The Big Machine

The Harry Potter Generation

2011-07-13T16:34:00.000-07:00

Nearly twenty years ago, Joanne Rowling was stuck on a train between London and Manchester. Suddenly, an idea for a scrawny little boy with black hair and glasses, who had no idea he was a wizard, appeared to her as if by magic.

Seven years later, the first manuscript of “Harry Potter and the Philosopher’s Stone” struggled to find a publisher willing to take the risk on such a strange book. Fourteen more years, seven books, eight movies and billions of dollars later, “the boy who lived” has taught us all the impact a story can have.

The scope of the Harry Potter brand, the little story that could, has reached the far corners of the world. The books have been translated to over 67 different languages and have consistently set records for the fastest selling in history. The films have grossed billions and brought Rowling’s vision to life on IMAX and 3D screens. Harry Potter fans can latterly visit The Wizarding World of Harry Potter at Universal Orlando Resorts.

But, unlike most global franchises, behind the hype and the money lies a story that has, in many ways, defined a generation. A story that takes place in a castle far away, hidden to non-magical eyes, turned out to be more realistic than we ever expected.

“It all ends.” A corny tag line that has been haunting us for months. It can’t really all be over, can it?
The release of “Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows Part II” marks the official ending of not just a series, but the coming of age of a generation.

The heart of this film will hit you square in the chest like a speeding Hogwarts Express over and over again. Watching Hogwarts fall, seeing the impenetrable magical walls crumble to the ground will be more than even moderate Potter fans can bear. The teenagers fighting to protect it are not so different than those watching, clinging onto their cup holders for dear life. With every twist, every turn, and every near miss, my heart nearly stopped.

The emotional weight of the film matches and even rivals that of its book counter part. The pain and struggle is pulled straight from the pages in a way that will leave fans of the book rejoicing. Where Part I lacked luster, Part II not only captures a full spectrum of emotion, but takes it to a whole new level. It was everything a true Potter fan could have ever hoped for, the drama, the suspense and the victory. A single sob caught in my throat for almost an hour actually prevented me from shedding tears. Only at the end, as Harry puts his son onto the train, did tears freely fall from my eyes. . .

The film itself is beautifully done. The utilization of 3D brings a gorgeous depth to the overall look. Flashbacks and visions are woven seamlessly with superimposed three dimensional images.

The performances of young actors Daniel Radcliffe, Rupert Grint and Emma Watson are the cherry on top. Their maturation from children into professionals makes the conclusion even more bitter sweet.

But the standout performance comes from none other than Alan Rickman. He is brilliant in his final appearance in what has become his most iconic role. We get to see a side of Snape that has been hidden for a very long time, and Rickman rose to the challenge like the old pro that he is.

“Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows II” is more than just the culmination of one the most successful and lucrative franchises of all time. It marks the coming of age for millions of young boys and girls who having been rooting for Harry ever since they first picked up “Sorcerer’s Stone” all those years ago, when he was just a boy in a cupboard under the stairs.

The film ignites triumph in the hearts of everyone who has ever fought off the evil in their own hearts. Everyone who has every felt unworthy or fear in themselves. Everyone who has suffered loss but still took comfort in the sunrise. But most of all, for everyone who, despite their best efforts, felt their childhood go by with the blink of an eye, the turn of a page and the roll of the credits.

But Part II didn’t do it alone. That feeling cannot be the product of a single movie. It is a culmination of years of waiting and hoping. We counted down the days and stayed up all night reading. We drew lighting scars on our foreheads with red marker and waited in the dark outside the theater. Book releases and movie premieres became important milestones growing up.

We hoped and prayed for the days and weeks to go by faster, until we went to high school, our first cell phone, driver’s licenses, prom night, graduation day, moving away from home…

And now that we’re here, at the ending, our final chapter, we wish we had read just a little bit slower.

I was nine years old when I read my first Harry Potter book. I was 18 when I read my last. Now, at 21 years old, I have seen my last Harry Potter movie.

The Harry Potter Generation is graduating college, getting married, traveling abroad, starting careers, feeling every bit as terrified as Harry. Because we face something just as frightening as Lord Voldermort – adulthood, and the real world.

As the final page turns, and the final scene fades to black, we can take comfort in knowing at least part of our childhood will live on in the pages and screens, to share with the next generation.

Thank you Harry, for keeping us company on this difficult journey. And remember,

“It does not do to dwell on dreams, and forget to live.”

Really Obscure Blog Post

2011-05-13T12:31:00.000-07:00

The word “hipster” has always reflected a rejection of mainstream society. In the 40s, hipsters were youths who followed the hot jazz and swing movement. They used slang, sarcasm and experimented with drugs. Their attitude and sexual practices were considerably relaxed. They were the first “alternative” movement, primarily characterized by a movement of white middle class youths attempting to adopt the “hip” Negro culture.

Today, Urban Dictionary defines hipsters a little differently.

“Hipsters are a subculture of men and women typically in their 20’s and 30’s that value independent thinking, counter-culture, progressive politics, an appreciation of art and indie-rock, creativity, intelligence and witty banter.”

Though it is technically a state of mind, hipsters are also recognizable by their fashion: shaggy haircuts, tight fitting jeans and wide rimmed glasses with no frames. They believe in counter-culture, progressive politics and independent thinking. They strive to be “effortlessly cool” and early adopters, always staying one step ahead of popular culture.

Thank you Urban Dictionary, but that was a very long and fancy way of saying something that is much simpler: hipsters are people who do not like something purely because everybody else likes it. Anything that is socially acceptable is toxic to a true hipster. They thrive on their superior knowledge of the way the world works and enjoy putting people down for not understanding.

You know you are talking to a hipster when the conversation turns into something like this:

You: “Hm, this is a good song. Who sings it?” Hipster: “Oh, they’re pretty underground. You’ve probably never heard of them.”

Sound familiar? How about this one: “I only like their old stuff. They were better before they were famous.”

You can tell you’ve just had an encounter with a hipster if you are feeling a little frustrated and a lot stupider.

They consider themselves rejects of popular culture; hipsters are religious followers of their own alternative subculture, doing everything it tells them to. These are the hipsters who shop at American Apparel and make documentaries on their MacBooks. They wear wide rimmed glasses, plaid shirts and headbands across their forehead.

A true hipster (in theory) will follow no one when it comes to movies, music and fashion, even their fellow hipsters. They seek out their bands and movies before everyone else, and take pride in their “superior knowledge” of culture just because they have found some crummy band that nobody else likes.

If it sounds silly, it should.

You can argue that pop culture robs people of their individuality and ruins our society’s taste for art, but at the end of the day you cannot dispute what makes someone happy. A lot of people went to see “Avatar” because their friends told them to, but does that mean they enjoyed it any less?

Popular culture is a community, and a fun one to be a part of. We all enjoy discussing the movies, music and clothes we have in common with friends. If you do not, then you are most likely hanging out with others who enjoy belittling the interests of others.

Are people so insecure that they need to simultaneously put down what you like while explaining why what they like is better? Why can’t we simply enjoy what we enjoy without other people having an opinion?

It might be cool to think everything is lame, but if you open your mind you have access to an entire world of arts and entertainment, regardless of who likes what. Blindly following the crowd, any crowd, is what really kills individuality.

Hipsters conform to nonconformity. They contradict themselves just by existing. For people who are so obsessed with searching a greater meaning to life, they don’t seem to be doing a good job learning about who they really are.

In this way, “hipsterism” is merely a myth. It’s not so simple to simply classify someone as “hipster.” Like most behavioral conditions, hipster occurs on a broad spectrum, with many people landing in the middle.

A person who simply adorns hipster fashion may not be a hipster at all. Listening to indie music doesn’t make you a deviant. We all like what we like for our own reasons. There may just be a little hipster in all of us.

This may seem obvious, but when in doubt, be yourself. Listen to terrible music because it makes you feel good and wear ugly clothes because they are comfortable.

The hell with everyone else, what do you like?

Charlie "The Sheen" has worn off

2011-03-20T19:49:00.000-07:00

For the first time, a Hollywood star has made a complete ass of himself, and is actually suffering the consequences.

Last week, Charlie Sheen was fired from his cushy gig at “Two and Half Men” for, lack of better words, being a complete ass.
While other celebrities return from their fall outs even more successful than before (Drew Barymore, Eminem, etc.), Sheen seems to be spiraling into a self-destructive hole that not even he can climb out of (despite the Martian warlock magic).

In the rants that led to his dismissal from CBS, Sheen verbally attacked Chuck Lorre, the extremely successful producer of “Two and Half Men.” He claimed Lorre’s success was due only to Sheen’s own talent and accused him of stealing money from the cast and production crew.

Sheen is now filing a $100 million lawsuit against Warner Brothers for damages resulting from the halt of several episodes as well as his removal from the show.

The suit claims Lorre purposefully withheld production of the episode to suit his own evil egotistical means and as a way of punishing Sheen personally.

In a letter obtained by TMZ to Sheen’s lawyer Martin D. Singer, Warner Brothers described his destructive behavior in detail.
“[The problem is his] physical appearance, inability to deliver lines, inability to collaborate creatively with staff and crew, inability to work with the executive producers, inflammatory comments poisoning key working relationships, and frustration of the show’s creative environment by the public spectacle of his self-inflicted disintegration.”

The studio actually cited his behavior as the primary reason for his release.

It’s comforting to know that large media corporations can still act like a normal private industry. If somebody is incompetent, kick them out. You can’t insult your boss and expect a raise. Sheen was expecting a hefty increase to his already staggering $1.2 million per episode paycheck for “Two and a Half Men.”

Apparently there is a limit to how completely ridiculous people can act before it finally becomes inappropriate. But the saddest part of Sheen’s downward spiral, is the people he’s leaving behind.

The fate of “Two and a Half Men” does not look so good. Because of one sick man’s delusional behavior, hundreds of people will lose their jobs. The fate of one of the most successful sitcoms on television has yet to be determined. Continuing a show after the loss of a major character is a dangerous road. The writers and producers are currently brainstorming a possible brand new character to replace Sheen as the bad boy.

