Movies
Ebert on why the box office is down.
The movies stink, man. I know the studios think to themselves, we can only make 5-10 really good movies a year and the rest we have to rely on tricking the audience to go see. How stupid and cynical is that? Once you hold that belief, it becomes a self fulfilling prophesy. Also - I know there is an anti-trust thing with the theaters being owned by the studios, but it seems to me no longer applicable. If I were super rich, I'd buy a studio and a theater chain, merge it, keep popcorn prices and ticket prices reasonable, and commit to making only quality movies with budgets under 50 mil. I know people think this is a preposterous goal - but I actually think the competition is so low - it could actually be accomplished. HBO essentially does it on TV and succeeds. It'd be like the Devil Rays or the OKC Thunder of the movie world.
Saturday, December 31, 2011
Logging
Film: Mission Impossible, Ghost Protocol
Here was my logic - I wanted to see a movie. Girl With A Dragon Tattoo was the obvious choice, but I looked it up and it was 2 hrs and 40 minutes long. This, for a story I've already read, already seen a previous version of the movie, and don't really care for. There are no actors in the film that make want to go see it - the only reason to go to this film, for me, is to see what David Fincher was able to do with the material. I love Fincher. He might be the best working filmmaker in Hollywood, but he is fundamentally, a technician, a visual master, and not someone with something vital to say about the world. I couldn't imagine really enjoying myself while watching this film. I already know what is going to happen and I already know it is not a masterpiece just by the reviews and word of mouth, etc. So what is the point?
Instead, I decided to see Mission Impossible, figuring lower expectations, maybe I'll actually enjoy myself. I was sort of right. The movie had some good wide shots. A few good action sequences in the first half of the movie. But ultimately, it was just exhausting. It felt like they tried to cram in 4 heist movies into one. The entire last act is simply a repeat of the second act. The stakes are preposterous and make ZERO sense. The movie was totally bereft of any ideas. Strange, considering Brad Bird did The Incredibles, a cartoon which was rich with ideas about middle aged angst, impotence, recalling past glory, rising above the crowd, all sorts of good stuff. To like this Mission Impossible is to accept such a narrow and small concept of what a movie can be these days. Non-stop nonsensical action. By the end, when the nuclear missile is flying around the world, not for one second am I thinking "Oh, no, don't let it explode." Stupid. Totally tension-less in the 3rd act.
The only thing worse were the previews. I believe I saw three movies where the "stakes" were the world was going to be destroyed. Is this the only goal that the studios think will get the audiences out of the house? Must the world be actually destroyed for people to go and see a movie? Whatever happened to just a bad guy killing someone or stealing some money? Isn't that enough to root against? Is it really that the entire world is going to be destroyed by some sort of creatures from another dimension or the past or some crazy technology? These plots strike me as "little man's" syndrome, excessive overcompensation for lack of story telling ability.
Film: Mission Impossible, Ghost Protocol
Here was my logic - I wanted to see a movie. Girl With A Dragon Tattoo was the obvious choice, but I looked it up and it was 2 hrs and 40 minutes long. This, for a story I've already read, already seen a previous version of the movie, and don't really care for. There are no actors in the film that make want to go see it - the only reason to go to this film, for me, is to see what David Fincher was able to do with the material. I love Fincher. He might be the best working filmmaker in Hollywood, but he is fundamentally, a technician, a visual master, and not someone with something vital to say about the world. I couldn't imagine really enjoying myself while watching this film. I already know what is going to happen and I already know it is not a masterpiece just by the reviews and word of mouth, etc. So what is the point?
Instead, I decided to see Mission Impossible, figuring lower expectations, maybe I'll actually enjoy myself. I was sort of right. The movie had some good wide shots. A few good action sequences in the first half of the movie. But ultimately, it was just exhausting. It felt like they tried to cram in 4 heist movies into one. The entire last act is simply a repeat of the second act. The stakes are preposterous and make ZERO sense. The movie was totally bereft of any ideas. Strange, considering Brad Bird did The Incredibles, a cartoon which was rich with ideas about middle aged angst, impotence, recalling past glory, rising above the crowd, all sorts of good stuff. To like this Mission Impossible is to accept such a narrow and small concept of what a movie can be these days. Non-stop nonsensical action. By the end, when the nuclear missile is flying around the world, not for one second am I thinking "Oh, no, don't let it explode." Stupid. Totally tension-less in the 3rd act.
