to lead them behaved. So more likely she has no objection to some kind of ongoing 'touching base' with the people she wants to consult.<br />
<br />
So Katene wants some sort of repeated, universal consultation of the will of the people of Fiji in how their nation should be run, and who should run it.<br />
<br />
While the operational details vary from case to case, there is a type of system that broadly fits what she's after.<br />
It's called democracy.Stephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5437112912422517362.post-50501541447700625502011-07-16T18:56:00.009+12:002011-07-16T19:51:45.836+12:00Twecon jobI took part in the second <a href="http://twitter.com/#%21/saved-search/%23twecon">#twecon conference</a> last Monday. The twitter-based conference was organised by Matthew Dentith, who has archived the 19 papers presented on his blog <a href="http://all-embracing.episto.org/twecon-2011/">EPISTO</a>.<br /><br />In short, you have a maximum of six numbered tweets featuring the #twecon hash tag to make your point, or to make an artistic statement, or whatever. It’s very open.<br /><br />It was a lot of fun, and I’ll take part again next time (there’s another to be organised later this year I believe). I also think having to make a coherent case in six 130-character entries is an interesting challenge and could be a useful discipline. (The 130 character figure is if you leave out the numbers and hash tag.)<br /><br />I like the new rule, allowing for a non-numbered ‘appendix’ tweet. As long as the case is made cogently in the six tweet maximum I think one more tweet for references and background reading links is still in the spirit of the enterprise. Some of the #twecon papers are quite poetic, and the effect may in some cases be lessened if they had to be interrupted by tiny urls.<br /><br />I enjoyed the Q&A aspect, but could only take part later in the day, because I cannot really contribute while I’m at work. Maybe #twecon could be held on a weekend or public holiday?<br /><br />Anyway, here is my paper.<br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic; color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">1 No agarrarse su lengua: A case for teaching second languages to children at an early age #twecon<br /><br />2 Debatably, younger children more naturally learn language. Children who learn second languages more easily learn further languages #twecon<br /><br />3 Language learning can seem intimidating to an adult, especially if we are too comfortable with the quasi-world language of English #twecon<br /><br />4 We should teach children a second language as soon as possible or we are missing an opportunity. Some say it should not be forced #twecon<br /><br />5 That’s a weak objection: at early ages most subjects are compulsory; we don’t say “only take PE if you want” #twecon<br /><br />6 Te reo and/or a foreign language should be taught to children early. Then they will have the genuine choice to continue or not #twecon</span><br /><br />Fellow tweconer <a href="http://twitter.com/#%21/stacefamily">stacefamily </a>made the very good point that "NZ Sign Language should be on curriculum too. Useful throughout life".Stephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5437112912422517362.post-22287674872007231462011-05-22T02:43:00.004+12:002011-05-22T02:55:25.435+12:00Apocalypse not nowIf the end of the world did not defeat us, then...<br /><br /><iframe width="425" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/bSuxnF8dOPU" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>Stephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5437112912422517362.post-829310492947837062011-05-05T18:08:00.007+12:002011-05-06T00:51:05.268+12:00Easter Special.<br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">Belated</span> Easter special.<br /><br />I have finally written my first article for Poplitiko: <a href="http://poplitiko.blogspot.com/2011/05/jesus-who.html"target="_blank">Jesus Who</a>.<br /><br />Yes, it is about Jesus Christ and Doctor Who.<br /><br />I hope to post moderately regularly there, now I'm under way. Pop culture writing is, er... <span style="font-style:italic;">safer</span> than politics, now that I'm in the public service. (Not that I won't continue to post here.)<br /><br />--------------<br /><br />This is not an Easter song:<br /><br /><iframe width="560" height="349" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Z3eaO8ZWo0k" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>Stephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5437112912422517362.post-10131967920933382002011-02-12T00:54:00.018+13:002011-03-06T23:28:16.058+13:00Taxing the ideologueThis is a response to <a href="http://www.davidwhitburn.com/2011/01/why-tax-capital-gains-its-time-to-cut-government-spending/#"target = "_blank">this blog post</a> by property investment lawyer David Whitburn, which in turn was a response to a series of articles in the New Zealand Herald about the worth of a capital gains tax. (They start <a href="http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10698224"target = "_blank">here</a>, but it’s the <a href="http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=10698913"target = "_blank">second installment</a> where you can read the argument in favour of a capital gains tax.)<br /><br />I’ll say upfront that arguments such as those of Chye-Ching Huang and Craig Elliffe have put me in favour of the introduction of a capital gains tax. However, this post is not about the benefits of such a tax per se, but a criticism of Whitburn’s response.<br /><br />Whitburn makes the early claim that Elliffe and Huang "were disappointingly emotive". Yet, Whitburn himself then goes on to make several statements that could be described as ‘emotive’ to say the least. For example:<br /><br /> - “Do we want to borrow several billions of dollars every year until 2016 and create a noose for the taxpayers now, our childrens’ and grandchildrens’ generations...”<br /><br /> - “The idea of a new tax really offends me. It smacks of arrogance and a neanderthal like ‘big Government is good’ mentality...”<br /><br />And most laughably, he concludes with: “<span style="font-weight:bold;">New Zealand needs a capital gains tax as much as we need the plague to strike us</span>.” Yes, the original comment was in bold. But hey, let’s not get emotive.<br /><br />Next, he moves on to claim that Elliffe and Huang have apparently “forgotten that New Zealand’s mountain of debt is mainly not government (or sovereign) debt. In fact New Zealand is an outstanding performer globally when compared to most other countries" ... “As a country we are in the safe dark grey zone with Government debt at (considerably) less than 30% of GDP.”<br /><br />Okay, so we don’t need a capital gains tax, because the public debt is not a big problem. Yet strangely, as soon as Whitburn has finished reassuring us that we don’t need capital gains tax or any other increase in public revenue – because public debt is low, we’re safe – he then comes up with a number of suggestions to cut public spending - some of them quite drastic. For example: “Don’t let people leave NZ until they have paid off their student loan.”<br /><br />What could justify this kind of action, along with the other 15 suggestions he makes to cut government spending? The problem with our public debt, that's what. You know: that low, safe level of public debt.<br /><br />[Some minor edits have been made to the following points.]