Unfortunately, it’s an abridged version, so it should not be your first experience with The Hobbit. But Nicol Williamson is fabulous, the music is great, and I have a whole basketful of childhood memories that go along with it. (Oh, and here’s a BONUS.)
Speaking of excited, I’m not sure I’ve seen Peter Travers THIS excited for a long time. A hopeful sign indeed.
THIS “thriller” was a useful exercise primarily because it reminded me of several important facts one should always keep in mind when creating this sort of cinematic potboiler.
Rule #1: When adapting a book, be careful to remove unnecessary, unimportant, incidental, and “hard to explain either quickly or clearly” information from the story, and make a semi-serious effort to keep all the necessary plot points in the script. It makes everthing a bit easier to follow for the audience. (Oh, and if you’ve decided not to follow Rule #1, don’t go with the 24ish editing style. That doesn’t lend itself to increased storytelling clarity.)
Rule #2, which might be seen as a corollary to Rule #1: An action thriller only requires a very basic level of plausibility; one which should not be too difficult to achieve. If one can manage to keep the plot holes down to the Mack Truck size, it’s a plus. Airbus size is just a bit hard to swallow. Apparently, someone forgot to tell George Nolfi this little factoid. (It is probably important to remember that we’re talking about the writer of Timeline, Ocean’s Twelve and the upcoming Hawaii Five-O here. Perhaps he’s not being hired for “plausibility purposes.”)
Rule #3, which is almost certainly just a corollary to Rule #2 (and therefore, depending on your view, a corollary to Rule #1): If you make a movie about the Secret Service, it’s a good idea to have them be moderately competent and mostly ethical. The unsatisfying alternative is to have one of them be a horrible traitor while the rest are simply buffoons. Aside from the taste this leaves in the viewer’s mouth, it’s just not very believable.
Rule #4:In the Line of Fire is a really well-made, gripping film about the Secret Service and Presidential assasination attempts. It is a tight, polished, mostly plausible story highlighted by excellent performances, high production values, and featuring one of the best cinema villains ever. Do not make a movie that will be compared to it unless you’re ready to “bring your A game.” This “C+ game” stuff isn’t really going to cut it.
An Italian architect said he is poised to start construction on a new skyscraper in Dubai that will be “the world’s first building in motion,” an 80-story tower with revolving floors that give it an ever-shifting shape.
The spinning floors, hung like rings around an immobile cement core, would offer residents a constantly changing view of the Persian Gulf and the city’s futuristic skyline.
The story doesn’t do a whole lot to explain the “how,” and I’m pretty sure there’s absolutely no way to address the “why” to any rational person’s satisfaction.
And while Fisher’s claim that “his tower will revolutionize the way skyscrapers are made” seems perfectly true, one is left wondering why we’ve stopped trying to change things for the better.
Maybe this is the key:
Fisher acknowledges that he is not well known, has never built a skyscraper before and hasn’t practiced architecture regularly in decades.
This is frightfully tardy, but if I don’t start the viewing long again, I’m going to fall hopelessly behind; make that “more hopelessly.” And then I’ll forget everything. Writing down my thoughts is simply a crutch for those of us (me) who are already afraid that their heads are so filled with trivial details that we (I) won’t be able to keep track of the things I’d actually like to remember.
Not sure this film fits into that “things I’d like to remember” category, but one must start somewhere, musn’t one?
I recently (in Galapagos land tortoise terms) had the opportunity to view this Nordic FILM, (sometimes lovingly referred to as Den Brysomme mannen), and I am pleased to report that it did indeed live up to its name.
It was a bothersome film.
Although blessed with so many of the strengths usually displayed by foreign independent features - (wonderful and wonderfully restrained acting, superb visuals and camera work, high yet not overdone production values) - the film suffered badly from “M. Night Syndrome”: “the weakness of trying to say too much, and doing it far too quickly.” Unfortunately, it also suffered from “The Fellini Condition”: “the state or condition of being unwilling to compromise your artistic vision or principles for the sake of a basic level of storytelling clarity and audience understanding.”
