South Park's episode, "The Entity" from November of 2001 proved to be quite prophetic. TSA is completely and totally out of line. Mr. Garrison questions the efficiency of the airlines and rightfully points out that they asked the government for a bailout so they wouldn't have to fire employees, and after being granted the bailout, the airlines fired the employees anyway. In another sequence, Kenny is discovered to be carrying nailclippers and is shot on sight.
Our newest reign of terror from TSA is the nude scanner which takes pictures of you underneath your clothes in order to prevent another threat like the underwear bomber from last Christmas. The fact of the matter is that it is proven that the underwear bomber's powder explosive wouldn't have been picked up by the nude scanner, so why do we have them? TSA promises that they will usher in much better security than we already have and that they will not harm us.
Let's think about this for a moment. The nude scanner was said to pick up guns, knives, and other dangerous materials passengers were concealing (including a syringe), but wouldn't these materials be picked up by the metal detector? We are given the option to opt out of the nude scan, but if we do, we are given a more 'personalized' examination of our bodies. Which is worse- having nude pictures taken of you and stored on archives or being felt up in a manner that goes beyond what the police would do if you were arrested? As a matter of fact, I seem to remember one officer molesting a woman in the movie "Crash," but what he did in that movie seems normal compared to what TSA does nowadays.
My mother recently went through TSA. A female TSA employee directed her to go through the nude scan. My mother declined. The agent then made her stand at the other end of the metal detector as her bags were for around a half hour while they got the necessary employees to give her an examination. This eventually led to the employee making her stand with both legs spread and her arms pointed outward for ten minutes while the employee lectured her on how these scans weren't a big deal. TSA claims that they do not discriminate against people who decline to take the nude scan.
Where do we draw the line? It is clear in this instance that TSA is way out of line. As a matter of fact, I would like to be given the exact numbers of how many people were caught solely because of the technology that they seem to be constantly developing. For instance, After metal detectors were installed, we had the metal detecting wands. After the wands, we had to take off our shoes. After our shoes, we were given intrusive pat downs. After the pat downs, we are told that we have to have nude photos taken of us. Where are the numbers that show the numbers for the nude scans above the pat downs? The pat downs above the shoe removal?
I'm strongly against forcing people into situations where they would be uncomfortable. I don't understand how airlines have more intrusive scans and security measures than most government buildings. Regardless, the solution to these problems is never to react after the fact but to pre-empt the threats. Why don't we convert these resources to doing research on people before they even reach the airport? How many of those that we have caught would have been easier to catch if one had simply looked into their lives slightly? Yes, it takes time and effort, but so does having one man look over hundreds of nude pictures every minute with respect to different clothing, body sizes, etc. If the threats are as horrifying as we are led to believe (one blogger who is quite pro-TSA wrote that one in 10.8 million who fly would be subject to a terrorist effort. Those numbers seems quite good for us), then why do we keep endorsing past efforts rather than looking into the future?
Let's face it- it's only a matter of time until TSA has to answer to the sum of a class action lawsuit that would make the producers of Inception squeamish. I can hardly think of a jury in the US that would be dissuaded from finding for the plaintiffs because like it or not, we've all been exposed to horror stories about innocent people being unlawfully searched in the name of liberty. All it takes is for someone who is much more qualified than I to explain how these scans and searches are unnecessary. Or, better yet, we could make an alternative to flying. Then the TSA employees who blindly corral thousands of people into machines daily and follow routines that seem out of line (such as feeling children in their crotches while their parents have to watch) will have to answer to pissed off people for future work. I remember how embarrassed I was when I had my first physical examination; I can only imagine how mortified I would be if I had been flying at that age.
This is not about people wanting to get through security faster but about sheer logic. If our nude scanners wouldn't have prevented what we claim they would have prevented and aren't more efficient than what we already have in place, then they are a waste of time, money, and pride. I would be embarrassed if I was a TSA employee and required to feel up other people and/or look at nude pictures of them. I would quit my job on the spot if asked to do something that intrusive. That people still work those jobs baffles me.
