Verbisaurus Blogicus

This Blog Site Sucked

2010-01-05T14:08:00.004-06:00

So I don't use it anymore.

Please go to this place to visit my active blog site.

A Letter to My Third Least-Favorite Retailer

2009-01-16T15:21:00.001-06:00

Dear Best Buy:

Last year, for the first time in over a decade, I entered your store and made a purchase. I had decided not to shop at Best Buy after disastrous customer service in the past, but my wife insisted that your company would have the best buy on TVs and, well, you did. Through a series of coincidences, I also came in to possession of a $100 Best Buy gift card and a coupon for 40% the purchase of a GPS. This coupon, incidentally, I discovered while geocaching with a friend in Frontenac State Park. There was an entire book of Best Buy GPS coupons, along with a flyer explaining that Best Buy was working with the State Park system to encourage geocaching (and requesting that each individual only take one coupon).

Needless to say, I was exciting. I enjoy geocaching but, lacking a GPS, I either have to go with a friend that does have a GPS or try to locate the caches via print-outs (not terribly successful).

So, in September, I went in to the Eagan Best Buy. Neither of the two employees who I spoke with that day even knew what geocaching was. They were thus unable to answer my questions about the various GPSs. I asked if they could show me how one particular model worked and, after pressing random buttons for five minutes, the employee said: “Well, these are new, so we haven’t been trained on them yet”. I left without buying anything.

I searched online for the models that I felt would work best and then visited the Maple Grove location. The employee who approached me also had no idea what geocaching was. I showed him print-outs of the two GPSs I liked best and told me that the store did not have them in stock. I asked him if another store in the area had one of the GPSs, and he shrugged his shoulders. So I asked him to show me a comparable model. He claimed ignorance and told me to wait for another employee. He went over to that employee (who was busy with other customers) and told him to help me next. After waiting ten minutes, I left the store empty-handed once again.

A few days later, my wife, who decided to buy a GPS for me for Christmas, visited the Mall of America location. They didn’t have the GPSs, either, and they were incapable of suggesting a similar model to my wife, saying that since the GPSs were new, they’d had little training on how to use them.

Two weeks before Christmas, I stopped at the Roseville location. The employee informed me that his store did not have either of the GPSs (which I found at Best Buy’s website) either. He knew how to look up the availability and told me that no store in the region had the GPSs in stock. (I could have ordered the GPSs on-line, but the coupon was only good for in-store purchases.) I asked him if he could suggest a comparable model, but, after playing around with a few GPSs for 15 minutes, declared that he lacked sufficient training. So I spent a half hour looking at the GPSs myself. Finally, I went up to the employee and said: “If you can show me how this GPS works, I will buy it.” He was unable how to show me how to perform even the simplest function. (To me, this is akin to asking a phone salesperson how to make a phone call on a particular phone, and having them say they don’t know how.) So then I said: “Listen, if you can find any employee in this store who knows how to use this GPS, I will buy it right now.” He walked up to a couple of employees and cursorily asked them if they knew how to use GPSs, but they both shook their heads ‘no’ and continued on with their conversations.

Figuring that the Roseville store was unusual in this regard, I returned to the Eagan store. Again, no one knew how the GPS I had selected functioned. The day before Christmas, I stopped at the Apple Valley location, but, again, no employee knew even the most basic workings of a GPS.

On January 1st, the coupon expired. My wife and I visited the Apple Valley Best Buy and used our $100 gift card on various trivial items.

I am completely astonished that I did not purchase a GPS. With my gift card and coupon, a $500 GPS would have only cost me $200 out-of-pocket. I really wanted one. And yet, no employee – at five different locations – was able to competently demonstrate this device.

I hope this letter serves to make you aware of the need to train your employees on the use of the items they sell. Particularly in tougher financial times, customers are not likely to make six trips to five different locations to purchase an item they don’t really need.

As for me, I am considering swearing off Best Buy once again, having been stridently reminded of the poor service I experienced there in the past. If you can offer any help in the area of acquiring a GPS, I’d appreciate it.

Thanks for your time.

Good-bye 2008, I hardly knew ye

2009-01-07T14:57:00.003-06:00

Well, good-bye 2008.

GOALS:
I’m happy to say I met some of my goals for the year, including: read Tom Sawyer; read Huckleberry Finn; run in a race; continue learning guitar; and finish the first draft of my book. Some goals, I didn’t make at all, such as: learn to yo-yo; brush up on my German; and edit our wedding video. Oh well.

One of the goals I listed for the year was: Create at least one new film. I’m happy to say I made TEN new films in 2008, and with two films from the year still needing to be edited, that number could bump up as high as 12. So, totally kicked ass at that goal.

I also had a goal of writing for a newsletter/magazine. I met this goal in April, when I wrote a short article for Minnesota Atheist Newsletter about an upcoming speaker. But I did even better when I wrote a review of the film WALL-E (see below), an essay on the definition of “atheism” and two on-line articles:one about Christmas and one discussing the Catholic Church’s forgiveness of John Lennon. That Christmas article was also accepted for posting at the Rake and Memoirs of a Godless Heathen. My definition of atheism essay was also published in the PIQUE (a secular humanist newsletter based in New York). I hope to do better with my writing in 2009. Things are looking promising. Century College accepted an essay I wrote to be published in their book “Breathing In” this spring.

8 GREAT DAYS IN 2008:
March 22nd – Attended “American Atheists Convention” in Minneapolis with my friend Ryan. Got to meet Dr. Krauss, bought some awesome books, a fun t-shirt & Ryan introduced me to Baja Sol (a great Mexican fast food place). Also, it was nice to hear some mentally-stimulating talks for once.

May 14th – Jennifer and I celebrated Owen’s birthday with him by taking him to Nickelodeon Universe, Underwater Adventures and the Rainforest Café. A nice break in the middle of the week.

May 18th – Heard Grant Steves speak on cults, then hurried back home for Owen’s birthday party.

August 14th – Owen and I checked out the Twin Cities’ Railroad Train Museum, had lunch at Jimmy Johns, visited the library & hung out at a park we’d never been to…just for the heck of it. Another weekday well spent. Bonus: Owen fell asleep fast and easy that night.

August 25th – Jennifer and I visited Fort Snelling along with her immediate family. Got in for free, there were no crowds and we had a fun time. Afterwards, Jennifer’s parents treated us to dinner for our anniversary.

September 21st – A free day at Valleyfair thanks to my place of employment. The day was made even better spending it with two old friends and one new friend.

December 21st – Jennifer, Owen and I froze our asses off at Murphy’s Landing. A very cultural and appropriate (considering the season) activity. Bundled up under blankets with hot tea and cocoa when we got home.

December 25th – Happy Birthday, baby Jesus! The three of us traded gifts with each other, then drove to Jennifer’s parents’ house for more holiday fun, then off to her Uncle and Aunt’s place where the whole family celebrated. I played Wii, board games, the dice game, ate, drank & made eye contact with my wife everytime someone said something “Catholic”.

ONE LOUSY DAY IN 2008:
Okay, there were many, including my recent two hour+15 minute commute home. But the booby prize has to go to…
March 7th – Yeah, I was happy to be leaving Big Lake, but not happy to wake up the sickest I was all year. I felt like passing out on the table during closing, and especially enjoyed learnin the man buying the house was a curmudgeon, then used what little strength I had to finish packing, then had to go pick up a moving truck (did I mention it was below zero?). I didn’t even have the strength to pull the ramp out of the truck I was so sick. Jennifer’s sister helped, but this meant I had to watch two toddlers. We had less help than we predicted, so it took a long time to load the truck. In the cold darkness, I nervously drove the big truck an hour away, with Jennifer driving behind, calling me to let me know when it was saft to change lanes. Her parents met us at the aparment long after their bedtime, and we unloaded the truck. Finally, at 11:00, I had to drive the truck an hour back to Big Lake. It was so cold, my frozen hands couldn’t locate where to plug in the truck, so I had to set my alarm for every two hours that night. I’d get up, don my coat and boots over my pajamas, then go sit in the truck for 15 minutes while it idled. A bad, bad day.

CINEMATIC EXPERIENCES:
I saw six films at the theater in 2008 (okay, I actually saw seven – but I’m excluding Sweeney Todd as it was from 2007): 2 animated, 2 documentaries, 2 big-budget blockbusters. I’m happy to report they were all well worth the money (particularly The Dark Knight, which my friend Ryan paid for). Allow me to detail…

U2:3D – Holy cow! This documentary didn’t let up. I was actually hoping for it to chill out for a few minutes just so my heart rate would stop. I saw this at the iMax, which undoubtedly helped. Still, sweet footage, first-rate music. A

Horton Hears a Who – For the first time in nearly two years, my son joined my wife and I at the theater. I am pleased to report that he enjoyed himself to remain seated through the entire showing. A good movie based on a great book – way better than the film version of The Grinch. B+

Indiana Jones and the Obnoxiously Long Title – Decent fourth (but woefully delayed) outing in a great series. Better than Temple of Doom, not as good as Raiders or Last Crusade. Probably the worst of the six films I’m listing here, but still, worth a look. B

WALL-E – The best Pixar film ever (and that’s saying something), WALL-E was so fraught with cinematic bliss I didn’t even have time to realize how much it made me think until it was over. Unique among the films I saw at the theater in 2008, WALL-E was promptly added to my list of 50 best motion pictures of all time (Sorry, Rebecca, you’ve dropped off the list, but I still have a place in my heart for you). A+

The Dark Knight – Another outing at the iMax, Dark Knight was the best Batman film ever (though that’s not saying much). I jumped, I gasped, I gripped the armrest, I wondered why in hell they bothered with the two-face storyline. B

Religulous – Bill Maher is so full of himself, I thought I was watching Michael Moore at times. Regardless, Maher humorously made some excellent (and, at times, uncomfortable) points, culminating in his 10 minute Armageddon-back-dropped tirade against religion. Though I suspect he’s just preaching to the choir (pun intended), any movie that exposes religion as the pernicious fairy-tale that it is is alright in my book. B+

Of course, not every movie I saw this year was at the theater. The best film we rented was United 93, which, I think, is not only the first time I viewed a drama based on a historical event that happened in my lifetime (I’m just a tad too young for All the President’s Men to fit that bill), but also blurred the line between fiction and non-fiction. I had to make room for this amazing film on my top 50 list (Sorry, Mary Poppins, guess you’re not practically perfect in every way).

The worst film I saw this year was Umberto D, which is one of those films that film snobs watch so they can maintain their snobbiness. It was long, depressing and pointless. Oh – I guess I should mention Casper: A Spirited Beginning, which was so god-awful (pun intended) that my wife and I couldn’t even finish it.

LANGUAGE:
2008’s word of the year: GEOCACHING.

Another Half Read

2008-12-23T19:09:00.000-06:00

Almost always, if I read past, say, page 10, I finish a book. After reading the reviews of the book, the back cover (yes, I do judge books by their covers), and scanning the Table of Contents, I plunge into books full well expecting to finish them. Even if the book is sub-expectations, I like to finish it (just as I endeavor to finish all movies I start) if for no other reason than to put it on my list of books I’ve read and to have the freedom to dismantle its lousy content.

