Ken and Cindy got here yesterday and it was a lazy-ish day as they adjusted to the time zone and to taking the red-eye here from Hawaii.  I was, of course, still mostly sedentary although we did manage to get in my longest walk since surgery.  Go team!

One of the fun things about hanging out with Ken and Cindy is that they love movies as much as I do.  I was definitely ready for a movie of stronger fare than I had last week (watching old favorites and enjoying Space Chimps is fine in its way but sometimes a new, challenging film is called for.)

We found just the ticket in the movie, The Visitor.  I had previously seen bits of this movie while flying across country...with the sound off and only intermittent viewing, it didn't appear to be much of a film.

But with the sound on, with the full texture and nuance of characters presented by a uniformly talented cast, this film is truly a jewel of a story.  Richard Jenkins, an easily recognized character actor, has the lead as a widowed professor who finds squatters living in his New York apartment and forms an unlikely friendship with them.  To tell you any more about the moving plot would be to deprive you of the experience of the film's unfolding.

Jenkins was nominated for a SAG award for his role.  In my opinion, any of the other characters in the film's small cast would also be worthy of nomination.  The actors are: Haaz Sleiman as the young, drum-playing squatter, Daina Gurira as his girlfriend, and the luminous Hiam Abbass as the drummer's mother.  If you haven't already seen this film, buy it for yourself for Christmas.  It is rich with meaning, thick with craft and a film you will see again and again.

We are off to North Carolina for a week, so yesterday (after an early golf game) was concentrated office work.  Hence, no blog.

I also took a look at the latest episode of TrueBlood on HBO.  A friend recommended the show and it's been pretty enjoyable so far.  Lots of cable eye-candy and an interesting story about vampires.  In this world, synthetic blood that can sustain the vampires has been developed, so they no longer need to feed on humans and can come out of the closet.

The vampires are a clear metaphor for gays...there's even a sign in the credits that reads "God hates Fangs" like the familiar (and repulsive) God Hates Fags signs courtesy of the small-brained Fred Phelps.

Before I digress...the show is worth checking out if you have HBO.  The first two episodes were a bit uneven but I think they've hit their stride in the third.  And by the third episode, the viewer is familiar enough with the characters and various supernatural plot points that she spends less time going "huh?" and hitting the rewind button.

I'll be blogging from NC.  Maybe even will get some political research done!

Now, to pack.

Well, it's official.  I will be a work widow at the beginning of October.  So Dan and I are taking a little mini-vacation at home.

It began with a golf lesson this morning, followed by a trip to Roger Dunn and then a movie.

If you liked (or even loved) Fargo like I did, you will really enjoy the gruesomely funny Burn After Reading.  I thought it was snort-worthy hysterical...but you've got to be ready for a little blood to leaven your laughter.

Particularly good were George Cloony, Frances McDormand and Brad Pitt.  But the actor who carried the emotional center of the show, imo, was Richard Jenkins. 

So, if I'm sporadic about blogging the next few days...please forgive.  We're trying to wrangle as much together time as we can.  And if you like odd-ball humor, go see Burn!

Two more items of note on Sarah Palin today.  The first has to do with her aggressive pursuit of earmarked funds as Mayor of Wasillah, Alaska and as Governor of Alaska.  It seems that when John McCain was introducing her as a fellow devotee of eliminating earmarks, he hadn't done his homework.

The LA Times reports that Palin even defended earmarking in an opinion column.  When did she write that article?  This year.  I'm all for candidates who change their minds given a good reason.  I just like for them to acknowledge the about face and give a logical argument for that change.

Instead, Palin's pretending to be a reformer.  Or, worse, she really believes that dismissing people summarily and for political (or even personal reasons) qualifies as "reform."

The second issue on Palin is the disconnect between her political views on "abstinence only" education and her daughter's pregnancy.  I am not the only one scratching my head over that.  Tim Rutten penned an astute examination of the issue in his column.  Read it.  It's worth your while.

Another thing worth your while, and to get off the topic of Sarah Palin, is a new movied called, Traitor.  Don Cheadle heads a talented cast including Guy Pierce and Said Taghmaoui.  The film is a nuanced exploration of what it means to be loyal to one's beliefs and what it means to betray those beliefs.