As for the fate of Sheen himself, it looks bleak. Once the media interest in his spectacle runs out, it’s hard to say whether or not he will ever work again. Many critics are predicting his talk show circuit is being treated like an audition.
Alec Baldwin, who has suffered a similar fate after being kicked off of the series “Hunt for Red October,” offered Sheen some advice in a recent Huffington Post article.

“Take a nap. Get a shower. Call [Two and a Half Men co-creator] Chuck [Lorre]. Go on Letterman and make an apology. Write a huge check to the B’Nai Brith. And then beg for your job back,” he wrote, adding, “P.S…. buy [Jon] Cryer a really nice car.”
It seems to me, Sheen can ride this wave in one of two ways.

One: Hit rock bottom and hope that he is still shocking enough to continue on talk show circuits or
Two: Take Baldwin’s advice and shape up quick before he loses the best thing that ever happened to him.

Although, many believe it’s no longer a question of whether Sheen will work again, but if he will survive. If he is serious about his claimed drug use, and if his delusions are real, Sheen’s self-destructive behavior could land him in prison, or actually kill him.

In the past few weeks Sheen has continued to make the talk show rounds, never failing to make a complete fool of himself.
“I am on a drug, it’s called Charlie Sheen. It’s not available because if you try it once you will die. Your face will melt off and your children will weep over your exploded body,” Sheen told Andrea Canning in a 20/20 special.

I guess all we can do is say a little prayer for all of the lost, lonely, self-absorbed cracked-out celebrities in the world. And be thankful that Hollywood even cares.

Something Queer

2011-03-06T17:26:00.000-08:00

Gay teens on television have for a long time been either a fleeting dream or a blatant stereotype. Television has put gay characters in a neat little box. They are estranged outcasts or charming sidekicks.

But with the emergence of bold new gay characters (“90210’s” burly Teddy, “Pretty Little Liars” popular and beautiful Emily, and “Skins” punk cheerleader Tea, to name a few), Hollywood has been redefining they way we see gay teens on TV and creating a space for well rounded characters, who just happen to be gay.

The new hot ticket in the Gay community is up-and-coming teen cutie Chris Colfer, the charming and troubled crooner on Fox’s overnight hit “Glee.” The inclusion of his character has made waves amongst the LGBT crowd not only in Hollywood, but across the country as well.

At first glance, Kurt seemed like another typical “token gay,” what with the sweater vests, high vibrato and sleek hair-do. But what is revolutionary about Kurt is the way his sexuality defines him. Watching him interact with those around him makes it clear that he is neither sidekick nor outcast.

These new characters, like Kurt, are dealing with teenage issues that aren’t necessarily attached to their sexuality. They are portrayed as real people with normal problems.

Kurt is a young man who seems to have known he was gay from the very beginning. After coming out to his John Mellencamp/football father after just a few episodes, “Glee” moves on from the typical gay issues fairly quickly (coming out, acceptance, etc.). Kurt suffers from teen angst and unrequited love, much like his friends. He struggles with the death of his mother and his father’s remarriage and even questions his faith after his father’s heart attack.

Teenagers are often the main characters in classic coming of age stories and lessons about growing up. As teenagers, we go through challenges and tests that build character and teach us how to be adults. Young gay characters are now showing up as protagonists in their own stories, with their sexualities not always being the focal point.

And when “Glee” chose to focus on Kurt’s sexuality, they made it count. His conflict with a homophobic bully has lit a fire under anti-bullying and harassment campaigns in schools. His apprehension to spend time with the other men in Glee club highlights the way the boys identify with one another, and when stepbrother Finn let the F-word slip, the consequences were made very clear.

More recently, and perhaps most important of all, Kurt met Blaine – fellow show choir enthusiast with the same neat hair-do.

What makes the relationship between Kurt and Blaine so groundbreaking is not that they are openly gay teenagers living amongst peers who accept them (for the most part) and see them for who they are, but because they are willing to see their sexuality for what it is: purely sexual. Blaine makes the realization that perhaps being gay isn’t just about being in show choir and dressing nicely. Only after kissing a girl for the first time in the latest episode, is he able to truly know his sexuality.

Young men are constantly being called gay because they sing, dance, dress nicely, show emotion (etc.). The discovery that Blaine makes is that his gay identity does not have to be attached to any of his other characteristics. Look at Kurt’s maybe-gay football bully: a confused young man who probably thought playing football and beating people up would “cure” him.

Whether or not being homosexual is fate or choice or accident, it only needs to be one aspect of a person’s calling card.

A major key to the acceptance of gays is seeing them portrayed on screen as they are in real life. They are Doctors, lawyers, teachers and students. Whether it’s the confused jock or show choir geek. The gay characters in “Glee” not only raise acceptance and awareness amongst viewers, but hope for every scared kid who doesn’t know where else to turn.

When Colfer took home the Golden Globe for his performance this year, he said it perfectly.

“But most importantly, to all the amazing kids who watch our show and the kids that our show celebrates, who are constantly told ‘no’ by the people in their environments, by bullies at school. That they can’t be who they are, or have what they want, because of who they are. Well, screw that kids.”

The Bieber Fiever

2011-02-27T18:53:00.000-08:00

Our pre-teen years were a strange time in many ways. Our bodies were too small for our legs, and we had terrible taste in music.

I’ve noticed something strange happening. My female friends and I are still very loyal to our love for the Backstreet Boys, N*SYNC, Britney Spears, S Club 7, (etc.) Every now and then we’ll put in an old CD into the car stereo, sing along and reminisce.
But lately whenever anybody from my generation comes across a young pop star of today, the eyes roll and the radio switches off. There is one in particular that seems to have all my twenty something friends in absolute agony.

Justin Bieber.

It’s Bieber Fiever. And my friends seem to be extremely allergic. It is strange because I’ve seen the same people who still worship the teen idols of our youth scorn those of today. But what is so different about them?
Why are we so annoyed by these new teen pop stars?

Well, probably because most of them are talent-less hair twirlers cranked out by the Disney Channel (Miley Cyrus, the Jonas Brothers, Selena Gomez, Miranda Cosgrove. . .) We’re worried about the musical degradation of the next generation. They’re being inadvertently sexualized and brainwashed, at least, according to the Disney critics.

But Beiber is different. He made a name for himself on YouTube when he began posting videos for singing contests. Soon enough, Justin Timberlake and Usher were battling over this small Canadian kid who, I’ll admit, kind of looks like a girl. He signed with Usher and the rest is history. Bieber has an obvious advantage to his pre teen counter parts.

Talent. He’s talented not just as a musician, but also as a performer. Heck, the kid can hold his own next to Usher. And anybody who has seen some of his live YouTube videos knows he has the voice to back it up. Plus he’s cute as button. (Perhaps a tad on the feminine side, but what’s wrong with that?)

His music celebrates a part of youth that we can no longer understand or relate to. In our rush to grow up and prepare for the real world, songs about first loves and school crushes seem laughable.

Justin Bieber represents something so sweet and wholesome that it makes older, more jaded college students retch. Maybe our resentment comes from a deeper bitterness that gone are the days when we were free to obsess over the cute boy with the guitar. We’ve moved on and grown up.

But that doesn’t mean we can’t still celebrate youth. There a lot of people, of all ages, out there who understand what I’m talking about. There are adults who really do love Bieber, not because of a deep longing for youth, but because they genuinely love his music. It’s ok to throw Bieber some love. It won’t ruin your taste in music or your ears. But if not, that’s fine. Just please stop rolling your eyes and making plans to bury him.

Even though the Bieber Fiever probably won’t be able to woo anyone over the age of 15, there are parts of his music and message that we all can enjoy. I think there is room in all of our hearts for a little J.B. Not in a creepy jailbait way, but more like a fond memory of our carefree preteen days.

It may be naïve and overly sweet, but he makes people happy. Girls all over the country sing in the shower and into hairbrushes. They dance when they think no one is looking and try really hard to not to hum to loud in class.
Since I still do all of these things, I know there is a little room for Bieber in my life. And on my iPod.

The Halftime Headache

2011-01-28T18:05:00.000-08:00

In the beginning, the Super Bowl was about football. It was about two competing leagues, a merger, MVP’s and the Lombardi trophy.

But as the years went by, the Super Bowl became more than just a football game. We loved football so much that it was dubbed the de facto holiday “Super Bowl Sunday” so we could drink, eat and scream at the television. The football game has become a football event, complete with mass food consumption, the coveted million dollar commercial spots, and of course the half time show.

For a performer, the chance to star in the Super Bowl halftime show is more valuable than almost anything. The Super Bowl is one of the most viewed television programs of the year, a dream for even the most successful of artists. The exposure alone has been shown to prompt huge spikes in album sales and music downloads. The event has naturally evolved over the years, until recently it hit a wall of controversy that it hasn’t been able to overcome.

I think we all know what I’m talking about. Janet Jackson’s boob is still ingrained into my innocent thirteen year-old brain. For the folks in charge, it was enough to ban MTV and all young “popular” artists from the Super Bowl for six years.

If you take a look at Super Bowl I, there is no indication that it would become what it is today. The first halftime shows featured local marching bands from colleges and high schools. It wasn’t until Carol Channing’s performance during Super Bowl IV that prompted interest in bigger names in entertainment.

Another turning point came in 1993, when Michael Jackson made the halftime show one of the most watched television events in history. It was the first halftime show to be aired in its entirety, setting the standard for the rest to follow. Ratings for his performance were higher than the game itself. There was some concern over the amount of crotch-grabbing, but nobody seemed exceptionally worried. Not yet at least.

Network execs had begun to treat halftime as a program in of itself. There was a new determination to have famous “hip” performers at halftime.

In 1996, Diana Ross was a sensation with a performance that included four costume changes and a grand exit via helicopter while belting “Take Me Higher.” 1998 was a Motown tribute featuring Boyz II Men, Smokey Robinson, The Temptations, Martha Reeves and Queen Latifa. The next few years were headlined with artists such as Christina Aguilera, Gloria Esefan, Phil Collins and Enrique Iglesias.

2001, the only other MTV produced halftime before the nipple incident, saw the height of young entertainment at the Super Bowl, particularly with a line up consisting of NSYNC, Aerosmith, Britney Spears and Nelly.

