Mark Kirk: Stupid AND Ironic

Mark Kirk is a Republican Representative from Illinois who is caught up in a minor scandal about lying about his military record. Not a huge deal, except that he's running for Senate, and lying about your military record is the kind of thing that raises questions. It's more an issue of stupidity than out-and-out venality.

The specific issue is whether or not he was recognized as "Intelligence Officer of the Year." He wasn't, but his unit was. Sort of a fine distinction, but also something that anyone who has ever written a resume should get right.

Here's the irony: it's a stupid mistake about being "Intelligence Officer of the Year." So the fact of the scandal kind of repudiates the fact of the award.

The moral of the story is: don't make stupid mistakes about awards that have the word "intelligence" in the name of the award.

Salsa Classes at Hope!

Movies and Criminals

I was watching a collection of Ocean's 11 clips when I realized why I like a particular genre of movies. I like romantic comedies, and within that genre, I really like romantic comedies with a criminal element, like Grosse Pointe Blank, The Thomas Crown Affair, or A Fish Called Wanda.

Watching this video from Ocean's 11, it occurred to me that what criminals and filmmakers have in common is that they both have to be very creative. They both have to think outside the box. At least the kind of criminals played by George Clooney and Brad Pitt have to think like this. Criminals, by definition, are challenging the system, albeit for the wrong reasons. But they also have to pretend to be part of the system. Just like people making movies, criminals have to walk a fine line between fitting in, being like everyone else, and doing something that no one else has thot of. Entrepreneurs are the same way, which is also a reason why I like that class of people, as well.

It's not the most emotionally healthy or morally or politically correct analogy. But it sure is fun.

Star Wars question

I just watched Stars Wars, Episode IV, A New Hope . I was in a Barnes & Noble, and I happened to see the DVD on sale. I realized I don't actually own it, so I figured I should buy it (you can too, on Amazon - Star Wars Episode IV - A New Hope (1977 & 2004 Versions, 2-Disc Widescreen Edition)).

I noticed something that I've never noticed before. They come out of the trash compactor looking a little damp, but they dry off very quickly, and suddenly they don't look like they came out of a trash compactor. Not a big deal, because Luke and Han were wearing those presumably watertight stormtrooper outfits. Chewie is a Wookie, we can't really tell if there's a big difference in how he looks. But even in the first moments out of the trash compactor, Princess Leia looks great, as she always does. Makeup perfect, hair tightly coiled in those buns. At this point, she has been captured by Imperial stormtroopers, tortured and interrogated by Darth Vader, and seen her planet blown up. She has had just about the worst day ever. Yet there are no smudges anywhere on her face, and her perfectly white tunic thingy is still perfectly white. You would think that at the very least she would have been crying, after seeing her all those people die on her planet. But no, no running mascara for the Princess!

Here's my question: Did Princess Leia use the Force to keep herself looking that good, in the midst of all that trouble? Was that her special gift? We know that the Force was strong in her, being the daughter of Darth Vader and the twin sister of Luke. Is this why she never needed a lightsaber?

Also, we never really learn how the Rebel Alliance got the plans to the Death Star. We do, however, know that Princess Leia was involved in stealing those plans. If she could use the Force to keep herself looking great walking out of a trash compactor, did she use it in other ways we don't know about? Wink, wink, nudge nudge. Is this the hidden history of Princess Leia? Is this REALLY why Han comes back to save Luke? Did Leia plant some seeds in his mind before he left the rebel base?

Just curious about that.

Can't Resist This One - "What Is A Philosopher?"

The New York Times introduces a new column/blog/something-or-other today by the name of "The Stone," and apparently it is a forum for philosophical discussion. Way to go, NYT!

The first column asks the question, "What is a philosopher?" Good way to start!

Here's my first take at an answer: a philosopher is someone who realizes how incredibly stupid it is to ask a question like "What is a philosopher?" because there are a million different answers, almost all equally meaningless.

Here's my second take at an answer: a philosopher is someone who can't resist trying to answer the question "What is a philosopher?" because his or her answer might be that one-in-a-million answer that is the most interesting and not entirely meaningless. Not "right," because in philosophy, there is no "right" answer, just more or less interesting ones. An "interesting" answer to a question, at least by philosopher standards, is one that provokes the listener into thinking more about both the question and the answer.