Saturday, August 13, 2011
Saturday, February 12, 2011
Oscar Predictions
Supporting Actor- Christian Bale (The Fighter). He's the front-runner, and his best competition in this category is Geoffrey Rush for The King's Speech.
Supporting Actress- Amy Adams (The Fighter). This is the most difficult category for me to predict. Gambling rules state that if there are two front-runners, you go for the least likely, but the least likely is very hard to say. Hailee Steinfeld for True Grit and Melissa Leo for The Fighter I believe are the two front runners which leaves the other three less likely. Helena Bonham Carter did an excellent job in The King's Speech, but she managed to be overshadowed by the other two actors. Jacki Weaver for Animal Kingdom was well-reviewed but not watched by many which may include Academy voters. In this case, Weaver is the least likely, but she may be so unlikely that she's beyond everyone's radar.
Adapted Screenplay- The Social Network. The dialogue is perfect, and Aaron Sorkin created The West Wing.
Original Screenplay- The King's Speech. The best competition in this category according to the Academy is The Fighter because of its nomination for Director whereas Inception, The Kids Are All Right, and Another Year did not receive that honor.
Original Score- The Social Network. Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross are very far in the front despite my belief that an 'adapted' score should be in here (Black Swan).
Original Song- 127 Hours. Country Strong was the frontrunner at one point, but the movie was badly reviewed, and the winner last year was Crazy Heart, another movie about country music. The next place would be Toy Story 3, but I'm not a Randy Newman fan. It's a far cry because A.R. Rahman won previously for Slumdog Millionaire, but the song (Jai Ho) has become an anthem for joy.
Animated Film- Toy Story 3.
Art Direction- Alice in Wonderland. Tim Burton films usually win in this category.
Cinematography- The King's Speech, but on second though, I think it will be a Deakins year for True Grit. He's been nominated more than a few times and has never won.
Costume Design- Alice in Wonderland.
Makeup- The Wolfman.
Sound Editing- Inception.
Sound Mixing- The King's Speech because of the quiet environments and use of dialogue. The Social Network could pull an upset as well as True Grit, but Inception is probably the frontrunner. Given its lack of necessary nominations (including Director and Editing), it will either sweep its categories or only win one or two.
Visual Effects- Inception. I would bet my college fund on it (which is currently $13.88).
Documentary- Restrepo. Exit Through the Gift Shop has debates over its authenticity, and the creators are silent about such claims. The Academy most likely won't go for it, but the only other documentary on everyone's radar is Inside Job. I'm betting on Restrepo.
Documentary Short Subject- Killing in the Name for its subject material.
Film Editing- The King's Speech. I can't remember a movie that won Picture but not Editing in the past, but I can name a movie that won Picture without capturing Screenlay (that would be Million Dollar Baby, losing Adapted to Sideways).
Foreign Language Film- Biutiful because of its recognition of Javier Bardem for Actor. Dogtooth is simply too controversial for a win.
Animated Short Film- Day & Night.
Live Action Short Film- based on trailers, Na We We. I really have no clue nor the opportunity to see the nominees, so this is a mostly blind guess.
Directing- David Fincher for The Social Network. He does many brilliant things with the film despite the fact that I appreciated it more than liked it.
Best Actress- Natalie Portman. She runs the show with Black Swan and has no other real competition except for Annette Bening. Those are enough reasons, but I will add that Portman was robbed for a win for Closer.
Best Actor- Colin Firth. A respectable nominee last year, he's now the frontrunner.
Best Picture- The King's Speech because of its gathering storm of publicity after The Social Network.
Supporting Actress- Amy Adams (The Fighter). This is the most difficult category for me to predict. Gambling rules state that if there are two front-runners, you go for the least likely, but the least likely is very hard to say. Hailee Steinfeld for True Grit and Melissa Leo for The Fighter I believe are the two front runners which leaves the other three less likely. Helena Bonham Carter did an excellent job in The King's Speech, but she managed to be overshadowed by the other two actors. Jacki Weaver for Animal Kingdom was well-reviewed but not watched by many which may include Academy voters. In this case, Weaver is the least likely, but she may be so unlikely that she's beyond everyone's radar.
