Movie Monday: Hancock and I, Witness

For the last of my CGI marathon, I saw Hancock. Will Smith, Charlize Theron, and Jason Bateman all interact in this CGI super-hero super fest. And, I liked it.

Oh, I know you can drive a truck through all the plot holes and the extensive product placement lends itself to a great drinking game. But for its genre, it was fast-paced and short, poignant and wackily over the top. It was made to make money (Oh, the horror! Movies made to make money.) but there was enough care in the script, enough good acting by the principals, enough quiet time from the over the top CGI that I liked it; I really liked it.

First, the acting. Smith toned down the swagger of I, Robot (another personal favorite.) His scene in the restaurant where he is explaining his past: I must have been some bastard for no one to claim me,* is right on. It’s also reminiscent of the scene in I, Robot where Smith explains his hatred of robots: She was somebody’s child also. He could have saved her.* This may be the extent of Smith’s acting range but, hey, no one’s asking for a Shakespearean performance here.

Theron played a muted role for most of the movie. Her face and her eyes do the expressing and do it very well. All the clues are there that she and Smith have a history together and nothing shows it better than watching her eyes fill with tears when Smith talks of his past in the restaurant.

But the real gem is Jason Bateman. Jason Bateman! I have only faint memory of this name in relation to a TV show. I would have always put him in the Ashton Kutcher range. I was wrong. Bateman, while not a superhero is this movie, is super important to the plot. His is a role that played wrongly would sink the film. He’s an idealistic PR man (that’s an oxymoron) who tries to convince potential clients to give away their products. And, he means it. When Theron says about him to Smith: He’s a good man.* She means it. There is never a wrong note with Bateman; whether he’s trying to rehabilitate Hancock’s image or reacting to the truth of Hancock and Mary’s relationship. Until the end, when he does become a hero, he plays a trusting, good man with all the right nuances to make you believe and care.

I was thinking about the ending of this movie. (And yes, you must accept a lot of screwy "superhero in the real world illogic" but you can do that painlessly in this movie.) It could have gone bittersweet or dreadfully sad. I won’t give the ending away ( that's for the 5 people in the world who missed this movie when it came out in ‘08) but I think it’s appropriate. After all this is a superhero movie not some French auteur flick.

And then there’s I, Witness with Jeff Daniels, James Spader. It’s from 2003 so it’s only available on TV, movie rental, or DVD. (Is there a DVD?) It takes place in Mexico where a human rights activist (Daniels) is observing an attempt to unionize a factory. He gets more than he bargained for when 27 people plus two American boys are found shot to death. The movie veers all over the place. Are the multinational corporations the guilty party here? The police? The U.S. government? A deus ex machina ending occurs which saves the movie from complete bleakness but also leaves the taste of corn (like Capra-corn; you can look that one up) in your mouth, which is very unsatisfying.

I’m coupling this movie with Hancock because both Smith and Daniels play superheros in such opposite ways for while Daniels has no super powers he faces the same corrupt world as Hancock but with fewer defenses. Like Smith, he is trying to do good. However, unlike Smith, has no super hero defense. A bullet will kill him.

While Hancock regales you will CGIs; I, Witness peppers you will unanswered questions such as: Does the "little guy" really have a chance against power? Does the honest man suppress his desire to do good if his family is at risk? Is all power corrupting?

In many ways, I find I, Witness more troubling than Hancock. You can walk away from Hancock and chalk it up to an enjoyable diversion. You can't walk away from I, Witness in spite of the contrivances which dilute the plot and theme. This is where we all live. It's never a happy thought to know you exist on a darkling plain.

*These are not the actual quotes. Those, I can't remember.

Knitting Friday

I was sitting, watching CNN around noon yesterday. That’s very unusual for me; both the sitting and watching CNN, but I was. This was the time yesterday just after one entertainment figure had died and a few hours before the death of another, more famous, entertainment figure’s death would be announced.

So I guess you could say that I was watching CNN when they were still throwing you snippets of real world news; before they moved into what they love to do best: 24-7 coverage of entertainment.

The news topic at noon was the 19% drop in the number of millionaires due to the present economic conditions. OK, this is a piece of slightly interesting demi-news. Then the co-anchor says something like: Well, you may be wondering why this is important but these are the people who create the job for us.

Wow! This bobble-head anchor is spouting Reagan’s trickle down voodoo economic theory in which the lords of the manor must be given all sorts of economic advantages (read: tax breaks) so they can bestow largess on all us, peons. Where do we get these TV fools? How do people think this way in our so-called representative democracy? Perhaps it’s time to shutter the schools and provide American kids with Nintendo games all day, every day. They might even pick up more logical thinking this way. Obviously, our schools can’t be teaching much of it.

Capitalism with a strong social purpose such as health care and education may work. Unchecked capitalism is like granting a few privileged kids unlimited access to the candy store. They get all the goodies and all they share with us is their vomit.

Before you say: Knitting Friday? This is Knitting Friday? Well, it is. Because you may be wondering after reading the above why my head didn’t explode as I watched CNN at noon yesterday. Because I was knitting. In this crazy mixed-up world of greed and illogic there are oases of calm and peace. And one such oasis is called knitting.

Outside of having my socks knocked off (and I was even wearing any) by that CNN anchor’s comment, it has been a crazy knitting week. I never did get back to the prototype for my summer sweater. I spent most of the week finishing my red Alix shawl in garter. There was a point at the end when I was goofing every row, and that’s after I thought I had counted the row correctly. I’d knit a row. I’d tink (knit spelled backward) the row. There was even one time when I wondered: Do I frog this whole thing?

Take a look at the picture of the shawl. It’s done and I love it. It’s one of the reasons serious knitters keep at the craft: every once and a while you finish something (and it’s usually a bear of a project) and you can’t believe it turned out so well.