The only thing worse were the previews. I believe I saw three movies where the "stakes" were the world was going to be destroyed. Is this the only goal that the studios think will get the audiences out of the house? Must the world be actually destroyed for people to go and see a movie? Whatever happened to just a bad guy killing someone or stealing some money? Isn't that enough to root against? Is it really that the entire world is going to be destroyed by some sort of creatures from another dimension or the past or some crazy technology? These plots strike me as "little man's" syndrome, excessive overcompensation for lack of story telling ability.
Friday, December 30, 2011
Logging
Film: Due Date
The theme of my Christmas break seems to be mediocre comedies from on demand. I laughed during Due Dute. It was no Hangover, but it wasn't that bad. A very funny line from Zach G. "When he was alive, he enjoyed coffee and when he died, he was enjoyed as coffee." I suppose it only makes sense if you've seen the movie.
Book: The Tao of Warren Buffett
Just simple investing and life advice that took 1 hour to read. When Buffett is about to buy a stock he thinks if the stock market closed tomorrow for 10 years, would he still feel comfortable about owning the company before he purchases. This keeps him away from weird tech stocks and other stuff. Smart.
Film: Due Date
The theme of my Christmas break seems to be mediocre comedies from on demand. I laughed during Due Dute. It was no Hangover, but it wasn't that bad. A very funny line from Zach G. "When he was alive, he enjoyed coffee and when he died, he was enjoyed as coffee." I suppose it only makes sense if you've seen the movie.
Book: The Tao of Warren Buffett
Just simple investing and life advice that took 1 hour to read. When Buffett is about to buy a stock he thinks if the stock market closed tomorrow for 10 years, would he still feel comfortable about owning the company before he purchases. This keeps him away from weird tech stocks and other stuff. Smart.
Thursday, December 29, 2011
Writing Advice
Of course the best one comes from Mark Twain.
Of course the best one comes from Mark Twain.
"Write without pay until somebody offers pay; if nobody offers within three years, sawing wood is what you were intended for." ~ Mark Twain
Yikes
9 foot tall super soldier mourns Kim Jong Il.
File that one under headlines I would have never anticipated.
9 foot tall super soldier mourns Kim Jong Il.
File that one under headlines I would have never anticipated.
Social Media: Too Much Buzz
More like too much bullshit.
Social media is a party that the cool folks left a hour ago.
More like too much bullshit.
Social media is a party that the cool folks left a hour ago.
Logging
Film: Dinner For Schmucks
So I only made it about halfway through before falling asleep. Strange movie. I was actually enjoying the tone until Steve Carrel showed up. His character made almost zero sense. I want to see the French original on which it is based. Another plotting point that made no sense was his girlfriend's strident reaction to Paul Rudd going to dinner. Very strange and obviously just some obstacle the screenwriters needed to come up with. Not character based or realistic. A plotting hiccup.
Film: Dinner For Schmucks
So I only made it about halfway through before falling asleep. Strange movie. I was actually enjoying the tone until Steve Carrel showed up. His character made almost zero sense. I want to see the French original on which it is based. Another plotting point that made no sense was his girlfriend's strident reaction to Paul Rudd going to dinner. Very strange and obviously just some obstacle the screenwriters needed to come up with. Not character based or realistic. A plotting hiccup.
Brilliant Article
Shareholder value: the dumbest idea in the world.
A scathing article on the retarded practices of the business world. One pretty startling point - it all started with creating a problem (principal-agent) that didn't really exist -
I call these people "Tinkerers," the types who are always trying to fix problems that don't really exist and in doing so, often create larger problems. Examples: fans of instant replay in football, drunk driving laws, health care regulations, rewrites on movie scripts, etc.
Jack Welch puts it well -
Shareholder value: the dumbest idea in the world.