But the halftime show most of us remember clearly is the 2004 Janet Jackson performance that ended with an unfortunate “wardrobe malfunction.” During what many have come to call “Nipplegate” Justin Timberlake ripped off a piece of Jackson’s costume to reveal a pierced nipple. The incident led to a heavy crackdown on indecency in broadcasting. CBS was slapped with a $550,000 fine and banned MTV from producing any more halftime shows.

It was in many ways a peak and tipping point for Super Bowl entertainment. The show was highly produced featuring six artists with eight different numbers. With Jackson’s dancers writhing about suggestively, enough pyrotechnics to set the stadium on fire and half-naked cheerleaders, it was enough to make even the more liberal viewer worried. Apparently this is where the line was drawn between family entertainment and a rave.

In the years that followed, the halftime show was reduced to only one artist at a time, almost all of them classic rock (Paul McCartney, The Rolling Stones, Prince, Tom Petty, Bruce Springsteen and The Who). In 2006, a five second delay was implemented to help censor and prevent indecent images. What used to be a party for drunken football fans became more of a traditional concert, leaving more youthful fans disappointed.

Which is why the scheduled performance of The Black Eyed Peas is so notable. It is the first time since 2004 that a woman will be headlining the show, let alone anybody under the age of 40. Perhaps this is a way of easing back into the more popular artists. In future years, more than one artist might even be aloud on stage again. What made the halftime shows great was bringing together our favorites from different genres, like Gloria Estefan and Stevie Wonder, or No Doubt and Sting.

But the older crowd shouldn’t be worried. My fifty-something mother tells me how much she loves that “I’ve Got a Feeling” song. Maybe The Peas could be the group to bridge the generation gap. Plus, they’ve promised not to perform “My Humps.”

All we can do is hope everything goes well.

And that Fergie wears a bra.

Summer Reading List

2010-05-16T15:35:00.000-07:00

As finals and papers bare down on the few days remaining before that sweet three-month freedom called summer vacation, I started to get plans ready for my long awaited leisure time.
One of the things I look forward to the most is catching up on all the reading I put off during the year, and I’m not talking about textbooks. A lot of us haven’t had time to sit down and read a good book in years.
So if you have time this summer to read a book or two, I suggest a few from the list below. A few are from my own summer reading list and others are some I think should be on yours.
Happy Reading.

“The Help” by Katheryn Stockett
After listening to this one on audio book, my mother practically begged me to give it a listen. Over spring break I decided to try out the first few chapters. Needless to say I almost stole her iPod when I had to come back to school. So I bought a copy in the airport terminal and crammed in almost half the book on my flight back. Finishing this book is first on my to do list this summer.
“The Help” tells the story of four women living in the early 1960’s Jackson Mississippi. The story is told from the multiple points of view of each of the characters, allowing us to fall in love with these amazing women one at a time. The story is rich with not only beautifully developed characters, but also a nail biting mystery/drama. Want “The Color Purple” meets “Desperate Housewives?” Trust me. You do.
And I would hurry because it will probably be a feature film within the year.

“Acceptance” by Susan Coll
Acceptance deals with teenage issues of identity, depression, and in the midst, making a decision that will alter your entire life. It really examines the idea of a seventeen year old deciding what they want to do for the rest of their life, and the pressure to succeed. It follows several high school students during their senior year and the challenges and difficult decisions they face.
I read this book the summer before my senior year of high school. I was caught up in the madness of S.A.T. tests and college applications and was nowhere short of loosing my mind. Everybody around me had an opinion except for me.
The tone of this book is perfect for a student lost in transition, whether it is grad school, the work force, or your parent’s basement. Big decisions coming up? Let “Acceptance” put things in perspective.

“Shadow Puppets” by Orsan Scott Card
“The Ender Series” is a fabulous series of books I have been reading on and off for the past four years. They tell the story of a futuristic world where humans do battle with aliens. Except their army is fully composed of children. Genius children who are put through rigorous academic and strategic training in order to create the perfect soldiers and commanders for the most powerful army in the universe. For those of you interested in a sci-fi novel you will actually be able to understand, look no further than here.
It currently consists of eleven novels and ten short stories, most of which can be read independently of each other. As a general rule of thumb, I would start with the first book Card wrote, “Ender’s Game” and go chronologically in the order they were published. If this advice seems strange, that’s because the story of the “Ender Series” is not completely linear.
But don’t feel like you need to tackle every single one. I just give you fair warning of the consequences of falling in love with a book that has 9 sequels.
And after four years, believe me, I would know.

“Lamb” by Christopher Moore
This is another recommendation from mom that I have not gotten to yet. It supposedly tells the story of Jesus through his childhood friend Biff. A lighthearted satire of the life of Christ from his childhood days up until his crucifixion may be just the dose of irony my summer needs.
Those who fear blasphemy should probably stay away however. A coming of age story of young Jesus that is described as “slapstick” will probably not be appreciated by his more faithful followers.
But if you are like me, religiously defunct, this should be right up your ally.

“Eat Pray Love” by Elizabeth Gilbert
This is another book I bought over winter break and never finished. Because of its notoriety and fame I figured I would finally give it a try. It is a true story about a woman who, after an emotional divorce, sets out to far continents looking for the love and meaning missing from her middle-aged world.
I hear the film version for this one is already in the works. So if you have not read it yet, now would be a good time.

“The Lovely Bones” by Alice Sebold
For those of you who saw the movie before reading this book, I apologize. This is one of my personal favorites.
“The Lovely Bones” is a beautiful story about a young girl who was murdered by her neighbor, and must watch from heaven as her family tries desperately to solve her murder. It is a stirring coming of age tale for the friends she leaves behind, and an emotional take on family and love.
You may shed a tear or two, but I can’t stress the amazing feeling hope left after reading this book. Do not be deterred by the heavy subject matter. There is actually much more to happy about in “The Lovely Bones” than sad.

So I thought I could Dance

2010-05-09T14:52:00.000-07:00

People have been dancing forever. We danced for the gods, for our ancestors, to celebrate a bountiful harvest or special occasion, and in many cases, just for the hell of it.

There is a show on television called “So You Think You Can Dance” in which dancers compete against each other, much like on “American Idol.” The show is entertaining enough, until the judges and viewers start criticizing beautiful dancers for missing a jump or a turned in foot.

If you asked these dancers why they are on the show, they may say something like how much they love it or how it is an outlet for expression. But if that were true, I would be up there with them.

In today’s world, people dance because they are talented.

We all know them, the kids who have been ballerinas since they were three and dropped out of school to join professional companies. The girl who eats a quarter cup of cheese on her salad. Their feet bleed and they never sleep, all for the love of dance.

But not everyone can have this life. Only the select few, the lucky ones, who are talented enough to compete professionally. The ones who live by an idea that in my opinion, ruined the art of dance. They are the ones with perfect technique.

So where did technique come from? I highly doubt the Native Americans or African tribes were concerned with proper technique. By “technique” I mean the list of rules that all talented dancers must follow, like point your feet or spot your turns. If you ever watch an episode of “So You Think You Can Dance” you will get a big lesson in technique.

Personally, I blame it on the emergence of ballet in 15th century Italy. It began as a dance of the court, and as it spread across Europe it became the first dance with its own rules and vocabulary.

While I have been in and out of class and the stage for over 7 years, I would hardly consider myself a “dancer.” Any talent I possess is pure consequence of hard work and extremely good coaching. I do not pretend to have any natural talent or predisposition for dance. Or any concern for my “technique.”

A longer history of music lessons and choir classes has given me a well-trained ear for musicality and rhythm. But none of that can get you to switch leap.

People who know me now would probably never guess it, but I was a child of the theater during high school. The thrill of tech week and opening night, being the chorus girl. This is where my experience with dance began, when I was fourteen. They were some of the greatest years of my life. But the only downside of doing musical theater, were the other performers.

Only after leaving for college do you realize how silly some things are. Like foregoing homework for late night rehearsals. Like dropping ten pounds in one month and acting like its no big deal. Like loosing track of where the stage ends and the real world begins.

People who perform tend to be a bit over dramatic anyway. They are people who need every emotion they have at their beck and call. It is no wonder why most of them cannot control it. But the unfortunate part is the amount of personal investment performers put into their success. As if some how the ability to hit the high C or triple pirouette says something about their personal worth.

And its no surprise they act this way. Every dance flick ever made has a message reading something like this, “You can accomplish anything if you just believe in yourself and want it badly enough.” There are some obvious flaws with this reasoning.

While confidence is key, just “believing in yourself” is not going to fix everything for you. My bad hip eliminates my ability to do any sort of impressive high kicks or extensions without severe pain. No amount of confidence will fix that.

But because making performing arts a real profession is so competitive, young performers are taught to build confidence. And confidence breeds egos. Big ones.

It is not the sort of person I’m keen on becoming anyway.

So I try to embrace the way I am, to be proud of how much I have improved and how hard I have worked despite my short torso and creaky hips. I love my average abilities and remind myself of this every time I walk into dance class and I see the dance majors whose talent is often far superior to my own.

It is hard sometimes to have a hobby when people assume that because you are dancing, you must be a “dancer.” It is much more easier for young people today to pick one thing and excel at it than to experiment with several different talents. We are raised to avoid the things we’re bad at. The kids picked last for kickball were not the ones who wanted to play the least; they were the least “talented.”

For those of you who have ever wanted to try something new: play soccer, go rock climbing, sing karaoke, or even take a dance class, do not let the “talented” ones stop you. Do not be afraid of failure. Be afraid of becoming someone who never takes risks, or quits because they don’t have a natural turn out.

If you love what you do, talent is never going to really matter.

What Would Walt Do?

2010-03-21T15:09:00.000-07:00

We are always worried about the next generation. We want them to have everything we had, and more. But things inevitably change, and we need to make way for the new. If my dad can learn to use a cell phone, anything can happen.

My latest trip to San Francisco, only recently made me realize how much I miss the old. Nestled in the presidio is a small pocket of history that resonates a little differently than any other museum ever has in my experience.

The Walt Disney Family Museum is like no Disney attraction ever seen before, particularly for its convenient Nor-cal location. The ten galleries of the museum take only a few hours to walk through, making it the perfect afternoon excursion for a trip to the city. Moderately priced at 20 dollars per ticket (15 for students), it is affordable even on a state budget.