Here's my third take at an answer. This is a paraphrase of a quote from Franklin Roosevelt. He used the world "radical," not philosopher, but it's a fun take on it nonetheless: "A philosopher is someone with both feet planted firmly in the clouds."

Here's my fourth take. This one is rather cynical: A philosopher is someone who is paid to be professionally confused for years at a time.

Here's my fifth take, again rather cynical: A philosopher is someone who is professionally uninterested in making decisions.

Actually, four and five are not great answers, because it is entirely possible that someone could meet either or both of those criteria and not be anything close to a philosopher. But it was fun to write those sentences.

Sixth take. There are limits to questions. There are limits to what can be known merely by thinking. A philosopher is someone who is aware that these limits exist, and may even be vaguely aware of where they are, and completely ignores them.

Here's my final attempt to answer the question "What is a philosopher?": a philosopher is someone who understands this analogy: doing philosophy (not necessarily "studying" philosophy) is like driving a Ferrari: 99 times out of 100, it's either largely pointless, not worth the extra effort/cost, or potentially fatal. But that 1% of the time, there is nothing like it in the world.

Kick-Ass

So I saw Kick-Ass, because I can identify with a geeky high school kid who wants to be cool, as, I am sure, many people can. Also, you have to respect a filmmaker and studio who name their movie "Kick-Ass." That takes a certain amount of chutzpah.

The buzz on this movie has been very good. I am pleased to report that the buzz is deserved. This movie does, in fact, kick ass. There are good movies. There are great movies. Then there are movies which change film. This movie will change film. It will be one of those movies which become part of the cultural consciousness.

There are many movies based on comic books, as this one is (the movie and comic book were developed in tandem). Most of them feature a male superhero. Occasionally there is a female superhero. Never before has there been a superhero who is an 11-year old girl. Kick-Ass is the name of the main character, a superhero created by a teenage boy out of nothing but his own hopes and dreams. And a cheesy wetsuit. Hit Girl is the name of the aforementioned 11-year old girl. Hit Girl is a much better superhero than Kick-Ass. Hit Girl can pretty much wipe the floor with Kick-Ass. Hit Girl, actually, can pretty much wipe the floor with just about anybody.

This is female empowerment unlike anything we've ever seen. She's the purple-haired daughter of Wonder Woman and Morpheus. Thelma and Louise, meet Wolverine. Tommy Lee Jones, Will Smith, call your agents - Men In Black just dropped a notch on the cool list. One thing that gives her an edge in the competition to be an unforgettable figure in the cinematic history of heroes with guns is that she is totally adorable. Sorry, Mr. Eastwood and Mr. Wayne, this is Gloria Steinem's revenge. And Princess Leia's.

But she's an adorable sociopath. She doesn't just take out the bad guys - she takes out a lot of bad guys. Questions have been raised, and will continue to be raised (and are being answered), about whether or not it is appropriate to have someone so young playing a role so violent. She also uses language the actress herself (Chloe Grace Moretz, an instant superstar) can't use in real life (she has said that if she did, she would be "grounded for life"). She isn't just violent and foulmouthed - she's also ruthless and coldblooded. But even when she is reloading her Glocks in midair - damn is that a cool shot - she's still somehow cute. The purple wig is a big help.

She's cute partially because she is just absurdly self-confident. We're talking James Bond-self-confident. Sean Connery James Bond-self-confident. You have a feeling that, if she met Darth Vader in a dark alley, she would take out her own light saber and do the Jedi a big favor.

Iggy Pop probably wasn't this tough at 11. And he's sure as hell never been this focused.

She's this way because she was trained to be a lethal assassin by her father, Big Daddy. Whoever thot up "Take Your Daughter To Work" never expected this. Nicholas Cage, who took his own name from a comic book (his real last name is Coppola; he is the nephew of Francis Ford Coppola, and changed his name to avoid any appearance of nepotism) plays Big Daddy. I am not a big Nicholas Cage fan, paticularly of late. But he's perfect here. Big Daddy has his own costume, strongly reminiscient of Batman, and that deep thirst for revenge so necessary for a great vigilante.