Despite my occasional sympathies for folks with Problem #1, I have never been able to work up an ounce of tolerance for folks with Problem #2. Sadly, The Bothersome Man falls firmly into both camps. And while some might argue that a certain amount of ambiguity and confusion was an essential part of the film’s message, I remain unconvinced that leaving folks “utterly lost” was what the filmmakers had in mind. (A significant dose of unnecessarily explicit sex - actually, is there any other kind? - and bewilderingly random, explicit violence also served to detract from the film’s overall enjoyableness.)
Yet despite these fairly harsh criticisms, the film succeeded in being both entertaining and thought-provoking. I suspect it would make for an excellent “discussion” piece, given the difficult-to-interpret-but-clearly-intended symbolism throughout. It’s just a shame that the writers couldn’t find a way to increase these worthwhile aspects of the film while decreasing the overall feeling of confusion.
(Oh, and don’t fall for the “Purgatory” interpretation. I don’t see how it can possibly hold together.)
Some of you might object that Waldo was already a card-carrying member of the digital age, but it’s not easy for me to come up with a witty title. That’s Duck’s territory.
Matt Harding even has his own Wiki PAGE, so we know that he’s made “the big time,” for sure. Wikipedia is definitely TRUSTWORTHY, right? Even if it’s not always very SENSITIVE.
But I digress.
This is probably my favorite Harding fact:
In 2007, Jawed Karim, one of the founders of Youtube, stated that Harding’s video is his favorite video posted to Youtube.
Well, that and the fact that his Where’s Matt 2008 video was uploaded three days ago, and has been viewed 1,707,449 times as of this second. Oh, wait: 1,707,451. I mean 1,707,452.
Apparently, yesterday’s first APPEARANCE from the baseball oddity NAMED Pat Venditte didn’t go all that smoothly:
Thus began the grand experiment that has led Venditte, a natural righthander, to the Staten Island Yankees of the Class A New York-Penn League. On Thursday, he threw a scoreless ninth inning in his professional debut, a 7-2 win over the Brooklyn Cyclones.
But even that appearance was not without controversy. Before Venditte faced the last Cyclone batter, switch-hitter Ralph Henriquez, Venditte and Henriquez played a game of cat and mouse, with Henriquez switching sides of the plate every time Venditte switched his specially designed glove from his left hand to the right, preparing to pitch from the same side the hitter chose.
After this happened several times, the teams appealed to the umpiring crew, delaying the game for a total of seven minutes. The umpired ruled in favor of the pitcher. Henriquez chose to hit from the right side, and Venditte struck him out to end the game.
What I’d really like to know how it could possibly have taken the umpiring crew seven minutes to reach a decision on this. Venditte’s story has been plastered all over the place over the last couple of weeks. Wouldn’t you expect them to have already had this discussion in anticipation of his arrival?
Perhaps it’s muddled by the fact that the rule book doesn’t actually cover this instance. Do we need a rewrite?
Some of this would probably fit better under “Trivial Time,” but that makes it sound like I’m wasting everyone’s time. (And while I might very well be doing just that, I don’t like to remind myself of the fact.)
THIS story amuses me because it reminds me of Flight of the Navigator, which I love dearly. And because it distracts me from other THINGS we can do with our advanced technology. (I advise against watching the video. It’s creepy.)
Perhaps, as you complain, Petroleo does exude a certain glamour in his patter song promising magic lanterns and horseless carriages and flying machines. But when he seduces the chief Minemaiden, the music darkens with a menacing crescendo as they embrace, singing “Combustione! Combustione!” There is no mistaking the unholiness of their union, nor its catastrophic consequence once their daughter Carbonia is born.
(And THIS makes for an interesting companion piece. Although, to be perfectly honest, I’m not a big fan of using that particular argument as a stick with which to beat Algorina.)