A scathing article on the retarded practices of the business world. One pretty startling point - it all started with creating a problem (principal-agent) that didn't really exist -
The article performed the old academic trick of creating a problem and then proposing a solution to the supposed problem that the article itself had created. The article identified the principal-agent problem as being that the shareholders are the principals of the firm—i.e., they own it and benefit from its prosperity, while the executives are agents who are hired by the principals to work on their behalf.
The principal-agent problem occurs, the article argued, because agents have an inherent incentive to optimize activities and resources for themselves rather than for their principals. Ignoring Peter Drucker’s foundational insight of 1973 that the only valid purpose of a firm is to create a customer, Jensen and Meckling argued that the singular goal of a company should be to maximize the return to shareholders.
I call these people "Tinkerers," the types who are always trying to fix problems that don't really exist and in doing so, often create larger problems. Examples: fans of instant replay in football, drunk driving laws, health care regulations, rewrites on movie scripts, etc.
Jack Welch puts it well -
“On the face of it, shareholder value is the dumbest idea in the world. Shareholder value is a result, not a strategy… your main constituencies are your employees, your customers and your products. Managers and investors should not set share price increases as their overarching goal. … Short-term profits should be allied with an increase in the long-term value of a company.”
Tuesday, December 27, 2011
Logging
Film: The Artist
After watching this movie, I had an urge to re-watch Miller's Crossing, which I did via on demand. This is maybe the first time I've used on demand. It cost $3 - just as good as going to blockbuster (except that blockbuster now charges only .99). I was impressed with the number of movies available. I love Miller's Crossing. It might be the best written movie of the Cohen brothers - or at the very least - some of the best dialog. People always talk about Sorkin being the successor to Ben Hecht and Preston Sturges, but I don't see it. Miller's Crossing is much more in that vein than Social Network - truly witty dialog, full of flair and panache. Example:
Tom Reagan: All in all not a bad guy - if looks, brains and personality don't count.
Verna: You better hope they don't.
Come on. That's better dialog than anything Sorkin's ever written.
The Artist was enjoyable. Clever. A nice reminder of the basics of movie going. Some very good moments. Every year, someone still manages to make a movie that makes you go "Huh. Good idea." I probably won't watch it again, but was glad I saw it in the theater.
Film: The Artist
After watching this movie, I had an urge to re-watch Miller's Crossing, which I did via on demand. This is maybe the first time I've used on demand. It cost $3 - just as good as going to blockbuster (except that blockbuster now charges only .99). I was impressed with the number of movies available. I love Miller's Crossing. It might be the best written movie of the Cohen brothers - or at the very least - some of the best dialog. People always talk about Sorkin being the successor to Ben Hecht and Preston Sturges, but I don't see it. Miller's Crossing is much more in that vein than Social Network - truly witty dialog, full of flair and panache. Example:
Tom Reagan: All in all not a bad guy - if looks, brains and personality don't count.
Verna: You better hope they don't.
Come on. That's better dialog than anything Sorkin's ever written.
The Artist was enjoyable. Clever. A nice reminder of the basics of movie going. Some very good moments. Every year, someone still manages to make a movie that makes you go "Huh. Good idea." I probably won't watch it again, but was glad I saw it in the theater.
Monday, December 26, 2011
You Don't Say
Affirmative action does not work.
I think sport provide a pretty good example of why affirmative action is a bad idea. Imagine tossing in a few token Asians into a basketball game simply because they wanted "diversity" on the field. Whatever it's original purpose, this example shows how it's more outdated than an Apple IIe.
Affirmative action does not work.
Racial preferences, says University of San Diego law professor Gail Heriot , have backfired. She is one of three members of the civil rights commission urging the Supreme Court to recognize the damage it unleashed when it allowed racial “diversity’’ to trump the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection of the laws. Skin color was always an ill-contrived proxy for diversity of experiences and beliefs. What more than 30 years of race-based admissions have made clear, Heriot argues, is that “even with the best motives in the world, race-based admissions do far more harm than good.’’ Especially to the students they are supposed to help .