A great vigilante, of course, is nothing without a great villain, and Mark Strong is wonderful as the local godfather. He has a son with a Michael Corleone complex, interested in taking over the family business, despite being still in high school. Also present in this character are shades of James Franco in Spiderman.

But back to the title character. Kick-Ass, aka Dave Lizewski (Aaron Johnson, a Brit with a perfect American accent), does not have Hit Girl's collection of weapons or her years of martial arts training. He isn't even particularly strong. All he has for weapons are a taser and a couple of big sticks. What he does have - besides the obvious delusions of grandeur - is determination. And a high threshold for pain. Another thing he doesn't have - and which every superhero needs - is a girlfriend. This brings up an interesting issue with Hit Girl. She's cute, adorable, and funny - but she's 11. She's not beautiful or gorgeous, because those are adjectives that tend to be attached to females in our society who are at least past puberty. Lyndsy Fonesca, who was also John Cusack's girlfriend in Hot Tub Time Machine, supplies the sex appeal as Dave's friend Katie. Not girlfriend - she thinks he's gay. Tony Stark does not have that problem.

All of this would be meaningless, of course, if it were not a well-directed movie. It's not a well-directed movie. It is an extraordinarily well-directed movie. Just about everything, from the costumes to the cinematography, is stylized just enough to be interesting, but not so much as to be distracting. One reason Hit Girl's violent tendencies are so disturbing is that she goes way over the top, but the rest of the movie feels fairly grounded. It's a very realistic comic book movie. Even the 2 or 3 goombas who are fortunate enough to have some speaking lines before they get whacked don't feel like cliches.

On IMDb, this has a rating of 8.5 out of 10, which puts it at #166 out of the top 250. That would be the top 250 movies of all time. I completely agree with that. It may move up. 165 is Dog Day Afternoon. 167 is Gandhi.

I have my own answer to whether or not it's appropriate for an 11-year old girl to be responsible for a couple of dozen deaths. My answer, unequivocally, is yes. Because if that 11-year old girl can't take on a role involving lots of bullets and blood, then she won't have the opportunity to become an iconic badass on the scale of Samuel L. Jackson in Pulp Fiction (John Travolta was the epitome of cool in Pulp Fiction, but Jackson was the badass). And why shouldn't an 11-year old girl have an opportunity to become an iconic badass? There's a question that's never been asked before in the history of pop culture. Buffy was at least in high school, and it took her several seasons to reach icon status. Hit Girl makes Joan of Arc look like a slacker. That comparison hasn't been made too many times before.

What about preserving the innocence of children? Ah, it's a little too late for that. Harry Potter was 11 the first time he took on Voldemort. Wasting a room full of bad guys may send the wrong message to impressionable young minds about the efficacy of violence as a means of conflict resolution. Might be a little too late for that one, too. Problem-solving, let's remember, does wonders for self-esteem. Hit Girl - and Kick-Ass - solve a lot of very big problems.

Most superheroes have a sidekick. Trinity, let's be honest, is Neo's sidekick. Hit Girl is not Kick-Ass's sidekick. If anything, it's the other way around. She's not even Big Daddy's sidekick. Hit Girl ain't nobody's sidekick.

One of Yoda's great lines is "There is no try. There is do, or do not." Kick-Ass learns that lesson. Hit Girl was born knowing it.

Original Idea Fund Launches Today!

Big excitement in the world of Talented Earthquake Productions today - I am starting a mutual fund on the Hollywood Stock Exchange, and the IPO is today! The Original Idea Fund will invest in movies that are based on an original idea. No sequels, prequels, remakes, or sequels to remakes. Nothing based on a book, play, comic book, musical, news story, or theme park ride. No biopics. No documentaries. Just original ideas.

So no Pirates of the Caribbean, no Ocean's Eleven, no Twilight or Harry Potter. But I will be investing in movies made by people like Kathryn Bigelow, Woody Allen, and Quentin Tarantino. I might be investing in the next Avatar or The Hangover. I will also be investing in StarBonds of actors and actresses who star in these movies, although initially I am planning to limit those to one or two StarBonds per movie.