But what is really unique about the museum, is the target audience. This is not a museum designed for toddlers hoping to push talking buttons or play with touch-screen games. It is geared toward a more mature crowd, looking to learn about the man behind the mouse.

The first gallery begins with Walt’s family history, and the means by which he grew up and spent his childhood. Even at an early age, Walt’s love for cartooning is a common theme in his family’s early travels across the Midwest in the early 1900s. It was in Kansas City where he discovered the world of motion pictures, vaudeville and amusement parks. His love for drawing and storytelling eventually leads him to Hollywood, and the birth of Mickey Mouse.

The following nine galleries led us through the other stages in Walt’s life and career including his early Hollywood days, beginning of the feature films, the artists strike, Disneyland and his last years. It is in many ways the story of a small company that made it big. But at heart, it is the story of a small man who followed his dream. He set standards for child and family entertainment that may never be met. And not only that, Walt was surrounded by a loving family of his own and was loved by dozens of friends and fellow artists. He must have been the happiest man on earth.

Being in the museum transported us to a time when Disney was a family name. To the small studio of close friends, who picked stories that meant something to them. In his lifetime, Walt Disney worked on just over 20 full length feature films, dozens of other projects for television, short films and of course, Disneyland.

The life of Walt Disney really puts his work into perspective. But what is really illuminating is how small a fraction of the Disney productions were actually overseen by Walt himself. “Mary Poppins” is the last film Walt was fully involved in before his death in 1966. That was over 50 years ago.

Since then, hundreds of movies, television shows and other projects have been released. The Disney Company itself has grown to epic proportions, owning dozens of cable channels, publishing companies, record labels and film studios.

Giant media ownership would not be so saddening if it were not for some of the things being made with the name Disney attached to it. Take the ABC network for example, which Disney owns. What would Walt have to say about “Desperate Housewives” or “The Bachelor?” Or even its self-titled Disney Channel?

The mom and pop days are certainly over. The little company that could has become so big and so successful; it may have spread itself to thin. It has even been accused of blatantly marketing sex to its young audience.

Ever since returning from the museum I have been worried about this. Worried that my children would not experience any of the Disney magic that came before them, that the age of storybook cartoons was over and the age of 3D technology was taking over.

Films like “Alice in Wonderland” frighten me because they stand as proof that this new company is willing to stray from why we came to love the name Disney, in the interest of profit (reaching an audience who will pay an extra five dollars to see a movie).

But there are reasons to be hopeful. Like Disney’s recent release “The Princess and the Frog.” This film pretends to be nothing but a charming story about a prince and a princess. The music is catchy and the moral of the story is something we can all get behind. It reminds me of something straight off of Walt’s drawing table.

My doubts are at bay. For now.

But taking a glance at some of the upcoming releases in the Disney studio is not very promising. A computer-animated version of Rapunzal is set for release at the end of the year, but does not seem to have any of the storybook charm of “The Princess and the Frog”, and does not appear to be the start of a new pattern.

And then there is “The Sorcerer's Apprentice”, set for release this July.

Do not be fooled by the title. Trailers are already in theaters, and from the looks of it, Jerry Bruckheimer is set to butcher the classic Mickey Mouse “Fantasia” segment with the help of Nicholas Cage and Jay Baruchel.

It is an obvious, borderline pathetic, attempt at recreating the lucrative “Pirates of the Caribbean” and “National Treasure” franchises.

After all, it is much easier to cash out on old ideas than take a risk and be creative.

Right Walt?

The High Score

2010-03-14T20:09:00.000-07:00

I would consider myself a fairly well versed movie buff. Granted I have a life outside of the theater and my DVD player, but as activities go, I tend to rank watching movies pretty high.

There are not many films I discriminate against. I am an enthusiastic “Saw” and “Harry Potter” fan, I worship Alfred Hitchcock and the classics, I enjoy both low brow comedy and intellectual commentaries, and I will admit to having seen “Love Actually” a few to many times. Every genre has something new to offer. Every style keeps things exciting. Ask a film buff what their favorite movie is, and they will probably say something like, “Off of which top ten list?”

Some buffs fixate on directors or actors. They may own the complete works of Tarantino or Kubrick. Hard-core Johnny Depp fans will have seen all five seasons of “21 Jumpstreet” and know all the words to “King Crybaby.” Others are obsessed with special effects, others with the writing.

And my poison? The composers. It may or may not be something that stands out to other people, but for me, the music is everything. Music has always been a big influence in my life, and when it comes to my favorite movies, the score is a deal maker.

Imagine the famous “Psycho” shower scene without Bernard Herrmann’s haunting string theme, “Chariots of Fire” without the stirring piano fanfare of Vangelis, or the opening of “Star Wars” without the strong chords of John Williams. It is probably the most exciting classical music you will ever hear.

James Horner, Hans Zimmer, John Williams and Danny Elfman are household names, and I follow them like a groupie. My iTunes genius has now created a play list for classical music alone. Not many college students have that in common.

These songs are great for just about anything – driving, meditation, exercise, or background music for homework or chores. These are a few of my favorites that circulate in and out of my play lists.

Titanic
“Hymn to the Sea”- James Horner
It is a well known classic, a staple for your classical film soundtrack play list. James Horner is a personal favorite of mine for his ability to capture raw emotion. The melancholy bagpipes are perfect for some deep introspection, or a big cry.

Napoleon Dynamite
“Music for a found Harmonium” - Simon Jeffes

To break up the classical vibe, the main theme from Napoleon Dynamite is more fusion between folk rock and pop music. It is a surprise coming from a film as forgettable as this one. But “Muisc for a Found Harmonium” is a great track for a walk or jog on a sunny day.

Little Miss Sunshine
“The Winner Is” - Mychael Danna

It almost seems out of place when you watch “Little Miss Sunshine”, but having this song on your Mp3 player is a must. Like Horner, Danna’s music is great for meditation or reflection, and even a long drive.

The Lion King
“This Land”, “...To Die For” - Hans Zimmer
In this case, I cannot pick just one. The entire “Lion King” soundtrack is worth owning. Elton John singing “I Just Can’t Wait to Be King” is a personal favorite. While “This land is a beautiful slow classical piece, “…To Die For” is much more intense.
Recognizable from the stampede scene, this song is one for driving. Picture the stampede behind you on East Cotati Ave. Priceless.

American Beauty
“Dead Already” - Thomas Newman
A unique score for a unique film. Aside from perfectly capturing the essence of “American Beauty”, the strange synth is oddly fun to run to. Since running becomes such a quest for Lester in the film, it inspires listeners to “look good naked” as well.

There is a song for everything you do, and what better music to have in the background than the songs that were designed for it.

The Moral of the Story

2010-03-07T21:22:00.000-08:00

It snuck up on us before we new what was happening. It has swept girls and women of all ages across the world, and it is even worse than Hannah Montana.

The vampire fad has reached dangerous levels. Toxic even.

Of course, many people will call this a gross over-exaggeration, many of them being fad-followers themselves. But it is natural to defend something that has brought you enjoyment. That’s easy to understand. It’s a personal thing.

But this vampire trend is one of the only things I cannot seem to wrap my head around. I genuinely can’t understand the appeal. From what I understand, vampires are undead immortal daemons that feed of the blood of living beings. What could possible be attractive about that is beyond me, but I guess its normal for people to have fetishes. And I can accept that.

After all, vampires have been in literature, film and television for many years. It is not necessarily a “new” idea. There is the classic “Dracula” and popular TV show “Buffy the Vampire Slayer” as well as movies like “Van Helsing” are just a few.
My real beef however, is with something a bit more recent.

The “Twilight” series, written by Stephanie Meyer, takes the fascination with vampires and targets it primarily at young women, girls to be more accurate.

The whole premise of “Twilight” is this: girl meets boy, boy is dangerous blood thirsty vampire who wants to kill her, boy and girl fall in love anyway.

How… Romantic?

Girls and guys, if you were in main character Bella’s situation, would you really stick around because the two of you have “chemistry?” I tend to put my survival above hot boys. Like I said, personal preference.

But “Twilight” is full of much more than harmless teenage angst. The characters and story are teaching some scary lessons to readers, again, mostly young girls. John Scott Lewinski at bspcn.com believes there are twenty such unfortunate lessons.

“When a boy leaves you, going into shock, losing all your friends and enduring night terrors are completely acceptable occurrences,” or “Young women should make no effort to improve their social skills or emotional state. Instead, they should seek out potential mates that share their morose deficiencies and emotional illnesses,” or even “When making or watching a major feature film, you should gleefully embrace the 20 minutes of plot it provides in between extended segments of vacant-eyed silence and self-indulgent, moaning banter,” are just a few he brings up.

Other life lessons found on the list include lying to your parents, keeping life-threatening secrets, using men to fix things, using men in general, and car theft.

Not exactly your wholesome fairytale.

In fact, the relationship between the two main characters, Edward and Bella, is far from wholesome. Despite their abstinence, much to Bella’s displeasure, the two cannot seem to keep the steam at bay. Even though he won’t sleep with her, again – very unhappy Bella, he has no problem with sneaking into her room in the middle of the night to watch her sleep, a habit he picks up before even introducing himself.

Ok, maybe steamy is the wrong word.

But it is easy to see there is something wrong with the way Edward treats Bella. There are many signs therapists use to diagnose abusive relationships, and they say that if your partner is showing even one of the signs a red flag should be going up.

According to the National Domestic Violence hotline, some signs to look for include, but are certainly not limited to: “looks or acts in ways that scare you, threatens to commit suicide, isolates you from friends or family, friends or family warn you stay away but you have trouble leaving, and reckless driving.”

It is hard to imagine why anyone would want to be with someone like that. When listed so plainly, it is also hard to imagine how it is not more obvious.

This is what a reviewer said on Meyer’s website about the first book.

“Imagine seeing a guy, more handsome than any you’ve ever seen, and not being able to tear you eyes away from him. Imagine that the force of your mutual chemistry feels like electricity. I promise you that every girl will want to be Isabella Swan.”

Because who wouldn’t want to be Bella? She is celebrated as a great female heroine in literature. And why not? She’s obedient, she’s quiet, she cooks, she shops, she cleans and she stays out of her father’s way, who prefers sitting on the couch, drinking a beer and cleaning his gun.

