Entertainment Archives

April 27, 2008

Alvin and the Chipmunks

Alvin_and_the_Chipmunks2007 Saturday night we watched Alvin and the Chipmunks (2007,PG) (ScreenIt! Review).  From the ScreenIt! review:

A struggling songwriter thinks he's hit pay dirt when he finds himself in the company of three chipmunks who can not only talk, but also sing in perfect, if high-pitched harmony.

It was OK.  I wondered if they skimped on the special effects because the munks at times didn't seem as well done as I'd have expected.  The boys enjoyed it, especially when someone was shaking his booty or making a rude noise.

I give it 3 out of 5.

- Jonathan

Categories: 3 out of 5

March 16, 2008

Babel

200px-Babel_poster32 Saturday night we watched Babel (2006,R) (ScreenIt! Review).  From ScreenIt!:

Various strangers' lives are affected and become intertwined by an act of violence.

I usually dig films like this, but this one not so much.  I give it 3 out of 5.

- Jonathan

Categories: 3 out of 5

March 15, 2008

World Trade Center

200px-Worldtrade Tonight we finished watching World Trade Center (2006,PG-13) (ScreenIt! Review).  From ScreenIt!:

Family members worry about and rescuers try to find victims buried in the rubble following the attacks of 9/11 and subsequent collapse of the World Trade Center towers.

The depiction of the anguish of the families of the missing first responders was remarkable and  brought Lisa to tears.  Somehow I didn't care for Nicholas Cage's performance.  I give it 3 out of 5.

- Jonathan

Categories: 3 out of 5

March 02, 2008

Children of Men

200px-Children_Of_Men_3 Last night we watched Children of Men (2006,R) (ScreenIt! Review).  From the Wikipedia:

Set in the United Kingdom of 2027, the film explores a grim world in which two decades of global human infertility have left humanity with less than a century to survive. Societal collapse, terrorism, and environmental destruction accompany the impending extinction, with the United Kingdom, perhaps the last functioning government, persecuting a seemingly endless wave of illegal immigrant refugees seeking sanctuary.

I'm surprised I hadn't heard of this one before.  It was fantastic.  I never would have guessed it was a "companion piece to Cuarón's Y tu mamá también."  You couldn't help but think of The Road and also 28 Days Later, and it was interesting for many of the same reasons...but also because so much of it felt so familiar...pervasive anti-immigrant sentiment, soldiers with German shepherds, hooded prisoners, etc.

I give it 5 out of 5.

- Jonathan

Categories: 5 out of 5

Alpha Dog

200px-Alphadog_posterbig Friday night we watched Alpha Dog (2007,R) (ScreenIt! Review).  From the ScreenIt! Review:

A group of wannabe suburban gangsters must deal with the repercussions of kidnapping an associate's 15-year-old brother.

This had potential (and it was interesting to learnt that it was based on a true story), but in the end it seemed kind of flat.  The most interesting part to me was the way the Jake Mazursky character pretty much left Truelove with no options.

I give it 3 out of 5.

- Jonathan

Categories: 3 out of 5

February 23, 2008

Banished

Another race-related documentary film I watched today was Banished, from PBS' Independent Lens series.  From the Independent Lens site:

From the 1860s to the 1920s, towns across the U.S. violently expelled African American residents.

Today, these communities remain virtually all white.

As black descendants return to demand justice, BANISHED exposes the hidden history of racial cleansing in America.

At least 12 different counties in eight states banished their black populations. More than 4,000 black residents were expelled from their homes.

The film takes the approach of visiting four of the counties where this occurred, discussing the historical events as well as examining the towns today.  What it finds is that the counties remain almost completely white and that they are generally of two minds regarding blacks: either they still aren't welcome or they are (even though somehow that doesn't translate into any residents of color).  I tend to think about this kind of thing as being long ago in the distant past.  However, the film shows footage of  a visit to Forsyth County Georgia in 1987 (75 years after blacks were driven out) by a group of whites and blacks who planned to march in honor of MLK and in memory of what had happened in that county.  They were met by huge crowds of people from the KKK and other racist organizations who made it abundantly clear with signs, shouts, and even thrown rocks how unwelcome their visit was.  This was only twenty years ago.  It was also interesting to see the difficulty in coming to resolution about what happened...the conflict between the fact that these black folks basically had their land and property stolen when they were driven out long ago and the fact that the current owners were not the wrongdoers but rather just people who happened to buy land that at some point in the past was stolen.  Like the documentary about the Little Rock high school, this film left me depressed about where we came from and how far we apparently still have to go.

