Month: December 2006

Here’s the list:

20. American Beauty. Not sure. I saw it, I liked it well enough, I wasn’t surprised by the critical buzz, though I wondered if it wasn’t a bit of some guys fixated on young Mena Suvari. This falls in the category of, if you see it BEFORE the buzz really begins, it may be more entertaining.

19. Chicago. The musical had just about died, Moulin Rouge notwithstanding. I thought this was very entertaining, occasionally very funny – the Richard Gere/ Christine Baranski back-and-forth was fun, Queen Latifah was a force. And the leads were good. If the editing was sloppy, as some suggest, it didn’t detract from the (a)morality play.

18. Clerks. Horrors, I’ve STILL never seen this.

17. Fantasia. Oh, please. For 1940, this movie was AMAZING. Yeah, it could have done with some editing between the numbers. And I’ve always seen this movie (once in the theater, a few times at home) under the influence of nothing.

16. Field of Dreams. Every time I’m flicking through the channels and I see this is on, I end up watching it again. And it always gets me, Doc’s choices, the James Earl Jones’ character’s soliloquy, the Costner character playing catch with his dad…excuse me, I need a hanky.

15. Chariots of Fire. This movie suffers for me because I saw it (with my girlfriend at the time and her son) a week AFTER it had won the Academy Award for Best Picture. Looked pretty, but we said, “Is that all there is?” I dare say, if I had seen it four months sooner, I might have had a different reaction. Haven’t seen it since.
14. Good Will Hunting. I enjoyed it. Even enjoyed Robin Williams, which isn’t always the case.

13. Forrest Gump. I liked it in parts, such as the football game, ping pong matches, Lt. Dan’s missing legs, and the meetings with the Presidents. The running section, which used three different songs (only one or two which made it to the soundtrack) went on too long – yeah, it was SUPPOSED to go on and on, but still. (I seem to recall that the running, bearded Hanks was actually played by his brother. Or am I just misremembering?)
I get annoyed that Jenny, the antiwar character, is, as Weird Al Yankovic describes in the great parody of “Lump” by The Presidents Of The United States Of America called Gump, a “bit of a slut”. Forrest’s creation of the Smiley face seemed forced. Generally, I watched the film with a real detachment. Maybe it’s because I could never buy Sally Field, who was Hanks’ stand-up comedy competition in the movie Punchline six years earlier, as his mother. Yet I’m always touched by the big reveal near the end with Haley Joel Osment.

12. Jules and Jim. I saw it a LONG time ago, 35-40 years ago, remember being awed by it, but probably should see again.

11. A Beautiful Mind. I think the backlash comes from the fact that it took liberties with the facts. I enjoyed it for what was actually on the screen. Russell Crowe showed again – I’d seen him in L.A. Confidential and The Outsider – that he was a fine actor, before his persona came to the fore.

10. Monster’s Ball. My sense is that Halle Berry was playing against type and revealed aside not suspected. At that level, it worked, though it was an unpleasant film to watch.

9. Moonstruck. Obviously the reviewer needs to snap out of it.

8. Mystic River. Really wanted to see this. Or not. It came out when Carol was pregnant, and the storyline just didn’t appeal to me at that moment. Maybe I’ll see it now.

7. Nashville. Tried to watch this on video recently, unsuccessfully. Will try again.

6. The Wizard of Oz. The transformation from the b&w Kansas to the technicolor Oz as NOT necessarily where Dorothy wanted to be is an endlessly fascinating philosophical conversation. I love how many actors had two or more roles, especially Frank Morgan: Professor Marvel plus the Emerald City doorman, the Wiz himself and more is a hoot. Know what really scared me? The talking trees – yeesh!
The movie’s cultural impact based on quotes alone, is huge. They’ve made new plays, books, etc. based on the (eventual) success of this movie. Overrated? Not in this country.

5. An American in Paris. Only seen clips on TV.

4. Easy Rider. Sure it’s of its period, but the ending blew me away when I first saw it in the theater. And for good and for bad, it propelled Jack Nicholson’s career.

3. The Red Shoes. Haven’t seen.

2. 2001: A Space Odyssey. Haven’t seen since it first came out in 1968. I said, “What the heck” a lot, but I liked it. Probably should see again.

1. Gone with the Wind. I have never seen this film in its entirety. It’s the length, the subject matter. It so peculiar, too, because I remember when it first aired on TV over two nights. It’s STILL one of the most watched programs ever. It provided the opportunity for the first black person ever to win an Oscar. But seriously, all I REALLY know about this movie, I’ve seen in Carol Burnett sketches.