It is with great regret, therefore, that I must report that I did not – and will not – finish reading “Star Wars on Trial”. I mean, it sounded promising: an entire book featuring a mock courtroom drama in which prosecution and defense deconstruct the merits, morals and meaning of some of the greatest (New Hope, Empire Strikes Back) and worst (Phantom Menace) films of all time.

Why not finish?

For starters, there were two introductions. I always read the introductions, for reasons stated above (see par. 1), but let’s be honest: no one wants to read the introduction. It’s like the instruction manual for a video game: just a necessary how-to that everyone wants to skip. So having two was, well, a terrible kick-off. As were the opening statements (essentially a phase-two of an introduction) that lasted until page EIGHTY-ONE!

I also assumed, judging from the fact that a mock courtroom is displayed on the book’s cover (and the fact that the judge is named “Droid Judge”), that the text would read like we were in a courtroom. But the book’s authors constantly referenced the book itself. For example, when one lawyer asked for a moment to respond to an allegation, the judge said, “Try to limit yourself to half a page”. This line would have been way better had it been “Try to limit yourself to one minute”, thereby maintaining the illusion of being in a courtroom.

Worse, the authors began by saying anything in the six films were fair game, but then constantly referenced books, comics and other Star Wars paraphernalia that lost me, and served as a constant reminder that we were not in the Star Wars Universe but were, instead, reading a book about some stuff George Lucas makes money off of. One author seemed to think it was worthy of note that he had authored to novel version of Revenge of the Sith – so much so that he cited his “credential” three times. He also claimed to have insider information from Lucas himself that verified his claims, but simultaneously (and frustratingly) claimed to be unable to divulge this special information. Sounds a lot like religion to me: “Star Wars is the best film ever made, and I know because God told me, but I can’t tell you how God told me…”

But the straw that broke this tauntaun’s back was this: twice in the first 70 pages, the authors took the opportunity to cite as evidence of Star Wars’ importance, the fact that the reader was reading the book! Sorry, that doesn’t hold up. Any book can say “My thesis is very important, and I cite as proof the fact that you bothered to read this sentence” But that’s wasn’t enough, evidently. Realizing that not everyone who is reading the book has purchased the book, the author’s twice stepped aside from the arguments to downgrade persons who were reading the book but had not purchased it. On page 77 they said: “YOU! Yeah, YOU! Don’t just sit there sipping that latte! BUY this book, you cheap bastard-!”

Okay, this is just unacceptable. I did not steal the book, I checked it out of the library. The authors were under no compulsion to make their work available at the library, but they did. Further, I pay all sorts of taxes – some of which goes to the library…and thus to authors for the sale of their book to the library. Further, I only buy books that I am sure I will either reread, or reference repeatedly for years to come. As such, most books I buy are books that I HAVE ALREADY READ. Yeah, that’s right, far from being a cheap bastard, I am simply a cautious consumer. I bought Animal Farm after having read it five times. And I’ve read it since. And Orwell never harassed me for not buying his book the moment it went on sale at Barnes & Noble.

Bottom line…

The idea of “Star Wars on Trial”…A
Execution of that idea…F

Coming to Terms

2008-11-20T11:37:00.000-06:00

In October, I read an article (can’t find the link) that said being a President is a dangerous job; after all, one in four Presidents die while in office. I even parroted this statistic to others a few times. Later, I did some research, and, well this isn’t exactly true. And even if it was, it skews the intent of the message somewhat.

Let me explain…

First of all, eight men have died while serving as President. As of this writing, there have been 43 Presidents (I’m including Cleveland twice, because that’s the law). If you do a little math, you’ll see that’s not 1 in 4. It’s not even 1 in 5. It’s 1 in 5.375. But wait! Maybe the writer of that article meant to say that 1 in 4 Presidents didn’t finish the job. There’s a subtle difference here, but by phrasing it this way, we can also include Nixon, who didn’t finish the job he was elected to do…but certainly lived to tell about it (he lived for 19 more years). And then there’s Bush Jr. Perhaps we shouldn’t count him at all, because he hasn’t finished the job…yet. So, if exclude W as a President, and include Nixon as someone who didn’t finish the job, this means 9 out of 42 Presidents didn’t succeed in seeing out the end of their term. This still isn’t 1 in 4, but it’s a hell of a lot closer: It’s 1 in 4.666666666666666666666666666666.

But I still have some problems with this. First of all, is it really fair to say 9 out of 42 presidents failed to finish their term when some of those people only became president because their predecessor died or resigned? I mean, Ford only became president because Nixon resigned. If Nixon hadn’t quit, there wouldn’t have been a President Ford. So maybe we should exclude from our list VPs who rose to the office of Presidency upon the death or resignation of their President. But then I think we should add back in Teddy Roosevelt, Calvin Coolidge, Harry Truman and LBJ because, even though they initially rose to president due to death, they still did get elected in their own right later. So if we exclude the 5 people who only finished out a term that was not theirs, we find that 9 out of 37 Presidents did not make it to the end of their term. This, my friends, is very close to 1 in 4.

But wait! The whole premise is flawed here.

I mean, sure, it’s fair to say JFK didn’t finish the job the country asked him to do, but can we say the same about FDR? The man was elected to the Presidency four times, and he did manage to live through three of them. For my money, a guy who lives out three terms is more successful than someone like, say, Carter, who was only elected once.

So, instead of looking at how many men survived their presidency, I propose we look at terms. That is, when the populous/electoral college/congress/Supreme Court asks a person to become president (whether for the first, second, third or fourth time), do they manage to stay in office for those four years*?

Since 1789, there have been 55 presidential terms**. During that time, 37 different men have been elected to the position. The question is: how many of those terms were completed successfully? Or, put differently, how many of those terms were completed by the same man who started them?

Let’s find out by utilizing the greatest tool known to humankind: the list.

[BIG SURPRISE: THIS SHITTY BLOG PROGRAM DOESN'T ALLOW FORMATTED LISTS. OH WELL.]

As you can deduce, the answer is that 45 of the 54 completed terms have been successfully carried out by the person selected to do the job.

Now for some trivia: There have never been back-to-back unsuccessful terms.
The closest the nation ever came to this was in the 1840s. The 14th term was not successful (William Harrison died in office). Neither was the 16th (Zachary Taylor died in office). Kudos to James Polk for staying alive during the entire 15th term.
When was the longest streak of successful terms? The answer, by a comfortable margin, is: right at the beginning. The first 13 terms were successfully completed by the first 8 men elected to them. The second-longest streak is currently happening: the last seven terms have been successful. And, unless the rapture occurs in the next 60 days, Bush Jr. will bring that total up to eight.

*Any list of President’s requires, by law, at least two footnotes. So here’s the first one: Washington’s and Roosevelt’s first terms were both shortened slightly due to altering the date of subsequent inaugurations. Therefore, these two terms were not a full four years. I’m still counting them as successful, though.

**And here’s the second one.

Letter to the CEO

2008-11-19T11:16:00.000-06:00

Here is an email I sent to the CEO of my company two days after the election:

Dear XXXXXXX:

Thank you for the email sent out on Monday, reminding us of the importance of the election and urging us all to participate in the democratic process. In view of that email, I wanted to take the opportunity to tell you how things went in my department.
I was assigned several training samples to run through a method on Election Day. Due to the nature of the testing, I could not delay running the samples, nor could I split the work between two days. So, I awoke before 4:00 in the morning and got to work immediately upon arriving. I worked straight through without any breaks or lunch time. I realized the polls were open until 8:00 in my state, but I feared the lines would be long or that some other issue would arise at the poll.
But at least I was able to vote. A co-worker began testing over 100 samples that day (about double the normal number). These samples needed to be pulled for testing two, four and twelve hours after their initial drop into shakers. As you can imagine, this made for a very long day for my co-worker. He arrived at work shortly after I did and was still on the clock after 11:00 PM. He was never given the opportunity to vote.
Other co-workers arrived late or left early (cutting into their workdays and wages) in an effort to find the best time to vote. Still others did not participate in their usual carpooling (increasing their gas expenditures) so as to be freed up to visit the polls at an opportune time.
As this is a company that encourages us all to take the opportunity to vote, I think the above examples (all from one department) are inexcusable. No one should have to choose between wages or voting and no one should be so overtaxed with their workload on Election Day that they are unable to leave long enough to go vote.
One of my favorite benefits working at XXXXX is the time off for holidays, which is generous in comparison to other local corporations. Each year, we are granted eleven days of paid time off to celebrate certain days as we see fit. I propose that, in election years, one of these eleven days be assigned to Election Day. In this year, for example, we were given paid time off for Presidents' Day - a day most employees would probably not mind working. Again, I'm not implying that I did not appreciate having that day off, but given the choice, I would have opted to have Election Day off instead.
If assigning Election Day off is impractical, I recommend offering employees a Floating Holiday so that those who feel the need can use this on Election Day.
I know you are busy and I thank you for taking the time to read this. It is a pleasure to work here at XXXXXXXXX.

(No reply received as of 19Nov08.)

A Good Question - Part Two

2008-11-12T12:49:00.000-06:00

The other religion-centered question that was posed to me was this:

What kind of negative influence did the religion have on you?

This question, asked by a relative, was not asked in the spirit of sincere inquiry, but as a challenge. The reason for the challenge was because of something stupid I said. See, I was first asked why I would decide to leave the religion and, further, make my findings available on the web. My answer was two-fold: I left the religion because it is not true and because it has had a largely negative influence on my immediate family.

I’m not sure why I allowed my answer to ramble. The first part (because it’s not true) certainly would have sufficed. For example, if someone says: “Why don’t you believe the Earth is flat?”, a full, complete answer would be: “Because it’s not true”. You shouldn’t have to supplement it with “And because believing it’s flat is bad for my health.”

Nevertheless, that’s what I said, and that’s what my family member decided to jump on. I was soon reminded, however, that it’s impossible to ever point out to a Witness that their religion has a pernicious effect upon its members. This is because all evidence provided is dismissed into one of two categories: 1) You can’t blame the actions of some elders/pioneers/Bethelites on the religion as a whole. And 2) Your claim isn’t that bad.

Let me explain this with examples.

First, when I argued that one member of my family was subjected to child abuse at the hands of her (elder) father, my relative said: “Oh come on, you can’t point out what he did to his children and say that that’s a problem with the religion. He was acting out of line with what the religion teaches.” But this is a total cop-out. Matthew 7:16 declares “By their fruits you will know them”, and Jesus claimed that the identifying mark of his true disciples would be that they have love among themselves. Additionally, Witnesses love pointing out how united they are, so even if I was to grant that some elders have acted out of line with the official doctrine, this only serves as evidence that they are not united.
It’s funny, really, because as I ran down a litany of offenses elders have committed against my family, the person with whom I was talking knocked them all down as exceptions, aberrations, to the religion at large. Again: cop out! If I could list off a dozen elders that pushed their own opinion, abused their kids, empowered pedophiles, were over-eager to disfellowship, pushed their own opinions or caused members of my family to leave the meeting crying…then who’s to say those are the only twelve elders like that in the whole world?
My brother-in-law once compared the religion to a job, and I think his description was apt. Allow me to use it here: if your supervisor molested your kids, would you continue to work for him? And if you quit, would you keep silent about it?