Just to recap: This is the Alix shawl in garter which is a top down knit. I used US 8 needles and the yarn is a mystery yarn which I think is a mixture of cotton and spandex. The weight is slightly more than fingering and slightly less than sport. Unblocked (and I think it’s staying that way) it’s 53" x 26" and it has 6 blocks of pattern. The pattern is reversible, a plus, but being reversible you miss the pattern definition until it’s done. Or you can put the live stitches on a long strand of yarn to view your progress. (When I returned these stitches to the needles I had to play hide and seek with a dropped stitch - a common, annoying problem.) Oh, and don’t forget to work with the Alix chart and not the written directions. If you have never used a chart before; take the plunge.

I also finished a beige cotton crochet thread shawl this week. I have no idea why I bought this thread except I’m a sucker for sales and crochet thread. I’ll post a picture of this one next week. I’m still debating whether to block it.

For those of you who would like a shawl adventure and no charts, try:

http://www.anniesattic.com/free_pattern_day/kn_cats_paw_lace_shawl.html

It’s an Annie Attic’s free pattern and after set-up you only work two rows for the pattern body. I’m thinking about seriously reducing the body size (may need some serious thinking) and eliminating the optional fringe.

For a rectangular shawl without chart reading, there’s:

http://www.rosiesyarncellar.com/library/rosieknitsdownloads/rosieknitspdf/vladivostock.pdf

This is an 8 row lace pattern with four resting rows. It lists a wrong and right side but since it’s all knit, I think it’s reversible. The dimensions are huge (72" x 36") but the stitch multiple is given so you can adjust.

That’s it for this week. I hope to have my summer sweater up next week but my black cotton yarn is crying out for a shawl...... Happy knitting.

Website Wednesday

Shakespeare. I’m sure fingers are flying to the “Move Along” button as you read this. And I guess I’ll just have to accept that. Shakespeare is plays and poetry. Shakespeare is language that at times is barely decipherable by the average reader. And you have to read him in high school. He’s one of those subjects your parents and teachers tell you is important to learn in order to become an educated person. And, of course, we all know that education is the first thing occupying your every thought when you're a teenager.

So we were forced to pick up Shakespearean remembrances. Like Julius Caesar got stabbed. That Hamlet was always going around thinking “Should I? Shouldn’t I” and that’s why that stupid play is so long. And maybe if we got lucky we were assigned the Zeffirelli film of Romeo and Juliet with the nudity.

You probably even have one Shakespeare play on your bookshelf. Perhaps it was never cracked open and is collecting dust, but Shakespeare is ubiquitous. He is one of a handful of rare humans who achieve the historical reference of: What Shakespeare gave the world.

For the millions who love the Bard and for the millions who don’t but share intellectual curiosity, take a look at:

http://www.shakespeare-online.com/index.html

This site is like getting all your favorite candy brands in one place. Amanda Mabillard says: My name is Amanda Mabillard, B.A. (Honors), and I am here to provide comprehensive and accurate information about the Bard. And she does.

I can’t begin to do justice to all the Shakespearean information Amanda gives us so it’s best to just start clicking. While a lot of the hyperlinks will take you to the About.com Shakespearean pages, Amanda contributes many original essays.

You can read the plays and poems and then read the essays and analysis. The home page’s right scroll bar gives you: New this Week; Today’s Question; Essentials, Favorites, and Hot Picks. There is also a current readers’ forum. (Be warned: a few links are broken or “coming soon.”)

Rather than I taking your time by telling you about this great site; just go to Shakespeare Online. To be corny: It’s such stuff as dreams are made on. Enjoy.

Movie Monday and CGIs

A weekend of The Dark Knight, The X Files: I Want To Believe and Live Free or Die Hard. All of them action movies which deal heavily in CGI with The X Files being the mildest dealer with the weirdest plot (and that’s saying a lot.)

First to get Heath Ledger’s performance as the Joker in The Dark Knight out of the way. I know it’s been touted as the second coming and his death has been hyperboled (I think I made up a word here) to death. His performance is a tour-de-force for about the first three times he appears on screen then it quickly becomes derivative and an obstacle to the plot (there was a plot?) It took me a while to place his voice but it’s dead on for Peter Lorre and his performance as the mad MD in Arsenic and Old Lace. The tongue thrusting was so reminiscent of Barney Crouch Jr. in Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire. All in all, a performance which might have been considered just good if Ledger had not died before the picture was released. Because of his death, I think the entire PR campaign used the buzz it created to sell the movie. Can’t be sure but there are scenes with the Joker which seem totally extraneous. Like the filmmakers decided after Ledger's death to increase his role. On extraneous scene: the Joker escapes jail and is seen hanging out the back of a police car and “catching the breeze” as it moves along. First of all, just who is driving the police car? And second, how does this obvious pick-up from the cutting room floor advance the plot? It’s really only: Oh, look, more Heath Ledger.

But my point is not to join the IMDB comments which checked “Hated It” regarding The Dark Knight. My point is to try and figure out why filmmakers are so attached to bigger and bigger CGIs and why filmgoers continue pay money for bigger and bigger CGIs and less and less coherence.

I saw it happen with Peter Jackson in The Return of the King. The CGI of more and more Gollum began to slow down the story; the battles became longer and longer and I agree with one comment: How did the bad guys ever feed those Oliphants? Let alone clean up after them.

In The Dark Knight we are asked to believe that the Joker wired an entire hospital with explosives without detection; that Batman “wired” every cell phone in the city to transmit pictures to his special 100 mini-screen room where Morgan Freeman is able monitor all the screens to track the entire city (now that’s a feat of human endurance.) And don’t forget that the Joker loads a building and two ferries with hundreds of barrels of explosive liquids without detection. And while I’m at it: how did the Joker and his gang get into Bruce Wayne’s exclusive party. Talk about loosey-goosey security for a roster of bigwigs.

But here in the U.S., we believe all capitalism, all day so the ½ billion dollar gross of The Dark Knight trumps any opinion I may have.

Moving quickly to Live Free or Die Hard with Bruce Willis we enter the la-la land of complete unreality. Though a real plus is Willis’ bald head, which may be the only reality in the entire movie. This movie is like telling thirty-somethings to believe in Santa and they agree. It is so outrageous hokey. Even titanium-made robots couldn't survive the bodily punishments Willis gets. Perhaps as an homage to women, Willis’ longest battle is with a female villain who gives much better than she gets until Willis uses Michigan’s finest product – the car- to take her out. And that extended death scene seems endless. But not pretending morality or meanings and only asking us to accept the sheer absurdity of another movie about John McClane's travails for much less than two hours, it’s a much better movie than The Dark Knight. OK, I can’t believe I said that.