<br /><br />So what other arguments does he make against a Elliffe and Huang? None. That one inconsistent, misdirected point about public debt was it. He addresses none of the benefits they discussed; he addresses nothing else in their case at all. <br /><br />There are many other suggestions he raised in regard to spending cuts that I diagree with (cuts to education spending, disposing of MMP), but will limit myself to a few more quick points. Whitburn asks: “Do we want to run the risk of more good Kiwis going overseas?” Well apparently, David, you consider a ban on people leaving the country a viable option, so why worry?<br /><br />He says he does not approve of increasing government income by raising taxes. Yet, one of his suggestions is to raise tax. “Raise the tax on cigarettes so they cost at least $25 per packet (that will stop a great number of smokers and therefore save a lot of money on our pressured healthcare system)”. He claims he doesn’t like a Big Government mentality, and is in favour of individual liberties and personal freedom. Raising the tax on cigarettes is a move often criticised as “Big Government” or “nanny state”.<br /><br />I do agree with some of what Whitburn suggests. We need, at some point, to raise the age at which the universal pension becomes available, or otherwise address the cost of the system. And I think a 4-year electoral cycle is worth considering.<br /><br />Also, I’m not against increasing taxes on cigarettes. Then again, I’m not saying that the introduction of a tax is an arrogant compromise of my personal freedom.<br /><br />I prefer the stance of libertarians over Whitburn’s stale conservatism. I still disagree with them, but at least they’re more consistent. Whitburn will have a lot of people largely agreeing with his position. The problem is that they don't even realise their own ideological myopia.Stephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5437112912422517362.post-84813609894503657262011-02-11T14:07:00.008+13:002011-02-11T14:56:48.549+13:00Brian Edwards vs the Sun...day Star Times.<br /><br />Okay, lame joke aside, I just want to have a quick word about the idiotic decision by the <a href="http://www.stuff.co.nz/sunday-star-times/"target="_blank">Sunday Star Times</a> to threaten defamation action against <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Edwards_%28New_Zealand%29"target="_blank">Brian Edwards</a>. <br /><br /><a href="http://brianedwardsmedia.co.nz/2011/02/lawyers-for-the-sunday-star-times-threaten-me-with-an-action-for-defamation-but-the-threat-is-not-for-publication/"target="_blank">Here is the Edwards post that summaries the situation.</a><br /><br />I am against our defamation law as it stands, but even if I were not, I think this case amounts to little more than intellectually feeble reasoning and, frankly, bullying, on the part of the Sunday Star Times' editor and the journalist cited as the other client, Jonathan Marshall. This will clearly end up being a counter-productive threat (in part due to the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect"target = "_blank">Steisand effect</a>), if it isn't already. If the SST and Marshall were advised to take this step, they received some very bad advice. Maybe they should sue.<br /><br />Anyway, I just wanted to vent that, and show some support for Edwards' stance on this issue.Stephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5437112912422517362.post-39231415060630913102011-01-02T18:47:00.035+13:002011-03-06T22:18:42.044+13:002011 ReviewTwo days in: So far, so good.<br /><br />What have I done in the first two days? I've enjoyed Wellington's fairly decent weather and got a lot of washing done. And some drinking.<br /><br />I've had fun <a href="http://www.radioheritage.net/NZLPFM_Search.asp"target="_blank">checking out</a> some of the 150-plus* Low Powered FM radio stations available in Wellington. (Yes, that's the sort of thing I do for fun.) That's over one hundred & fifty in Wellington alone (including Kapiti etc). That doesn't even count the standard power stations like National Radio or Active, or any AM frequency stations like Access Radio. I was quite surprised.<br />[*Edit: Okay, not all of those are currently active, but there are a lot of smaller stations around, some of which are quite interesting.]<br /><br />I finished Vladimir Nabokov's <span style="font-style: italic;">Despair</span>. Good book. (I wonder if the original Russian title, <span style="font-style: italic;">Otchayanie</span>, has slightly different connotations than the English equivalent?)<br /><br />I read Charles Reece's <a href="http://www.amoeba.com/blog/contributors/writings-from-the-holy-texan/page1.html"target="_blank">Best 11 Films of 2010</a>. I always enjoy his efforts at getting many non-standard publicity posters for the films. Such as...<br /><br />EDIT: sorry, image not working any longer. <a href="http://www.shockya.com/news/wp-content/uploads/toy_story_3_big_baby_poster.jpg">This was it.</a><br /><br />I got into part 3 of <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Y:_The_Last_Man"target="_blank">Y:</a> The Last Man - 'One Small Step'.<br /><br />And I caught up on the latest <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzn1V5l74qU"target="_blank">Natalie Tran Vlogs</a>.<br /><br />That's not too bad for two days of the new year.<br /><br />------------<br /><br />For the next little while at least, I'll be posting all "pop culture" related stuff (such as film reviews and commentary) over at <a href="http://poplitiko.blogspot.com/"target="_blank">Poplitiko</a>. Where I am inclined to comment on something other than pop culture, it'll be here. Plus I'll post links to Poplitiko just in case.<br /><br />------------<br /><br />Merry new year.<br /><br /><object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/F1TOkSYmNFE?fs=1&hl=en_GB"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/F1TOkSYmNFE?fs=1&hl=en_GB" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object>Stephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5437112912422517362.post-2118866527687383852010-09-20T20:33:00.020+12:002010-09-23T18:40:00.449+12:00Sound & RhythmThis week's 15 minute film review looks at the Wellington Film Society screening of Beyond Ipanema, which was shown Monday 13 September in conjunction with the <a href="http://www.reelbrazil.co.nz/2010/Home.html" target="_blank">Reel Brazil Film Festival</a>, now in its second year. Unfortunately I missed last Monday's (20 Sept) screening of Belgian Bond parody <a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0464913/" target="_blank">OSS117: Cairo: Nest of Spies</a>. So, start the clock...<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;"><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1198121/" target="_blank">Beyond Ipanema</a></span> (2009)<br /><br />It would be difficult not to make a reasonably entertaining and interesting documentary about the resurgent Brazilian music scene: the soundtrack's a given, Brazil has ample gorgeous vistas and gorgeous people, and there's 60 years of history and interest from world famous musicians (chiefly David Byrne). Filmmaker Guto Barra (along with co-producer and music director Béco Dranoff) manages to make a doco that's just that: interesting, entertaining, handsomely put together, and featuring great music.<br /><br />It's a good documentary film, but it seemed lacking in enough detail, enough depth; there weren't many of those moments that make the audience feel like they are marvelling at an incite. The film was somewhat like a bus tour, with a better than average guide holding the mike. (A tour mostly around Rio and New York, which received much of Barra's focus.)