I give it 5 out of 5.

- Jonathan

Categories: 5 out of 5

Little Rock Central: 50 Years Later

I recently watched a documentary from HBO Films titled Little Rock Central: 50 Years Later.  From the HBO web site:

The wave of desegregation that transformed the South during the 1960s began in Little Rock in September 1957. After Arkansas Governor Orval Faubus defied the Supreme Court's 1954 Brown v. Board of Education ruling and ordered the National Guard to prevent nine black teenagers from entering Central High School, President Dwight D. Eisenhower responded by sending troops from the 101st Airborne Division of the U.S. Army to protect the students as they entered the building.

But what is the legacy of the Civil Rights struggle for equal education today? To mark the 50th anniversary of the forced integration of Central High School, Little Rock natives Brent and Craig Renaud provide a candid look at the lives of contemporary Central High students in the documentary LITTLE ROCK CENTRAL: 50 YEARS LATER.

Brent and Craig Renaud followed the lives of contemporary Central High students, teachers and administration, as well as community leaders, over the course of a year for this intimate documentary, visiting classes, school meetings and assemblies, teenagers' homes and community events. Sharing the stories of both black and white students, the special reveals the opportunities and challenges facing them in and out of the classroom.

There are many interesting aspects to this film.  One of the most striking was how the school that was forcefully desegregated 50 years ago is today voluntarily segregated on the common line of race and wealth.  Another was hearing some of the black kids face the realization that their black peers don't care about school and neither do their parents, and they don't try very hard to succeed.  Another was how many of the black kids resent the advantages that the wealthy white kids have (which, admittedly, they do have) without acknowledging how hard the white kids work to succeed in their advanced coursework.  Another was a segment of a black kid admitting how prejudiced he is against whites.  In the end, the film was pretty depressing...both in terms of the situation we were in 50 years ago and the ones we are still in today.  We're certainly moving in the right direction...but it's obviously a long, slow process and we're nowhere near the end.

I give it 5 out of 5.

- Jonathan

Categories: 5 out of 5

Icons-mini-comment.gifAdd a comment on Little Rock Central: 50 Years Later

Comments on Little Rock Central: 50 Years Later

People gravitate towards folks that are like them. Common looks, beliefs, values, church affiliation, sports, etc. That is what we do. it is just more obvious when it comes to race.

I agree that what you're describing is probably a common and natural trend, but I don't think it represents the best path in a world with so much diversity. It may have the advantage of being more comfortable, but also many disadvantages. As illustrated in the current left vs. right culture/political "wars", it seems like you lose the patience, the desire, and even the ability to talk rationally with the "other", tending to talk at or about but not with each other. I think understanding/exploring/dealing with that which is different from you is an integral part of maturing, understanding, and giving substance to your own views and perspectives. As we gravitate to people like us, I think we set the stage for conflict and misunderstanding with those who are different than us. And I think this trend toward homogenization may set the stage for society to experience the worst the sub-cultures have to offer rather than the best.

You won't listen to Rush because his views are not your political views. I also notice that most of the blogs you participate in are usually COC people. The things you read listed on your blog are mostly or all liberal. Those are the things you like and are interested in. So when it comes to race the same applies. We are interested in very different things and because of color it is in the spotlight. If there wasn't the different of color we would just say that we all have different interests and gravitate toward folks that like what we do.

When Chris went to Eastern, which has a high black population on campus he found out that most of the black kids did not want anything to do with the white kids. The black kids had certain hangout areas, ate in a specific area of the eating areas and whites just weren't wanted. He found out quickly what the world is really like. And he found out just how many of those black kids in his dorm who were there on full ride scholarships, but were not as smart or had the grades that he had.

We can all hope for better, but we all tend to gravitate to folks that have common interests.