And now, moving finally to The X Files: I Want to Believe. Well, I want to believe that I missed nothing by never watching The X Files TV series. Just what was its premise: there are things beyond our comprehension out there? Things like god, and prophecy, and..... well, it beats me. The movie however seems to say that there is something to prophecy; some people have the knack.

This movie has the fewest CGIs but an awful lot of body parts. Just what was with all those heads? When you finally got to the final big scene with the bad guys performing really gross surgery I was reminded of the “fearless leader’s” head from C.S. Lewis’ That Hideous Strength. It’s been a long time since I read this Lewis so I could be remembering incorrectly though two things I do know: Lewis has the nicest, talking magical and poweful bear and Lewis, even with the talking bear, made more sense than The X Files; and was more enjoyable.

However, it wasn’t CGIs which drove me screaming into the night with The X Files but rather their Martian POV regarding U.S. health care. For it had to be an interpretation from another planet because no literate human could look at the boy’s experimental treatment in a U.S. hospital (and we know it’s the U.S. since an FBI agent goes missing in WV), treatment that the head of the hospital opposes, and not say: What were the screen writers smoking to dream up the possibility that there is an insurance company in the U.S. which would cover the cost of this risky experimental surgery. Work with me guys; make some thing in your script plausible.

I know I haven't answered part of my original question: Why are these movies so popular? Even I can't believe there are that many 16 - 24 year old males to make up audiences for these block buster movies. (OK, sorry if that was sexist. I'm only parroting what I hear.) Like The X Files says, I may have to accept that some things are unfathomable.

But if you arrive at Blockbusters and only the three above movies are available go with Live Free or Die Hard which winks at us, urges us to enjoy their short venture into super human heroics and unbelievable (and I don’t mean in the shock and awe sense) CGIs. Says to its audience: Sad? Mad? Glad? Watch us and we’ll take you on a visual roll coaster. We’ll keep your eyes in REM to almost the final credits. We are different. We’re make believe and we know it.

Knitting Friday on Saturday

Knitting Friday was another a traveling day which meant I went from there to here or here to there and I had to bring all my “stuff” for knitting pictures, and that included remembering to pack the camera. Unfortunately, the camera didn’t meet up with the photo layout until this a.m. that’s why it’s Knitting Friday on Saturday.

Until Wednesday I was about to pack in Knitting Friday altogether since I had spent the week in the frog pond. How can a one row pattern: K1, *YO, K2tog* K1 cause so much grief? After the seventh (yes, seven times; it was not a charm) frogging I decided that perhaps my problem was that the pattern was just too simple and I needed more of a challenge to keep my concentration. Well, that myth was soon busted.

A little background. I want to make a white cotton summer cardigan. Well, first I wanted to make a white cotton yarn summer shrug. A discussion on shrugs can wait to another day but the prototype I made looked so homemade as opposed to handmade that the shrug idea became a short sleeve summer cardigan project.

And now, a short digression regarding white cotton yarn. Until, I am fixed in stone as to how beautiful the pattern will come out (that is, after I’ve made it a zillion times) I always use cheaper yarn and make a sample before I tackle the final project in white cotton. White cotton looks very tacky fast and it’s no fun ripping this yarn out. That’s why I’m wasting my time using acyclic yarn for a sample cardigan. Even if knew that this pattern would work for the body, I’m experimenting with casting on for sleeves when I get to the armhole and I don’t want to be pulling out the whole body in white cotton. So if you get the picture I’m frogging yarn which will not even be my final garment because I can’t get the simplest lace pattern right. I’m wasting all this time knitting and frogging on a sample.

That said, here’s the pattern I finally settled on so far. I’ll post the final pattern when it’s finished in the cotton.

Summer Short Sleeved Cardigan
First, depending on your yarn, cast on the number of stitches needed for the fronts and backs of a cardigan suitable for the size you wear. For example, I cast on 5 sts for border – 12 sts for front – 54 sts for back – 12 sts for front – 5 sts for border for a total of 88 sts. This should be a cardigan which doesn't quite meet in the front. However, I think the sample piece will button in the front. Not what I want but I’ll decrease the stitch count on the cotton sweater. Right now, using US 10.5 needles, this is what I’m doing: Cast on 88 sts.
Border Rows 1 - 5: Work seed stitch
Body pattern: Row 1: 5 sts in seed, *twisted knit stitch across* (put the right needle into stitch on the left needle as to knit. However, bring your yarn around from the back along the left side of your work around both needles to the front and then take the yarn around the front of your needles down the right side of your work to the back. Finally, take the same yarn between the two needles to make a knit stitch as usual) end 5 sts in seed.
Row 2: 5 sts in seed *purl* 5 sts in seed. Work Row 1 and
That’s it. I’m about 5 inches along. When I get to the armholes, I’ll post again for it’s there that I want to try to create an easy but attractive cast on short sleeve.

The two pictures below are Alix Shawls:
http://www.debbiemacomber.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=nnp&pageID=195

The red one (right) in garter is still in progress and doesn’t photograph that well yet. The green (left) is in stockinette.

Stockinette is so easy to do for the Alix Shawl; the garter stitch is a bitch. First, you don’t have the stitch definition you have with stockinette since it is reversible with no right or wrong sides. This makes the pattern difficult to see and mistakes difficult to find.

That red one was a real frogger but I think I’m on the right track now. Be sure to mark the increase side of the pattern in garter. I’‘m also taking a long strand of different colored yarn and threading it along the increase rows so that each pattern repeat is marked. You’ll figure out where to lay the yarn quickly. This way if one repeat has a different stitch count you know where the problem is before you start the resting row. I differed from the pattern suggestions for knitting in garter by keeping the four border stitches in seed.

The green shawl is in sport weight; the red one is in fingering. The red is taking longer than the green did but I like spongy feel of the red. Oh, I used US 10 needles for the green and US 8 needles for the red. The Alix Shawl is a Faroese type so it curves nicely to stay on your shoulders.