Second, other arguments I threw up were swatted down as “not that bad”. It’s hard to qualify this. Especially in the mindset of a Witness, there is almost nothing a person could endure as a Witness that qualifies as “that bad”. For instance, many Witnesses died in Nazi-sponsored concentration camps. To a Witness, this is well worth it, as such people are practically guaranteed a place in paradise (sorry, no virgins in this paradise – quite the opposite, some Witnesses think that resurrected folks will be prohibited from sex). So, when I complained of being an outcast in school, not celebrating my birthday, wasting time in a pointless volunteer work and subjecting myself to the whims of elders, Witnesses just chalk this up to the kind of life we must endure in this wicked world. They argue that not celebrating a birthday isn’t that big of a deal (and maybe it’s not) and, further, that by not celebrating one’s birthday, a person is helping cement their relationship with Jehovah. And while most Witnesses would sympathize with being an outcast at school or work, they would say that such things are persecution orchestrated by the devil & that God will reward us appropriately in due time.

At any rate, I ended this portion of the conversation by stating that the negative influences were not what caused me to leave. It was, plain and simple, the fact that the religion is not true.

In a future post, perhaps, I will cite specific cases of how the religion was detrimental to my life.

Ten Busy Days

2008-10-31T14:30:00.000-05:00

All day, I keep having this feeling like I'm forgetting a project or two, and that might be because I have A LOT to do in the next ten days. Allow me to delineate everything & then I'll get back here 10 days hence and see how I fared.

Today (31Oct) - Work. Trick'r'Treating with Owen at the Mall, then coming home to pass out candy to the locals.

01Nov - 11:45 appointment to get my haircut at my sister's salon. I gotta remember to bring my laptop so she can update her iPod. In the afternoon, I need to call into a conference call so I can hear all the rules and requirements of Video the Vote, which I signed up for. Also, I have to smack the pack of yeast so that I can brew beer on Sunday. Set the clock back before hitting the pillow.

02Nov - Friends coming over for dinner and to watch me brew beer. I'd also like to video-tape some of this for a how-to filmlet.

03Nov - Work. Going to a meeting for Video the Vote for one last training session.

04Nov - Work. Want to leave right at 3:00 to get home in time to stand in line & vote. Bringing my camera. Need to be on hand to film any voting problems that arise in my area between then and 7:00.

05Nov - Work. Leaving early to go to a routing physical to make sure I'm not filled with the drugs I work on at work. Going straight from there to guitar lessons.

06Nov - Work. Hosting Atheists Talk TV Show in the evening.

07Nov - Work. During lunch break, meeting via phone with a woman from the foundation that is offering writing grants (with the hope that this will help score me the grant). Running in a 6K race sponsored by my employer.

08Nov - Lunch with grandparents.

09Nov - The beer might be ready to bottle. Also, the grant proposal is due on the 10th, so I should have it all prepared today & ready to drop off tomorrow.

There! In between all that, I need to find time to finalize the latest issue of MA, work on the grant proposal, monitor the beer and practice guitar. I think some friends might want some assistance with their kitchen floor tiling, too.

I'll write again around the 10th to report back.

Now back to work...

A Good Question - Part One

2008-10-24T15:29:00.000-05:00

I keep meaning to write something here, because I think both people who read this blog enjoy my extremist views on life. Alas, I have been quite busy with a number of personal pursuits which I’m sure would bore you if I discussed them any further.

In amongst all the things that have kept me busy lately, I have had a couple of very interesting conversations. In one of them, I was talking with an ex-Witness. This ex-Witness, in particular, was in the religion far longer than I. He rose to the position of Elder and even considered himself one of the anointed (i.e., going to heaven when he dies). During the course of our verbal exchange, he asked me:

When you were a Witness, did you ever do anything for which you should have gotten into trouble?

It’s a good question, primarily because many JWs I speak with delight in ‘blaming’ my exit from their religion on the fact that God’s spirit ‘left me’. Of course, this begs the question: Why did God’s spirit leave me? Their answer is usually something like: “You must’ve done something wrong”. So I’m gonna take this opportunity right now to spell out everything I did wrong as a JW and I will leave you, the reader, to decide if any of this warranted a termination of God’s (whoever you feel God is) love.

I first want to point out that I’m listing off absolutely everything here. So, unless I list it off, you can assume I never did it. For instance, I never murdered anyone, so even though that is against JW policy, I was never guilty of that sin. Second, there are really two time frames here: 20th Century James, who believed in the Watchtower Society and the inerrancy of the bible and 21st Century James (2000-2006) who didn’t believe it was true but still did it anyway for reasons that would make this a phenomenally long story (trust me). I will divide my sins appropriately. Third, any JW will admit that all JWs sin all the time; maybe they told a white lie, or they stayed home from the meeting when they shouldn’t have, or they had a ‘bad’ thought about someone else. I’m not gonna list those tiny sins because, well, for one, I don’t remember them all and, two, no JW ever got into trouble for those silly little things, they were just told to pray for forgiveness.

1. I drank to excess.
Between 1995 and 1999, I was over the legal limit (probably) 20 times. I want to point out that I never drank with the intention of getting drunk, it just sort of happened when I was enjoying a particularly strong Long Island Iced Tea. I never fell asleep on the floor or vomited or woke up the next morning unable to go to work, so I was never THAT drunk, but I was tipsy to the point where I shouldn’t have driven. And, don’t worry, I never did drive.
Between 2000 and 2006, I was over the legal limit (probably) 10 times. On one occasion, my wife had to pull the car over so I could puke.

2. I watched rated-R movies.
In the 20th century, I watched One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest, The Godfather Trilogy, Schindler’s List, Saving Private Ryan, Shakespeare in Love and Braveheart. Real trashy stuff. Funny thing, though, most JWs have also seen these movies – they either do so in private (going to great lengths to hide their contraband) or they just watch them on TV where they can still get the benefit of all the violence, but are saved the God-hating images of bare breasts.
In the 21st century, I (like many other JWs) decided the Society’s rating policy was asinine and took to watching whatever the hell I felt like watching (though I still abstained from spiritistic movies and porn).

3. I went too far with my girlfriend.
No, we never hit a homerun in those days, but we did more than what you see in the Young People Ask Book. Now I go too far with her all the time.

4. I didn’t turn people in.
Yeah, that’s right, I wasn’t a tattle-tale. I really couldn’t care less if other JWs got drunk or slept with other people. As long as no one got hurt, I didn’t feel it was my job to run to the elders telling on people. For example, when my sister-in-law and her boyfriend slept in the same bed together one night, my wife got all upset and said we should tell the elders. I didn’t feel like making a big fuss over it. This means I now have a lot of dirt on a lot of people.

5. I held contrary opinions.
From 1975 onwards, I disagreed with their love of neckties. From 1985 onwards, I disagreed with their stance on beards. From 1985 onwards, I disagreed with their belief on dinosaurs and proto-birds. From 1997 onwards, I did not believe Noah’s Flood was global. From 1998 onwards, I knew the Watchtower was wrong about certain dates. From 2000 onwards, I disagreed with their teaching on biblical genealogies and the age of humans.
I also disagreed with individual elders on occasion. For example, when the elders’ decision on a matter caused my favorite Aunt to leave the Kingdom Hall in tears, I felt they were wrong. When the elders told me I was not qualified to perform a wedding ceremony, I knew they were wrong (as this contradicted a Watchtower article I had in my pocket). When some elders discouraged a couple of young men in the congregation from informing the authorities about molestation they experienced at the hands of another JW, I felt they were incorrect. When Mike Lewis suggested to my fiancé and me that we should not have ‘worldly’ music played during our wedding and that we should not have a limo to drive us from our wedding to our reception, I thought he was wrong. In fact, since my grandfather (also an elder), paid for and surprised us with a limo at our wedding, I knew Mike was wrong.

Who wants to cast the first stone?

Seeing the Twin Cities...without prying open My Wallet

2008-09-22T16:14:00.000-05:00

In the last 6 weeks, I have visited the Twin Cities’ Model Train Museum, the Bakken Museum, a Vikings pre-season game, Fort Snelling State Historical Site, The Minnesota State Fair, The Renaissance Festival and Valley Fair. Owen was with me for four of these adventures, and Jennifer was with me during three of them. You might wonder: How does someone pay for all that stuff? Especially since there’s evidently no money left in the country anymore?

Here’s how:
First off, your friendly neighborhood library offers free passes to local attractions. So, I first picked up a ticket for the Model Train Museum. Admission to this museum is only four bucks, and Owen was free anyways, but, hey, I saved some cash.

Owen and I did the same thing for the Bakken Museum: Owen was free anyways, and I saved myself 7 big ones.

Jennifer and I got into the Vikings football game for free thanks to our soon-to-be-ex-brother-in-law who thoughfully gave us tickets he was unable to use.

For Fort Snelling, I again tried the library. They only have a limited number of free passes each week, so there’s no guarantee there will be one when you want one. So I was rather pleased when I went in to the library one Monday morning and found a free pass waiting on the shelf. I took it to the front counter and attempted to check it out…but the clerk informed me I could only have one pass at a time and the Bakken Museum’s pass was still checked out to me.

“But I already went to that museum,” I whined.

“Doesn’t matter,” she said, “You can’t check out another free pass until Wednesday.”

So, I did what any good cheapskate would do, instead of putting the pass back on the shelf, I hid it inside an obscure book on a lower shelf in the back of the library. I returned on Wednesday, walked up to my book, opened to the correct page, and pulled out the pass. The clerk then allowed me to check it out. On August 25th, then, Jennifer, Owen and I got into Fort Snelling for free…a savings of $20.

For the State Fair, I ordered tickets through my place of employment, which offers discounts on major events. Jennifer and I were granted admission for $16 instead of $22.

For the Renaissance Festival, I nabbed tickets for $8 a piece from a co-worker who also works at the Festival. As the normal cost of admission is $19.95, Jennifer and I were able to enter for $16 instead of $39.90.

Finally, my company buys out Valley Fair once every other year for the employees and three of their friends. Since admission is $37.99, and I got in for free, this was the best deal of the bunch.

So here’s what I spent on those six attractions for my own admission and Jennifer’s (when she accompanied me): $32.

And here’s what those same attractions would have cost without discounts: $170.89.

The List of Lists

2008-09-09T10:52:00.000-05:00

One day, while completely befuddled by the high number of lists I maintain, a friend of mine asked if I have a list of my lists. I laughed and said that I do not. So, here, for fun, I’m going to correct that. But first, here’s a list of things I’m not including on the list: 1) Phone lists (even though I am the head of the department phone list at my job 2) Work-related items involving projects and/or trade secrets (they’re boring lists anyways) and 3) Temporary lists (such as: Things to buy at the grocery store).
I’ve added a brief explanation for lists with non-obvious titles. Anytime I use the word “we” it should be understood to mean “Jennifer and I”.