<br /><br />One of the best moments was when someone from the Bossa Nova scene explains the difference between his style and regular jazz. It was all conveyed in the way he gestured and mimicked the sound and rhythm of the two styles - that's what made the scene, what drew the laughs, what instilled the appreciation. It's really not something a written review can replicate, which surely is a sign of documentary film at its best - working with sound and vision to impart wisdom and effect not easy to summarise.<br /><br /><object width="480" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/7agPOt1XZz8?fs=1&hl=en_GB"><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/7agPOt1XZz8?fs=1&hl=en_GB" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="480" height="385"></embed></object><br /><span style=";font-family:trebuchet ms;font-size:85%;" ><br /></span>Stephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5437112912422517362.post-65303151708213745912010-09-08T14:39:00.027+12:002010-09-11T23:18:32.811+12:00The fog of warOver the next few months I'm trying an experiment of sorts. I am attending the Wellington Film Society screenings on Monday nights, and would like to comment on the movies I see. However, I don't have the time to post a lengthy critique every week, so I've set myself the humble task of reviewing each week's screening in 15 minutes. The 15 minutes is for the main content, and does not include a little time afterwards for adding in links, tags and images, and proofreading for typos. I will post the comment after work on the day after the screening, so it should be up by around 6.30pm Tuesdays.<br /><br />This first attempt is an exception: <span style="font-style:italic;">No Man's Land</span> actually screened last week (30 August, I didn't go to this week's showing), and this review took longer than 15 minutes. It's a trail run...<br /><br /><span style="font-weight:bold;"><a href="http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0283509/"target="_blank">No Man's Land</a></span> (2001)<br /><br />I went into the screening of <span style="font-style:italic;">No Man's Land</span> (written and directed by Danis Tanovic) not knowing much about it. I'd heard of it, mostly because of the coverage it got from its 2001 Oscar win for Best Foreign Language Film, but had little idea of the story other than that it was set in the Bosnian war (1992 to 1995). It's one of those films where this lack of knowledge helps, as its story telling makes effective moments from the unexpected. For example, the opening scene is set in a night fog, with a Bosnian patrol lost and about to hunker down till dawn. We seem to be getting to know the gang - this film's dirty dozen, or inglorious bastards - as they talk and joke with each other. Then with daybreak the gang finds that they're much too close to the Serbian lines and suddenly virtually everyone in the Bosnian group is brutally killed.<br /><br />Eventually, we settle on two or three main characters in a predicament together in a trench in no man's land. The relationship of the Serb and Bosnian characters in the trench is fairly realistically drawn, and appropriately frustrating. It is here, and in the character of the head of the French UN unit trying to intervene, that the humanity of the story is at the fore. The wider shenanigans involving the UN peacekeepers, the British command, the two sides' respective leadership in the area, and the media is more satirical, at times even perhaps a touch over the top, and gives the film a strong parable feel.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_faJ61tz3HOg/Sj5-oSfnrZI/AAAAAAAAAI8/Q4gHsXxLOPM/s400/nml.bmp"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 400px; height: 267px;" src="http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_faJ61tz3HOg/Sj5-oSfnrZI/AAAAAAAAAI8/Q4gHsXxLOPM/s400/nml.bmp" border="0" alt="" /></a><br /><br />I'm wary of actors turned directors when it comes to the visual aspect, and this is a good example of why. No Man's Land has fairly bland cinematography (the shot above is one of the more interesting). Apart from the effective opening scenes, Tanovic relies largely on a few establishing shots and a lot of "Um, I know, let's point the camera at the actors".<br /><br />Despite that, No Man's Land does a competent job blending different genres and styles: effective as war movie, situation comedy, tragedy, satire, farce, and even thriller. <br /><br />Criticism of the film includes that it seems to have little to say other than 'war is hell'. That's true to a point, but I think that of most war films. I've never been a big fan of war satires. The likes of <span style="font-style:italic;">Dr Strangelove</span> and the movie version of <span style="font-style:italic;">Catch 22</span>, supposed classics of the genre, are okay, but not hugely impressive. Maybe it's a 'shooting fish in a barrel' thing - war seems easy to satirize. No Man's Land is one of the better attempts. Even so, the absurdities and violence on display still seem only an indication of the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bosnian_War#The_pre-war_situation_in_Bosnia_and_Herzegovina"target="_blank">complexity</a> and <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_the_Bosnian_War#Systematic_rape_by_armed_forces"target="_blank">brutality</a> of the real conflict. <br /><br />War may provoke the occasional good movie, but on balance, I'm against it.Stephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5437112912422517362.post-86684416419476912022010-09-05T15:12:00.008+12:002010-09-06T23:25:09.073+12:00Lost on yer merry wayAhem. I'm... a little late with this one. <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lost_%28TV_series%29"target="_blank">Lost</a>'s season finale was screened 30 May 2010. <br /><br />(Spoilers)<br /><br />So how about I cop out and refer to what others have written - after all, my thoughts are summed up nicely by much earlier comments and reviews, and, like the characters from Lost, I really need to move on. (In their case to the afterlife, in my case to reviewing <span style="font-style:italic;">No Man's Land</span> and <span style="font-style:italic;">Inception</span>.)<br /><br />In regards to the finale itself, <a href="http://www.amoeba.com/blog/2010/05/writings-from-the-holy-texan/lost-their-way-the-end-.html"target="_blank">Charles Reece's Amoeblog commentary</a> pretty well covers all the stuff I disliked, and the few aspects I liked, about The End.<br /><br />I was particularly disappointed with the sentimentality (not to mention illogicality) of the 'Sideways Timeline' resolution, juxtaposed with the otherwise excellent final few 'real world' scenes on the Island. <br /><br />I still feel the series overall was worth my time: often an almost perfect blend of the elements that make good science fiction/fantasy television drama. The flashbacks were well used early on (but not so much in season 2, where they were often wasted on characters who would turn out to have little real significance to the ongoing events), and the switch to flashforwards in season 3 was clever. The show was at its best during seasons 3 to 5.<br /><br />Wellington's <span style="font-style:italic;">Dominion Post</span> tv reviewer, Jane Bowron <a href="http://www.stuff.co.nz/entertainment/tv/3758400/Lost-the-phenomenon"target="_blank">sums up</a>:<br /><br /><blockquote>What the show did do was throw action, science, myth, and retribution into the soup as it made acute observations on human nature in intriguingly drawn characters.