Adapted Screenplay- The Social Network. The dialogue is perfect, and Aaron Sorkin created The West Wing.
Original Screenplay- The King's Speech. The best competition in this category according to the Academy is The Fighter because of its nomination for Director whereas Inception, The Kids Are All Right, and Another Year did not receive that honor.
Original Score- The Social Network. Trent Reznor and Atticus Ross are very far in the front despite my belief that an 'adapted' score should be in here (Black Swan).
Original Song- 127 Hours. Country Strong was the frontrunner at one point, but the movie was badly reviewed, and the winner last year was Crazy Heart, another movie about country music. The next place would be Toy Story 3, but I'm not a Randy Newman fan. It's a far cry because A.R. Rahman won previously for Slumdog Millionaire, but the song (Jai Ho) has become an anthem for joy.
Animated Film- Toy Story 3.
Art Direction- Alice in Wonderland. Tim Burton films usually win in this category.
Cinematography- The King's Speech, but on second though, I think it will be a Deakins year for True Grit. He's been nominated more than a few times and has never won.
Costume Design- Alice in Wonderland.
Makeup- The Wolfman.
Sound Editing- Inception.
Sound Mixing- The King's Speech because of the quiet environments and use of dialogue. The Social Network could pull an upset as well as True Grit, but Inception is probably the frontrunner. Given its lack of necessary nominations (including Director and Editing), it will either sweep its categories or only win one or two.
Visual Effects- Inception. I would bet my college fund on it (which is currently $13.88).
Documentary- Restrepo. Exit Through the Gift Shop has debates over its authenticity, and the creators are silent about such claims. The Academy most likely won't go for it, but the only other documentary on everyone's radar is Inside Job. I'm betting on Restrepo.
Documentary Short Subject- Killing in the Name for its subject material.
Film Editing- The King's Speech. I can't remember a movie that won Picture but not Editing in the past, but I can name a movie that won Picture without capturing Screenlay (that would be Million Dollar Baby, losing Adapted to Sideways).
Foreign Language Film- Biutiful because of its recognition of Javier Bardem for Actor. Dogtooth is simply too controversial for a win.
Animated Short Film- Day & Night.
Live Action Short Film- based on trailers, Na We We. I really have no clue nor the opportunity to see the nominees, so this is a mostly blind guess.
Directing- David Fincher for The Social Network. He does many brilliant things with the film despite the fact that I appreciated it more than liked it.
Best Actress- Natalie Portman. She runs the show with Black Swan and has no other real competition except for Annette Bening. Those are enough reasons, but I will add that Portman was robbed for a win for Closer.
Best Actor- Colin Firth. A respectable nominee last year, he's now the frontrunner.
Best Picture- The King's Speech because of its gathering storm of publicity after The Social Network.
Thursday, February 3, 2011
127 Hours - **** out of ****
"127 Hours" is a movie that wouldn't work if lesser hands were involved. The story is deceptively simple, but what we are left with is a thrilling, suspenseful, and thought-provoking look into humanity. And what insights it gives us! This movie isn't entertainment- it's a gift. Perhaps it's not a gift that you think you want, but in the end, you will want it.
Aron Rolston (James Franco) is an adventurer who often takes off for long weekends just to get high on himself. He knows most of the landscape like the back of his hand, but what he makes us see he doesn't want anyone else to see. It's not like we're privileged- we're just the audience. Not answering the phone when family calls, Aron takes off in the dark for the adventure that would change his life forever. That last line gives me indigestion, but it is true. Aron becomes trapped by a boulder for 127 hours.
Before you start quoting cliches, I should mention that this is a true story, and as the real Aron Rolston states, the closest to a documentary about what happened as can exist. Yes, that changes things dramatically.
Aron goes through all the stages of grief in different ways. Like a computer, he begins talking to his camcorder in order to document why he is trapped and what he'd need to get out. Gradually, his layers are stripped and we are allowed to see the real Aron during a brilliant scene where he states that the boulder had been waiting for him his entire life.