Many progressives have never quite understood why the most vehement religious opponents of homosexuality view it as such a threat. [I would count myself in that number.] I myself have always assumed that it is because religious opponents are devoted to the preservation of traditional gender roles, which sustain a male/female hierarchy. But the Ted Haggard story suggests a different reason– at least for that segment of religious opponents who, like a significant proportion of the population generally, share same-sex or bisexual orientations and desires. Viewed from Ted Haggard’s perspective– a man who, despite his shame and guilt, is attracted to other men– gay marriage and the gay lifestyle really are a threat to heterosexual relationships and heterosexual marriage. That is because they are a threat to his heterosexual identity and his heterosexual marriage. He knows the Devil is always tracking him, waiting for him to slip up. That is because he conceptualizes his sexual desires as sin and as alienation from God, and not as the expressions of something that might actually become valuable to him if accepted them as part of himself.

That can’t be it, can it? I mean, some people can be tempted to stray regardless of sexual orientation. But it would seem to naive ol’ me that someone in a committed gay relationship, or straight relationship, might be just a tad less tempting than someone not in such a relationship. What am I missing here?

I am not saying that people don’t stray, even when married; that’s why the 10 Commandments have been around for SO long. I’m saying that I’d think that gay marriage, an equal legal commitment in the society, would theoretically STRENGTHEN marriage of straight couples, not threaten them. Here’s a Brief History of Marriage Meddling in the United States.

I was at a party just this past Sunday when this topic came up. What was humorous about it for me is that I was all proud of my church congregation’s position as a More Light congregation, and the woman I was talking with, if anything, thought that being More Light did not go far ENOUGH in the process of including gays, lesbians and transgendered people. She, who’s been a Presbyterian far longer and more actively than I, believe the church’s position on ordination, for instance, is equivalent to the military’s “don’t ask, don’t tell.” Since 1978 it has been the policy of the Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.) not to ordain “self-affirming, practicing homosexuals.” The key here is “self-affirming”.

I was very nervous that the New Jersey Court decision about gay marriage just before the last election would “mobilize the conservative base,” and maybe it did, since 7 of 8 states voted for restrictions on gay marriage this month. Since the election, NJ conservatives are pushing proposal that would grant the rights of marriage – but not the title – to gays, siblings (!) and others involved in domestic partnerships. So, it it the TITLE of marriage that’s so scary?

Sun, 19 Nov 2006 11:25 PM

Hi Roger,

I have responded to your Blog that refers to Snoopy vs. Osama.

I am the academic computing administrator and web analyst for Lake Superior State University. I help the students. What’s in a title? My department is under the dean of the library. How ironic.

I just wanted to thank you for making conversation about The Royal Guardsmen. I enjoyed it.

Thanks again,
John Burdett (Drums)
***
I wrote back:

Hey, John-

Could I use this letter you sent for my blog? I think it shows a different side of you than the response you posted, a tad less intense.

Also, is the name of the song Wednesday or Any Wednesday? I’ve seen it listed both ways. I know I mentioned that I REALLY liked that song.
***
Tue, 21 Nov 2006 1:02 PM

Hi Roger,

Absolutely, you can use my e-mail on your Blog.

I see that my explanation of what we were trying to accomplish, was taken as though we were tying to change the old Snoopy character to a new one. I suppose I should have gone to greater parameters.

Where the change takes place is in the new song. The new tune is about that character being growing up and taking on responsibilities that an older Snoopy would, as if he had matured. Of course, we know the real Snoopy can’t get old and I wouldn’t go there outside of the song. However the song is what it is. Some may like it and some may not, but it is controversial. We aren’t hijacking Snoopy. It’s just this song with today’s military agenda.

I think if you re-read my response to the Blog, you will find I agree with what was said, it is nasty. War is nasty. The only thing I disagreed with was the point of controversy, but I respect everyone’s opinion.

Regarding your response; yes, we have a lot of time on our hands. We don’t hold a candle to the artists that you mentioned. So I agree with you totally. [Actually, that was someone else’s response, but I tended to agree with the sentiment.]

This is about the new song. If it were about how I think and feel, well, we just don’t have time…lol, butI enjoyed every bit of the rhetoric we put forward. It was a lot of fun and if ever you want to mince again, it would be an honor to do so with you.

Your new friend,
John Burdett

PS. Any Wednesday
Merry Snoopy’s Christmas! (The original Snoopy)
***
Tue, 21 Nov 2006 5:36 PM
Hi Roger,

I forgot to ask. Would like me to mail you a promo copy of Snoopy vs. Osama?

John B.
***
I replied in the grateful affirmative.

The next week, I received it. I played it several times, after reading the copious notes John included:

Hi, Roger,

FYI

The song is mastered for radio, so for the best listening experience, use headphones moderately loud and flat on the EQ.
This is the dissection of our efforts put into this song. Some of the things we put in the song are obvious and some more more subtle.