<br /><br />Above all, the show made us feel our loneliness, that we are all isolated in spite of Charlie's words at the very beginning when he assured Sayid: "They'll find us. They have satellites in space that can take pictures of your licence plates."<br /><br />To which Sayid sarcastically replied: "If only we were all wearing licence plates."<br /></blockquote><br /><br />Adios, Perdidos.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:oje_yI53B4uVAM:http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v254/catscratch/vlcsnap-2010-05-25-17h47m04s114.png&t=1"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 300px; height: 168px;" src="http://t3.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:oje_yI53B4uVAM:http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v254/catscratch/vlcsnap-2010-05-25-17h47m04s114.png&t=1" border="0" alt="" /></a><br /><br /><blockquote><a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M_ZykTEZkFU"><span style="font-style:italic;">Off on a merry way, Often in a lotta days, Lost on yer merry way<br />Cause unrevealed and never known.</span></a> </blockquote>Stephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5437112912422517362.post-5688108677991682722010-05-30T16:13:00.012+12:002010-05-30T23:23:01.314+12:00Lost for wordsNope, I'm not about to review the final of <span style="font-style: italic;">Lost </span>- not yet. I have to watch it first. We had to record the final episode, shown in NZ on Saturday, as we had a social engagement and I decided that my friend was (narrowly) more important than watching <span style="font-style: italic;">Lost </span>as broadcast. In the meantime I've been giving some consideration to the title I'll give the the blog wherein I do comment on <span style="font-style: italic;">Lost</span>, which I'll be watching tonight. There's the above, and...<br /><br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><span style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0);">Making up for Lost time</span><br /><br />The Island of the day before and after<br /><br />The Lost Boys and Girls<br /><br />Hurley <span class="blsp-spelling-error" id="SPELLING_ERROR_0">burley<br /><br /></span></span><span style="font-size:130%;">One Lost chance <span style="font-size:100%;"><span style="font-size:85%;">(I came up with it </span><span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_1" style="font-size:85%;">independently</span><span style="font-size:85%;">, but <a href="http://arche-arc.blogspot.com/2010/05/one-lost-chance.html">Gene </a></span><a href="http://arche-arc.blogspot.com/2010/05/one-lost-chance.html"><span class="blsp-spelling-corrected" id="SPELLING_ERROR_2" style="font-size:85%;">Phillips</span></a><span style="font-size:85%;"> beat me to it. I also like his next post, 'The Last Lost Chance Saloon'.)</span></span></span><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><br />Lost in translation</span><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><br />You Lost me<br /><br />Lost in spaces<span style="font-size:100%;"><span style="font-size:85%;"></span><br /></span><br />Jack shit<br /><br />Get Lost.</span>Stephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.com3tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5437112912422517362.post-47225740849144509842010-03-17T20:22:00.010+13:002010-09-24T20:44:57.463+12:00Thank you Garielle McKoneThe top 20 keyword searches that led people to Booksmart, so far this year.<br /><br />I knew there had to be at least one porn searcher, but "booksmart porno"? And what's with "primetime live pizza hut"?<br /><br />-------<br /><br />1. "gabrielle mckone"<br /><br />2. follatio<br /><br />3. nz comic name suppression<br /><br />4. political spectrum results<br /><br />5. "2010 oscar nominations"<br /><br />6. "book smart on both"<br /><br />7. "courtenay place park"<br /><br />8. "left social libertarian"<br /><br />9. book smart positive points<br /><br />10. book smart positive views<br /><br />11. booksmart porno<br /><br />12. booksmart.net reputation<br /><br />13. everyman and his blog<br /><br />14. gabrielle mckone<br /><br />15. gabrielle mckone courtenay place exhibition<br /><br />16. primetime live pizza hut<br /><br />17. rehmat khan squash natasha<br /><br />18. good things about book smart<br /><br />19. hello laziness hypertext<br /><br />20. not book smartStephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5437112912422517362.post-51794527256305833402010-02-25T20:58:00.030+13:002010-09-09T19:00:35.883+12:00Laughing at fateI know one shouldn't take the annual Academy Awards seriously. It has absurdities such as <span style="font-style: italic;">Avatar </span>even being nominated for "Best Picture", let alone that it is more likely to win than, say, <span style="font-style: italic;">Inglourious Basterds</span>. But come Oscar time I just can't help myself. Call it a guilty displeasure.<br /><br />That said, the best picture nominee list this year is not bad. Had the Academy stuck to the usual five pictures for this category, and had they been <span style="font-style: italic;">Up in the Air, District 9, Inglourious Basterds, A Serious Man</span>, and <span style="font-style: italic;">Up </span>I would have been very impressed. Every one of those films is recommended from me. (<span style="font-style: italic;">The Hurt Locker</span> and <span style="font-style: italic;">The Blind Side</span> have not yet been released in cinemas in NZ, and I missed <span style="font-style: italic;">An Education</span> as it finished its cinema run before I found out it was one of the chosen few. I hope to catch <span style="font-style: italic;">Precious </span>this weekend.)<br /><br />Of the six nominated films I have seen so far, only <span style="font-style: italic;">Avatar </span>has disappointed. However, initially I was also a little disappointed with <span style="font-style: italic;">A Serious Man</span>.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.filmwell.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/623edb761795fa57_a-serious-man.jpg"><img style="margin: 0px auto 10px; display: block; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 550px; height: 308px;" src="http://www.filmwell.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/623edb761795fa57_a-serious-man.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br /><br />[WARNING: This commentary is best read after viewing the movies discussed, A Serious Man and Up in the Air. Partly because it contains some spoilers (albeit vague ones), but mostly because I can't be bothered to summarise the plots.]<br /><br />You could almost justify going to <span style="font-style: italic;">A Serious Man</span> just to see the scene which gave us the brilliant still above. As is often the case with good films set in what are usually considered drab or uninteresting environments (rambler home studded <a href="http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/37/Suburbia_by_David_Shankbone.jpg"target="_blank">bland suburbia</a> in this case) the visuals are surprisingly engaging.<br /><br />However, although it has largely been reviewed positively, I have sympathy with some of the criticism of the Coen brother's latest effort. I quite liked Joe Morgenstern's <a href="http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704471504574446962410393646.html"target="_blank">sly take</a> on the question posed in the film: what does God want of us? "What do the Coen brothers want of us?" he wonders.