The Fund will IPO at H$20, as all mutual funds do on HSX, and will delist, or cash out, when it reaches H$100. Looking forward, there is a question that I haven't answered yet. Many mutual funds cash out, and then have another IPO. So there have been six iterations of the New York, New York fund, for example. But, given the nature of this fund, I don't think I could do a sequel!

Trivial question of the Day

President Obama stopped by a bookstore in Iowa today, and bought some books.
This line caught my eye:

Obama pulled out five $20 bills to pay for the two books.

This made me wonder: how does the president get cash? Does the White House have an ATM? Does he call up Tim Geithner and have him send some over? Does he call Ben Bernanke and have him bring some by the next time he's in the neighborhood? Does the Secret Service get it for him? How? Do they go to the bank for him? Wouldn't that mean he would have to give them his ATM card and his PIN?

Just couldn't stop thinking about that.

Health Care Reform passes

The Democrats finally did it, passing health care reform. Props to Nancy Pelosi for bringing it through the House. Props to all the Dems in the House who voted the right way, which was most of them, and enough of them. There are some other procedural votes in the Senate, and then Obama has to sign it. But it's done.

The details of what this bill covers have been examined in excruciating detail in many, many places. Andrew Sullivan rounds up the usual suspects and their reactions. I'm just thrilled that we finally have something - anything - different from the status quo. I don't know whether or not this bill will solve the problems we hope it will. I hope it will. I have a certain amount of faith. For various reasons, I haven't followed the ins and outs of this debate as closely as I could have. I understand the basic outline, the amount of detail has been mind-numbing. I started following politics seriously when all you had to do was read The New York Times and a couple of other sources, and you knew all you had to know. I still haven't learned how to drink from the firehose that is the Internet.

What I do know, or at least what I feel comfortable theorizing about, is that this isn't just about healthcare, as broad as that topic may be. This may be the last great victory in the culture wars that started almost 50 years ago. Liberals have won on almost every issue in those wars: they have won on feminism, civil rights, the environment, abortion, and separation of church and state. They're winning on gay rights. They've essentially lost on gun control, but they're starting to win on crime, after losing for decades. Some would argue that they lost on the very broad issue of capitalism, but I don't think that was really up for debate. As frustrated as liberals are by corporations, only the wackiest have really seriously contemplated any kind of alternative to capitalism.

This is not just a political, legislative, or even cultural victory. This is a philosophical victory, an ideological one. What won tonight was the idea that government can improve the lives of its citizens. That's an idea that has been around for a long time, and there have been many victories on that front along the way. But this may be the ultimate victory for that idea. Which may be one reason Republicans fought this legislation so hard: they knew what was at stake, and they knew how badly they were losing. And now they have lost. Take it away, Mr. President:

Oscars!

It's that time of year! Time for the Oscars! The ceremony is this Sunday (as if you didn't already know). The one bummer this year is that there isn't a lot of drama. Some of the categories are pretty much a lock - Christoph Waltz for Best Supporting Actor for Inglorious Basterds, Mo'nique for Best Supporting Actress for Precious, Jeff Bridges for Best Actor for Crazy Heart. But the two big ones are a fascinating race, particularly since it involves an ex-husband and wife. Will Kathryn Bigelow be the first woman to win Best Director? Or will it be her husband, master craftsman James Cameron? Will they split the big prizes, with her winning Best Director and his movie winning Best Picture? That's my bet, because Avatar is one heck of a movie, and, even if the story is a tad cliched, the movie itself is an incredible visual spectacle, and Cameron does deserve recognition for that. I think he deserves recognition as a producer first, and director second, because I think he pulled off a small miracle producing this movie. I also think he did a very good job directing it, but I do take away a couple of points for the lack of imagination in the script.

The other sort-of controversy, which turned out to not be that much of a controversy, is the fact that there are 10 Best Picture nominees. There was quite the hullabaloo over this when it was announced, with strong opinions on both sides. Some thot it was a brilliant move, others thot it was the height of folly. I was in the middle. Yes, it could dilute the prestige, but it is not unprecedented - there were 10 nominees for several years at the beginning of the awarding of the Oscars, until 1943 - and it could be fun.

The answer turned out to be that it was a good move, largely because there are 10 movies worthy of the distinction of being a "Best Picture" nominee. Some people have issues with various nominations - a friend thinks The Blind Side stole a nomination from another, more worthy picture - but for the most part, each Best Picture nominee has received accolades as a very good movie.