Knitty
The new Knitty is up. I like Entomology, the short shawl:
http://www.knitty.com/ISSUEsummer09/PATTentomology.php
And Annette, the summer cardigan:
http://www.knitty.com/ISSUEsummer09/PATTannette.php
And Cold Mountain, a lace shawl with three long but not terribly complicated charts: http://www.knitty.com/ISSUEsummer09/PATTcoldmountain.php

Some Ravelry members think Knitty has too much winter knitting this month. Go take a look and see what you think.

Happy knitting.

Next week: I hope the summer cardigan is finally done in the white cotton yarn.

Website Wednesday

Well, there I was in the very early hours of Tuesday morning, sound asleep with the television on and “sleep watching” Harry Potter and the OOTP which had started at 9:30 Monday night. But when I momentarily awakened I was not starring at Lord Voldemort but the dreaded black screen and the writing “ You are not subscribed to this station.” Alas, I knew my glorious extended weekend of HBO HD was over.

Perhaps it’s true that we’re getting hidden messages from that black box we love so much: You must think about TV programs all the time. You must subscribe to as many movie packages, as you can. (Paging the people who wear tin foil hats) because I am going to talk about movies again today. And, it’s not even Movie Monday.

In fact, I am so psyched and hyped after 3 days of all movies-all day I may weave movies into Knitting Friday. That was an interesting sweater Luna was wearing in Harry Potter.

But for today; let’s talk about auteurs. Just saying that word makes me want to stand taller and look down my nose at the common herd. French words do that to me. (So it’s probably good I can neither pronounce nor spell them.) It’s like when you use them you’re moved into the special realm of the Bill Buckleys of the world where you must use the “royal vocabulary.”

It has been stated that Louis XIV made life at Versailles so elaborately formal that it would cost the nobility their fortunes in order to “keep up with the Jones” while they vied for a place there at the king’s side. Thus, they had no money available to wage coups against Louis.

I think it’s the same way with “good” manners (as opposed to common civility) today. People will become incensed over a comedian’s joke or a President’s feet on a desk. Like when you watch the magician; his main purpose it to divert you to the sideshow so that you miss the main event and thus you believe in his “magic.”

So for me the word auteur is so phony. So made up. So cocktail party stuff. What is an auteur? It’s a film maker (read director) whose works are his vision and are not bogged down by movie studio endings or, in fact, many times, any adherence to the natural laws of time and space.

A lot of bad movies get made this way and get a pass from a lot of critics. Think Memento (and I’m not passing judgment on this movie perhaps because I still have no idea what happened) where the “hero” has no short term memory and the director’s sense of chronology is something he picked up from another galaxy. Think of The Sixth Sense where I’m still sorting the pieces.

Wikipedia tells us that Cahiers du cinéma, a French film magazine from the 1950s, invented the term auteur. In fact, it tells us that the Cahiers du cinéma reinvented film theory with François Truffaut spouting: "(t)here are no good and bad movies, only good and bad directors.”

The timing makes sense. The late 1940s is considered the peak of film noir. This dark look at the world was not unexpected from a world which had just lived through two world wars and a great depression in less than 50 years. Truffaut was commenting on, not inventing something new. Ah, those French.

By now, you are probably thoroughly turned off by all things French. (I hope you are drowning your disgust with some good French wine.) But before you go off and cross out every French word you can find in your dictionary, take a look at:

http://www.theauteurs.com/dashboard

The purpose of The Auteurs is: Four things that were on our minds when we first dreamt the Auteurs: Number one: why can’t you just watch In the Mood for Love in an airport lounge? Number two: why is it so hard to get hold of Antonioni’s complete filmography? Number three: Wouldn’t it be great to instantly send Tati’s Playtime to a friend if you think they need it (there’s nothing like film therapy)? Number Four: why do films on the Internet look just awful? And that was that. We simply couldn't resist the idea of everyone having their own online film library… your little cinema, anytime, anywhere… after all not everyone can make it to the Cannes Film festival… less if you are a school teacher or you live in Winnipeg (or both)… but that doesn't mean you can’t recite all of Kubrick’s films in reverse chronological order or that you are not desperate to watch the latest Kitano film that is definitely not going to be released in your local multiplex.

Click Films and get 157 pages of films (at 20 per page, that’s over 3000 films), each with a short synopsis, reviews and sometimes an articles on the director. Films range from Persona (Bergman) to Casablanca; from The Dark Knight to Duck Soup.

For some features, you must register (it looks free but this is only from my glance at the Terms of Service with my TV Perry Mason law degree) but so much reading about films and directors and comments to these films can be viewed for free.

I know this is a specialized site. Not every moviegoer wants to peel the onion this carefully when it comes to film. But for anyone past the Herbie and Chuck Go to Vegas XIII movie stage, there is something here for you to like.

Take a look.

Movie Monday: Michael Clayton

For some reason, this past weekend HBO HD became free for us. We probably had it all day Saturday but we only picked it up Saturday evening. I started watching the MST3000 movie but soon realized that Michael Clayton was on.

Fast forward to the present. This weekend was HD all the way. I saw The Golden Compass, Harry P otter and the Order of the Phoenix, Eastern Promises (note: see this with A History of Violence since they are matching bookends), Charlie Wilson’s War, and perhaps a few others I slept through.

I admire George Clooney political/societal beliefs. I really enjoyed his tour-de-force role in O, Brother Where Art Thou? better than his typical Cary Grant type roles. In Michael Clayton it’s like Grant in a seedier role, say None But The Lonely Heart. Having said that, his acting didn’t get in the way of the story in Michael Clayton, a real plus for any actor.

Now a look at Michael Clayton (Spoilers ahead.) There’s really nothing new about Michael Clayton’s plot. Oh, it does twist a few things: Clayton is a mediocre lawyer in a big firm (it’s very unusual for that type to last; they wind up practicing law like Paul Newman in The Verdict) and the masterminding villain is a woman. Besides that it really a tale of a jaded man who has to make a moral decision. And, I think there are better movies dealing with this theme. In fact, moral dilemmas are universal so the competition to make it into a good movie is immense.