1. List of meals the company has paid for
2. List of free things I’ve gotten from the company
3. Wage history
4. Books I have read (this is probably the oldest list here)
5. Number of books I’ve read per year
6. Subjects of the books I’ve read
7. An alphabetical list of the books I’ve read
8. Mistakes I’ve found in books I’ve read (this list is 27 pages long)
9. List of Edgar Allen Poe works
10. List of Sherlock Holmes stories
11. List of books authored by Theodore Geisel
12. Short stories I own
13. The ultimate calendar (a listing of every event in my life for which the exact date is known)
14. Timeline of my life (a list showing when and for how long I lived in certain places, held certain jobs, attended certain schools and how they overlapped)
15. Residences I have lived in
16. Cities I have live in
17. People I have lived with (there are 12 people on this list…)
18. Vacations I have been on
19. US states I have been to
20. Countries I have been to
21. Times I have been on an airplane
22. What we did for our anniversaries
23. Days since we married that we haven’t seen each other
24. Jobs I’ve had
25. Schools I’ve attended
26. Concerts I’ve attended
27. Professional baseball games I’ve attended
28. Plays I’ve attended
29. What we did on our cruise each day
30. Cars we have owned
31. Lego pieces I own
32. Board/card games we own
33. My 50 All-time favorite motion pictures
34. My 20 favorite TV shows
35. My 10 favorite albums
36. My 50 favorite songs
37. My 10 favorite non-fiction books
38. My 10 favorite fiction books
39. Motion pictures I have seen (there are 1,189 movies listed)
40. Number of motion pictures seen from each year
41. Motion pictures I have seen at the theater
42. Read the book…and seen the movie (I pick which I prefer)
43. Billboard #1 albums (1956-present)
44. Billboard #1 songs (1940-present)
45. Things that annoy me
46. Our ten year anniversary trivia quiz
47. Bart Simpson’s chalkboard writings
48. Best songs by people I know
49. Customer service (list of grievances filed with companies and what sort of recompense we received)
50. Deep Thoughts (from the SNL spot)
51. Rolling Stone magazine’s 500 greatest rock songs of all time
52. Non-work money (list of money I have made outside of work, such as at garage sales)
53. Favorite quotes from 1984
54. Favorite quotes
55. Quotes from famous losers
56. Addams Family episodes
57. Battlestar Galactica episodes
58. Little House on the Prairie episodes
59. Northern Exposure episodes
60. Quantum Leap episodes
61. View Master reels I own
62. Mistakes we found watching “Voyager”
63. Wal-mart facts (notes I took while reading “How Wal-mart is Destroying America”)
64. Website traffic (I track the number of new visitors to my website each week)
65. Words to learn
66. Bible verses mentioning dogs
67. Partakers at JW memorial, 1980 – present
68. US religious census statistics
69. Money spent by the Watchtower Society each year on Circuit Overseers, 1980-present
70. JWs publisher increases/decreases, 1930-present
71. JWs versus world population, 1950-present
72. Survey results (I sent out a survey asking ex-JWs if they thought they were going to die at Armageddon)
73. Chemicals in the atmosphere
74. Nations of the world
75. National parks
76. Places I want to visit in Minnesota
77. Vacations I want to go on
78. Word of the year (I pick a new word every year that I had never known about before)
79. Self-created filmlets
80. Other videography projects (weddings, baptisms, etc, that we have filmed)
81. Filmlet commentary
82. Every email address
83. Goals for 2008
84. Passwords
85. Palindromes
86. Autonyms
88. Homophones
89. My book – chapters, pages and words
90. Wonderfalls episodes
91. Arrested Development episodes
92. Freaks and Geeks episode
93. Awful Truth episodes
94. Star Trek: TNG episodes
95. Star Trek: TOS episodes
96. Star Trek: Voyager episodes
97. Firefly episodes
98. Best Picture Oscar winners
99. Best selling motion picture from each year
100. This list

There.
I actually have less lists now than when I was a kid, thanks in part to the internet. For example, I used to have a list of where the Olympics were held each olympiad, but that seems pointless now as I could just look it up. You may have noticed that some lists aren’t very personal (such as “Sherlock Holmes stories”), but the reason why I have such lists is to check them off as I watch/read the items on the list.

Light Reading

2008-09-03T07:42:00.000-05:00

Owen and I read books together nearly every night before bed. After a long period in which he would only allow me to read a handful of non-fiction books (with the exception of Where’s Spot?), he’s finally allowing me to branch out into his entire reading library.

Here are some things I’ve noticed, and some other things I’m wondering…

One book Owen owns is a thick book of nursery rhymes. I don’t often bring this one out for fear he’ll insist I read every rhyme in the book (and the book does put forth an ambitious effort to include every nursery rhyme ever conceived), but reading these bizarre, often scary poems as an adult now has me asking:
What’s with the three men in a tub? I mean, let’s set aside the strange amalgam of blue-collar professionals sharing such tight quarters, what I find weird is that, in any illustrative depiction of the poem, the men are invariably in a barrel floating in a body of water. What gives? Should the poem be three men in a boat? Did “tub” used to mean “a thing you float in”?
And while we’re on the subject of nursery rhymes, why is Humpty always portrayed as an egg? Nothing in the poem seems to indicate this. What’s more, Humpty is shown to be a MALE egg. Again, nothing in the poem itself tells us what gender Humpty is, and I think you’d be pretty hard pressed to find something in the refrigerator that screams FEMALE! more than an egg.

Speaking of gender, one of our favorite books to read together is Wacky Wednesday. For the life of me, I can’t figure out the gender of the main character, despite the fact that he/she is shown on every single page – including one page in which he/she is naked but for a pair of socks. We never learn the protagonist’s name, and no one talks to him/her in any way that requires a telling pronoun. The boy/girl dons a pink shirt with jeans and sports hair going down just over his/her ears. Very cryptic.

Another Dr. Seuss book we read is Green Eggs and Ham. Here’s the funniest thing about that book: the pages are numbered. Yes, that’s right, despite the fact that there’s no table of contents or index, and despite the fact that the book can be read cover to cover in under five minutes, someone, somewhere along the way, felt it necessary to include page numbers. I guess, that way, when Owen comes to me with a confused look on his face asking: “Hey, where in this book does Sam-I-Am ask if his friend would be willing to eat green eggs and ham in a box or with a fox?” I can say, with precision, “Oh, that’s on page 22.”

You may not have heard of If You Give a Mouse a Cookie, but in that book, a boy concedes to giving a mouse the above-mentioned dessert, only to have it escalate. The fun part is turning each page to see how it’s escalating. For instance, after eating the cookie, the mouse says he’s thirsty, so…(turn the page)…now he wants a glass of milk. Anyway, at one point, the mouse has drawn a picture and decides he wants to hang it on the fridge, so he needs…(drum roll)…Scotch Tape. You read that correctly: Scotch Tape. The first time I turn to this page, I felt cheated. Who hangs stuff on their fridge with Scotch Tape? Isn’t that why magnets were invented? It didn’t say he wanted a glass of Dean Milk, or a Nestle Toll House cookie. I searched the small print inside the front cover expecting to find something like “This book made possible by a grant from 3M”. No such luck. I hate when an otherwise good book does something stupid like pointless product placement.

In the book Where the Wild Things Are, we are told that Max is anointed “King of All Wild Things”. But I think a better title would be “King of All Run-on Sentences”. Here’s a doozy:

That very night in Max's room a forest grew and grew and grew until his ceiling hung with vines and the walls became the world around and an ocean tumbled by with a private boat for Max and he sailed off through night and day and in and out of weeks and almost over a year to where the wild things are.

…Yep, that’s right: 62 words spread out over 5 pages, and that’s not even the longest sentence in the book. I am certain this book has more pages than sentences. I keep looking at the cover, expecting it to say “written by Thomas Jefferson”.

In the matter of funky sentence structure, I was going to mention Corduroy, with it’s predilection for passive statements (e.g. try to sound natural when reading things like “Over it fell with a crash.”), but, instead, allow me to point out one of the book’s reviews, which is reprinted on the inside front cover. The first sentence begins:

A winning, completely childlike picture book in which a stuffed bear waiting hopefully in a toy department finds a home with a little black girl...

…Yes, you read that correctly: Corduroy goes home to live with a black girl. Unlike, say, the Sneetches, ethnicity has absolutely nothing to do with the story, so I’m not sure why the reviewer was compelled to tell us Corduroy’s ultimate friend is black, nor why the publisher deemed this the best review to print in this edition.

My white son and I look forward to reading more books tonight.

Tea Time

2008-08-19T09:35:00.000-05:00

I happened upon a how-to website the other day (and I'd put the link here, but this blog-publishing site isn't very user friendly, even to a computer genius like me), and while looking up info on beer brewing, I noticed a link titled "How to Make Sun Tea".

"Hmm...sun tea," thought I, "That brings back happy memories of when my Grandma used to set a pitcher of water out on her back porch and I'd periodically check on it to see when it was ready." So, since I like my Grandma, tea, and using the word "periodically", I figured I couldn't go wrong in trying my hand at brewing some sun tea of my own.

Thanks to reading the book The Tea Companion, by Jane Pettigrew and our recent forays to The Tea Source and Teavanna, I've become somewhat of a tea snob. I know, I know, I was already a snob in the first place, but I think "snob" is a term requiring subcatergories: am I a car snob? No. Am I a beer snob? Computer snob? Film snob? Telescope snob? Yes, yes, yes and yes. In fact, my wife even points out (correctly) that I am a Map Snob (I'm thinking of starting a Yahoo Group for other map snobs).

My first task was to find a large container appropriate to the task. I wanted it to be made of glass (see? -snob), and to have a spigot on the bottom. We serendipitously found a very stylish number at a store in Highland Park (more snobbiness). The store was going out of business, so everything was 40% off the original price. So we purchased this very classy looking container; it's a far snazzier thing than the barrel-shaped/plastic-handle number I recall from my youth.

Anyway, with Owen's 'help', I filled it with water, added some tea bags and set it out on the deck table. We checked on it (periodically, of course). Here's what it looked like four hours later...

At any rate, the tea turned out find. Some alarmists warn that you shouldn't make sun tea because strands of rope-looking bacteria grow in the heat of the sun, and this can make you very sick. But I did more research and found out you can avoid this by A) periodically ensuring the container is clean, B) using filtered/bottled water only, C) not leaving the tea out in the sun for more than six hours and D) discarding any tea that does have "ropes" hanging from the surface of the water.

The container is rather large and unweildy, so don't ask me to bring some to your house (should I be invited). Instead, feel free to periodically come on over and try some straight from our snobby kitchen!

Cheers!