Some people don’t see the shadow of the Bradley behind the dog house. [Count me as one of them.] The tassels on the scarves have been removed to give it a more modern feel [ditto] and Snoopy is in charge while we are hanging out in the past with our old uniforms. The Snoopy vs. Osama title is surrounded by the blood red of war [noted] and the states represented by the stars are not in focus, as the states are not in focus about policies [I missed that]. However, the red and white stripes take to the foreground representing the clarity of the wounded and dead. [I did see that, but didn’t realize its significance.]

The call to prayer was selected by our Islamic students at LSSU. It says, “Let there be hope through prayer and what comes to be the will.” [It’s very affecting, actually.] As the eastern singer hits his last note, it is a fifth to the root chord, which would makie it Gregorian. Just a little twist! [Way too subtle for me!]

The marching has a wounded cadence to it. The tempo of the bridge was given the feel of dragging its heel, a kind of stuck in the sand, thud tempo, portraying the respolitics poltics affecting the effort. [I noted that it had a deeper “feel” than the original, but never could have deconstructed it so precisely.] The bass drum rhythm beating heart of war that contrasts the thud tempo.

The verse and chorus pick up the tempo with determination as in representing ther individual soldier’s attitude and ability not to falter in the face of adversity. [I heard the change of tempo, but didn’t recognize its intentionality.]

We used close mike techniques to get the warm vocal and the John Lennon spit in the microphone sound…lol.

Using a bugle rather than a trumpet at the end gave it a patriotic but haunting sound. [Haunting indeed.]

There is absence of a lead guitar, in reverence to our departed Tom Richards in 1979. [Oh, THAT’S why it sounds different.]

The overall sound we were trying for is that warmth of a vinyl recording and to portray many aspects of the war through the feel and sound as well the lyrics.

Listeners may not hear or care about any of this; I just thought you might find how we built interesting. Hope you enjoy the song.

JB
***
WHEW! Yes, it is interesting and, as I’ve noted, not that obvious to me.

So, what do I think of the song?

I like the song for what it is. It isn’t as “chirpy” as the songs of the ’60s, it has a more somber tone, starting with the eastern chant, and as noted, the bugle is haunting. It is a well-crafted song, and obviously made with a lot of care, a lot of love.

Yet I still wonder about the use of the iconic Snoopy character, who, as John noted, doesn’t grow up as we do, but is frozen in time, to kill bin Ladin. I suppose I could go on and note that I don’t think killing bin Ladin at this point would solve many of our problems in the region, or the world, but that’s another issue.

Your Taste in Music:

Classic Rock: Highest Influence 80’s Alternative: High Influence 80’s R&B: High Influence 90’s Pop: High Influence Progressive Rock: High Influence

So, no, I’m not surprised that Classic Rock is my largest influence.

But there’s no mention of classical music. And speaking of which: someone on a listserv I monitor wanted to find a list of all the symphonies in the country and beyond. The two I’m citing do that, but there’s more.

At Meet the Music, there is a narrative and sonic section called “Meet the Composer”, where one can get a sense of the music of a variety of contemporary as well as old-line composers.

The American Symphony Orchestra League offers research, including a 260-page PDF about the 2005-2006 season.

The most frequently performed work: Beethoven’s 7th Symphony – 89 times
(Contemporary: Joan Tower, Made in America (2004) – 58)
Most frequent composer performed: Mozart – 1453 times
(American: Aaron Copland – 201)
(Living American: Joan Tower 81)
***
It’s funny, not necessarily in the ha-ha sense, that it almost always feels about a week before our Advent and Good Friday VESPERS service that we’re going to crash and burn, yet it generally comes out all right. See if luck holds:
The Chancel choir and orchestra of First Presbyterian Church, 362 State Street, Albany, under the direction of Victor Klimash, will perform Mozart’s Vesperae de Dominica as part of an Advent Vespers service on Sunday, December 10, at 7:30 p.m.
The program is free. Parking available on the street or in Washington Park.
***

Your Lust Quotient: 45%

You are definitely a lustful person, but you do a good job of hiding it. Your friends would be surprised to know that you’re secretly very wild!

At first, we thought they were colds. On her first visit after Lydia was born, my mother said that she was “sickly”. But we’ve since determined that it is a sinus infection that she gets with frustrating regularity. Indeed, many of the symptoms noted here under rhinosinusitis are applicable. We took her to a specialist recently, and he recommended the removal of her adenoids.

SURGERY?

Well, here’s the breakdown:

PRO: Carol’s talked to people whose children have had the surgery and they claim the very positive results in terms of not only no more runny noses and better breathing generally, but improved speech, fewer ear infections, and more.

We can probably get rid of all of her nose sprays, her quarterly doses of antibiotics, etc.

It is a minimally invasive surgery that can be done in about 7 minutes.

CON: It’s surgery.

Using general anesthesia.

On my child.