Category: All (-ish)

Three sentence movie reviews: Silver Linings Playbook

On second viewing (I brought the boyfriend along this time; he liked it) I can say that I really enjoyed the speeches by Jennifer Lawrence’s character when I could tell she’d been through a lot of therapy:  “Let’s talk about that…”  I also enjoyed how clearly and succinctly the family dynamics came through.  This held up quite well through a second viewing and I can still recommend it.

Where watched:  Regal City Center 12.
Cost:  Free, thanks to passes.

poster from:  http://www.impawards.com/2012/silver_linings_playbook_ver3.html
(I find their eye color in this poster distracting)

Three sentence movie reviews: Lincoln

This is a movie with excellent acting,* an interesting plot, as well as wonderful set design and costumes.  Alas, it is a grand example of really excellent pieces failing to come together into a very good, or even a good movie.  I found it to be overly long and boring repetitive experience of speeches made by whatever character was in the middle of the frame followed by the John Williams music swelling to let us know how to feel.**

Where watched:  Regal Fox Tower
Cost:  Free thanks to passes from Kelly.  If I’m going to sit through a so-so movie, it’s best that it be a free so-so movie. (Also note that this movie was mostly my pick, so double thanks Kelly)

*Please note that there was excellent acting by Sally Field, but she is twenty years too old (I looked it up) to be Mary Todd Lincoln and that was incredibly distracting from the overall whole of the movie and her performance in specific.  There is no way that Sally Field looks like the mother of Tad Lincoln who was 12 at the time of the movie.***  Also please note that seemingly every male character actor in Hollywood is in this movie and thus it was very hard for me to pay attention as I was constantly trying to figure out where I had seen that fellow before.


**Check back in 15 years, I suspect this film won’t age well.

http://www.loc.gov/pictures/item/brh2003003272/PP/
***Here’s a picture of Mary Todd Lincoln in her inaugural ball gown.  The information with the photo doesn’t say from which inauguration.   She’s no spring chicken, but she’s no old crone, either.  What 40-something actress would have been an age appropriate choice to play Mrs. Lincoln?

poster from: http://www.impawards.com/2012/lincoln.html

Essay: On Slow News

On Monday, the Oregonian ran a commentary* by Peter Laufer, in which he attempts to convince the reader to join the “slow news” movement.  Mr. Laufer, I am happy to say I am already a member, as evidenced by the fact I read your column on Wednesday, two days after it was published.

 I already have stepped off the 24-hour news cycle, having realized that there just isn’t enough news for all 24 hours of the day.  I read the paper daily—though I don’t always finish the current day’s paper by the end of the current day—I listen to NPR while cooking dinner and that is it.**  I will, on occasion, poke about online for more information about a current event, but mostly I just keep informed as people did in the last century: by reading the newspaper and listening to the radio.
Laufer says, “We need to be able to decide for ourselves what so-called news is worth our while, not just allow ourselves to be subjected to an endless barrage of unfiltered media assaults.” What’s worked for me is to have regular times each day to check in with the world.  Mine are: on the train to and from work, when
I read the paper; also the aforementioned cooking dinner hour with NPR.  Unless some national tragedy is occurring, I can wait to wade into the details.
It’s worth noting that my definition of national tragedy is a lot stricter than the media’s view.  Here’s a tally of national tragedies in my lifetime:  the events of September 11, 2001.  That’s it. Everything else can wait until my news hour.  Remember the DC sniper?  Coverage of that event was a wake-up call for
me.  For the entire period the sniper was active, all our local news—morning, noon, evening, late night—spent a substantial amount of time reporting about something that was happening on the other side of the country.  Given that
most days there was no new news and given that few non-governmental events occurring in our nation’s capital are local it was a colossal waste of time.
Laufer also points out that the first coverage of an event
is often inaccurate.  Agreed. I would
also add that it tends to be quite hysterical.  When the shootings at Columbine High School
occurred, I recall thinking, “I can’t wait until someone writes a book about
this.”  I had to wait a decade, but the
book was worth the wait, as it carefully and completely proved that pretty much
everything we “knew” about Columbine after the shootings was not accurate.
I’d like to invite all of you to join me in the slow news movement.  We can be informed, even if we check in at limited, regular intervals.