Recent Pop Culture Experiences

2008-08-13T12:07:00.000-05:00

-There are no shortage of fans when it comes to actors, authors, singers, painters, directors, dancers and athletes. But have you ever heard of anyone becoming a fan of…a narrator? Well, now you have, because I am hereby declaring myself as a fan of Jim Dale.
Let me bring you up to speed on Mr. Dale. As I’ve mentioned here before, I recently listened to the entire Harry Potter series on audio cassette while driving to and from work. About mid-way through the first book, I thought to myself: “Yeah, the story is decent, but you know what’s really awesome? The guy doing the reading”. I mean, he was spectacular. He had a different voice for every character of varying ages and nationalities – even managing to sound like pre-teen girls without resorting to a falsetto. Hargrid (the giant) sounded large and gruff and Snape sounded cold and foreboding. I don’t know how he managed to keep it all straight, but I would often know who was speaking just by the voice. For example, when he read: “’I don’t like this,’ said Ron”, I knew it was Ron even before he got to the ‘said Ron’ part.
I looked on the back of the box and discovered that Dale subsequently won an Emmy award for his reading (well deserved, sir!). He also narrates the TV show Pushing Daisies, which I had noted to my wife more than once that “this show has a great narrator”.
Anyway, after finishing up the Harry Potter books, I went to the library and looked for another audio book narrated by Dale. I found one: Around the World in 80 Days. At the end of that book, Dale says: “We hope you enjoyed this unabridged recording of ‘Around the World in 80 Days’, by Jules Verne”, and for a split second, I thought “Hey, wait, this book was by Jim Dale, not Jules Verne”. But then I thought: “Silly James, Dale was merely the narrator, not the author”.

-While browsing the virtual shelves at Amazon.com the other day, I fortuitously stumbled upon Paddle to the Sea, a short film from the 1960s that I had last seen in Kindergarten. In fact, I totally forgot the film even existed until I saw the ad for it. I immediately went over to Netflix to add it to my queue, but to my consternation, they did not have it (marking the first time Netflix ever failed to have a DVD I was searching for). Alas, the local library did have it. We watched it that very night as a family, and Owen was completely enthralled by it, asking to watch it again on each subsequent night that week. He calls it “Paddle the Boat”, an endearing moniker that’s no less of a misnomer than the title (as there is not a single stroke of paddling in the entire film).
At any rate, after rewatching this film for the first time in nearly three decades, I have added it to its rightful place in my pantheon of Best Short Films Ever. Go rent it, you’ll like it, and so will that special toddler in your life.

-The wife and I recently viewed the documentary The Fog of War. It won the Oscar for Best Documentary back on 2003, and it’s directed by Errol Morris, which equated to a sure bet (in my opinion). The film is, essentially, an interview with Robert McNamara, who, in case you don’t remember, was Secretary of Defense under both Kennedy and Johnson. McNamara, who doesn’t succeed in proving his case despite being given an hour an a half to do so, comes across as a man who has lived long enough to see how historians have painted him (he’s 92 years old).

He does a good job of splitting the blame between his underlings and subordinates. Like a manager, when it’s convenient, he blames the President and, when it’s convenient, he blames his employees. McNamara seemed to have no trouble recalling the absurd atrocities Johnson (in his all-too-relevant Cowboy politics) committed during his tenure as Commander-in-Chief, yet can’t seem to remember details about his own life, like if he authorized Agent Orange or not.

McNamara implied that Kennedy’s assassination was a tragedy for another reason: had Kennedy lived, the American involvement in Vietnam would have ended far sooner than it did under the two buffoons who succeeded him. It’s an interesting thought, but ultimately pointless – maybe Kennedy would have ended Vietnam…maybe Buddy Holly would have become more famous than Elvis…maybe Jesus would’ve become CEO of a bread company. Who knows?

The documentary is filled with reflective comments from McNamara, wondering why it took so long to learn the lessons we learned in Vietnam, wondering if the acts of aggression we committed are crimes against humanity, wondering if the evil we performed in Vietnam was justified by the good that came of it. I kept wondering: what’s with this WE crap, Bob? When millions of Americans were protesting on the streets – including a man who lit himself on fire right outside your office, how dare you ask why it took us so long to learn. It didn’t take us a long time to learn Vietnam was immoral…it only took you a long time.

Near the end of the film, Morris asks McNamara if he feels guilty, and McNamara (who, earlier, said he always held a policy of answering, not the question that was asked to you, but the question you wish was asked of you) simply says he’s dammed no matter how he responds. So he says nothing. Nice try, Bob, but your attempt to win sympathizers is too little, too late.

Harry Potter: B
Jim Dale’s narration: A
Paddle to the Sea: A
The Fog of War: B
Robert McNamara's career: F

Save $5,000 a Month!

2008-07-31T10:29:00.001-05:00

Apparently, when there’s nothing note-worthy to report on (like the latest Hollywood fashion or a 2.0 earthquake), the news gravitates towards money-saving tips. These “tips”, more prevalent in today’s Bush-whacked economy, get my vote for most pointless news items in existence. I mean, at least a report on Hollywood fashion gives us some eye candy, and a report on an earthquake that shook a leaf off a tree might be a harbinger to something we’ll really need to know.

These money-saving tips must work for only two people: People who, up until this moment, have never bothered to attempt to save money, but are now looking to do so and people who are too stupid to think of any way to save money by themselves. I’m talking really stupid, as in: “It sure would be nice if we had more spending money,” said Jack as he rolled up the fifty dollar bill, stuck it between his lips and lit it on fire.

Take this article, for example: http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/105450/Cut-Your-Spending-by-%24500-Per-Month

Here’s one tip they give: Lower your car insurance payments. Okay, who doesn’t know to do that? That’s like saying, “if you want more food in your refrigerator, take less food out of it”. And, anyway, there are good reasons to not go with the cheapest car insurance company. Other so-obvious-they’re-painful tips include: pay off your credit card, don’t go over on your cell phone’s minutes, stop paying bank fees and put more in your 401K (oh yeah, that’s sure to help with the day-to-day making ends meet problem).

Another gem is here: http://green.yahoo.com/blog/greenpicks/191/saving-gas-isn-t-just-for-tree-huggers-anymore.html

To save gas, this article recommends not driving your car to work. It also mentions not idling your car and not going through the drive-through.

I’d like to, just once, see a “money-saving tips” article in which the tips are not 1) simply restating the title of the article; 2) so obvious that everyone already does them anyways (or at least knows they should) or 3) things that you can’t just do even if you want to (such as moving to a cheaper city).

Following the astute insight such writers have in saving us consumers money, therefore, I humbly submit my list of money-saving tips:

1. Don’t spend your money.
If there’s something you want to buy, like food or clothing, don’t. It’s as simple as that. Multi-millionaires don’t want you to know this secret, but now you do.

2. Try to find an item of equal quality but of lower cost.
Why spend $5,000 on a used car when you can spend $500 on a used car? Why spend $10 on lunch when you can spend $1?

3. Accumulate more money.
Stop volunteering! Demand your employer give you monetary reimbursement for the services you provide for the company. Also, if you have something of value, trade it for cash. Or at least for a receipt you can then use when you itemize your deductions.

4. Stop consuming gas and electricity.
Why drive 20 miles to work when you can walk? Why turn on the lights at night when you can sit in the dark? Unplug your refrigerator and your alarm clock. Use your computer as a paper weight.

5. Only do free things.
Don’t invite people to your house, where they’ll consume your electricity, water, toilet paper and put wear and tear on your furniture and silverware. If a friend invites you to go somewhere, decline. If you get invited to someone’s home, don’t offer to bring anything. Ask them to pick you up.

My Bid for the Presidency...

2008-07-10T10:45:00.001-05:00

http://www.news3online.com/index.php?code=3Guw215uxd7ibj046z56

One more feather in my Sight-seeing cap

2008-06-28T09:29:00.000-05:00

So, after more than 33 years, I finally saw one of those famous (at least by local standards) Paul Bunyan/Babe the Blue Ox statues. Specifically, my wife, son and I stopped by the one in Bemidji near the shores of the lake with the same name. We didn’t trek up north with the purpose of seeing Paul. In fact, I didn’t even think we’d be going into Bemidji. But we went camping about a half hour away and, since the weather was its usual self (crappy), we spent the day exploring this outpost of civilization.

And if that’s not enough local culture, get this: the very next day, as we drove home, we stopped for lunch in the town of Hackensack:

Turns out, this is the city where Paul’s girlfriend beckons from. So, we also got a chance to see the slightly less-tall and slightly less-popular Lucette statue.
(Okay, so Lucette isn't exactly what I'd term a "pretty face", but I think if I was a twenty foot tall guy, she'd have a certain appeal that most other ladies would lack. Go Paul!)

All this local culture got me thinking: why is it that locals never explore their own area? Oh, I’m sure some do, but isn’t it funny how people will make huge travel plans to go across the globe and see the Eiffel Tower, yet never bother walk across town to the local museum? It’s like the shoemaker’s kids who went barefoot. I remember being in New York City once, and I asked my friend (who had lived there for over a year) if he’d ever gone to visit the UN. He said he hadn’t, and I was stunned.

But maybe I shouldn’t have been. After all, what have I seen of my own state?

Here, then, is a list of notable landmarks and tourist attractions (I hate that term, but, oh well) that I’ve visited here in the Great State of Sky Blue Waters:
*Duluth Lift Bridge
*The Metrodome (Twins games and a U2 concert!)
*The Bemidji Paul Bunyan
*The State Fair
*The Minnesota Zoo
*The Mall of America (God, I even worked there)
*Minnehaha Falls
*Split Rock Lighthouse
*Lake Superior
*The Mayo Clinic
*Gooseberry Falls
(And, I’m not sure if these are as significant, but here are some other sights I’ve seen in our state: The Duluth Zoo, The Skyway System, The U of M, Summit/Grand neighborhood, Lake Mille Lacs, The St. Croix River, The Minnesota River, The Oliver Kelley Farm, Murphy’s Landing, The Glensheen Mansion, Valley Fair, The Lock and Dam system on the Mississippi, the Science Museum, Landmark Center, Rice Park and that shitty Great Lakes Museum in Duluth.)

But here’s what I’ve missed:
*Voyageur’s National Park
*Angle Islet
*The Minneapolis Sculpture Gardens (Yes, I’ve seen that spoon/cherry thing from the road, but I’ve never been there)
*The IDS Tower (again, I’ve seen it, but I’ve never gone inside)
*The Mississippi River headwaters
*Fort Snelling (God, I can’t believe it – it’s right stinkin’ there, and I’ve never visited)
*The Foshay Tower
*The Spam Museum (Okay, I’m not sure this qualifies as ‘notable’, but I am curious)
*The State Capitol
*The James J. Hill House
*The Como Conservatory (Even my son has one up on me here – and he’s only 1/10th my age)
*The Brainerd Paul Bunyan

Have I missed anything of significance? I gotta start seeing more sites…

(Am I the only one who thinks this is a bit macabre for a family-friendly park? Kind of reminds me of Abraham and Isaac.)

Happy Birthday To Me

2008-06-11T22:26:00.000-05:00

Today marks #33. I've outlived Anne Frank, Lady Jane Grey, Billy the Kid, Patsy Cline, Buddy Holly, Kurt Cobain, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Jim Morrison, Bruce Lee and Alexander the Great. Jesus, in two months, I'll have even outlived John Belushi. Speaking of Jesus, I'm set to overtake his age by year's end, too.

So, I will combine my love of birthdays with my love of list-making. Here's a list of every birthday I can remember, and how I celebrated it...

5 years old - Last day of preschool. It was career day. I dressed up as a doctor.