I think sport provide a pretty good example of why affirmative action is a bad idea. Imagine tossing in a few token Asians into a basketball game simply because they wanted "diversity" on the field. Whatever it's original purpose, this example shows how it's more outdated than an Apple IIe.
You Don't Say
Affirmative action does not work.
I think sport provide a pretty good example of why affirmative action is a bad idea. Imagine tossing in a few token Asians into a basketball game simply because they wanted "diversity" on the field. That's how stupid an idea affirmative action is.
Affirmative action does not work.
Racial preferences, says University of San Diego law professor Gail Heriot , have backfired. She is one of three members of the civil rights commission urging the Supreme Court to recognize the damage it unleashed when it allowed racial “diversity’’ to trump the Fourteenth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection of the laws. Skin color was always an ill-contrived proxy for diversity of experiences and beliefs. What more than 30 years of race-based admissions have made clear, Heriot argues, is that “even with the best motives in the world, race-based admissions do far more harm than good.’’ Especially to the students they are supposed to help .
I think sport provide a pretty good example of why affirmative action is a bad idea. Imagine tossing in a few token Asians into a basketball game simply because they wanted "diversity" on the field. That's how stupid an idea affirmative action is.
Showbiz Analysis
Pretty interesting.
He likes IMax and not 3-D. I was at Best Buy the other day and the sales clerk says next year, they are going to be pushing 3D TVs and phasing out everything else. Really? Who the hell is going to watch 3D TV? What is it going to even look like? What if you have people over - is everyone going to bring their own glasses? This entire concept is absurd. No one wants this crap.
Also was thinking about Avatar -- by the far the best example of 3D movie making. Question: imagine Avatar NOT in 3D. Do people still flock to theaters? I think so. I think the movie is visually spectacular WITHOUT the 3D. Sure, it made it more of an event, but I still don't believe there is a rich future in 3D. People don't care about this crap. They care about seeing good stories well told. And I think the comparisons to sound cinema are not relevant. Or color. Sound and color are obvious game changers. You could take the dumbest person off the street and they can see the immediate difference and be like: I get it. With 3D, the immediate reaction is sort of like "whhaaaaaa????," and people aren't sure whether they like it better or not. I imagine the majority of people are annoyed with it. With color and sound, you always had purists who though, oh no, this is going to change things for the worse, but the average lay person I'm sure was like - "oh cool, what is this." Not so for 3D. The average lay person is like "$4 more for tickets? I have to wear these stupid glasses to get like 3 feet of depth? Not for me. I'll stream a movie on Netflix."
Pretty interesting.
He likes IMax and not 3-D. I was at Best Buy the other day and the sales clerk says next year, they are going to be pushing 3D TVs and phasing out everything else. Really? Who the hell is going to watch 3D TV? What is it going to even look like? What if you have people over - is everyone going to bring their own glasses? This entire concept is absurd. No one wants this crap.
Also was thinking about Avatar -- by the far the best example of 3D movie making. Question: imagine Avatar NOT in 3D. Do people still flock to theaters? I think so. I think the movie is visually spectacular WITHOUT the 3D. Sure, it made it more of an event, but I still don't believe there is a rich future in 3D. People don't care about this crap. They care about seeing good stories well told. And I think the comparisons to sound cinema are not relevant. Or color. Sound and color are obvious game changers. You could take the dumbest person off the street and they can see the immediate difference and be like: I get it. With 3D, the immediate reaction is sort of like "whhaaaaaa????," and people aren't sure whether they like it better or not. I imagine the majority of people are annoyed with it. With color and sound, you always had purists who though, oh no, this is going to change things for the worse, but the average lay person I'm sure was like - "oh cool, what is this." Not so for 3D. The average lay person is like "$4 more for tickets? I have to wear these stupid glasses to get like 3 feet of depth? Not for me. I'll stream a movie on Netflix."
Saturday, December 24, 2011
NFL Week 16 - What We Learned
1. God was apparently busy preparing for Christmas the last two weeks because Tebow played awful again. 4 interceptions today. I wonder how much longer this nonsense will last. The Broncos can lose to anyone in the league. And seriously - isn't it the job of a reporter to question Tebow - if God is responsible for your good luck, isn't he also responsible for your bad luck? I don't think this is being anti-religious, just a decent reporter. Religious people can't seriously think God would spend one ounce of energy on football of all things.