And the one earth shattering thing she does is fall in love with a dangerous vampire? Some heroine.

So aside from perpetuating exaggerated ideas of gender roles (did I mention Meyer was Mormon?) “Twilight” is not only teaching its readers to accept, and even celebrate these kinds of relationships, but they are also getting skewed ideas of what a good relationship is. It simultaneously conditions them to live with abuse while making them believe they are in a fairytale.

Also that it is cool and romantic to sacrifice everything, including your own life, to be with someone who may end up killing you anyway. Who need friends or a healthy social life when you can have eternal, undead love?

Here’s a clue that most well adjusted young adults are aware of, including myself: no person, human or not, will ever measure up to the characters we read about in fairytales. There are plenty of hot and spicy relationships out there that do not involve major blood loss.

There is no doubt “Twilight” has served it’s purpose as a Young Adult novel. But perhaps we should be taking a closer look at some of the trends young people are following.

Sex is natural, but abuse, lies and murder are not. We deserve better.

"Spooky Island" or "Why won't Leo smile?"

2010-02-24T00:27:00.000-08:00

Martin Scorsese’s latest stab at the big screen fits nicely into this classic genre, which happens to be one of my personal favorites:

The “mind fuck.”

The “mind fuck” is characterized by blatant (borderline corny) foreshadowing, furrowed brows, culminating a juicy, decadent plot twist. Thus we are forced to watch the entire film over again, now knowing what was really going on.

We all have our favorites. From the classic “Citizen Cane” (rosebud!) to the more recent “Six Sense,” and “Donnie Darko.”

O.k., the “Six Sense” is a bad example. Go with me here.

“Shutter Island” is no exception to the pattern. It strings us along for over two hours, giving no hints while asking even more questions. DiCaprio stumbles along the cliffs bordering the sea and treks trough the deep forests and creepy graveyard inland. We wait patiently until…

“What?!”, a direct quote from disgruntled Shutter Islanders this past weekend. Apparently, classic is out.

Scorsese does go back to basics. The suspense is a direct homage, if not rip off, to the styles of Hitchcock, displaying beautiful cinematography and highly drawn out anticipation. The opening sequence is something straight out of film noir, as the two unfamiliar detectives approach the gate of the spooky mental hospital.

The plot seems simple enough, they always do:

Set in 1954 Boston, U.S. Marshal Teddy Daniels takes an assignment to investigate a disappearance at the Ashecliffe Hospital for the criminally insane, conveniently located on sinister Shutter Island.

But when Teddy thinks he has found a lead, the doctors refuse to give him access to the records he needs. When you combine rumors of dangerous and sinister mal-practice, a dangerous hurricane cutting off all communication to the island and a “missing” prisoner who no one wants to discuss, “Shutter Island” will have even you doubting your sanity.

As typical with many “mind fucks,” the actors have a difficult time outshining the convoluted plot. DiCaprio is no exception. He ranges a total of one facial expression for the entire film. Would it kill you to smile Leo?

Even Mark Ruffalo, who plays Daniels suspicious partner Chuck Aule, gets lost in the shuffle. At least DiCaprio HAD a facial expression.

It was a promising idea, and even though well executed, still leaves something out. Lets just say that the whole point of the “mind fuck” is that you cannot figure it out. I’m not sure even that can be said for spooky island.

There is not much to get excited about either way. It is disposable, another unfortunate symptom of the “mind fuck.”

Looking Back at Broadway

2010-02-17T13:49:00.001-08:00

My bags were packed. I had memorized the subway maps and street names. I was on my way to the city that started it all, the city that never sleeps, the big apple, the big time.

Manhattan has been calling to me every since my parents began taking me to the California Music Circus in Sacramento. And add on seven-odd years of acting, singing, and dancing, it is not hard to understand the fascination I’ve had with Broadway. It is something that entices every theater geek, whether they care to admit it or not.
While I was never destined to headline any marquees, with each year of my youth that ticked away I felt I was long overdue to see where it all began, to make the sacred pilgrimage.

Manhattan is a right of passage for anyone really. For those who covet fashion and Tim Gun, who swoon for the hip-hop of the Bronx, or even business moguls drooling for Wall Street, New York City is a hot bed of American culture. It is the city where dreams come true, and my dream was to get there.

But like I said, my sights were set on 42nd and Broadway. My first glimpse of Times Square, standing outside the Will Rogers Theater, sitting in the old fashioned theater was something I never thought I would get to do. At least not as a sophomore in college.

My short stay on the biggest little island gave me two theater excursions: “In the Heights”, the 2008 Tony Award winner for best musical, and “Billy Eliot: The Musical” the 2009 Tony Award winner for best musical.

“In The Heights” tells the story of three days in the life of the people living in the Dominican-American neighborhood, Washington Heights. The score features hip-hop, salsa, meringue and soul music. Think “West Side Story” meets “Rent.”

“Billy Elliot The Musical” is based off of the film “Billy Elliot” (2000). With music by Elton John, “Billy Elliot The Musical” takes place in a small town in 1980s England, where a little boy trades in his boxing gloves for ballet shoes and discovers his true calling in life.

These are two of the newest, most popular musicals to hit the stage. One is hot, sexy Dominican party complete with rap music and gyrating choreography. The other, a new kind of jazzy comedy featuring cross-dressing boys screaming obscenities at their brash parents.

In short, the new Broadway is edgy. It swears, spits and isn’t afraid to reflect a society that has come to worship sex, drugs and rock n’roll.

It is a completely different world. I was not around to experience Broadway in its golden age (roughly 1940 to 1960) with the wartime themes of love, loss and social strife. I only know the new Broadway, where instead of glamorous eveningwear, top hats and corsages, I arrive at the theater in jeans and a pea coat (along with about two scarves and a hat, as January weather requires).

Sitting in the old theaters is incredible. Not only for the beauty or age of architecture, but for how out of place the theatergoers seem. We all looked as if we had set foot in a time machine. But instead of being transported to the early 1900s, we are whisked away to present day Washington Heights, or a small town 1980s England.

The magic of Broadway has always involved two things. First, embracing the past and using it to relate to the present. We celebrate shows that take place in the 80s (Billy Elliot) for the parallels we can draw to our lives today.

Second, Broadway shows must push the envelope. The force of innovation is what keeps show business moving forward. Including finding new sources for material. Big name shows pull their ideas from books (Les Miserables, Wicked), movies (Legally Blonde, Shrek), television and music.

So where is innovation leading us currently? Walking along Times Square, I passed a large marquee for the upcoming “Adams Family” musical, starring Nathan Lane. If that isn’t enough for you, the hot ticket this spring is going to be rock opera “American Idiot” based on, you guessed it, the Grammy Award winning album by Green Day of the same title.

The next “Tommy?” Maybe. But whether or not we enjoy it doesn’t distract from its originality. It is a sub culture that has yet to really make it big on the stage. Lead singer of Green Day Billie Joe Armstrong actually co-wrote the script with director Michael Mayer, whose previous work includes Tony Award winning musical Spring Awakening.

If you tuned into the Grammy’s this year you saw a sneak peak of the show. The cast of “American Idiot” performed one of the songs from the show, “21 Guns”, with Billie and the band themselves.

If the Broadway musical was offensive before, just wait until the cast of “American Idiot” with their skinny jeans and eyeliner, hit the stage blaring, “Well maybe I’m the f***** America!”

I’m not sure where the line between innovation and tacky is. I enjoyed the two shows I saw a great deal, and maybe that’s all that matters, and wishing for the past is a waste of time. All we can do is look forward to what is to come. No matter how vulgar.

The Best Part of the Big Game

2010-02-08T00:02:00.000-08:00

It’s not the chips. It’s not the dip. It’s not the beer. It’s not the cheerleaders. And it most certainly isn’t football.

It’s the commercials.

We’re all well aware the status of the super bowl has in our hearts and minds.

For decades advertisers have clamored for a spot on one of the most watched TV programs of all time (close to 100 million viewers tune in every year).

A thirty-second commercial spot during our country’s game of the year can typically cost millions of dollars. The projected figure for the 2010 game is $3 million.

These high prices pretty much guarantee one of the best commercial line-ups of the year, and are often more anticipated than the game itself.

Characterized by their high quality, innovation and sense of humor, the super bowl ads have charmed us year after year.

So how does 2010 measure up to its long ancestry commercial gold? Super Bowl XLIV saw a great deal of the magic of the previous years, though perhaps no new entries to the hall of fame. In other words, regardless of our favorites, its likely they will be forgotten by next year.

Some common themes were economic depression, manliness, the environment, big budgets and famous celebrities.

We laughed, we cried, we took bathroom breaks. Here are your top ten Super Bowl commercials of 2010. They may not have sold you their product, but that has never really been the point anyway.

10. Dockers: Men Withouot Pants
I’m not sure about the connection between not wearing pants and buying Dockers. Maybe it just went over my head at the sight of all those whitey-tighties. So, maybe not the cleverest of ideas. But there is something about a chorus of pant-less men trouping through a field united in song, “I wear no pants!” that you can’t help but smile at. They were, however, men I would have rather seen in pants than without. But maybe that’s part of the charm.

9. Bud Light: Stranded
Some plane-wrecked islanders are much more excited to find the in-flight stash of Bud Light than the radio. Perhaps a spoof strategically timed with the new season of “Lost?” An enjoyable ad nonetheless.

8. Doritos: Underdog
Who doesn’t love an underdog? We see an average joe enjoying his bag of Doritos and inflicting cruel jealousy on his dog. But the tables turn and we see Fido with the chips and joe wearing the collar. Who’s the underdog now?

7.Google: Search On
We follow the story of one searcher as he travels the world, falls in love, and starts a family, all with the help of the famous search engine. What can I say? I’m a sucker for sap.

6. Denny’s: Chickens Across America
Denny’s warns chickens of its upcoming “Free Grand Slam Day.” Again, a simple idea goes a long way. All it takes is screaming chickens. “Great day to be an American, bad day to be a chicken.”

5. Budweiser: Clydesdale/Fence
“Nothing comes between friends, especially fences.” This heartwarming tale of two friends who over come the obstacles (and fences) that stand between them. You can’t go wrong with that feel good feeling.