However, Michael Clayton moves along quickly and has some good pluses. The acting is very good, down into minor roles. There is real suspense and villainy: the killing of the lawyer, Arthur Edens, the planting of the bomb. The child actor, Austin Williams, who plays Clayton’s son is charming. (Child actors can be a kiss of death for a movie.) And refreshingly, the boy’s stepfather is shown defusing a confrontation between the boy and his mom.

Just to stop and summarize the plot: A top lawyer at a big firm (Tom Wilkinson as Arthur Edens) has been negotiating one big case for six years. He’s on meds (boy, is he on meds; be sure to look at that medicine cabinet scene) but has stopped taking them and one day during a deposition for the case, strips naked in the room and runs out into the parking lot. Clayton, his friend and colleague, is called in. Edens tells him that their client has been polluting and killing people and he has the documents to prove this. The rest of the movie concerning the firm’s general counsel (Tilda Swinton as Karen Crowder) going deeper and deeper in treachery first in order to silence Edens and finally to silence Clayton. Shit happens but there is a a deus ex machina ending and “good” bests “evil.” Or does it?

Using the plot I just summarized, I found Michael Clayton rather pedestrian. Good performances aside, it was perhaps second only to The Verdict on my “disbelief at the ending in a legal drama” scale.

It was scary in how Edens was killed; suspenseful as Clayton walks towards his car while the killers are planting a bomb in it; realistic to hear a lawyer tell the hit-and-run client that he really can’t “make it all go away”; and refreshing to see the small role of the step-father played without meanness. But that was it. The movie doesn’t stay with you except as a very well-crafted film. I can just picture the meeting with the screenwriter and the director.

Director: We have to get Clayton out of his car before the bomb goes off. Any ideas?

Screenwriter: Mumble, mumble. (Gears in brain racing.) I’ve got it. We have Clayton leaving the client in Westchester and racing through country lanes. Suddenly, he looks up a hill and sees three horses standing together at dusk. He’s dumbfounded. He leaves his car and walks up to them. The horses stay still. We watch Clayton studying this scene and then BOOM!, the car blows, the horses gallop off. The lit majors will love the metaphor.

Unfortunately, I don’t get the metaphor. And finally, I don’t get why Crowder would talk to Clayton in that empty hall scene and incriminate herself by bribing him. Even I know about wearing a wire. Jesus H. Christ. She was general counsel for the firm. Had she been living under a rock?

So in summary: You won’t go wrong with Michael Clayton as long as you’re not expecting a “white knight” movie. Perhaps in the end, Clayton bested his treacherous law firm and dented the reputation of a multi-billion, multi-national corporation but he didn’t save the world. He didn’t win one for the little guy. You have no clue that he is concerned, as Edens was, with the plight of the polluted farms and farmers.

And now, having taken you this far, let’s back up to final scene between Crowder and Clayton. Just one line when Clayton is saying that Crowder didn’t have to go to the extremes she did. He says something like: You didn’t need to do this. Don’t you know my role in the firm? I’m the janitor.

You know, the janitor. The guy who cleans up the messes, like spilled paint in the art room, like psychotic lawyers off their meds.........

Then, also in that final scene, Clayton says something like: You didn’t have to try and kill me, I already got the money for my debts. (Clayton had a failed restaurant and gambling debts.) So he’s saying that he had already been paid off, they had already bought his silence.

Now, take another look at the movie. Take another look at Michael Clayton. It becomes an even darker film. It becomes one you will remember.

(Final note: Swinton won the Supporting Actress Oscar for her role. OK, maybe it was Oscar worthy (if you think the Oscar is a worthy award) but that scene where she is practicing her speech is right out of the earlier Elizabeth with Cate Blanchett where she used this technique and in which movie Blanchett deserved an Oscar.)

Sermon on Sunday

What follows is the e-mail I just sent to Preisdient Obama regarding a national health care plan. If you haven't thought about the health care system in the U.S., please think about it now.

If you are a U.S. citizen and favor a national health care plan, please contact your representatives and President Obama. If you are a citizen of a country with a national health care system, also contact President Obama.

http://www.usa.gov/Contact/Elected.shtml - will take you to their e-mail addresses.

The swiftboating of a national health care plan has already begun. Our President needs encouragement.

Remember, this is the United States, the only country where monied interests can convince citizens to spit in their own faces. It takes a special breed of human to take the "trickle down" the monied classes hand us and smile for more. Even a dog knows when he's been kicked.

This is another defining moment for my country. It's time to stand up and be counted.

(e-mail to President Obama)

Dear President Obama,

Please institute a single payer national health care system based on the successful Medicare model. And not a “pie in the sky” plan of affordable medical insurance for all.

I know this will be difficult given the fact that pharmaceutical, insurance and medical lobbies contribute so heavily to our obscenely expensive election campaigns and they view a national health plan as an anathema to their profits.

However, there are moments in history when leaders must stand against the very monied few.

Healthcare is a human right; not a privilege based on ability to pay. If necessary, taxes must be raised to pay for this right.

Unfortunately, we are truly standing over the abyss regarding healthcare. Employment hiring and personal and business bankruptcies are just two major areas which will be affected by the health care decision.

Lyndon Johnson gave us Medicare in the middle of the last century. A national health care plan for all Americans can be achieved.

Best of luck.

Knitting Friday

A short posting today since I have two rows left on my second Alix shawl. I have to get hopping and finish it. And then I have to go and buy invisible thread to tack down the yarn ends.

I am loving the Alix shawl. Here's the website again:

http://www.debbiemacomber.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=nnp&pageID=195

But don't use the written instructions. Click on the bottom for the chart. Even if you don't like reading charts or have never done so; do so now. This is a great introduction to chart reading. Just remember each row begins and ends with a 4-seed stitch border which isn't shown.

On both shawls I've worked only one extra row of inverted "Vs" for a 57" x 27" triangular shawl on the first one - which is a nice size in cotton for a cool summer evening. (And, if this rain doesn't stop, for a cool summer day.)