2. I doubt we will see Adrian Peterson play football again. A torn ACL and MCL in mid-career for a running back. It takes a year to recover from an ACL and this was a particularly bad one judging by the replay and the fact that both the ACL and MCL are torn. I always thought AP was going to get a nasty injury, just by the way he runs. Tom Brady returned after a year off from an ACL, but he's an immobile QB, whereas AP is a violent runner. Also, remember, AP tore an ACL in college. I just don't see him playing again, even though he is a young man. Turning out to be just like Gayle Sayers.
3. Marshawn Lynch is one of the best running backs in the league. The man is a beast. The Seahawks are a QB away from having a legitimate playoff team.
4. Alex Smith is actually a good quarterback. I'm riding this guy. He isn't flashy, he isn't getting on ESPN, but he simply does not make mistakes. All of a sudden, I have confidence in the guy. And I think the Niners are better off so long as the rest of the football world snickers about Alex Smith. Let all the degenerate gamblers outthink themselves and bet against him in the playoffs. He is legit, especially if you consider the Niners are depleted at receiver and Gore isn't running the way he was early in the year.
5. Mark Sanchez and Rex Ryan are in a really strange place. I assume the Jets aren't making the playoffs this year. Where does this leave the team? Their aging defense is no longer dominant and their running game is no longer strong. Sanchez is unmasked as the lousy QB he's always been and clearly cannot carry the team. They are in a tough spot. Rex deserves it for being such a blowhard.
6. What is Colin Cowherd going to say when the Jets and Cowboys don't make the playoffs? I think the Giants are beating the Cowboys this week and Cowherd is always fellating Sanchez and Romo for being good when it counts. So what happens when both teams don't make the playoffs? I wonder if he eats his words.
Playoffs are going to be fun this year.
1. God was apparently busy preparing for Christmas the last two weeks because Tebow played awful again. 4 interceptions today. I wonder how much longer this nonsense will last. The Broncos can lose to anyone in the league. And seriously - isn't it the job of a reporter to question Tebow - if God is responsible for your good luck, isn't he also responsible for your bad luck? I don't think this is being anti-religious, just a decent reporter. Religious people can't seriously think God would spend one ounce of energy on football of all things.
2. I doubt we will see Adrian Peterson play football again. A torn ACL and MCL in mid-career for a running back. It takes a year to recover from an ACL and this was a particularly bad one judging by the replay and the fact that both the ACL and MCL are torn. I always thought AP was going to get a nasty injury, just by the way he runs. Tom Brady returned after a year off from an ACL, but he's an immobile QB, whereas AP is a violent runner. Also, remember, AP tore an ACL in college. I just don't see him playing again, even though he is a young man. Turning out to be just like Gayle Sayers.
3. Marshawn Lynch is one of the best running backs in the league. The man is a beast. The Seahawks are a QB away from having a legitimate playoff team.
4. Alex Smith is actually a good quarterback. I'm riding this guy. He isn't flashy, he isn't getting on ESPN, but he simply does not make mistakes. All of a sudden, I have confidence in the guy. And I think the Niners are better off so long as the rest of the football world snickers about Alex Smith. Let all the degenerate gamblers outthink themselves and bet against him in the playoffs. He is legit, especially if you consider the Niners are depleted at receiver and Gore isn't running the way he was early in the year.
5. Mark Sanchez and Rex Ryan are in a really strange place. I assume the Jets aren't making the playoffs this year. Where does this leave the team? Their aging defense is no longer dominant and their running game is no longer strong. Sanchez is unmasked as the lousy QB he's always been and clearly cannot carry the team. They are in a tough spot. Rex deserves it for being such a blowhard.
6. What is Colin Cowherd going to say when the Jets and Cowboys don't make the playoffs? I think the Giants are beating the Cowboys this week and Cowherd is always fellating Sanchez and Romo for being good when it counts. So what happens when both teams don't make the playoffs? I wonder if he eats his words.