I may have mentioned the majority of the plot, but this is a journey. It's not about where it's ultimately going as the movie assumes you've heard the story or read the book beforehand but instead gives us insight into Rolston's psyche as layers are torn down. There's a wonderful comedic scene where Aron interviews himself with canned audience reactions and a triumphant finale which involves a couch, but none of this would work if there was not a perfect actor to take the lead. That actor is James Franco.
James Franco is Aron Rolston. I have no hesitation in typing those words. He embodies the man and channels everything directly through the screen as if it weren't there. Rolston is a loner, confident, and in no need of help from anyone. It's unclear what made him this way but what is clear is that he doesn't entirely love himself. These things crash down around him as he believes that he will die in this place.
Danny Boyle and Simon Beaufoy wrote the screenplay with Boyle directing after his Oscar-winning work in "Slumdog Millionaire." The final result makes a brilliant use of splitting the screen in three ways so we can see how things happen that are meaningful. Crowds of people ignoring each other on the left, a cheering basketball game crowd on the right, and Aron in shadow in the middle is one of the opening examples. If you stopped during every one of these, you could write your own story on how they relate to the movie's story.
"127 Hours" very well may turn into necessary viewing and reading for film students. This is a wonderful film that shows us humanity in its weakest and most triumphant.
Rated R for language and some disturbing violent content/bloody images.
Check your local theater for showtimes.
Aron Rolston (James Franco) is an adventurer who often takes off for long weekends just to get high on himself. He knows most of the landscape like the back of his hand, but what he makes us see he doesn't want anyone else to see. It's not like we're privileged- we're just the audience. Not answering the phone when family calls, Aron takes off in the dark for the adventure that would change his life forever. That last line gives me indigestion, but it is true. Aron becomes trapped by a boulder for 127 hours.
Before you start quoting cliches, I should mention that this is a true story, and as the real Aron Rolston states, the closest to a documentary about what happened as can exist. Yes, that changes things dramatically.
Aron goes through all the stages of grief in different ways. Like a computer, he begins talking to his camcorder in order to document why he is trapped and what he'd need to get out. Gradually, his layers are stripped and we are allowed to see the real Aron during a brilliant scene where he states that the boulder had been waiting for him his entire life.
I may have mentioned the majority of the plot, but this is a journey. It's not about where it's ultimately going as the movie assumes you've heard the story or read the book beforehand but instead gives us insight into Rolston's psyche as layers are torn down. There's a wonderful comedic scene where Aron interviews himself with canned audience reactions and a triumphant finale which involves a couch, but none of this would work if there was not a perfect actor to take the lead. That actor is James Franco.
James Franco is Aron Rolston. I have no hesitation in typing those words. He embodies the man and channels everything directly through the screen as if it weren't there. Rolston is a loner, confident, and in no need of help from anyone. It's unclear what made him this way but what is clear is that he doesn't entirely love himself. These things crash down around him as he believes that he will die in this place.
Danny Boyle and Simon Beaufoy wrote the screenplay with Boyle directing after his Oscar-winning work in "Slumdog Millionaire." The final result makes a brilliant use of splitting the screen in three ways so we can see how things happen that are meaningful. Crowds of people ignoring each other on the left, a cheering basketball game crowd on the right, and Aron in shadow in the middle is one of the opening examples. If you stopped during every one of these, you could write your own story on how they relate to the movie's story.
"127 Hours" very well may turn into necessary viewing and reading for film students. This is a wonderful film that shows us humanity in its weakest and most triumphant.
Rated R for language and some disturbing violent content/bloody images.
Check your local theater for showtimes.
Tuesday, January 11, 2011
Michael Clayton - **** out of ****
"Michael Clayton" is one of the most fascinating movies I've ever watched. The stripped-down thriller is filled with engrossing scenes not because of what is happening but instead why they are happening. It features many different layers that can be analyzed separately but ultimately belong together.
Michael Clayton (George Clooney) is a fixer who self-advertises as a janitor. He is a lawyer but is said to specialize in wills and trusts. Clayton previously wished to get out of the business and open a restaurant, but the financial investment fell through due to his gambling and other unforeseen circumstances. Someone wishes him dead. The explanation may seem simple, but it's really much scarier than you could imagine.