I know this is a bit old, but I thought that Peggy Noonan’s Brave New World?ARTICLE was very insightful. It frightens me, though.
America is always looking forward, not back, it is always in search of the fresh and leaving the tried. That’s how we started: We left tired old Europe and came to the new place, we settled the east and pushed West to the new place. We like new. It’s in our genes. Hope we know where we’re going, though.
This little INCIDENT, brought to my attention by my fascination with fairly unimportant (trivial, even) Dodger details and by Rick Reilly’s PIECE, is horrible. It also says as much about the catastrophic erosion of sportsmanship in this country as anything I’ve ever seen.
The catcher’s explanation is unbelievable, which is why I liked this:
Then some payback came for Hill, who was planning to walk on at Gordon College in Barnesville, Ga., next season. He got the word from Gordon coach Travis McClanahan, who said, Forget it, we don’t want you. “I’ve seen catchers get crossed up before,” says McClanahan. “But he appeared to be blocking a curveball in the dirt. I was shocked. I’ve never seen that happen. I’ve never heard of a player even suggesting doing that.”
And now, at last, for some real trivia - (sports trivia, of course): What do Brandon Inge, Dale Murphy and Craig Biggio have in common?
He eats with his right hand. Writes with his right hand. Brushes his teeth with his right hand. But don’t call him a natural righthander, at least not in baseball terms. The 22-year-old looks just as smooth throwing with his left arm as he does with his right.
Venditte’s unique skill set turned him into a strategic anomaly at Creighton these past few years. When a righthanded hitter came to the plate, Venditte threw with his right arm, and vice versa to lefthanders. With switch hitters, he decided ahead of time which arm he’d use to go at them.
The Yankees were so intrigued by Venditte that they first drafted him a year ago even though he had made it clear to teams he had no intention of leaving college after his junior year. The Yankees couldn’t sign him then, but they weren’t deterred. They drafted him again this year, 25 rounds earlier.
NPR was INTERESTED, and it’s such a specific group of baseball players that Baseball-Reference.com has a PAGE exclusively devoted to ambidextrous pitchers. (Plus there’s this Onion-style ARTICLE.)
The only rule I’ve been able to find is an NCAA one. Rule 9.2.k:
Pitch both right-handed and left-handed to the same batter during a plate appearance (ambidextrous-pitcher rule)
PENALTY—If a pitcher changes pitching hands during a batter’s time at bat, the umpire shall:
(1) Call a balk if a runner(s) is on base;
(2) Call a ball for an illegal pitch if no runner(s) is on base;
(3) Warn the pitcher; or
(4) Eject the pitcher if the offense is repeated.
A.R. 1—When facing a switch hitter, an ambidextrous pitcher shall declare the hand with which to pitch to the hitter.
A.R. 2—If a pinch hitter replaces a batter during a turn at bat, the pitcher may change pitching hands.
Interestingly, it is listed as a rule that has no Major League equivalent. However, in THIS “Ask the Ump” section, Tom Leppard (MLB’s Director of Umpire Administration) refers to a rule exactly like the NCAA one. Perhaps it’s in the Umpire Handbook?
The Creighton University reliever entered Saturday’s contest against Illinois State and started throwing left-handed. Every pitch was tossed sidearm and crossed the plate at 78-81 mph.
After a few throws, however, Venditte made a remarkable transformation.
He moved his glove to his left hand and started throwing right-handed. This time, every pitch was thrown over the top and hit the catcher’s mitt at 88-91 mph.
78-81 miles an hour? That’s not big-league stuff. The 88-91 could be, depending on the amount of movement he gets and his ability to locate. But this makes him sound like a right-hander to me.
But the real genius, at least from my perspective, is the way it’s shot. The grainy, Super 8 look, the way they leave in the beginnings of takes (or even just leave entire unnecesary takes uncut), the way the mayor only occasionally has his eye-lines or queues right.