I've used US 10 needles on both double knit and sport weight yarn. Oh, watch out for the first couple of rows once you start your pattern. That's where I made my mistakes. Once you get past Row 3, things get easier. Just be sure you put in all yarn overs since it'll be two rows before you find your mistake. But they do follow an easily memorized pattern.

I really got messed up at the border where I was frogging (or is it tinking?) continuously until I figured it out. Here's what I did finally:

1. Row 1, eyelet row: Just follow the directions. If you have the correct stitch count you will end your *yo, K2tog* one stitch before the center stitch (CS)and after you follow the directions for the center, you 'll continue your *yo, K2tog* and finish the row ready to work the 4 ending border stitches. This part is simple.

2. Row 2: Just the borders and *P* row. Again, simplicity itself.

3. Row 3, 5, & 7: Ah, the dreaded rows 3, 5 and 7 - all the same; all pulled out quite often until: First, remember the center stitch is always stockinette (K on RS, P on WS). Then:
a. Starting at the border stitches, work in seed stitch to 1 stitch before the CS.
b. Increase in the stitch before the CS so that it stays in seed stitch. So, if two stitches before the CS is purl, increase in the next stitch by knitting then purling into it. If two stitches before the CS is knit, then increase the next stitch by purling then knitting into it. (Note: whatever the increase was - K or P - I did it in the back of the stitch so I wouldn't have a hole.)
c. Knit the center stitch. Always knit the center stitch on the right side. Do not worry that it is not in the seed stitch pattern.
d. Then go to the end of the row and count back from there to the first stitch after the CS to see whether that stitch should have a knit or purl increase in order to keep in the pattern consistent with the ending border seed stitches.
e. For example: If the stitch following the CS should be knit then increase in this stitch as purl then knit in the stitch. If the stitch following the CS should be purl, then increase in this stitch as knit then purl in the stitch.

4. Rows 4 & 6: Work in seed with the CS purled to keep it in stockinette.

This may seem like overkill in instructions but I wish someone had explained it to me. I wasted a lot of time figuring out a "half-hitch" and trying to keep the CS in the seed pattern. I even looked minutely at all 126 shawls on Ravelry trying to see how they did the ending border.

That's it for now. Next week, I'll put up the pictures of the two shawls.

Future projects: I want to make this shawl longer in garter. Garter didn't work in variegated yarn but I'm hoping it does in plain yarn. I want to put a crochet picot border across the top and fold the top for a collar effect. And, I have got to make a summer shrug.

Happy knitting.

Website Wednesday

In less than two weeks, the kids will be home for the summer and it becomes 24-7 until Septemeber. All that government-sponsored free time (public schools are paid for by taxes) is gone when the school doors swing open on the last day of school and hordes of screaming, happy kids run to embrace summer freedom. Ah, the idylls of youth!

But since it’s against the law and common sense to leave these school-free cherubs alone, parents throughout the country are frantically planning summer activities for them. Now I’ll leave the big stuff like camps and summer school and cooking classes and swimming to the parental units and concentrate on the small stuff: little fillers to pull out of the hat when the dreaded cry wails up of: I’m bored.

Neo K12 is such a filler and a pretty fantastic one: http://www.neok12.com/

This site is composed of short educational videos running from about 2+ to 8+ minutes on a whole range of topics which seem to include all school subjects except languages. As their name says, they’ll interest kids from K to 12.

Their mission statement says: We...are committed to cataloging the best free online educational videos from across the internet at one place. We watch and review each and every video to ensure they are safe and appropriate for K - 12 kids. We also check the accuracy of the content and catalog it under the relevant categories and topics.

What mom (OK, that’s sexist) could ask for more?

The home page shows you a list of categories under which are listed topics. Click on the category and you get a listing of the videos and their running time. I did the math with one topic Acid and Bases and the running time of the videos is close to 45 minutes.

All the topics range from K to Grade 12 level. How do I know this? Under the American Revolution, there are two videos with the Sesame Street puppets explaining it.

Two minor quibbles and a two major pluses:
1- I can’t find who the people are behind this site. I would like to know who’s making the selection decisions. (But having said that, they do look like excellent selections.)
2- Unless you can tell from the small picture accompanying each topic (for example: Sesame Street characters) you can’t tell the grade level until you play the videos.
3 - The pluses: There are no advertisements and it’s FREE.

So take a look at Neo K-12. It’s a nice gift to parents facing the long, hot summer.

Movie Monday

I was going to write about kids in the movies today but Saturday night was an evening of Twilight so I’m going to start with that movie, since it contains kids. Or does it?

What can I say about Twilight? There are millions of young girls who would devour me more swiftly than vampires if I dissed it. I know this since I saw the extra features for this movie which included 6,000 screaming girls at a forum with the stars, the director and the author. They just screamed at any words coming from the stage. If Robert Pattinson had answered a question ith a non-related word such as “Ketchup.” the hall would have exploded in gales of approval. This movie is the prerequisite sexual awakening movie for the pre-pubescent/early pubescent girl.: the mystery, the violence, the sexual tension, the sexual desire, the Gothic romanticism. It is a rite of passage.

I don’t know how many of you have read Twilight but great literature, it ain’t. Probably not even good lit. Basically, it can be pared down to the classic theme of the handsome loner with a secret tamed by the good girl. We’ve seen it so many times throughout movie history. Ironically, it started very early with a cousin of this movie, the 1931 Dracula. (A topic for another posting: the evolution of the vampire into the sensitive, albeit bloodthirsty, creature.)

But on the plus side the book is a very easy read and the author seems charming. I’ve started to read the first book of the series, Twilight. There's a lot of dialogue and the book has a different twist from the movie version regarding the beginning mating dance of Bella and Edward. The book treats it more benignly; Edward seems to watch Bella bemusedly from afar. The movie moves the sexual tension up a few notches which is necessary for rapid plot development. Novels can languish; movies, except perhaps foreign ones, better shake their tails fast. Edward is moody from the beginning; Bella is mad about this. As appropriate in this feminist age, Edward seems more the romantic gentleman while Bella has a core ball-busting psyche that she barely manages to hide.