4. Coke: Cheering up Mr. Burns
When Mr. Burns looses his fortune, the citizens of Springfeild show him happy life can be, with a coke. If a coke could cheer up Mr. Burns, just think what it could do for you. It’s nice to see the Simpsons characters in something uplifting for a change. It may be out of their comfort zone, but I enjoyed the message, and my coke.

3. Doritos: House Rules
All he wants is to score points with the hot chick, but ends up in a fistfight with a little kid. “Keep yo hands of my mamma, keep yo hands off my Doritos.” Cutest boy of the super bowl? I think so.

2. Bud Light: Voice Box
Girlfriend brings home bud light for the party, prompting boyfriend to break out in his T-pain voice. It’s hard to not entertain with T-Pain’s voice. And topping it all of with an actual T-Pain appearance, makes this my favorite Bud Light ad of the day. Nothing beats T-Pain saying the word “guacamole”.

1. Mars Snickers: You’re Not You When You’re Hungry
Our favorite golden girl takes on a tough beating in this, my favorite ad of the day. When Mike isn’t playing his best, his girlfriend hands him a snickers, transforming him from weak Betty White into his normal self. My only problem with this ad? Betty White is definitely tougher than every one of those guys put together. If the role of White and her “tough” alter ego had been flipped, it may have been a bit more believable. But that’s just me. Kudos to Snickers.

There you have it. These as well as all the other Super Bowl XLIV ads can be viewed at hulu.com/adzone or cbssports.com/superbowlads.com

How Apple Let Me Down

2010-01-31T18:13:00.000-08:00

At the close of the previous decade, I wondered what was around the corner for Apple. It had been over a year since the release of its last creation, the beloved iPhone in 2008, and many were waiting for what new revolution Apple had up its sleeve.

So what was the next big leap in Apple technology? It’s a giant iPod, a miniature laptop, and supposedly works better than both. On Wednesday Jan. 27th, Steve Jobs unveiled Apple’s newest product, the iPad.

At first glance, iPad looks like a bigger version of iPod touch. A further look shows that iPad is, in fact, a giant iPod touch. Equipped with all the same gizmos like the calendar, Internet, iTunes, YouTube (etc.), iPad does a superb job of making all of the fun features of iPod touch…bigger.

Supposedly there is a lot of hype behind this new device. All I see is people gazing at the iPod touches, iPhones and Macbooks they received this holiday season, and shedding a few tears. iPad is being marketed to us as a better version of a smart phone or computer. They make it seem like all previous apple products are now void by comparison.

However, a device like iPad can’t really replace your phone, music player, or computer.

Sure the iPad has iTunes, but it doesn’t fit in your pocket, and would be a lot harder to hide during class. And although the touch keyboard allows you to type emails, it’s not like you can write your term paper on it.
And the iPad is no phone. Even if it was, I doubt anyone would suffer the grief of walking around with a 9-inch screen on the side of their faces.

It its defense, iPad does have a cool eBook system (sorry kindle users) and a near life-size touch keypad you can type on. It runs iWork applications and you can even run a 3G cellular wireless data plan starting at 14.99 a month.
Jobs assures us that iPad is superior to iPhone, iPod, and the Mac in web browsing, email, photos, video, music, games, and eBooks. I needed some convincing here. How can a mobile device be superior to a computer when it comes to things like surfing the Internet?

But the ease and speed at which Jobs sailed through web pages with the touch of a finger began to sell me. Apple again dazzles us with a beautiful design, fun functions and touch technology. Only this time, the technology behind the glitz seems like old news. It may be unreasonable to expect people to pay more money for just a bigger screen.

So much for an earth-shattering advance in technology. Perhaps it may come down to personal preference. It is great to have another option. But myself, among others, was hoping for something a little more impressive to kick off the decade.

Come on Apple, you’re supposed to be pushing the boundaries of mobile technology. You essentially invented the laptop back in the 90’s, changed the way we enjoy music, and created the top smart phone in the world. Don’t waste all your potential by releasing bigger, fancier versions of old ideas. And frankly, Apple employees, I think your getting a little cocky. You let Steve Jobs babble on for ten minutes about how awesome you are before even saying the word “iPad”

Few people have even held one, so maybe this “magical” device has yet to win me over. I doubt it.
iPad starts at $499. For a full list of the features and to watch Jobs rave about iPad himself, visit apple.com.

Avatar is #1?

2010-01-31T18:02:00.000-08:00

Faraway planets, action-packed battles, Sigourney Weaver, and blue people. One of the most unlikely candidates recently nabbed one of the highest titles a film can posses: the highest grossing movie of all time. It sailed past the worldwide box-office record of “Titanic’s” $1.84 billion U.S. last Tuesday, coming in at $1.86 billion.

There have been many stories circulating around celebrating the genius of James Cameron, and the awe of the film that climbed its way to the top in only 41 days. But does Cameron’s achievement really deserve the top spot in history?
When you combine the Cameron magic of Titanic and The Terminator, you get something a great deal better than you may think.

When “Avatar” hit theaters moviegoers were given something they have not seen in a long time. A real popcorn muncher, and something that is, to put it simply, epic.
Director James Cameron originally attempted to make the film 1999 as an immediate follow-up to his highly successful “Titanic” (1997).

However, the special effects he wanted for the movie ran a proposed budget over of over $400 million. No studio was willing to fund the film, and it was subsequently shelved for almost ten years. With a suspected budget of almost $230,000,000, this is the most expensive movie ever made.

And it isn’t hard to see why, literally. The movie is 40% live action and 60% photo-realistic CGI, including a great deal of motion capture technology for the CGI characters. Though many are apprehensive about Cameron’s story (myself not included), the receptions of the visual design are almost one hundred percent positive. It may even be worth shelling out the extra cash for a blue ray player just for this movie.

And the blue people, they’re great. But as I said before, my favorite thing about this film was not how much a computer science major can enhance an image. Cameron manages to back up his spectacular visuals with a beautiful and heartfelt story. It is a classic heroic struggle between what you have always been taught, and what you are about to learn. (See “Dances With Wolves” but sans the Indians and adding some blue people.)

We haven’t seen a combination like that since Star Wars. And that’s saying something.

But don’t let the CGI fool you. Cameron took the acting in this film very seriously. He took the cast and crew to Hawaii where they spent days hiking through the jungles and living like tribes in order to get a better idea of life on Pandora.
If you can stomach the 3D, do it. It’s worth every penny, several times over.

It may have reached the highest position on the charts, but that doesn’t mean “Avatar” is about to lose steam. With Academy Award nominations just around the corner, though it is not predicted to outshine sister film “Titanic”, there is a chance that it is about to become even more popular.

But now for the tricky part: Many are beginning to argue that Avatar’s climb to the top deserves some sort of asterisk, with a footnote that goes something like this.

Avatar had the advantage of being released in 3D, adding and additional three dollars per ticket. And when you consider that ticket price inflation for even 2D films is at its worst ever, it is more difficult to accept Avatar’s lead.

In fact, adjusting ticket prices for inflation, Avatar ranks as the 26th-highest-grossing film in the U.S., according to Box Office Mojo. And who comes out on top? Gone With The Wind, with $1.5 billion adjusted gross in the U.S., followed by “Star Wars” with $1.3 billion.

For the most part, most of the films at the top are from at least thirty years ago. On the normal all time charts, “Gone with the Wind” does not even make the top 50.

A possible solution has been to do away with the all time chart and only focus on this adjusted list. Or, my personal favorite, base the all time chart on attendance and not money. The cultural significance of a film depends on how many people see the film, not how much they paid to see it.

Whether or not “Avatar” cheated its way to the top, plenty of people like myself have gone and enjoyed what it has to offer. That cannot change whether it is number one or one hundred.

The Best Of The Decade

2009-12-10T23:24:00.000-08:00

Time magazine is calling it the decade from hell. Between 9/11, George
Bush, the War in Iraq, a tanked economy and the impending take over of Miley Cyrus, it is easy to think there is nothing left to live for. At the rate we’re going, maybe our impending 2012 doom isn’t so difficult to believe.

But I like to go into an apocalypse with at least a positive attitude. These are the things I have enjoyed the most over the past ten years. Some require less comment, some deserve more, but all of them belong on the list for one reason or another.

You Tube
Lets face it. Some of our best times in the 2000’s have been gathered around the computer with the Numa Numa guy and Charlie the Unicorn. More importantly, YouTube became a platform for the common man to join the mass media. After all, could we have lived without Justin Beiber?

Facebook
Of the social networking sights that have popped up over the past few years, none have had the same widespread impact. I knew things were out of control when I received a friend request from my dog, but Facebook has always been more than just adding friends. I like to think Sonoma State itself is run on Facebook. If I’m hearing about a lecture, a dance, or an event, it’s almost always through Facebook. I no longer give out my phone number to class members, “Just add me on Facebook.” However, the hours of my life lost to farmville will never return to me. But I think I can live with that.

American Idol
At the turn of the century, nothing was more funny than watching strangers make complete fools of themselves. American Idol was the dawning of the era of talent competition reality shows. The idea that anybody can make it big, and that your vote could make somebody’s dream come true propelled television of the new millennium. American Idol picked people of off the streets and turned them into actual stars (Kelly Clarkson, Jennifer Hudson, Carrie Underwood) with the occasional oddballs (Clay Aiken, Taylor Hicks). Of course, this all excludes the fact that show got a little tired five seasons in. But who knows - now that Elen is a judge the show may be worth a second chance. Maybe.

My iPod
Remember when your phone and your mp3 player were two separate devices? Or for that matter, does anyone remember life with CD’s? Portable music is now part of everything I do. I hate walking to class in silence. I can’t do homework even or sleep without my headphones in. I’m patiently waiting for Steve Jobs to invent the iPlug that can stay in my ear 24/7, and then I could get to work on the soundtrack for my life.

Johnny Depp
Whether you like him or not, this has been Johnny’s decade. From Jack Sparrow to John Dillinger, Depp has been delivering smash, sometimes weird, though always entertaining performances on the silver screen. He and pal Tim Burton are scheduled to release their latest oddball romp “Alice In Wonderland” in 2010. Maybe the legacy will continue. But if not, I can always go back to the entertaining myself thinking about Tim Burton and Helena Bonham Carter’s children. Is crazy hair hereditary?