<br /><br />Sometimes I feel as if the Coen's use the "black comedy" label as an excuse to portray the sort of "repellent ... grotesque" caricatures Morgenstern has concerns with in his review. With the exception of the protagonist, physics teacher Larry Gopnik (<span style="font-weight: bold;">Michael Stuhlbarg</span>), no one is really likeable, and almost everyone is infuriatingly selfish. Characters like Gopnik's nemesis Sy Ableman are not evil in a straightforward Ming the Merciless way, but they aren't far off, being very nearly as flat and clichéd. They all serve largely as cogs in the plot machine for the Job-like journey of the protagonist (almost the opposite of the previous Coen film, <span style="font-style: italic;">No Country for Old Men</span>).<br /><br />Gopnik seems to maintain his faith throughout the trials of the story, such as his wife leaving him for the aforementioned Ableman, an absolutely repugnant fake of a human being. Yet his faith, honesty, and a portion of dignity remain, while he understandably questions what all that means.<br /><br />But Gopnik rarely seems to give serious thought to anything else, other than asking "what does it all mean", or "why does this happen to me" and similar questions when things go wrong (which happens a lot).<br /><br />As Morgenstern mentioned, Gopnik describes Heisenberg's uncertainty principle by explaining that it "means we can never know what's going on." When explaining to a desperate student why he has failed a term test, Gopnik says he failed the maths. The student responds by claiming to have understood the theory in the story of the cat (in reference to <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schr%C3%B6dinger%27s_cat"target="_blank">Schrodinger's cat</a>). Gopnik brushes this off as mere metaphor - it's really just about the maths. "I mean, even I don't understand the dead cat. The math is how it really works."<br /><br />In the end, Gopnik's maths washes over him like a Tsunami, as in the image above, perhaps representing his tenuous grasp on the domestic reality that is rapidly untangling around him. At the very end of the story, when things seem like they might be about to look up for Gopnik, he is presented with a moral dilemma - and lo, he is weak. In the context of all that has happened to him many will find his weakness here understandable. But not his God, it seems.<br /><br /><br /><blockquote style="font-style: italic; color: rgb(51, 0, 153);"><span style="font-size:130%;">No, not me - I'm an island of such great complexity.<br /><span style="font-style: italic; color: rgb(0, 51, 51);"> </span><span style="color: rgb(0, 51, 51);font-size:78%;" >(Pavement - "Shady Lane".)</span><br /></span></blockquote><br />Another film from the Oscar list this year that could broadly be categorised in the same genre is <span style="font-style: italic;">Up in the Air</span>, my favourite movie of those nominated. Another comedy, this is a sort of 'romantic comedy' rather than a 'black comedy'. However, at times its humour is equally dry.<br /><br /><span style="font-weight: bold;">George Clooney</span> plays frequent flyer extraordinaire Ryan Bingham, who has the job of crossing flyover country in order to assist people in their transitional phase of life - that is, he tells people they no longer have a job. In the process he finally seems to meet that special someone. Also, his own job (at least as he thinks it should be done) may well be under threat.<br /><br />The depiction of the lone traveller 'man-is-an-island' lifestyle that is practiced and preached by Bingham is done perfectly. The acting is excellent (nominations for <span style="font-weight: bold;">Vera Farmiga</span> and <span style="font-weight: bold;">Anna Kendrick</span>), the script is about as good as mainstream Hollywood romance gets, and the politics is fairly evenhandedly dealt with by libertarian <span style="font-weight: bold;">Jason Reitman </span>(director and co-scriptwriter, along with <span style="font-weight: bold;">Sheldon Turner</span>).<br /><br />But it is myopic to see this film too much in terms of politics or even romance per se. As cheesy as it may sound, this film is a rare instance of Hollywood living up to its own promotion: it is about a man trying to make a connection, in a world increasingly built around superficial connectedness.<br /><br />Both <span style="font-style: italic;">A Serious Man</span> and <span style="font-style: italic;">Up in the Air</span> are funny movies. Neither film gives us a particularly happy ending, but the former is, ironically, trapped by its own genre nature - forced to buy into its black-comedic biblical twist. Despite the bitter pill delivered at the climax of <span style="font-style: italic;">Up in the Air</span>, it still offers at least the possibility of hope and change, even with its downbeat ending.<br /><br />There are fewer flaws and problems with tone and intent in <span style="font-style: italic;">Up in the Air</span> than in <span style="font-style: italic;">A Serious Man</span>. They have in common protagonists that try to maintain a certain sense of dignity in the face of what happens around them (albeit more cynically so in the former). Both protagonists have some idea of a faith or philosophy of life that they hold on to, rightly or wrongly, for most of their story. Both betray that philosophy at a crucial point, and in both cases, be it though fate or contingency, they pay a price for that decision.Stephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5437112912422517362.post-64512248059229871412010-02-03T23:35:00.014+13:002010-09-09T19:45:15.954+12:00Stephen to Academy: You Basterds<a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://forbiddenplanet.co.uk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Inglorious-Basterds-comic-5.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 382px; height: 591px;" src="http://forbiddenplanet.co.uk/blog/wp-content/uploads/2009/11/Inglorious-Basterds-comic-5.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a><br />A couple of years ago I made a commitment to myself to watch every Oscar 'Best Picture' nominated film. It was an <a href="http://www.theinsider.com/news/597955_Juno_Michael_Clayton_Among_Top_Oscar_Nominees">easy year to do so</a>, with <span style="font-style:italic;">There Will Be Blood</span>, <span style="font-style:italic;">No Country for Old Men, Juno, Micheal Clayton,</span> and <span style="font-style:italic;">Atonement </span>on the "Best" list. In the end, second best No Country won the Oscar.*<br /><br />I failed to meet my commitment <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/81st_Academy_Awards">the following year</a>, but I am determined to get back to the cinema to judge Oscar choices this year.<br /><br />So fuck you, Academy.<br /><br />Why? Because the 2010 Oscar nominations are out, and this year the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences has changed back to <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/03/movies/awardsseason/03oscar.html?ref=movies">ten nominations</a> for the Best Picture category.<br /><br />Ten films in a short space of time. Okay, it's not so tough as that, because I've already seen four of them. Three of those were pretty darn good: <span style="font-style:italic;">Up, District 9</span>, and <span style="font-style:italic;">Inglourious Basterds</span>.