And, you know what? It works. Which brings me back to kids in the movies. I had originally planned to write about the Harry Potter series, the Narnia series, and the High School Musical series. In all of these I felt I was watching actors playing characters; I could see the wheels turning; I could see the sausage being made.

With Twilight, I didn’t. Maybe it was watching it in an intimate home setting, maybe it was the delicious and vast amount of Kettle Corn I had made, but I believed this movie. It captured me. Well, I did know it was a movie. I do know that vampires don’t exist. I can’t imagine that raging teen hormones would have kept that relationship so chaste. (We do know that Bella has “been around” since her mom questions her about “being safe”, and I don’t think she means abstinent, when she learns of Bella’s relationship with Edward.) However, saying that, I do think the actors and the director pulled off this vampire fantasy very well.

The whole thing hinges on Edward and Bella. The director could have had top talent in supporting roles but her stars set the tone. Kristen Stewart plays Bella with a touch of “what are I doing here and how do I get out?” and this attitude works because Robert Pattinson must play his role more as a stock character. To have this all work, he, the “vegetarian” vampire, must utter some pretty silly lines of explanation but he’s playing against Bella’s edge and that makes it sound right. Pattinson is the perfect visual vampire but against Bella, he appears in the virginal role. It’s a juxtaposition that works.

It may help that all the actors playing these high school kids are older. Stewart is the youngest at 19. Unlike the Narnia and Potter series, Twilight actors didn’t grow up in the roles but were able to look back for insights. The Harry Potter series shows the problem child actors have. Kids are usually good actors because they are natural; it's like playing a game for them. As they develop into teenagers the awareness they grow into, stifles this young spontaneity. That's why to me the Potter series is becoming more tedious as the stars grow up.

An additional plus for Twilight is that none of the actors are stars. This type of ensemble acting is typical of England but not practiced in the United States. Here, you must become famous or languish, your best hope being character roles.

I know I have to see the movie again for a really valid review (and no, it won’t be like pulling teeth) but I did get a “warm, but not fuzzy” feeling from this movie. Like The Lord of the Rings series, I could suspend belief without protest. So they were vampires. So some of them were good vampires. So in the end, even these good vampires were brutal. So Bella and Edward didn’t have sex. OK, I bought it all. Although I’m not a screaming pre-pubescent girl I’m looking forward to the second movie, New Moon. I know from my glimpse of the bad vamp, Victoria, in the final shot, that there’s going to be trouble ahead.

Knitting Friday

I started to knit lace again. Well, I guess I should put in a disclaimer at the very beginning: I don’t consider this really lace only YOs, SSKs, K2togs, and DDs since my yarn is dishcloth quality cotton. I think you need to work in a more luxurious yarn before you start calling it lace knitting.

And now having said that: a word about the yarn. As you know I’m a sucker for a coupon and it’s a perfect marriage for me when A.C. Moore has their bags of “undetermined” fiber yarn and I have a coupon. Now, I don't buy the undetermined fiber yarn since it seems to always be shiny acrylic but once and a while they have bags of 100% cotton yarn and then I pounce. That’s how I have way too much cotton dishcloth quality yarn but in some pretty attractive colors.

So when I decided to do some lace knitting again , the variegated yarn pictured very badly below got pulled out for my swatch knitting.

And now a word about my brand of swatch knitting. I don’t swatch for gauge - oh, has that led to numerous expletive explosions - but I do swatch for patterns. So usually a new and tricky pattern gets knitted up in mediocre yarn before a tackle my “good” stuff.

And therein lies my current problem: this dishcloth grade variegated cotton looks damn good.i n real life, not the below picture, and I can’t imagine stopping now.

The pattern is called Alix’s Lace Prayer Shawl, it’s a top to bottom knit. Here's the website:

http://www.debbiemacomber.com/index.cfm?fuseaction=nnp&pageID=195

Here’s only the chart only website:

http://www.debbiemacomber.com/var/www/debbiemacomber.com/htdocs/graphics/Image/pattern_prayershawl_chart_lg.jpg

Even if you don’t like to knit from charts I’d recommend you use this one. It’s very simple and the written instructions look complicated. But be sure to read the non-chart website first since you only get one-half the chart and it’s without the border stitches. I’m not using a lifeline because my yarn is quite “sticky” and stitches don’t ladder down. However, I’d recommend them. If you belong to Ravelry check out the Alix shawl site there since you’ll get a lot of useful information.

One major reasons this is such an easy shawl is the number and placement of the yarn overs. In complicated lace patterns I find it necessary to “re-read” each row to make sure I have the correct number of stitches. This means not just counting the stitches (and this is a bear also) because you can have the correct number but not the correct number of yarn overs. but reading each stitch across. In Alix, the yarn overs appear in the same places in each lace row so as you finish each section you can see that it’s correct. Saves on a lot of frogging.

OK, that’s going to be it for Knitting Friday. They say that lace knitting is addictive and they’re right. I really do have to get back to it.

Happy knitting.

Website Wednesday

The economy in the U.S. is just peachy. Just listen to all the talking heads on TV and you’ll know that. GM declares bankruptcy on Monday and the stock market doesn’t even burp. Consumer confidence is at a 6-year high and cars are back in mall parking lots.

I aced Honors Economics in college -which is its own spooky story - but I never really appreciated economic systems. Oh, I understand them but once you get beyond the basic barter system of two people deciding the value of their labor or goods it all seems like an pyramid scheme to me, using many different names. The most successful schemes being those which could throw their net the farthest.

Like the U.S. scheme where a person had a piece of property and another person of financial stature looked at this property and said: I think your property is worth $5 zillion dollars and you can go to the bank on that. And, sure enough the first person went to the bank and said: Mr. X, of great financial stature, says my property is worth $5 zillion dollars and I would like to borrow a lot of money based on that appraisal with a low interest rate because I, having such a valuable piece of property, am very, very rich. You can see where this is going. Among the rich, the money moves.

And that’s where the asinine trickle-down economic theory comes in. It runs something like this: I, being rich, should keep all my money and not be bothered by pesky taxes. Then I, sitting on so much money will choose to spend it and therefore my wealth will trickle down to the poor.