Not only is the film intelligent, it's also pretty gripping--full of action, mind games and suspense.  I think it's the best film I've seen in a very long time.  Go see it!

We picked up Dan's brother, Steve, and Steve's husband, Kevin, from LAX last night.  We are enjoying various low key activities today.  Farmer's market this morning.  Shopping for dinner and lunch food.  Watching a movie (the excellent film, Bobby).  Eating tamales and beans for lunch along with chips, guacamole and salsa.

Most folks are napping right now but after I finish up this blog-let, I'll be heading off to the gym to work of some of the tamale.

I'd hoped to be taking my Ipod with me, to watch the latest Meet The Press and This Week with George Stephanopolous.  But my two year old Ipod seems to be on its last legs.  It won't turn off and stay off.  The battery doesn't seem to be holding much of a charge either.  So my Ipod gets to stay home and nap with the rest of the clan.

Maybe a new Ipod in my future, before the cruise?

Let's start with Official Recognition!  Ken (my brother-in-law) shared with me that one of his reviews got mentioned at an official movie website.  I'm so happy for him that I wanted to link everyone up!  The movie is Honeydripper (which I have not seen).  The review link is on the page and here.

As for golf, I had my first round since we got back from Hawaii in December.  9 holes with my friend, Renee'.  I shot 10 over par and had 3 pars, two bogies and the rest double bogies.  A bit better than my index would lead me to expect but I was chipping and putting really well today.  Part of the credit goes to Dan, who bought me a new attack wedge for Christmas.  It worked very nicely.

And Tagging...well, I checked in with Cindy's blog yesterday and found out that she'd been tagged by our friend, Todd.  So I went to Todd's blog to find out what the rules of the tag were and lo and behold, I'd been tagged too.  Quite some time ago.

Apparently I am to:

"List seven songs you are into right now. No matter what the genre, whether or not they have words, or even if they’re not any good, but they must be songs you’re really enjoying now. Post these instructions in your blog along with your seven songs. Then tag seven other people to see what they’re listening to. If you want."

First, the songs:

At This Point In My Life by Tracy Chapman
Your Heart is For Breaking by Anne Heaton (words only in this link)
Face of a Faith by Nellie McKay
L-O-V-E by Nat King Cole
Bless the Broken Road by Rascal Flatts
Mercy Now by Mary Gauthier
Love, Loss, Hope, Repeat by Carbon Leaf

As to tagging?  How about Mom, Erik, Hal, Deanna, Dale, Bev, and Dotty--all folks who I know read the blog at least occasionally!  Y'all don't have to post it on your blog tho...just answer the question in the comments section below.  If you feel like it.  <gg>

Off to pack now!

Yesterday Cindy and I saw the Leonardo DiCaprio documentary The 11th Hour at a local theater.  I've been pondering my response to the film since seeing it.  In a nutshell, I'm disappointed and yet I'm convinced you should see it.

By way of context, I should state up front that I do believe we human beings are having a significant, mostly negative effect on the biosphere.  Outside of conservative talk radio, there's really not much debate on this point and virtually none that is based on science.  Instead we hear from Rush and his wannabees how really there isn't any impact...or if there is, then it's good.  (After all, isn't everything we do good?)

So one would think that I'd be solidly recommending Leo's documentary.  Indeed, I do believe it's worth watching.  My disappointment in the film has to do with the quality of the direction and its effectiveness as a call to action. 

So let's start with what the film does well.  First off, it poses the issue in broad terms.  This is not a film about global warming.  It's not a film about pollution, overpopulation, conservation or even environmentalism.  It's a film that integrates all these topics and more to look at man's impact on his home, contextualizing it within the broad frame of the planet's history.  It's a film that rightly positions our tenure on this planet as (relatively) recent, brief and impactful.

It's also a film that presents man's ingenuity as the solution to these manmade problems.  The film's experts discuss the necessity of shifting the paradigms in a compelling and ultimately inspiring way.

Several facts are highlighted that bear mentioning.  First, the burgeoning human population.  Since 1960, we've gone from 3 billion people on the planet to 6 billion.  We've doubled the population in just under 50 years.  Prior to the 1800's, we were relatively stable at 500 million.  With the advent of industrialization and the fossil fuels that propel "advancement," our population has indeed "exploded."