11 years old - My Golden Birthday! This was the last day of 5th grade, in which I won an award for perfect attendance (probably the least-proud of any award I've ever gotten). It was raining all day, and after trudging home from the bus stop, I asked my mom if I could go play with one of the neighborhood kids, just to have something fun to do. She said no. Bookstudy that night.

18 years old - My high school graduation ceremony was held on this day, so I definitely did not go there. Instead, I attended my friend Jeremy's graduation ceremony along with our mutual friend Andy. Afterwards, we went back over to his parents' place for a barbecue. That evening, I did what every 18yr old male in this sexist country must do, I registered.

21 years old - Had dinner with my fiance' and with my friend Nick at the Applebee's at Snelling and University (which is no longer there). Ordered my first drink...in America. Since, only six months prior, I had been in Germany and ordered enough alcohol to last a decade, this wasn't such a big deal.

24 years old - Took a plane ride to Dallas compliments of the American Board of Optometry.

30 years old - Dropped my 4-week old son off with his Grammie. Then, Jennifer, Stan, Kara, Nick (not the same Nick as above) and I went to the theater to see "Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith".

32 - Blew out canldes on a cake & made a wish for the first time.

For the past several years, I keep having this idea that I'm going to blow out enough candles to make up for a lifetime of not blowing out candles. This gets increasingly ridiculous with each passing year. I'll have to plan that one out real well. Maybe next year.

Media Whore

2008-06-06T11:45:00.000-05:00

Sometimes, I find myself in a place or predicament, and I wonder what choices I have made in life that led up this point. It's kind of a fun little game I play in my mind to keep me interested in life. Like the time I found myself walking out of a job I'd have for 7 years. Or the time I was sitting in my office tape recording a phone conversation. Or the time I was leading a state trooper on a high speed chase. Okay, so that last one hasn't happened. Yet.

The most recent time I had such a thought, was last night. For the first time since the morning of December 17, 2006, I was wearing a necktie. I was sitting on a chair, in front of 3 cameras, interviewing a doctor of theology. How do I get into these sort of things? Beats me.

The show was "Atheist Talk", and it airs once a month on various obscure cable channels. The podcast will be made available here: . We filmed two episodes, one in which I interviewed Dr. Steves as he discussed a "Thought Driven Life" and another as he addressed the topic of studying the bible as literature in the public school system. And where was the shows normal host? Well, that would be Dr. Steves, and since he couldn't very well interview himself, I was recruited for the job. I think I came across very wooden, rigid and nonconversational - a lot like I am in real life. All in all, though, a pretty good time and a fun experience (even if I did have to don a phallic symbol around my neck).

Oh, here's proof:
I'm the guy on the right, feigning interest.

The sweat on my brow is not, as you might assume, from the lights. No, it's from the heat of hell's flames, which reach pretty high on this set.

This is smarmyness.

Why hasn't anyone told me what a bufoon I look like with my legs crossed like that?

Random Stuff

2008-06-03T22:18:00.001-05:00

1. So, I was with a friend the other day, and we got into his car to drive to a local burger place. On the way, I said: "Oh, you need to make a right up at the next light, so get in the other lane". He complied, but then - oh no! - that lane ended. "Oops," I said, "I guess you have to get back over. He sped up slightly and swerved back into the left lane...only to be pulled over by a policeman.

The cop asked if my friend knew why he had been pulled over. My friend admitted to changing lanes rather abruptly, but then I piped up and explained it was my fault for giving him such poor directions. The cop said told my friend that he had been speeding (by going about 38mph in a 35!) and that he must have been inattentive because he didn't stop as soon as the cop flashed on his lights.

This last bit was really rather stupid. Who does pull over as soon as cops turn on their lights? Certainly not me, because I don't drive down the highway staring into my rearview mirror. In fact, I couldn't care less what's behind me.

At any rate, the cop took his license & proof of insurance and walked back to his car. When he returned, he said: "Well, what would you do if you were me?" This has got to be one of the toughest questions a person can answer. Do you say: "Well, I'd let me go because I really didn't do anything wrong and you just seem out for blood", or do you say, "why don't you arrest me now before I escalate into a life of serial killings and downloading music.

What would you say if that was you?

2. So I took advantage of my company's on-site oil change service a few weeks back. The way it works is, you stick your key and a check in these little mailboxes, and when you leave at the end of the day, you retrieve your key which is now accompanied by a receipt.

As I walked to my car, I unfurled my receipt and noticed this statement: "Clipboard on floor found between radiator and frame". Yes, it means exactly what it said. When I got in my car, there was indeed a clipboard sitting on my floor. It was mangled and warped from temperature extremes & it had a coating of engine dust on it. It was from an automotive shop I used to frequent when I lived up north. Turns out, back in November, when I went in there to have my brakes worked on, someone must have shoved the clipboard in between the engine and the frame, and then forgot about it. So it languished there for six months.

3. My wife, son and I were eating dinner at a sandwich shop when a very haggard looking individual came up and handed me a very haggard looking sheet of paper. The paper said he was in a band and that he was trying to save up money to take a bus ride to New Orleans where his big band would be competing with other jazz bands in a tournament. Oh, and did I mention the guy was deaf? Anyway, I showed my wife the note and asked if she thought we should give him anything. My first reaction is that such people are scam artists, but I also saw my son was enamored with the man's signing, and I didn't want my son to think (know) that I am a cheap bastard. My wife said: "If you want", so I pulled out my wallet and found a one dollar bill, a five dollar bill and about six twenty dollar bills. The deaf guy saw the contents of my wallet, and knew he probably thought I had way too much money for my own good. So I gave the guy my five dollar bill. The whole evening I felt like he took advantage of me.

Later that night, we walked around a lake, and I gave a street musician my one dollar bill just for soothing us with his accordian.

Anyways, I know some people believe in that Oprah-sanctioned pay-it-forward stuff, so if you think such altruism is inevitably reciprocated by the world, I've got a good one for you: the next day, I arrived at work and one of my co-workers approached me. She handed me a five dollar gift card to Caribou Coffee. See, I had attended a work-related seminar the day before, where they held drawings for door prizes at the end of the day. I, however, did not stay for the drawings, but seem to have still won something.

See? In the end, the love you take is equal to the love you make!

Sorry for any incoherence / spelling snafus here. I just downed a 16-oz bottle of beer and am quite buzzed.

"Goblet" is Just a Fancy Word for "Mug"

2008-05-15T21:08:00.000-05:00

So, my quest to complete the enjoyable but non-spectacular Harry Potter series took a turn for the worse with book Four, also known as the Goblet of Fire.

What I enjoyed about the first three books was the all-encompassing universe, and how all the little threads of story lines come together in the end. I have been led to believe, by fans and casual readers alike, that the first three books are simply fun children's tales...it's the final four books - all more than double the length of any of the first three - that are darker and more engaging. Maybe Goblet suffers from middle-child syndrome.

In Goblet of Fire (and don't worry, I won't wreck anything for those of you who haven't read it yet), we are first forced to sit through a book-within-a-book about the Quidditch World Cup. Of course, this world cup is never even mentioned in the earlier books, and the reader knows nothing about any of the teams...so, though the several chapters about the world cup do drop hints of the later, more important plot, the sporting event itself, and the many details provided are completely uninteresting.

Finally, Harry and his young friends start the school year, eagerly wondering about a special surpise they've heard about. And here's the surprise: students from two other schools will be competing in various wizarding contests along with Hogwart's (that's Harry school) for a tri-wizard cup. These competitions are so dangerous and life-threatening, that the schools agreed the cancel the competitions 100 years earlier. Sounds exciting, but then we find out that only one student from each school can compete (meaning that dozens of students from the visiting schools just sit around all year and waste a year of their education – I’m not joking here)! So, naturally, we assume the competitor from Hogwarts will be Harry, right? Wrong! Only students 17 years of age and older (Harry’s only 14) can participate. This leaves out not only Harry, but also, Ron, Hermoine, Ginny, Fred, George, Neville and pretty much every other character we’ve come to love out of the running. But wait – there’s more! The yearly quidditch games, which we actually do care about (since we’ve come to know the teams and players) is entirely cancelled. You know, because one student will be soooo busy with three challenges (yep, just three) that no one else will have time to play their favorite sport AT ALL. Additional, the inter-house championship is also evidently cancelled; or, at least, it receives nary a word in “Goblet”

As you might have guessed (and I guessed it on about page 6), Harry nevertheless manages to become the competitor from his school (and, to make things confusing, the competitors are called “champions”). How does he do it? Well, we don’t know. And neither does Harry. It seems someone else has put his name into the aforementioned goblet. But wait – isn’t Harry too young? Yes, but once the goblet chooses a player, you can’t say no. Hey, isn’t Harry worried he’s gonna die, seeing how he’s so young and inexperienced compared to the other champions? Well, yes, but he HAS to play…because some stupid cup told him he has to play. Aren’t the other students crying foul because Harry got to play and they didn’t? Again, yes, but how can you say no to a goblet? Did I mention it’s a freakin’ goblet?

Now, I don’t know about you, but if I was forced to participate in an activity that A) I wasn’t too thrilled about in the first place; B) caused my peers to harass me and; C) might just cost me my life, I would do the most half-assed job ever (I know because this always happened in gym class). So when Harry has to battle a dragon, and he’s afraid that he’ll get killed, instead of just running to the other side, or collapsing on the ground stating he didn’t want to play anyway, he actually goes through all the motions of preparing, cheating and trying…just like all the real champions do.

Harry's heart, though, just isn't in it. In fact, it's not in anything. When it comes time for the Christmas Ball, Harry doesn't even want to go. Actually, it's funny anyone even goes, because Hogwart's, like most schools, is nearly deserted during the Xmas break as all the students have gone home for break. Inexplicably, no one bothers going home this year. Anyway, Harry doesn't want to go to the dance, but his dorm master reminds him that it's tradition for the school champion to 'open the dance'. What? How can there be a tradition if there hasn't been a tri-wizard challenge in 100 years, and if there's never been a Xmas dance before? And why doesn't Harry jsut say: "You know what? I didn't volunteer for your stupid competition, so why don't you get some other yes-boy to do your bidding?" Who knows.

Each individual task is exciting enough, but there’s only three of them, and they are separated by months, the last one even occurring in late June. (How long is Hogwart’s school year?! Nevermind, in this book, it makes no sense.)

How does it end? Well, I don’t want to ruin the ‘excitement’ for you, but, suffice it to say, it ends up not even mattering. Ha! Take that loyal readers of 700 pages! In the end, the dunces at Hogwarts send the boy you love to hate back with his abusive uncle and aunt…for the fourth time.

If “Order of the Pheonix” sucks as bad as “Goblet of Crap”, I won’t be completing the series.

Sorcerer’s Stone…B+
Chamber of Secrets…B-
Prisoner of Azkaban…B
Goblet of Fire…C-

To the Reading of Many Books There is No End

2008-05-02T11:18:00.000-05:00

Ever since we moved to the new apartment and bought a new book shelf, I’ve been very aware that I have a lot of books to get through.