Two factors alone make this theory abhorrent (that is, if the theory were even true): 1. Supposedly, the U.S.A. is living a representative democracy not a feudalistic to-the-manor born system. 2. Did you ever try to fill a glass with water as it trickles out? It’s not a very satisfying process.

For more on the rich in America, read the article in Alter Net:

http://www.alternet.org/workplace/140394/our_economy_is_going_to_keep_tanking_until_we_stop_shoveling_billions_to_rich_people/

The URL says it all: Our Economy Is Going to Keep Tanking Until We Stop Shoveling Billions to Rich People and, yes, this monster link does work.

But the one thing I have figured out, with an economic pyramid scheme you need a very, very wide net if you want it to work successfully. China has one. It makes products and sells them to other countries so the money that is returned to them is other people’s money. As long as the world economic market remained stable China was rolling in dough, wanting to invest it: in their infrastructure, in the world.

That’s why the U.S. Treasury Secretary made a speech in China this week saying that with China’s help the U.S. would emerge from this financial crisis. That why a headline in the NYT says today: Australia Feels Chill as China’s Shadow Grows.

In America, this pyramid scheme is very fragile, especially with consumer spending totaling about 70% of the GNP. If American consumers stay home, a real trickle-down system starts: low paid store employees are laid off; big ticket purchases are put off, U.S. manufacturers start cutting staff, homes and cars don’t sell, homes and cars stop being built..... Soon, the trickle becomes a geyser. Franklin Roosevelt didn’t make those radio talks because he liked to hear his voice during the 1930s Depression. He did it to assure a spooked nation. You can become a spooked nation pretty fast.

But Roosevelt differed from today’s U.S. leaders. Roosevelt, the consummate patrician, knew that capitalism was broken and he did not shy from using elements of socialism to fix the country. Today, facing a country badly educated and thoroughly brought up on greed, all the Administration dares to do is get capitalism back on track. Although we have Social Security and Medicare, socialism is an expletive.

So I won’t predict that we are in for very rough times but I suggest you watch the health care reform as it gets passed in some form. If we move to a national health care based on the Medicare model there may be some hope. If we move to this insane plan of affordable insurance coverage for all, we’re doomed.

However, this is website Wednesday and in keeping with my doom and gloom here is:

http://beingfrugal.net

It is what it says: being frugal. It’s a blog about saving money. It tells you where to get free Milkbones and free men’s touch up dye for job interviews. The archives gives you the last 30 posts which go back to January 2009. It has recipes and more. For example, in the deviled egg recipe (you have to search for the actual recipe) has tips on transporting them and filling the eggs. OK, you say, that’s pretty basic. But the Spicy Thai Noodles with which I have always had a coating problem has tips for sauce consistency.

http://beingfrugal.net/2008/04/03/frugal-tips-to-survive-a-recession/ will take you to frugal tips from readers.

This is probably a site which would be read in one sitting but perhaps you would want to come back for the current blog tips.

(Note: read in the About section: I’m a Christian wife and mother trying to get out of debt. Since she identifies herself first as a Christian, I don’t know if her religious beliefs are part of the site. However, good tips are good tips. You can decide how valuable they are.)

Movie Monday - The Walker

I’ve seen The Walker four times in the last few weeks. That either means it’s a very good movie or it’s the only movie in my TV movie packet that’s worthwhile (at least during the hours I’m watching.) The answer is: both.

The Walker stars Woody Harrelson in the lead role with some very good actors: Kristin Scott Thomas, Lauren Bacall, Ned Beatty, Lily Tomlin, William Dafoe, Moritz Bleibtreu and others scattered about in substantial or trivial roles.

First, what The Walker isn’t. Well, it isn’t Philadelphia. And I mean that in its treatment of gays. I hated Philadelphia’s treatment of gays and their friends and family. It made me want to pour molasses on the TV and have it set on by wild dogs. All gays and gay friends were so good and understanding. All non-gays and their minions were so bad. (Even with Mary Steenburgen’s throw away line after she finishes a brutal cross examination of Tom Hanks of: I hate my job; non-gays had no redeeming qualities.) This complete lack of reality cheapened that movie into a hackneyed polemic.

In The Walker, Harrelson as Carter Page III is gay and so-called “the walker” because he escorts rich women as part of his work. Carter descends from "royal" Washington, D.C. lineage so he fits right into the top-tier D.C. society and he walks the wives of the most powerful men. You learn early on that Carter is accepted for his sexual orientation since he travels freely with the welders of power - or is he?

A lot of stories are swirling in this movie. We have Carter’s relationship with his lover. Not being gay, but being human, I understand the pitfalls they were facing and how they were trying to establish a life together. Like all people, they were not on the same page: Carter walked in an effete society; Emek produced naturalistic photography which was abhorrent to his lover. Emek wanted Carter to fund a gallery showing for him and Carter felt he is being used. But when Carter gets into deep shit, Emek is there for him.

In many ways, the “deep shit” may seem like the movie is veering off course but the murder is the necessary catalyst for it turns Carter’s world upside down and finally he must face his dead and living demons.

Although the murder soon becomes this movie’s mover, it’s always a character study and Harrelson gives a superb performance as the Southern-accented, slightly lisping, impeccably dressed bon vivant who just happens to be gay. While Carter is not a character you would meet in a typical grocery store visit, it was refreshing to see gays portrayed not as icons; not as queens but what they are: humans like all of us.

Another big plus for me was that this movie mentions Iraq - more than once, and it mentions “the meanness of this administration - I’ve never seen anything like it” and it mentions that after 9/11, “the gloves came off.” Then there is the confrontation with the murderer scene. You don’t see the Hollywood Clint Eastwood moment but Carter reacts as the rest of us mere mortals would. Of course, there's more: the gay bar scene, it works; the smiles on the women in the final scene; and I still haven't figured out Kristin Scott Thomas' swaying hips scene.

In some ways the ending is deux ex machina. Or is it? Is the ending just cynical D.C. pragmatism? You decide.

There is so much to see in this movie. It truly is multi-layered. Watch it. I hope you enjoy it as much as I did.