Christopher Guest
Christopher Guest is a British-American director, actor, screenwriter, composer, and comedian. He is more widely know for directing, writing, and staring in a series of “mocumentary” films featuring the same troop of comedic actors including Eugene Levy, Catherine O’Hara, and Fred Willard. The films “document” everything from heavy metal bands to dog shows. My personal favorite, “A Mighty Wind” (2003) pokes fun at the folk music scene. His more recent “For Your Consideration”(2006) spoofs the film industry itself. They may not be the “best”, but as far as I’m concerned the sky is the limit when it comes to Guest and his ideas. Personally, I’m hoping for an in depth look at the Bush administration. I’ve always thought Levy would make a good president.

Harry Potter
On the night of July 7, 2000, I was one of the thousands of children lining up outside of the local bookstore to receive their copy of “Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire”. Right around the same time, Chris Columbus was being approved as director for the film version of the first book, “The Sorcerer’s Stone”. What ensued was of one of the largest book franchises of all time. A franchise that would ensure the popularity of a series of books that in many ways, changed a generation. I and many others like myself awaited the new books with more eagerness than all of the Christmas mornings and birthdays combined.

One of the most valuable things J.K. Rowling brought us was an eagerness to read in an age of technology. Classic lessons of good vs. evil or right vs. wrong were given human faces for parents to discuss with their children. And as the children grew up, the books grew with them. I was nine when I first read my first Harry Potter Book. I was eighteen when I read my last. It’s the only thing that I never grew out of. And now with the franchise winding down, the last film is scheduled for release next year, I hope that the following generation will have something to be as excited about. I mean, once we get over the vampire fad of course.

The Uncanny Valley

2009-11-22T22:14:00.000-08:00

Ever since early flipbooks and nickelodeons, animation has captured the hearts and minds of artists and moviegoers. And from the doodles of “Steamboat Willie” to the final rendering of “Up”, animation has certainly come a long way.

Two weeks ago, the latest example of a new form of computer-generated animation hit the theaters. However, instead of bringing some early holiday cheer, “A Christmas Carol” may have taken technological innovation a bit to far. The reviews have been lukewarm at best, with a general consensus that while the film was digitally impressive, it lacked the heart and soul of a Dickens’s classic, not to mention being downright creepy.

But what makes animation creepy? It’s a problem that has plagued filmmakers for several years, all beginning with the computer.

Computer generated imaging, or CGI, is the art of creating moving images on computers. It is the digital successor to older forms of animation including stop motion and frame-by-frame 2D illustrations. The technology was revolutionary. It made animation more believable and opened up a whole new world of special effects and graphics.

Realistic can be a good thing, but studies have shown there may be a point where enough is enough. There is a theory among robotics that if a robot or other human facsimile looks and acts too much like a human, it makes people uncomfortable.

The hypothesis, nicknamed the “uncanny valley”, describes the phenomenon when representations of humans are to close to being the real thing. It makes the animation seem “eerie”, and elicits a repulsive response from viewers. In other words, if the likeness of the animation and human comfort ability were put on a graph, there would be a significant dip just before the animation becomes live action. Essentially, the animation in movies like “A Christmas Carol” is so lifelike, that the audience cannot relate to the characters, as well as being slightly repulsed.

“A Christmas Carol”, directed by Robert Zemmicks, has not been the first movie to “creep” people out. In fact, Zemmicks’s previous two films “The Polar Express” (2004) and “Beowulf” (2007) are guilty of the same thing. The graphic fight scenes in “Beowulf” left audiences uneasy, and the overuse of Tom Hanks in “The Polar Express” was strange to say the least, Hanks playing about half of the cast including Santa Clause himself. All three films were filmed with a technique Zemmicks is now infamously known for, called motion capture.

In motion capture animation; the movements of actors are recorded into a digital format. Futuristic-looking wires are hooked up to actors as they move about and say their lines, allowing the computer to capture not only body language, but also subtle facial expressions and nuances of human behavior. Humans have traditionally been regarded as the most difficult subject to animate, and back in 2004, the visuals in “The Polar Express” blew audiences away.

Many critics have accused Zemmicks of using a dead end technology. At what sacrifice are our filmmakers forging new paths in animation? Animation is supposed to allow the storytellers of film to take audiences to places that are impossible with live action. It allows their characters to perform feats beyond normal human capacity, and to behave in new and exciting ways. It is the realm of fantasy. But motion capture and other high tech animation are blurring the line between reality and fantasy.

As humans, everything needs to fit into a category, and ambiguous films like those of Zemmicks are difficult to place. Actors in motion capture are still limited by their own laws of physics if no extra editing is done, forcing critics to wonder what the point of this new technology is, other than allowing Tom Hanks to be five people at once.

Motion capture has gone in such a different direction, that it is difficult to even consider it animation any more. It implies something more real than a normal cartoon; that something in the film applies to real life. The authenticity of animated characters can completely alter the message of a film. What kind of message would WALL-E have sent if its humans were modeled with motion capture?

Only ten years ago, critics were rejoicing the computer technology that allowed thousands of Hun soldiers to spill over a snowy hill in the Disney classic “Mulan.” Of course, the computer effects of “Mulan” didn’t come at the price of its well-told story. Motion capture may be contributing to technological advances, but not so much to art, and I refuse to pay money to see somebody’s science project.

The good ol’ days when movies were either animated or live action are behind us. Now it seems we’re doomed to deal with these spooky near-human zombies indefinitely. As for my holiday wish this year, I would love it if Zemmicks would retire, but I guess not all dreams can come true.

Family Matters

2009-11-21T20:02:00.000-08:00

I don’t normally watch “Desperate Housewives”, and recently I was reminded why.

When I came home from class one day my roommates were watching lifetime reruns and an old episode was on. The blonde one, Lynette, was in an interview for a job. She was returning to the work force after a seven-year gap in which she stayed home to raise her four kids. However, instead of focusing on Lynette’s previous experience in the field, the interviewer chose to harass her as to what she had been doing for those seven years, as if she had somehow become “tainted.”

I personally wasn’t aware that children make you stupid. Or that stay-at-home moms, maybe even mothers in general, are somehow second-class. I myself would like to be a mother someday, and was not happy about being put down by a soap opera.

Of course, the world is a different place than it was in the fifties. Today, instead of glorifying suburban and family values as they did then, many see this lifestyle as simple-minded. The feminist movement liberated women from the chains of oppression in their homes and allowed them embark into the real world. And good for them, but where has this left the reputations of mothers and housewives?

Having grown up in a small community of a rich suburb, filled with your typical soccer moms and Stepford wives, I wanted nothing more than to get out and go to college. I felt like I was trapped in a world full of superficial people living materialistic lives. It was the last place I ever thought I would want to return to. But I can’t help but wonder if I should really be cursing my old life.

The fact is, that I owe almost all of who I am today to parents who devoted their lives to me. Despite whatever they had going on outside of the family; they were at every softball game, every performance and every parent-teacher conference. We ate dinner as a family almost every night. We went on vacations. We genuinely loved each other.

What is so horrible about that? People like to throw around the word “housewife” like it is some deplorable weakness, as if a woman becomes a stay-at-home mom because she lacks any other redeeming qualities that would allow her to actually contribute to society.

Women are expected to lead double lives in today’s society. They are supposed to be ambitious career women hungry to prove their worth against the men, but when things suffer at home they are called bad mothers.

The housewives of today shape the generation of tomorrow. Good parenting produces healthy and happy children that will grow into successful, well-adjusted adults. I think people lose sight of how important that is.

It is brilliant the way women have advanced in society, but must it come with a price? The feminist movement should not have to come with such a negative status for housewives. When women introduce themselves as stay-at-home moms, I want them to be admired and not scoffed at.

Whether it be mother or father, aunt or uncle, grandparent or friend, don’t sneer at a person who cares enough about his or her family to commit full time and attention to them. It is probably one of the least selfish career paths you can take, and it deserves respect.

Here at Sonoma State, as in many other colleges, women are using education to propel them in society. They are preparing for the work force, to make something of themselves, and maybe even change the world. Our twenties are supposed to be for “big dreams” and having fun. We’re told to wait until our thirties to ruin our lives with long-term commitment and children.

Not a lot of people in college make having a family a top priority. In fact many attend college, women in particular, to escape traditional family values and strike out on their own, planning on saving marriage and babies for later in life if ever.

My friend Julia and I like to laugh about one day earning our pearls and moving to houses with white picket fences and going to book clubs and P.T.A meetings. While maybe not to this extreme, one of the things I am most excited for in life is to be a mother and have my own family. And if I need to take a couple of years off work to be with them, I don’t think that makes me any less intelligent or ambitious.

It doesn’t matter how “big” your dream is, only how happy it makes you. I may not be the next woman president; and I may never be an astronaut or a movie star. My dream is to be happy. And it may not be good enough for the world, but its more than enough for me.

Tripping On Acid: The Search for a Plot

2009-11-20T21:35:00.000-08:00

I’m not sure what you can expect from a film titled “The Men Who Stare At Goats.” But I can guarantee it is nothing like you have ever imagined. Director Grant Heslov tells us right away, “More of this is true than you would believe”, which basically implies that portions of this film are a big fat lie. But what actually follows is a disjointed, uneven attempt at satire that may poke at you funny, but ultimately leave you scratching your head.

The film follows small town journalist Bob Wilton (Ewan McGregor). After suffering a nasty divorce with his wife, Wilton flees to the Middle East seeking adventure and headlines. There he meets Lyne Cassady (George Clooney), member of a special army unit that teaches super powers to its soldiers. Lynne is the only soldier to have become so skilled at his psychic powers, that he could stop the heart of a goat with a single stare. They proceed to journey across the desert in pursuit of Lyne’s “mission”, which he refuses to describe to Bob. The film flashes between present day and twenty years in past during the glory days of the “Earth Army.”

Clooney and McGregor all but save the movie. Clooney is wild-eyed and quirky alternative to the suave sophisticate we usually see him as, and the difference is very enjoyable. McGregor’s innocent rendition of the likeable lead is expertly delivered. Along with other Hollywood professionals Kevin Spacey and Jeff Bridges, who plays Cassady’s hippie commanding officer, the cast of “The Men who Stare at Goats” channel all their enthusiasm to create an all around stellar performance.