Here's the list:

Avatar

The Blind Side

District 9

An Education

The Hurt Locker

Inglorious Basterds

Precious

A Serious Man

Up

Up in the Air

What's particularly impressive about this list is the diversity. There's something here for everyone, and for just about every demographic. There are two war movies, Inglorious Basterds and The Hurt Locker, but they couldn't be more different. One is a very gritty, realistic movie about Iraq, with a small cast, no stars, and not much plot. The other is a fantasy about WWII, starring Brad Pitt, with a very complicated story and lush cinematography. There are two science fiction movies - Avatar and District 9, but, again, they couldn't be more different. District 9 takes place in a filthy, disgusting ghetto/landfill near Johannesburg, while Avatar takes on the exquisitely beautiful planet of Pandora. There are two adult dramas set in contemporary America, The Blind Side and Up in the Air. One is a sentimental story about a white Christian woman in the South, her family, and her community. The other is a dark comedy about guy who has as few commitments and connections in his life as possible. An Education is about a cute British girl coming of age in the 1960's. A Serious Man is about a Jewish man coming undone in the 1960's. And then, of course, there's Precious, which is yet again different from all the others, and Up, one of the only animated movies ever to be nominated for Best Picture.

What a great crop of movies. Most of these aren't just different from each other - they are different from just about any other movie ever made. How many movies have been made about WWII that rewrote the ending? How many movie stars have made movies while at the peak of their stardom in which they played corporate hatchetmen who specialized in firing people? How many movies have been made about a guy who flies his house to another continent with balloons? And, of course, there's Avatar.

The Oscars this year also demonstrate all kinds of diversity in Hollywood, particularly geographic. There isn't much American about these Oscars. There are only three that take place completely in contemporary America - Precious, The Blind Side and Up in the Air. The Hurt Locker features Americans, but has all of about 5 scenes here, and was shot in Jordan. There are only three that feature American movie stars - Inglorious Basterds, Up in the Air, and The Blind Side. Of those, Brad Pitt was not in very much of Basterds, The Blind Side represents Sandra Bullock's first Oscar nom, and Up in the Air was that rare movie that scored two nominations for Best Supporting Actress. Meryl Streep, quintessential Hollywood royalty, scored a nomination for Best Actress for playing a famous American - Julia Child - who spends the entire movie in France. Morgan Freeman and Matt Damon scored nominations for playing South Africans, in Freeman's case Nelson Mandela. Colin Firth, an Englishman, scored a nomination for playing a gay Englishman, in a movie directed by a gay man, Tom Ford, who made his name working for an Italian fashion house (Gucci). Christopher Plummer, born in Toronto, scored a nomination for playing a Russian, Tolstoy, while Helen Mirren, a Brit, scored a nom for playing his wife. Carey Mulligan, also English, scored a nomination for playing an Englishwoman. Penelope Cruz, who is Spanish, scored a nomination for a movie (Nine) that is sort of a remake of a movie by an Italian (8 1/2). The man who will probably win Best Supporting Actor, Christoph Waltz, is Austrian. Among Best Supporting Actor nominees, Stanley Tucci is American, but he stared in a movie directed by a Kiwi, Peter Jackson, who also produced one of the movies set in South Africa, District 9.

Looking down the list of nominated movies, in Art Direction, we find two 19th century English icons - Sherlock Holmes and Queen Victoria - another movie set in London, The Imaginarium of Dr. Parnassus, and Avatar and Nine again. Among the Cinematography nominees, there is one movie with any scenes at all in America - and that's The Hurt Locker, with about 5 minutes in this country. The others are Avatar (another planet), Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (Britain), The Hurt Locker (shot in Jordan, takes place in Iraq), Basterds again, and The White Ribbon (Germany). Costume Design nominees include Bright Star, about John Keats (there's that 19th century England again), Coco Before Chanel (French), and Parnassus, Nine, and Young Victoria again.

Hollywood both is and is not quintessentially American. It is American because it is physically located here, but it is and is not American because it embodies the great American qualities of freedom, adventure, and embracing the new, without limiting who can experience those to just Americans.