Through a series of fortunate events, I’ve come to own several books that I haven’t even read yet. I received a gift certificate to a book store for my birthday, and then another one on our anniversary, and then two more at xmas. I also attended a conference for chromatographers, where I won another gift certificate. At another conference I attended (See below), it was all I could do to limit myself to the three books that I did buy. And then Half-priced Books sent me a “25% off any one item” coupon…and how could I pass that up?

So I created a list of all the books on our bookshelf that I own, but haven’t read yet.

There are 19 books on the list.

But wait! There’s more! That list doesn’t include the five books I am currently reading. Five books…who reads five books at once? Well, I didn’t intend for that to happen, it just did.

There is, of course, the main book I am reading right now: the recent book from Lawrence Krauss (see his picture below). Did I mention that it’s an autographed copy?

But then there’s also the book on the history of tea that I keep at work & read during my lunch breaks. And then there’s Uncle John’s Bathroom Reader – a book specifically designed to be utilized while relaxing on the toilet. The book’s been sitting on top of the toilet for over two years and I’m not even half way through with it (primarily because I usually bring another book with me when venturing to the privy). I am also listening to the entire Harry Potter series while driving. And, finally, there’s a small book I keep in the other car to read on the rare occasion when I am not driving. As it is a book detailing the origin of Minnesota place names, somehow it seems fitting to read it while in the car.

I hope to tackle the majority of these books in the next few months. Lately, a few new projects have entered my life and I’d like to give them more time.

Will write more soon …I’m off to the library now.

Amazing Prophecy Proves Watchtower Society is One True Channel to God!

2008-04-22T12:05:00.000-05:00

Recently, I had yet another discussion with a relative concerning religion. Specifically, he contended that everything he believed was completely true and unfalsifiable while everything I believed was in error.

After pointing out to him the incorrect Watchtower teaching of a global flood, and that Jerusalem was not destroyed in 607 b.c., he invited me to find faith in the bible (and, by extension, the Watchtower Society) by invoking the power of prophecy. My cousin asked about the bible prophecy in which it was foretold that Babylon would be uninhabited. Today, he said, it’s not inhabited…viola!...the bible is inspired by God.

This is one of about ten prophecies that are touted out by Witnesses in an effort to prove the divinity of the bible. Though my cousin couldn’t recall where in the bible this was located, he was talking about Isaiah 13:19-22.

I explained to my cousin that this prophecy - if it was even written when the Watchtower Society claims it was written (doubtful) - isn’t really that amazing anyway. I said: “That’s like if I prophecy that New York City will be uninhabited in the year 2808. It probably will be! That doesn’t mean I’m a prophet!”

But he said: “No, it’s more like if you said New York won’t be inhabited five years from now and then your prophecy comes true.”

Like most Witnesses, my cousin hereby revealed that he doesn’t even know the very teachings he has dedicated his life to. The Watchtower claims Isaiah wrote his book around the year 800 b.c. And I informed my cousin that the Apostle Peter wrote the book 1 Peter while in Babylon some 900 years later – thereby proving it was still inhabited. My cousin doubted my words, but I gave him a specific Watchtower reference that would show I was correct.

“In fact,” I added, “Babylon was still inhabited 1,200 years after that prophecy.” I told him it was very likely that most cities now in existence would be gone 1,200 years from now. He disagreed, stating that most cities last for a long, long time. Babylon, he asserted, is highly unusual.

Again, he’s basing his faith (and entire way of life) around something he has not taken the time to investigate. Memphis, Carthage, Nineveh, Troy, Ur, Kish, Herculaneum, Et-tell (better known as Ai) are all cities that, in their day, were booming metropolises and, now, are completely sans citizens.

And here’s a whole article about ghost towns – most of which were inhabited 100 years ago.

And here’s a city that has gone from booming to uninhabited in my own lifetime.

And here’s the real kicker…part of the prophecy stipulated that Babylon would never be inhabited again, but it may become a city in the near future!

Even the Watchtower Society is worried about this development. Back in 1957, they confidently asserted : “Many cities are conquered and destroyed and yet are rebuilt. But not so with Babylon” (W 9/15/57, page 555).

Forty years later, they changed their tune: “Any restoration of Babylon as a tourist attraction might lure visitors, but Babylon’s ‘progeny and posterity’ are gone forever” (A book for all people, 1997, page 29). Hmm…so when the bible said it would be uninhabited, I guess that was with the one caveat that it may be a tourist attraction one day. Using this reasoning, I’d like to visit that uninhabited ghost town known as Las Vegas one day.

I Met One of My Heroes

2008-04-14T07:46:00.000-05:00

On Saturday, 22Mar08, I attended the 20th annual American Atheists Conference. I went, along with my pal Ryan, thinking it would be mildly interesting. Well, I was wrong.

It was freakin' awesome.

Ryan and I attended only one day of the conference. It began with a discussion by the president of MN Atheists on the work they are doing to insure separation of church & state at a state level. Specifically, a bill was proposed in the House calling for funds to be allocated for separate meals in public schools for those whose religion calls for it. The MN Atheist President pointed out the folly of pursuing this route by appealing to the Democrats on the basis of separation of church and state and appealing to the Republicans on the basis of how much money it will cost (and personal responsibility in regards diet). The bill died in session.

Other discussions included a hilarious rant on the ridiculous beliefs of the relgious right. (One book advocated preventing homosexual tendencies in your child by taking him in the shower with you and showing him your similar, but larger, penis. I guess this advise was meant for fathers.) Another speaker detailed his discoveries in Israel regarding the myth of Nazareth.

In between each talk was a 15-20 minute break, during which time we hobnobbed with others, visited the booths, and spent our meager funds on books and t-shirts and grabbed all manner of freebies. Ryan quickly developed a crush on the woman behind the communism table, and I developed a crush on the books she was selling.

The highlight of the day, however, was the talk "A Cosmic Mystery Story", given by Dr. Lawrence Krauss. Larry (as I call him), excitedly regaled us with words and images about the history of Dark Matter - beginning with Einstein's "Greatest Blunder", Hubble's discovery of a non-static universe, and the debate between flat- vs. open- vs. closed-universes. He next explored the mystery of dark matter - how we know it's there and so forth. This was, hands down, the best talk I have ever heard, both on subject matter and speaking ability. (Possible exception: Mike Lewis' March 1996 talk "Local Needs". Just Kidding.)

In case you haven't figured it out yet: Larry is one of my heroes. He was the main reason why I purchased a ticket for the event. I've read several of his books, my favorite being "The Physics of Star Trek". His reads are always enjoyable, and I decided to buy his latest book, "Hiding in the Mirror", sight unseen while there.

After his talk, I lined up to have him sign both the new book & my tattered old copy of "Physics of Star Trek". I told him it was honor to met him, and he not only signed both my books (In "Star Trek", he told me to 'live long and prosper'), but agreed to have his photo taken with me. Unfortunately, I only had my cell phone's camera with me, which evidently erases people's upper lips, but, anyway, here's the picture as proof...

The Conference ended with an 'ask the experts' round table, where submitted questions were answered by experts. One of the experts had to cancel due to sudden illness, so guess who took her spot? Richard Dawkins! He had spoken at the Conference the day before and not hearing him speak was one of my biggest regrets about not attending Friday's session. Anyway, Dawkins spoke only briefly (when questions suited his area of expertise), but he spoke with such eloquence, such intellect, that I was happy to hear him for the little time that I did. Ryan totally whored himself out to Dawkins by buying a t-shirt, having him sign it, and then shooting footage of Dawkins as he spoke. I am hereby sending out a request to Ryan that he upload said footage sometime this decade.

Anyway, I don't know where the Conference is to be held next year, but I'm gonna put forth an effort to attend.

From 31Mar08 Chemical and Engineering News

2008-04-02T10:29:00.001-05:00

Here’s a couple of fascinating things I just learned. I wanted to provide links to these articles but, alas, you can only get to the article if you have a subscription to Chemical & Engineering News, and I doubt everyone does.

1) How can the squid, with its very soft body, not manage to hurt itself with that tough beak?
The article says “you can imagine the problems you’d encounter if you attached a knife blade to a block of Jell-O and tried to use that blade for cutting. The blade would cut through the Jell-O at least as much as the targeted object”.
Turns out, the beak’s stiffness gradually from the tip to the base. In fact, the base is some 100 times more flexible than the tip, which reduces impact on the cheek tissue near the beak’s base.

2) Organic Brew found on Enceladus.
Usually, when scientists speak of finding life elsewhere in the solar system, they are speaking of Mars, Titan or Europa. So, it’s quite a find to have discovered that parts of Saturn’s satellite Enceladus are about 63 degrees (F) warmer than previously thought. And, there are water vapors and organic chemicals near the southern polar region, a recent Cassini flyby found. These molecules are present some 20x more dense then was expected and include such compounds as carbon dioxide and carbon monoxide.
Some smart guy at JPL said: “We have quite a recipe for life on our hands, but we have yet to find the final ingredient, liquid water”.
I just think it’s pretty cool that we’re exploring the universe and yet we still manage to find surprises in our own back yard.

Harry Christ and the Wizard of Frodo

2008-03-28T12:51:00.000-05:00

So, finally, after years of being inundated with advertisements, glowing endorsements and media reports about its ability to create frenzy amongst pre-teens, I have read Harry Potter and the Sorcerer’s Stone. Okay, so strictly speaking, I didn’t read it – I listened to it on tape – but I think that still counts and anyone who disagrees can please spell out their reasons below.

At any rate, I think Harry fell into that same trap that so many highly rated works of art fall into: I was expecting the absolute best. Not sure why. I think, because it’s the best-selling work of fiction of all time (excluding the Holy Bible), I was expecting something phenomenal. The same way I expected Gone with the Wind to be phenomenal for being the best-selling motion picture of all time.

I always seek out those “#1 selling” bits of art/entertainment just to see what all the fuss is about. Titanic, Thriller, Seinfeld, DaVinci Code, Citizen Kane and Roots are all things I initially looked into because they are, in their respective fields, some kind of superlative. I’ve met with different levels of satisfaction in each case. In the case of Harry, I certainly wasn’t blown away. I was never caught up in the action or emotion of the story so much so that I couldn’t put it (the car radio) down.

Overall, I enjoyed the book and am currently ‘reading’ book two in the mile-wide series. I appreciated how all-encompassing the world was: names of streets, names of potions; all sorts of things were detailed reminiscent of Star Wars in their ability to enhance a fictional world. As a side note, I wish we really lived in a world where you could tell if someone is good or evil based solely on their name.

At the same time I was listening to this book (well, not the exact same time), my wife and I were watching a TV miniseries entitled Tin Man, which billed itself as a ‘re-imagining’ of the Wizard of Oz.

I bring this up because both works of fiction had that same old worn-out premise: what I like to call “The Messiah Premise”.

Here’s the synopsis: A young person comes of age by discovering they are (in some ambiguous prophecy) destined for greatness. Only they can save the world! They are endowed with special powers, allowing them to cheat through their obstacles. In fact, they are so special that there was even something unusual about their parents: immaculate conceptions come to mind (or, perhaps we are just never told about their lineage). As they begin their world-saving journey, they are helped along the way by various friends – including one all-wise oldster who, for whatever convoluted reason, can’t do the job of saving the world themself. Along the way, they are told various bits and clues about their past and their future, all very cryptic and, without fail, would have been a lot more helpful had they known such things a wee bit sooner. In the end, they meet up with their greatest foe. And though their loyal sidekick may have been there with them right up until that point, through some twist of plot, they must face the demon alone. Oh – and they’re probably related to that demon. In the end, however, they succeed in saving humanity as we know it.