The problem is that for all the fun this movie must have been to make, I was not that fun to watch. There are some good moments, like Clooney crashing a car on the only rock in an entire desert. However most of the humor was lost on me. It’s like wanting to laugh at a joke when you aren’t fully sure if you got it.

In fact there were many things about this film I didn’t understand at all. For example, the notion that this is all based on true events. The movie is based on a book of the same title written by Jon Ronson, which deals with the U.S. army’s exploration of potential military application of the paranormal. Apparently the army has been experimenting with these “New Age” concepts for decades. Does this mean we’re supposed to believe a real life soldier used his mind power to stop the hearts of goats and walk through walls? What the heck is this movie getting at?

It is clear that the film is supposed to be making fun of something. But it seems to have forgotten to tell us what that something is. Is it the hippie antiwar movement? The Special Forces? Blockbuster war Dramas? Or simply psychics themselves? Somebody needs to tell Heslov, that for satire to be successful you need to make it clear to your audience what you are making fun of.

There is not much that can excuse this film’s overall lack of plot. This is the type of story you would expect from a Cohen Brother’s flick. “The Men who Stare at Goats” is full of unbelievable situations and mind-boggling humor. In other words, you can’t make this stuff up. The concept was promising, but apparently all of the most interesting material in world could not get Heslov to tell a good story.

I’m still trying to figure out what the point was. Sure, it was an entertaining movie and all, but I cant help but feel like Heslov made off with not only 90 minutes of my time, but a few of my brain cells as well.

And as for the message, I’m not sure one was ever delivered. Maybe its something like: in times of great adversity, we must not be confined by the rules and let ingenuity guide us. But remember, that is just a guess.

Of course, let’s not forget the real reasons to go see this film. 1: Getting to stare at George Clooney for an hour and a half. Which, lets face it, is appealing to a wide range of people. 2. Enjoying the immense irony of Ewan McGregor discussing “Jedi” mind powers. 3. The ultimate oxymoron: Hippie soldiers.

This film is one big inside joke that I just don’t get. Go ahead and add it to your netflix cues, and maybe take some advice from Jeff Bridges character and trip on acid while you watch. Maybe it will make more sense then.

Don't Stop 'Till You Get Enough

2009-11-18T10:40:00.000-08:00

On June 25, 2009, one of greatest entertainment legends of all time passed away. We all knew where we were when we heard the news. I was busy at work when I received the simple, heavy hitting text message: Michael Jackson just died. It has been just over three months since then. So what does a post-Michael Jackson world like?

From the hardcore worshipers crying over the flowers outside Neverland ranch, to the cynics who rolled their eyes and bid the “freak show” good riddance, it is difficult to know what to think.

Well, I can certainly see why the extremes exist. Michael Jackson’s life was full of constant ups and downs, celebration and controversy. He was a child star turned super star turned philanthropist turned bizarre sideshow. Its difficult to believe this is all one person. So people are selecting what they want to remember him by. His loyal followers remember him for his music and philanthropy. The critics remember him for his child molestation charges, his abnormal lifestyle, and mysteriously translucent skin.

Being a child of the 90’s, it was difficult seeing anything positive about Michael Jackson. The first images I saw of the “King of Pop” were of him on his way to the court house or dangling his son over a four-story balcony railing.

So much of this media about Michael Jackson was negative. Why had the King fallen so far? Was he simply a bad man? I believe there is more to it than that.

Jackson stated in a 1993 interview with Oprah Winfrey that his childhood was shrouded in darkness. He confessed that his father had beaten him on numerous occasions and verbally abused him during grueling rehearsal sessions. Many attribute Jackson’s antics on the Neverland Ranch to his lack of a normal childhood, that it was a desperate attempt to relive the childhood he never had. Perhaps he genuinely wanted the camaraderie of young boys, having never had any real friends when he was a boy himself. But many people were satisfied with calling him a pervert and moving on.

Few have never taken the time to get the facts straight. For example, the awful rumor that Michael purposefully bleached his skin to look “whiter”. Believe it or not, I can sympathize with MJ on this one. Both Jackson and myself suffer from a rare skin condition known as Vitiligo. Vitiligo results in the loss of pigment producing cells in the skin. In other words, loss of skin color. Of course, being extremely pale already, my vitiligo is less noticeable. However in people of darker skin, say African Americans, the effect can be devastating.

It is an extremely unfortunate condition to have when the world is putting pressure on you to look your best. I can’t say I blame Michael for layering on the makeup. I myself am terrified that the de-pigmentation will someday make its way to my neck and face. I would be horrified if anybody ever called me a freak because of my condition, or thought that I was doing it on purpose.

Right or wrong, there will always be that question mark about Michael because of the number of scandals and the manner in which he lived his life. Many say that death should be a reason to respect a bad person. And to the families whose lives he turned upside down, he will always be remembered in this way. It can’t be helped.

All I know is that the people who have chosen to remember Michael as the “freak show” have been going back and forth online ever since his death, arguing the same points over and over again. These conversations will never bring anyone any satisfaction. I much prefer seeing the comments on the fan sites. On michaeljackson.com in particular, there is a section for people to post memories. The entries are astonishing. Many describe the detailed way in which the king of pop had changed their lives. Many reminisce about their first Michael Jackson album or 45. Many simply wish him love and peace. And finally, they say thank you. Thank you for the music he brought to them.

The website also provides the anxiously awaited “This Is It” film, which will profile Jackson’s tour that was scheduled for this past summer. Exclusive behind the scenes footage will provide a rare look at Jackson as he developed, created and rehearsed his tour. The film will be out for a special two-week period beginning Wed. October 24th.

Rev. Al Sharpton, a family friend of the Jackson’s who spoke at the memorial service on July 7th, could not have summed it up better, “He put on one glove, pulled his pants up, and broke down the color curtain… it was Michael Jackson that made us sing “we are the world” and feed the hungry… he out-preformed the pessimists. Every time he got knocked down he got back up again… Michael never stopped.” What he said to Michael’s children was met with a standing ovation, “Wasn’t nothing strange about your daddy. It was strange what he had to deal with, but he dealt with it anyway.”

Considering everything he went through in his life, I think the easiest judgment to pass is humanity. He was only human, and people make mistakes. I’m willing to accept that and move on. You can call it mindless celebrity worship, I call it forgiveness. And in times like these, a little forgiveness could go a long way.

The Mind of a Child

2009-11-18T10:14:00.000-08:00

Inside of all of us, there is hope, adventure, fear, and even something a little wild. “Where the Wild Things are” brings yet another children’s book classic to the silver screen this fall. Spike Jonze (Being John Malcovich) directs as well as collaborating with Dave Eggers on the screenplay.

The story follows Max (Max Records), an imaginative, rambunctious boy who revels in his world of pretend. But one night, his games earn him a harsh scolding from his mother, prompting him to run from the house and disappear into the night. After sailing across a wide ocean for several nights, he comes upon the island of the wild things.

This strange place is home to a “family” of seven monsters: Carol (James Gandolfini), Alexander (Paul Dano), Judith (Catherine O’Hara), Ira (Forest Whitaker), Douglas (Chris Cooper), KW (Lauren Ambrose) and The Bull (Michael Berry Jr.). The creatures have been through some tough times, but their main goal is to stick together, and also to have fun.

And fun is definitely on Jonze’s radar. He has taken a book of only ten sentences and elongated it with a beautiful script, moving score, and visuals that other, less daring, film makers would not even consider attempting.

Despite early plans of a fully animated film, all of the creatures are played by real actors in costumes provided by the Jim Henson Company, famous for the Muppets and Labyrinth characters. Each costume is between six to eight feet tall, and despite advanced animatronics, rely mainly on computer generated effects to enhance the facial expressions. The designers at Henson were forced to take out a great deal of animatronics in the large heads due to the actors not being able to stand upright while in costume.

And in case anyone was wondering, nobody forced Forest Whitaker into a massive fuzzy monster suit. After the vocal cast staged their performances, the Australian actors on location watched footage from the voice recording, and then donned the gigantic costumes to mirror what the voice actors did to physically animate the wild things.

Maurice Sendak, author of the children’s book, was as involved in the production process as much as possible. He took the production of a potential film so seriously, that the entire project was put on the backburner for over a decade because he could not find a suitable director. Eggers and Jonze, hand picked by Sendak, kept in close contact with him all through the process, and their efforts are clearly shown in the story and design. The basic structure of the book remains while Jonze and Eggers delve deeper into the emotions and imaginings of the main character, Max, and his world.

Jonze’s vision is all about realism and innocence. Portions of the film are shot from handheld cameras to heighten Max’s experience running around with the wild things. Academy Award winning composer Carter Burwell’s chilling pianos and harps play melodies so beautiful yet so simple, that Max himself could be playing them out of his level one piano book.

In fact, the entire film feels like it could take place inside Max’s imagination. The script itself sounds like it was written by a child. Watching Max and his monsters is like watching one big game of pretend. The monsters think like Max. They believe what he tells them. They become friends just as fast as they were enemies. Jonze and Eggers created a place removed from reality and illustrated by the wonderfully simple mind of a child.

There are no opening credits, and there even doodles and scribbles over the opening logos. The pacing is disjointed, the dialogue is simple, but the child’s imagination is a complex place, and often does not make sense at all.

The film however, makes perfect sense. “Where the Wild things are” takes us to a place where we can be kids again. We can build giant forts, have dirt clot wars, sleep in giant dog piles, and bay at the moon.

However, the film cannot be exclusively a “kids” film. It is a must see for anyone looking to rekindle childhood fantasies, but may not work for younger children. Viewers should be warned that there are some upsetting themes in the film. It is neither a fairy tale nor a cookie-cutter Disney “feel good” flick. There is betrayal, devastation, and a great deal of rough housing.

As the characters learn, there is a disconnect between where imagination meets reality. And sometimes, the real world forces us to abandon our dreams. But as Max sits down to dinner with his mother at the end of the film, we see that perhaps reality does not have to be as bad as we make it out to be.

Needless to say, I left the theater with a mixture of feelings. Its funny how the mind of a child makes everything seem so simple, yet so complicated. Its true and its terrifying.

It never ceases to amaze me.