Again, I'm not saying you aren't accurately describing a trend...I'm just saying it is a trend for the worse that contributes significantly to many of our problems.

I'm not trying to pretend that I don't exhibit the same behaviors that I'm arguing are unhelpful. However, I don't listen to Rush because I don't think he is a voice of substance...rather, he is an entertainer that I don't find entertaining. I do read (or at least skim...it's hard to find time to read much of anything) Hewitt, Malkin, Weekly Standard, etc. because I'm interested understanding multiple perspectives on any issue. Since I usually don't agree with them, I don't usually "share" them but that doesn't mean I don't listen to them. I don't think you can make an informed decision otherwise.

I'll probably never accomplish it, but I've imagined and started to build a web site the would be a place where people could go to "hear both sides" of various issues (substance, not name-calling and attacking, etc.). There are some places like that, but generally it's hard to find sources like that for most subjects (which is a real shame in my opinion). Wikipedia can kind of be like that, except it has to be too impartial and often brief to include strong arguments one way of the other.

So far, I only have a domain name and logo
http://hearbothsides.info/

Good luck with a site where you can hear both sides without name-calling, bickering, etc. Even on the airplane forums there is plenty of that going on when different building ideas are discussed. Lots and lots of bickering and name calling. And that's just opinions on building airplanes, nothing political or of substance. It would be nice though to express individual opinions without getting emotional.

My idea is that for each issue there is a moderator who researches the subject rather thoroughly and seeds the site with the basic pros and cons. Then people could contribute their opinions,arguments, refinements, etc. as comments. After a comment is made, the moderator takes the substance from the comment, adds the substance where it fits into comparison of both sides, and then removes the comment. Also, users rank the different arguments based on which is most persuasive/important/relevant so that the most important appear at the top.

I agree with most of what Jonathan is saying about the need to hear both sides. It would be great to have more listening BUT I don't think the internet forum setting is the best place for it. Anonymity and the chance of misunderstandings inhibit true communication on the internet.

hearbothsides is not intended to address the problem of lack of interpersonal communication or interaction. In fact, it is intended to facilitate hearing both sides by doing the opposite...removing entirely anything interpersonal and only presenting facts/arguments fairly without promoting one side or the other.

February 11, 2008

When Do Our Shows Come Back?

In an article of the same title, the USA Today has a list of the TV shows that (now that the writers' strike appears to be near its end) are expected to return with new episodes this spring, which are expected to return but not until later, which are in doubt, and which ain't coming back.  I was glad to see that several new shows that we've been watching will survive: Pushing Daisies, Dirty Sexy Money, Chuck, and Life.  It was also nice to see that a couple of the shows that are dead were ones that I sampled but wasn't hooked by: Bionic Woman and Journeyman.   I was disappointed to see Reaper on the questionable list, and I wonder about Aliens in America (I guess I'm not too optimistic).  There is one dead show that I had been watching and thought was OK despite it being panned by most: Cavemen.

- Jonathan

Categories: Entertainment

My House in Umbria

200px-My_house_in_umbria_film_poster Tonight I finished watching My House in Umbria (2003).  From Rotten Tomatoes:

Based on the novella by William Trevor, MY HOUSE IN UMBRIA is set in the sprawling Italian countryside. After a tragic train accident, four survivors find solace in the villa of an English writer, Mrs. Delahunty (Maggie Smith).

This was a bit dull and never really grabbed me, though it certainly makes hanging out in the Italian countryside look attractive.

I give it 3 out of 5.

- Jonathan

Categories: 3 out of 5

Balls of Fury

200px-Balls_of_furymp The third (and best !?!) film that I watched on the flight back from Germany was Balls of Fury (2007,PG-13) (ScreenIt! Review).  From ScreenIt!:

A former child ping-pong prodigy is recruited by the FBI to lead them to a mysterious crime figure with an obsession for the sport.

You don't start watching a movie like this with your expectations too high, but I was pleasantly surprised.  It was goofy and funny and pretty consistent throughout...never running out of gas.  Maybe it was the mood I was in, or lack of sleep, or something, but I really enjoyed it.

I give it 5 out of 5.

- Jonathan

Categories: 5 out of 5

    HOME     Next Archive Page