<br /><br />One, <span style="font-style:italic;">Avatar</span>, was pretty darn crap.<br /><br />And given the Academy's record of <a href="http://eatingjourney.files.wordpress.com/2009/09/titanic.jpg">highly questionable taste</a>, I'd be surprised if more than half of the remainder will be worth seeing.<br /><br />Well, we'll see - I have until 7 March (US).<br /><br />--------<br /><br />* <span style="font-style:italic;">There Will Be Blood</span> was the best movie, but <span style="font-style:italic;">No Country for Old Men</span> was also excellent. <span style="font-style:italic;">Juno </span>and <span style="font-style:italic;">Atonement </span>were not bad and had aspects of interest, and <span style="font-style:italic;">Micheal Clayton</span> was somewhere in between.Stephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5437112912422517362.post-22076745532365086662009-12-25T02:33:00.013+13:002010-09-17T18:33:58.294+12:00Celebrity justice, broken clocks & hidden TigersI'm a bit late in writing a substantial comment on the <a href="http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sexual-assault/news/article.cfm?c_id=1500916&objectid=10605845&pnum=1"target="_blank">celebrity name suppression</a> issue regarding a musician's sexual antics in Wellington earlier this year. I just have a couple of thoughts I want to get down, and will not be breaking the court order. However, as most people probably realise, it seems anyone who really wants to know can find out the suppressed name anyway.<br /><br />This brings up the first issue. I wonder of this incident has been the death knell for that kind of name suppression. It seems to me that, rightly or not, people just do not respect this use of name suppression. I'm referring to when the suppression is for the benefit of the perpetrator, as opposed to the victim, and when the intent is to protect a reputation, as opposed to allowing for the completion of a fair trail. Given the way modern communication technology operates, I just can't see any other similar decision holding any more authority than this one.<br /><br />Secondly, it's very rare that I have any sympathy or find much agreement with right-wing blogger <a href="http://whaleoil.gotcha.co.nz/"target="_blank">Whaleoil</a> (Cameron Slater), but I do broadly support his stance on this issue. Slater is in some trouble with the authorities after allegedly giving out enough clues to identify the entertainer and another celebrity who also has name suppression. I do not know so much about the latter case and the circumstances are different, so for the purposes of this post I'll be addressing the first case only.<br /><br />I see this matter as basically being a question of whether the courts should concern themselves with protecting the reputation of an offender. The reason given for the discharge without conviction and permanent name suppression is that otherwise the consequences for the offender would supposedly have been out of proportion to the offence committed. Finlay Macdonald touched on this in a Sunday Star Times article (quoted from <a href="http://publicaddress.net/6319#post6319"target="_blank">this Hard News column</a>):<br /><br /><blockquote>Yet the media are the very ones who create such a special class in the first place, and there's something a little disingenuous about stoking society's celebrity obsession on the one hand while demanding celebrities receive no special treatment on the other. One might even call it hypocritical.<br /><br />You can call it the price of fame, but surely the price should be relative to the alleged crime.</blockquote><br /><br />Well, I don't like the way the media encourages the public's inane celebrity obsession either, but that is a separate issue. It is not hypocritical for some, including some in the mainstream media, to maintain that celebrities should be treated the same as "regular" citizens when it comes to conviction and sentencing for their criminal behaviour. As for the price being relative to the crime, it seems to me that the court's role is to ensure the sentence <span style="font-style:italic;">it applies</span> is fair for the crime committed, taking reasonable account of the circumstances in which the criminal act took place. It is not its role to protect the accused from the wider repercussions of their own behaviour. That is what is happing here that Macdonald and Russell Brown et al don't seem to appreciate: the perpetrator of a crime is being given special protection from the consequences of his asinine actions simply because those actions brought him to the attention of the courts. <br /><br />Consider another recent example of a misbehaving celebrity: the Tiger Woods affair (well, affairs). I've found much of the reaction to his transgressions somewhat sanctimonious. I don't condone what he did, but is it really that bad in the scheme of things? Should we even be so precious when we find out that many of these sports superstars are not (shock horror) the ideal role models we seem to want them to be? Macdonald again, on the NZ celebrity case:<br /><br /><blockquote>The offence wasn't trivial, but in the context of the horrors the courts routinely deal with, it's hard to argue it merited more coverage than a far more serious assault by a nonentity.</blockquote><br /><br />Wouldn't this sentiment apply to Woods? Does he deserve more scrutiny and media coverage than any number of other people who have engaged in similarly dodgy conduct? The NZ celebrity, by comparison, has benefited from his conduct being regarded as actually criminal - putting it before the court and thus providing the option of name suppression at the conclusion of the process. <a href="http://publicaddress.net/system/topic,2224,hard-news-so-called-celebrity-justice.sm?i=60#forum-replies" target="_blank">As I suggested on Public Address</a> [see comments for my original typo], the way for a celebrity to protect his reputation from the damage that can come from behaving like a fuckwit is to avoid behaving like a fuckwit. His reputation is his to look after, not the courts. Had the judge decided not to suppress the identification of the offender, any price this celebrity paid in terms of his reputation should be seen as the result of his own actions, not as a punishment of the court. <br /><br />Back to Russell Brown from his blog:<br /><br /><blockquote>Ironically, had he actually been named, the man would have been guaranteed a sympathetic run from the same media organisations who have been pursuing him -- in exchange for an interview. The Sunday Star Times was, for example, only too happy to softball Clint Rickards in exchange for pictures with his daughter. Such is the trade of celebrity value. The moral line can easily be moved to suit.<br /></blockquote><br />Yes yes, the media can be pretty shit. A capricious, shallow, hypocritical lot - well, much of the time. But the 'pro-suppression' arguments seem to be more about a distrust and (understandable) dislike of the way some aspects of the media work in regards to this sort of thing, rather than actual philosophical objections in terms of the broader justice issue. A more legitimate concern would be with why is the media and society in general so ridiculously celebrity obsessed, and relatedly, why does society naively persist in treating celebrities as role models or paragons of human conduct?Stephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5437112912422517362.post-4713825025389123142009-12-18T18:10:00.016+13:002010-09-23T18:15:48.026+12:00Shoot from the hipFirst, a quick note from the Admin part of my brain. I have been especially slack lately in blogging, exacerbated by now being back in full time employment. Nevertheless, I hope to get in at least one, maybe two more blog posts on Booksmart before going away on Boxing Day for two weeks for my first trip to the South Island of the country I have lived in for virtually my whole life.