Next, illustrations of global deforestation.  The changes we've wrought just by cutting down trees and planting fields or cities or both are clarified when one sees the change on a global scale.

Last, the impact of the global population on what has arguably been our richest source of protein.  We are straining the oceans both by what we take out of them in terms of food...and by what we put in them in terms of pollutants.

What the film does wrong, in my opinion, is two-fold.  One, it never creates a framework for the many facts presented by a multitude of talking-head presenters.  Instead, one is left to pick up a fairly obscure trail by weaving among the facts and creating one's own through-line.  It can be done, but it's tedious work at best and work that not everyone can or wants to do.

Two, the movie appears to be a call to action.  I say appears to be because the call is not clear, the actions are not defined and thus one is left without a vigorous sense of purpose.

As I exited the theater, I found myself wondering who the audience for the movie would be.  It works as "preaching to the choir" but isn't detailed or compelling enough to convince those still on the fence.  All in all, a well-intentioned attempt that falls short of the mark. 

Still, I recommend viewing the film for the following reasons. 

1.  It's informative and it's information we need to know.

2.  It provides reasoned optimism about ways to address the issues.

3.  It provides enough information for folks to determine further areas of research.  I will be picking up a book called Cradle to Cradle and another called The Last Hours of Ancient Sunlight" as a result of the movie.

4.  It is the 11th Hour.

Go see the movie.  Take caffeine with you.

I was down in San Diego yesterday to see Hamlet with Mom (at the Old Globe Theatre).  On the way to her house, I stopped by and saw Dad and Sally, Darrell and Jeanne and little Madeline (Jeanne's granddaughter).  It was quite the fun visit.  We got a few things squared away regarding printers and various computer programs...then it was off to downtown San Diego.

I am amazed how light the traffic is in San Diego when you're going against the commute.  A trip that would take an hour in LA, even during light traffic, takes 20 minutes or so in San Diego.  Unless you hit the commute.  Then you're toast.

Fortunately, I was going against the commute, so made good time to Banker's Hill.  Mom continues to do amazingly well on her new knees.  We had dinner at the Prado restaurant in Balboa Park, then walked over and had coffee while people watching by the Globe.

There was an educational lecture just prior to the show, so we listened to a lecture called "The Question of Questions" by Dr. Peter Kanelos of USD.  He was quite illuminating in his talk.  I've seen Hamlet I don't know how many times (a dozen?) and he pointed out things I'd never caught in the play.

For one, Hamlet is in his late 20's or even as old as 30 when the play takes place.  Another really interesting insight is that the "Mousetrap" play Hamlet stages to gauge his Uncle Claudius reaction to a poisoning has a nephew poisoning an uncle.  Kanelos suggested that Claudius' reaction to the play might be partially explained by his own fear of Hamlet.  This would be more convincing if Claudius didn't later confess to killing Hamlet's father.  But it was still an interesting twist and, I've read enough Shakespeare (and seen enough) to be convinced he doesn't put in such twists by accident.

The last insight, which I found very satisfying in the production, is that the play is a play of questions.  The most famous of which, "To be or not to be," finds its complementary echo when Hamlet finally decides to take action and says, "If it be now, 'tis not to come; if it be not to come, it will be now; if it be not now, yet it will come--the readiness is all.  Since no man, of aught he leaves, knows what is't to leave betimes, let be."

The lines above foreshadow Hamlet's dying statement...also amazing in this excellent production where there were words, and words, and words.  "...The rest is silence."

Watching this second production of Hamlet in one summer, I found that I preferred this Hamlet to the OC Performing Arts production.  The key, as I told Mom last night, is that the actor in the OC production "interpreted" Hamlet (in a truly quality performance).  By contrast, Lucas Hall of the Old Globe's production, inhabited the young(ish) prince.

One last note and I must get to work!  I also saw the film Donnie Darko for the first time this weekend.  A very interesting flick.  And it occurs to me that in many ways, Donnie is a modern pastiche of Hamlet. There is much of the same struggle with mortality and the corruption of the world in the eyes of the protagonist.  There is also the same question of the protagonist's madness being real. 

Anyone else ever see the connection between these two cult classics?  This rumination on Donnie Darko by Annie Frisbie quotes Hamlet, but doesn't link the plays.  Maybe there's an article in this for me!