Arthur Edens (Tom Wilkinson) is a trial lawyer within the same firm. Edens defends U-North, a company that made a bad insecticide that caused many animals on a farm to die and become deformed. Edens goes off of his medication and falls in love with the young plaintiff. Clayton is alerted that Edens has become a problem after he strips down naked in a deposition and runs through the parking lot wearing only his socks.
Karen Crowder (Tilda Swinton) from U-North steps in to manage the situation with knowledge from a leadership standpoint but none from what she feels she needs to be. There's nothing sexy or seductive in the character. She spends much of one scene rehearsing the answers to an interview in her underwear, but this isn't used to show her bearing much of herself or even that she has something to hide; instead, we see that Karen Crowder is, by her nature, plain and normal.
On that line, we should come back to Anna, Edens' love interest. He gives a monologue about two Lithuanian prostitutes performing oral sex on him, but he intentionally ruins it to make it last. When he sees Anna, he believes a light goes off in his mind that suddenly makes everything crystal clear in his life. Anna is what completes him. We meet her in a few scenes, and by a standpoint, there isn't anything physically special about her. She isn't overweight, nor is she supermodel skinny. Her hair is blond, but it isn't a standout shade. I could go on, but the point is that by our eyes, Anna is a background texture, one that we couldn't notice if we tried. Karen doesn't look the same, but she exhibits the same quality of plainness. The difference is that someone sees Anna for more than she is and for more than she thinks she is. Karen Crowder wants so badly to be the villain that her tragic flaw is that she doesn't know how to be.
You can probably catch on and see what I'm talking about when I mention layers. This rich layer cake of a movie keeps you with it throughout as we explore these people and their decisions. This is a movie that could have been created years and years ago and been a classic today. I can only hope that it will have that fate years from now.
Rated R for Language Including Some Sexual Dialogue.
Buy it here.
Michael Clayton (George Clooney) is a fixer who self-advertises as a janitor. He is a lawyer but is said to specialize in wills and trusts. Clayton previously wished to get out of the business and open a restaurant, but the financial investment fell through due to his gambling and other unforeseen circumstances. Someone wishes him dead. The explanation may seem simple, but it's really much scarier than you could imagine.
Arthur Edens (Tom Wilkinson) is a trial lawyer within the same firm. Edens defends U-North, a company that made a bad insecticide that caused many animals on a farm to die and become deformed. Edens goes off of his medication and falls in love with the young plaintiff. Clayton is alerted that Edens has become a problem after he strips down naked in a deposition and runs through the parking lot wearing only his socks.
Karen Crowder (Tilda Swinton) from U-North steps in to manage the situation with knowledge from a leadership standpoint but none from what she feels she needs to be. There's nothing sexy or seductive in the character. She spends much of one scene rehearsing the answers to an interview in her underwear, but this isn't used to show her bearing much of herself or even that she has something to hide; instead, we see that Karen Crowder is, by her nature, plain and normal.
On that line, we should come back to Anna, Edens' love interest. He gives a monologue about two Lithuanian prostitutes performing oral sex on him, but he intentionally ruins it to make it last. When he sees Anna, he believes a light goes off in his mind that suddenly makes everything crystal clear in his life. Anna is what completes him. We meet her in a few scenes, and by a standpoint, there isn't anything physically special about her. She isn't overweight, nor is she supermodel skinny. Her hair is blond, but it isn't a standout shade. I could go on, but the point is that by our eyes, Anna is a background texture, one that we couldn't notice if we tried. Karen doesn't look the same, but she exhibits the same quality of plainness. The difference is that someone sees Anna for more than she is and for more than she thinks she is. Karen Crowder wants so badly to be the villain that her tragic flaw is that she doesn't know how to be.
You can probably catch on and see what I'm talking about when I mention layers. This rich layer cake of a movie keeps you with it throughout as we explore these people and their decisions. This is a movie that could have been created years and years ago and been a classic today. I can only hope that it will have that fate years from now.
Rated R for Language Including Some Sexual Dialogue.
Buy it here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