<br /><br />Second, another brief plug for <a href="http://www.photospace.co.nz/gallery_index.htm">Photospace </a> (no, I don't get paid for this!). It's been done before, but I quite like the look of the upcoming "from the hip"-style photography show from <a href="http://www.gabriellemckone.com/">Gabrielle McKone</a>. (I thought <a href="http://www.gabriellemckone.com/BlogArchiveMonth.php?BlogMonth=08&BlogYear=2009" target="_blank">August 09</a> was a particularly good month.)<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.gabriellemckone.com/images/blog/1017med.jpg"><img style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 464px; height: 309px;" src="http://www.gabriellemckone.com/images/blog/1017med.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br /><br /><span style="font-style: italic;">Three Stories Up</span> opens Monday, 21 December outside Jimmy Cafe on Courtenay Place. The show is curated by Photospace's James Gilberd, and will be the next <a href="http://www.wellington.govt.nz/services/arts/publicart/pdfs/light-box-guidelines.pdf" target="_blank">light box exhibition at Courtenay Place Park</a>.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.gabriellemckone.com/images/blog/977med.jpg"><img style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 464px; height: 309px;" src="http://www.gabriellemckone.com/images/blog/977med.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a>Stephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5437112912422517362.post-7811598685853931042009-10-07T10:26:00.013+13:002010-09-23T20:49:53.754+12:00Some links to optimismI was cleaning up round the place and found this here blog. Better give it some exercise, I guess.<br /><br />I had reason to link to a presentation from a <a href="http://www.ted.com/pages/view/id/5" target="_blank">TED conference</a> during a debate I had on on morality over at <a href="http://publicaddress.net/system/topic,2109,on-morals.sm" target="_blank">Public Address.</a> It's a good talk by <span style="font-weight: bold;">Steven Pinker</span> about the the perception many seem to have that the world is a more violent and brutal place than ever. Pinker mentions the "non-zero sum" theory by <span style="font-weight: bold;">Robert Wright</span>, and I have since noticed that this is expanded on by Wright in an earlier TED talk in 2006.<br /><br />I don't entirely agree with everything Wright proposes, but no doubt there's something to it, and it makes for useful viewing before the Pinker talk from 2007. Pinker argues that (contrary to common views) we have in fact become a lot less violent over the centuries, and we are living in the most peaceful time in our history. He suggests reasons why things have improved and makes some very interesting points about the way we often perceive violence, the media's role in this, and how we should be a lot more positive, in some ways, about what humanity has achieved.<br /><br /><span style="font-size:130%;"><a href="http://www.ted.com/talks/robert_wright_on_optimism.html" target="_blank">Robert Wright on optimism<br /></a><br /><a href="http://www.ted.com/talks/steven_pinker_on_the_myth_of_violence.html" target="_blank">Steven Pinker on the myth of violence</a></span><br /><br /><span style="font-size:85%;">TED talks are covered by <a href="http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/" target="_blank">Creative Commons license</a>.</span>Stephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5437112912422517362.post-50295278830773515452009-07-21T09:57:00.017+12:002010-09-09T17:19:54.825+12:00Follatio breadIt was the big news of last week: Bread.<br /><br />Not the shitty band, the food product. In what was probably one of the biggest news stories in the nation during the latter part of Wednesday afteroon, the debate raged as to whether folate should be added to bread (a process known by the technical name "<a href="http://mybox.happycampus.com/kstudy/1074942"target="_blank">folation</a>"). <br /><br />It looks like the Government may eventually arrange for the addition of folate to bread. However, it won't be compulsory, <a href="http://www.stuff.co.nz/timaru-herald/news/2608079/Folate-in-bread-still-likely-as-Govt-halts-deal"target="_blank">according to the Timaru Herald</a>: "While the Government says it will seek feedback on the moratorium and other options before a final decision is made, by signaling that a moratorium is its preferred option, Mr Key has effectively called a halt to the compulsory regime."<br /><br />I think this is a good thing - I don't think bread should be folated against its will. <br /><br />I don't usually do polls, mostly because I don't have any readers to answer them, but this is important. Should we be folating bread?<br /><br />The polls are now open.<br /><br /><span style="font-style:italic;">UPDATE: Polls closed. The overwhelming majority (75%) agree: It's hard to believe people voted for that dick Tony Ryall.<br />A quarter believe we should <span style="font-weight:bold;">not</span> add folate, and no one is in favour of folating bread.<br /></span><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.subliminal-messaging.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/subliminal-imagery-2.jpg"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 450px; height: 279px;" src="http://www.subliminal-messaging.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/01/subliminal-imagery-2.jpg" border="0" alt="" /></a>Stephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5437112912422517362.post-45046042736609066092009-07-03T17:00:00.063+12:002010-09-09T19:40:52.187+12:00Bat for BowieAging and death - fun topics, right? Well, they seem especially prominent to me at the moment. Publicly, there was Farrah Fawcett, Michael Jackson et al. Privately, my dad is not in good health. And I don't know about you, but <span style="font-style:italic;">I</span> keep getting older. So I've decided to make two brief recommendations for your music collection that deal, to some degree, with such matters.<br /><br />Firstly, the sublime <span style="font-style:italic;">Two Suns</span> by <span style="font-weight:bold;">Bat for Lashes</span>.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://www.todayfm.com/Libraries/Gallery%20Two/BatForLashes.sflb"><img style="display:block; margin:0px auto 10px; text-align:center;cursor:pointer; cursor:hand;width: 332px; height: 332px;" src="http://www.todayfm.com/Libraries/Gallery%20Two/BatForLashes.sflb" border="0" alt="" /></a><br /><br />Now don't be fooled, Bat for Lashes is a band only in the sense that <span style="font-weight:bold;">Nine Inch Nails</span> is a band. Bat for Lashes is really <span style="font-weight:bold;">Natasha Khan</span>, an England-based artist. This is from her website bio: <br /><br /><blockquote>Born in 1979, yet combining influences that span decades, Natasha’s work dwells in the elemental, emerging in timeless forms.<br /></blockquote><br />But just ignore that Earth-child shit, her music is actually really good. The latest album is apparently largely inspired by "a coming together and journeying apart of two suns, two half hearts... a King and a Queen...". Thank God for relationships. If it wasn't for them not only may we not have been born, but no one would have anything to sing about.