Playoffs are going to be fun this year.
Friday, December 23, 2011
Take Your Time
It is okay by me if they keep the shadow inventory of foreclosed homes. Maybe by the time they release the inventory, me and my peer group will be ready to buy -- and it'll be as cheap as can be.
It is okay by me if they keep the shadow inventory of foreclosed homes. Maybe by the time they release the inventory, me and my peer group will be ready to buy -- and it'll be as cheap as can be.
Logging
TV: Hung Season 3, Ep. 2-8
Yes, I gorged on six episodes of Hung last night. Figured since the show went off the air, I was 2/3 through and might as well finish it off. Interesting, how the cancellation of the show actually prompted me to watch (and the fact that my parents don't have Showtime and I can't gorge on Homeland). The thing that I can say about Hung is essentially a back handed insult - that it is good because the episodes are 25 minutes. They require very little investment of my attention or time. And for that investment, there is some fun payoff, a few good lines here and there, some good sex scenes. I'll give the show credit for exploring the range of female sexuality and at least poses interesting scenarios in that department. But it falls short of being great. Great stuff is inspiring and Hung is much closer to soft core porn than inspiring drama. Charlie sums it up best, "Ray, you just a stubborn middle aged ho who don't do dudes."
TV: Hung Season 3, Ep. 2-8
Yes, I gorged on six episodes of Hung last night. Figured since the show went off the air, I was 2/3 through and might as well finish it off. Interesting, how the cancellation of the show actually prompted me to watch (and the fact that my parents don't have Showtime and I can't gorge on Homeland). The thing that I can say about Hung is essentially a back handed insult - that it is good because the episodes are 25 minutes. They require very little investment of my attention or time. And for that investment, there is some fun payoff, a few good lines here and there, some good sex scenes. I'll give the show credit for exploring the range of female sexuality and at least poses interesting scenarios in that department. But it falls short of being great. Great stuff is inspiring and Hung is much closer to soft core porn than inspiring drama. Charlie sums it up best, "Ray, you just a stubborn middle aged ho who don't do dudes."
Parenting
Interesting thoughts on why parenting needn't be so hard.
I actually think this about a lot of things - that there is a culture of stress and anxiety about all sorts of marginally relevant things (NFL football, getting into college, petty problems at work, dating, etc) - that we end up making things that ought to be fun into real chores that sap valuable energy for what otherwise might be spent on productive activity.
Interesting thoughts on why parenting needn't be so hard.
I actually think this about a lot of things - that there is a culture of stress and anxiety about all sorts of marginally relevant things (NFL football, getting into college, petty problems at work, dating, etc) - that we end up making things that ought to be fun into real chores that sap valuable energy for what otherwise might be spent on productive activity.
Thursday, December 22, 2011
Tuesday, December 20, 2011
Growing Up Poor and Black
An incredibly good analysis of why it is so hard for people to move out of poverty. They have a lot of things going against them.
An incredibly good analysis of why it is so hard for people to move out of poverty. They have a lot of things going against them.
Monday, December 19, 2011
Public Pension
A teacher/administrator gets a public pension of $174,000 a year.
I've got plenty of beef with corporate CEOs and their exorbitant salaries, but let's be honest, there are very few of these jobs and they are being paid by supposedly what value they bring to their companies as deemed by the market. I fail to see how we can afford pensions funded by taxpayers at this high a level for people who ARE NOT WORKING. I mean, this seems insane to me. Every single hardworking 30 year old I know would fall over backwards for a job paying that amount of money - and that money would go towards starting a family, buying a house, saving for retirement, you know, good things for society...
A teacher/administrator gets a public pension of $174,000 a year.
I've got plenty of beef with corporate CEOs and their exorbitant salaries, but let's be honest, there are very few of these jobs and they are being paid by supposedly what value they bring to their companies as deemed by the market. I fail to see how we can afford pensions funded by taxpayers at this high a level for people who ARE NOT WORKING. I mean, this seems insane to me. Every single hardworking 30 year old I know would fall over backwards for a job paying that amount of money - and that money would go towards starting a family, buying a house, saving for retirement, you know, good things for society...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)