*If you want to read the original column, it is titled “It’s OK to read yesterday’s news tomorrow.” and is available, for a time, by clicking here.

 **If I had more time, I would also read a weekly news magazine and also renew my subscription to Harpers and the Atlantic Monthly.  If I had more time and cable, I would watch the Daily Show and the Cobert Report.

Wait until you “See Back for Details”

This is one of those products I feel people go looking for.  They buy a smart phone, they realize they can’t use it with their gloves on, they consult their friends or the Internet for a solution, et voila, they find themselves in the glove section of Macy’s staring at the selection.  Or, they knew this product existed like I did, because the fluffy sections of the newspaper, as well as women’s magazines, explained the whole concept to me in the form of a “feature.”  Advertising as news.  Gotta love it.

But yes, I’m always happy for more details.

Unless the details are an obvious drawing that gives me no new information.
 

Essay: On seeing someone you knew briefly twenty years ago.

“She hadn’t changed a bit”

 “He was exactly the same.”
From When Harry Met
Sally*
Brace yourself.  If you don’t have a picture of the person, then the person today might not look anything like you remember.  Starting a decade or so ago, Facebook has made it impossible, for better or worse, to forget people from your past, however minor.  But for those of us who came of age before Facebook or digital cameras, having a picture of someone was not ubiquitous.  Sure, we might have a fair amount of photos of all your friends, but people on the periphery of our lives?  The people we worked with, went to church with or sat in classes
with?  We didn’t have photos of them.  In fact, a lot of people didn’t like having their picture taken, so sometimes it was difficult to get photos of some of your close friends.
If you don’t have a photo of someone, chances are your brain has airbrushed the image a bit, building up cheekbones, brightening eyes, straightening teeth.  Enough time has passed that the image that remains in your brain might look nothing like the person in question then, much less the person in question then plus twenty years.
Don’t worry that you have gained weight in the intervening years.  It’s been two decades.  How many people can say they weighed the same amount they did two decades ago?  You?  Well, you, my friend, are the exception.  Well done, I say.  But, for the rest of us, we all weigh more than we did twenty years ago, some of us substantially more.  And don’t forget that, in general, Americans are overweight.  If you’ve gained weight, chances are this person from your past has not escaped the same fate.
The hair.  The hair will be different.  Depending on which segment of life the 20 years encompass, hair will be markedly different.  I came of age when a lot of boys becoming men had long, sometimes very long hair.  Five years after I graduated from high school, most of it had been cut off.  And with men, especially, hairlines recede, or disappear altogether.  For women, the color
might be similar, or it might have changed entirely.  The style will be markedly different.
There’s a good chance you might think, “My god, do I look that tired/worn out/old?”  And yes, you do.  You were about 7304 days younger when you last saw this person.  And, for most of us, we were much more sprightly and younger twenty years ago.  If that person is in the same general age bracket as you and looks tired, chances are you look just as tired.  And that’s okay.  You’ve done a lot in the intervening years to earn that worn-out look.
You may have absolutely nothing in common.  Life throws us together and then separates us again.  We go off in different directions, explore different things, find new gurus and interests and enthusiasms.  Maybe you click with this
person and it’s like a day hasn’t passed. And maybe the only thing you share is your time together before. That’s okay.
*Probably not an exact quote but the search engines didn’t cough it up within my limited attention span and I was too lazy to search
further.

Three sentence movie reviews: A Late Quartet

If I hadn’t been sitting in the movie theater, I probably would have wandered off and found something else to do.  But I wasn’t annoyed or disgruntled while sitting in the movie theater, so this wasn’t a bad movie, just one where I was simultaneously bored and interested.  It did contain good acting all around and the subject matter (famous chamber music quartet) was one I’d never given much thought to at all.

Where watched:  Laurelhurst Theater
Cost: $3.00

poster from: http://www.impawards.com/2012/late_quartet.html