<br /><br />Anyway, the last track on the album, 'The Big Sleep', addresses death pretty bluntly... but hey, <a href="http://www.metrolyrics.com/the-big-sleep-lyrics-bat-for-lashes.html"target="_blank">you can make it your ringtone</a> if you like!<br /><br />Enough with the cynicism - <span style="font-style:italic;">Two Suns</span> is a fantastic, dreamy and yet soaring collection of songs. Its gorgeous, delicate soundscape has a lullaby-like quality at times, and yet also features surprisingly funky beats. (The beat programming and bass was partly courtesy of Brooklyn psychedelic experimental band <span style="font-weight:bold;">Yeasayer</span>). As the music reviewer cliche goes, it's an album that rewards repeat listening. <br /><br />Here's the first single off the album, <a href="http://www.batforlashes.com/journal"target="_blank">"Daniel"</a>, mashed up on You Tube to go with the Karate Kid. [Edit: Sometimes that link works and sometimes not, but you can probably google the You Tube vid.]<br /><br />(<span style="font-weight:bold;"target="_blank">Update</span>: I have just read this interesting <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/culture/music/4787192/Bat-for-Lashes-off-the-wall.html">article from The Telegraph</a> (which coincidantly used the same photo as I did). It points out Natasha is the cousin of the famous squash player <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jahangir_Khan#Training_Regime">Jahangir Khan</a>, whom her father, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rehmat_Khan">Rehmat Khan</a>, coached for several years. This period included his exceptional five year unbeaten run that lasted more than 500 games, and was ended by New Zealand's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ross_Norman">Ross Norman</a>.)<br /><br />Along with <span style="font-style:italic;">Two Suns</span>, I happen to be listening to a lot to the excellent <span style="font-weight:bold;">David Bowie</span> album <span style="font-style:italic;">Reality</span>. In many ways Bowie is at the opposite end of the spectrum to Khan. He ain't young, he's not new on the music scene, and he's not a cute chick. But he is British and he is talented. <span style="font-style:italic;">Reality </span>is generally accepted to be arguably Bowie's best album since <span style="font-style:italic;">Scary Monsters</span>. (I've heard it argued that <span style="font-style:italic;">Let's Dance</span> or <span style="font-style:italic;">Heathen</span> are better.)<br /><br />I think <span style="font-style:italic;">Reality </span>is massive fun, and one of the great albums of this century. It does somewhat dwell on those issues of old age, death, isolation and so forth. At least half the tracks are overtly orientated to issues of old age, loneliness and approaching death. But it's sincere, thoughtful and good pop music all at the same time. <br /><br />Not every song is ostensibly about such morbid matters. For example, there's the enigmatic lead single 'New Killer Star', with what seems to me to be quite humourous lyrics: <br /><br /><blockquote>See my life in a comic<br />Like the way they did the Bible<br />With the bubbles and action<br />The little details in colour<br />First a horseback bomber<br />Just a small thin chance<br />Like seeing Jesus on Dateline<br />Let's face the music and dance.</blockquote><br />Nevertheless, even on such tracks, death seems always on his mind. After all, the album's first line is a 9/11 reference: <span style="font-style:italic;">"See the great white scar over Battery Park".</span> In light of this, the ambiguous but catchy chorus of 'New Killer Star' seems somehow poignant: <br /><br /><blockquote>All the corners of the buildings,<br />Who but we remember these,<br />The sidewalks and trees...</blockquote><br />Now, there's your earth child.Stephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5437112912422517362.post-67652175892642510032009-06-29T13:22:00.008+12:002010-09-23T18:16:11.362+12:00Product placementI haven't forgotten <a href="http://www.parkesweb.com/2009/05/enterprising.html">my commitment</a> to review the latest Star Trek feature. I said I would, and I will; later this week will be the least topical review of Abrams' film likely to be published.<br /><br />In the meantime, here are a couple of things to look at (and listen to, in the latter case).<br /><br />First, the image below from <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/unaesthetic/" target="_blank">unaesthetic</a>, which was brought to my attention on <a href="http://bat-bean-beam.blogspot.com/" target="_blank">Giovanni Tiso's blog</a>. As noted on unaesthetic's flickr comments, and happily accepted by unaesthetic, it is very reminiscent of work by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andreas_Gursky" target="_blank">Andreas Gursky</a>. It's a great image.<br /><br /><a onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}" href="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_MFEeDQOmK_g/Sj9jMIhNqOI/AAAAAAAAAik/7okNk-Ga9B0/s400/supermarket.jpg"><img style="display: block; margin: 0px auto 10px; text-align: center; cursor: pointer; width: 400px; height: 300px;" src="http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_MFEeDQOmK_g/Sj9jMIhNqOI/AAAAAAAAAik/7okNk-Ga9B0/s400/supermarket.jpg" alt="" border="0" /></a><br /><br />That photo in turn reminded me of <a href="http://www.last.fm/music/Radiohead/_/Fake+Plastic+Trees" target="_blank">this Radiohead video</a>.<br /><br />So take a moment, ... look, watch, listen, and enjoy.<br /><br />[EDIT: Okay, the Star Trek review wasn't "later this week", as I said. Still, I WILL post it eventually.]Stephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5437112912422517362.post-74708462598244890842009-06-08T10:33:00.023+12:002012-11-18T18:47:58.760+13:00My political spectrum resultsI am apparently a left social libertarian<br />
Left: 4.43, Libertarian: 5.95<br />
<img src="http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/11x32.gif" /><br />
<br />
Not nearly social libertarian enough for my liking. I'll have to work on that.<br />
<br />
Further results:<br />
<br />
<b>My Foreign Policy Views</b><br />
Score: -1.74<br />
<img src="http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/n41.gif" /><br />
<br />
<b>My 'Culture War' Stance</b><br />
Score: -7.23<br />
<img src="http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/grid/c14.gif" /><br />
<br />
To try it out for yourself, visit the <a href="http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/political-spectrum-quiz.html" target="-blank">Political Spectrum quiz</a>. Let me know how you do. (Hat tip: brought to my attention on Dave Crampton's blog, <a href="http://big-news.blogspot.com/2009/06/political-compass-ive-taken-political.html" target="_blank">Big News</a>.)<br />
<br />
Oh, and finally, here's me (red) compared to the rest of New Zealand respondents (appropriately, blue).<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/compare/grid/9x32x18x23.gif" onblur="try {parent.deselectBloggerImageGracefully();} catch(e) {}"><img alt="" border="0" src="http://www.gotoquiz.com/politics/compare/grid/11x32x18x23.gif" style="cursor: pointer; float: left; height: 240px; margin: 0pt 10px 10px 0pt; width: 240px;" /></a>Stephenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04766545363197498449noreply@blogger.com1