This story is perhaps best known in the gospels, but is also central to Harry Potter, Tin Man, Lord of the Rings, Superman, The Matrix, The Never Ending Story, Star Wars (twice!), The One Moses, King Arthur and a thousand other tales. I’m not saying this makes for a bad movie/book/comic/TV show, I’m just bored with it. I much prefer someone who rises to greatness through their own gumption. Indiana Jones, Sherlock Holmes and Captain Picard come to mind…

Creation Reveals God’s Glory!

2008-03-14T12:08:00.000-05:00

The September 2006 issue of Awake! (a monthly periodical published by the Watchtower Bible and Tract Society) invites us to “consider the wonders of God’s handiwork”. It invites us to “then ‘hear’ what these things are ‘telling’ you. No doubt, you will reach the same conclusion as did the apostle Paul—that not only God’s existence but also his qualities can be readily ‘perceived by the things made.’” (page 27)

I, for one, whole-heartedly, unequivocally, unabashedly, unapologetically agree with this excerpt. Surely, if biological beings are the handiwork of the God of the bible, then undoubtedly a closer inspection of His creations can reveal much about Him. Much the same as Moonlight Sonata reveals the personality of Beethoven and Three Musicians clues us in to Picasso’s mind.

The Awake! magazine also said: “By taking an in-depth look at what God has made, ‘His handiwork,’ we can learn what some of his qualities are. Well, what do we see?” (08Jan1979, page 11)

Good question. What do we see?

When this line of reasoning was touted at Witness meetings, audience members reveled in noting the love a mother cat shows for her kittens, the humor we see in watching otters, the beauty in parrots, the power of whales and, of course, the intelligence of humans.

Here then, I submit 5 creations that reveal the Lord’s personality…

1. The Cuckoo
Female cuckoos don’t bother making nests and incubating their eggs. They simply find an existing nest with a clutch of eggs already inside it and then, when she sees an opening, she surreptitiously deposits an egg. When the nest owner returns, she is unaware that she is now sitting on someone else’s egg. Soon, the baby cuckoo hatches and proceeds to shove the original eggs out of the nest. Mom is left with an adopted child she never asked for and none of her own.

2. Japanese Giant Hornet
This lovely creature looks for food by searching out beehives, then calling in reinforcements. The couple dozen Giant Hornets spend the next couple of hours ripping the heads off of the tens of thousands of bees courageously guarding their nests. When finally all the bees lie asunder and dying, the hornets enter the nest and steal the children. They then carry them off to their own children, who will eat them. Kind of like when Israel ransacked Jericho.
Here’s a video of the storm troopers in action:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6fTrSOFyfxs

3. Human bot fly
God created this awe-inspiring animal in such a way that it lays eggs right on top of a mosquito. The violated mosquito then lands on a human, where the eggs rub off. The nice, warm body heat of the human gives the eggs the signal they need to hatch. The little hatchlings then burrow into the skin and live under there.

4. The Blue-ringed Octopus
Unlike other animals, which often kill to eat, the octopus just bites whenever it feels scared. God shows his mercy and kindness in this bite, which immediately numbs the mouth and tongue, blurs the vision and creates paralysis. There is no known antivenom, but if you can round up some of your friends, they can perform CPR on you for several hours until the venom wears off.

5. Ichneumon Wasps
This example of Godly benevolence lays its eggs right inside a living host. God even gave the females freakishly long ovipositors so that they can jab, syringe-style, right into a caterpillar’s body and push out their eggs. Upon hatching, the larval begin feeding on the STILL LIVING host. Since even baby wasps like fresh meat, they take precaution not to kill their host. Right away. At first, they chomp on non-essential organs, waiting until they are ready to leave the ‘nest’ before consuming the brain. Hallelujah!

Leap Day

2008-02-29T10:37:00.000-06:00

At one site I was visiting this morning, someone asked for people to contribute a 29-word 'story' in honor of Leap Day.

Here's what I submitted:

It was on this calendar day,
I proposed to my lovely fiance'.
And though eleven years have came and went,
It is only the third anniversary of our engagement.

No one said it had to be poetic, but I decided to nix grammar in favor of rhyming.

So...I'm putting this out there for you: anyone have a 29-word story/statement/poem/confession they'd like to post for this once-every-1,461-days day?

The Story of Writing a Story

2008-02-22T15:43:00.000-06:00

Here’s my recommendation of the week: if you have a life, write a life story.

Okay, I know, I know. Some of you might complain you’re not good writers or good spellers or your life is boring. But come on, do it for me. It doesn’t have to be a long book (why not shoot for that minimum of ‘official’ book status: 96 pages?), it just has to be a book that no one else could ever write: your own autobiography.

I long thought about writing an autobiography. Alas, I felt my life was too short, too common, too trite. All that stuff. Moreover, I worried that it was impossible to sum up my life with one overarching theme. Life is more like a recurring TV show than a single novel…and I didn’t know how to compress family, friends, jobs, hobbies, schooling, weddings, funerals, and beard-growing all into a single tome. More than that, there were big chunks of life I didn’t want to think about or share with other people. I worried that people would get offended or upset or bored.

In November 2006, I began (for the second time) writing my autobiography. I’m still plowing through; I’m almost done. Actually, I’m almost done with the first draft. I forget where I read it (I wish I remembered…) but in one book the author said that every book tells two stories: The story itself and the story of writing the story.

I’ve often expressed to my wife that I feel like I’ve relived everything while writing about it… When I detailed events from my elementary school days, I pulled out old dusty papers from the ‘80s. When I wrote about my first public speaking experience, I listened to the cassette tape of that day. When I wrote about the bus trip where I met my wife, I rewatched the footage I shot during that vacation (and subsequently edited it). When I wrote about my wedding, I looked through the guest book. And now that I’m writing about my son, I keep referring back to a book I wrote from that time period. I’ve contacted people to verify events from decades ago, and I continually check calendars and mementos from the past to verify chronology. I didn’t think my life story would have an appendix (heck, even I don’t have an appendix), but there you have it.

After a verbose 530 pages, I am finally writing about the present. Or, more correctly, I am writing about the most recent year that I will write about. For now. I am hoping to wrap this monstrosity up pretty soon so I can work on my next project: editing my book.

Through all this, I keep thinking that many of the people in my story should write their own story.

I encourage anyone out there to write their life story, too. Don’t be nervous…you can set your word processor to autocorrect spellig or punctuation, errors.

'A' for idea, ‘F’ for execution

2008-01-30T11:26:00.000-06:00

I am currently reading the book The 101 Most Influential People Who Never Lived, a book that was inspired (at least partially) by Michael Hart’s The 100: A Ranking of the 100 Most Influential People Who Ever Lived, which is one of my favorite books.

Besides its obvious connection to Hart’s book (which the authors simply “leafed through”), I was attracted to this book because of its potential. Yes, of course real people have influenced our lives, but can it really be true that fictional people have also had such influence? I was immediately taken in by the prospect of reading captivating, persuasive arguments on how fictional characters had impacted my life. Paging through the book, I caught the names of Mickey Mouse, Odysseus, Captain Ahab and Superman, and I thought “Yes, I can see how these people may have influenced culture, I am eager to read more”.

Alas, the persuasive arguments are not there. Well, they are in some cases: the argument is made that Uncle Tom was a partial cause of the US Civil War, that The Cat in the Hat encourages children’s love of reading and that Buck raised animal rights awareness (though I think that distinction belongs to Black Beauty, who doesn’t make their list)…but in most cases, the authors simply give a ‘bio’ of the character. When I read the entries on Don Quixote, Ebenezer Scrooge and Tarzan I made a mental note to one day read the books from which these people came, which is a good thing. But unfortunately, the authors spoiled the plots by deciding to reveal the entire story of said characters, rather than detailing their lasting influence.

This is a missed opportunity, to say the least. The fun of Michael Hart’s book is not found in retelling the life of Buddha or Darwin or Shakespeare, it’s reading Hart’s arguments as to why those men belong in the top 100, and why they belong at the position he assigns them. Conversely, this book makes no such arguments. Why do they place King Arthur above Santa Claus? How is it that Dick Tracy finds himself nestled between Hercules and Joe Camel? What’s Peter Pan doing at #70? What’s Dracula doing at #33? Why is J.R. Ewing even on the list at all? And why isn’t Ronald McDonald on the list? Sadly, we’ll never know…because the authors’ miss this great opportunity to make their case.

To make matters worse, the authors nix the idea of discussing each entry in order of importance, instead placing them in the book by category. Another fun aspect of Hart’s book is the variety: one minute you’re reading about Adolf Hitler, then you turn the page and you’re reading about Plato. But in this book, the authors lump characters into categories, which they are very proud of. Heck, the list of entries by category appears in the book prior to the list of entries by ranking. Sherlock Holmes, incidentally, appears in the “Crime” category, instead of the Adventure or Literature categories. The authors even interrupt the discussion of each character and devote a chapter to how they decided which category to place each character into: Why is Dorothy Gale placed in the Movies category rather than the Literature or Americana category? The better question is: Who Cares? Dorothy’s influence, like Superman’s and Luke Skywalker’s, isn’t limited to cinematic appearances.

One more thing: the authors miss a grand opportunity here for real controversy (and higher sales!): in the introduction, they tell us of their lame decision to leave out all religious characters. Too bad – God belongs at number one.

Bottom line…
The idea of writing such a book: A
The execution of the idea: F
The book as a whole: C

Credits and Demerits

2008-01-21T09:38:00.000-06:00

My wife and I have been watching a rotating selection of TV shows lately. We get the shows from Netflix, and watch them in order. I can’t help but notice that, sometimes, when we start an episode, we let the disk play right on through the opening credits. Conversely, with other shows, we habitually skip past the credits. Clearly, in the world of opening credits, not all television series are created equal.

Good opening credits (in order of when I thought of them):

Freaks and Geeks
Northern Exposure
The Addams Family
Star Trek (Both the original and the Next Generation)
Gilligan’s Island
Mission: Impossible
The Flintstones
Alfred Hitchcock Presents
The Jeffersons,
Wonderfalls
The Simpsons
The Office
The Muppet Show
All in the Family
The Twilight Zone

We’re not watching all these shows, of course, these are just good openings regardless of whether I’ve seen an episode lately. In fact, some of these shows aren’t particularly that great – the opening song is the best part of the show. Either way, I list them here because they either have a great song, clever footage, a unique or stylized intro, or it’s just nice and short. Or some combination of all that.

Bad Opening Credits:

Quantum Leap
So, first there’s an opening scene that explains the premise. This, I have no problem with. But then, there’s a really long, really dated song and, just when you think it’s all over, you realize they haven’t even flashed the actors names on the screen yet, and a whole other verse begins.

Battlestar Gallactica
This one is a lot like Quantum Leap, what with it’s “here’s the whole premise” thing. After the teaser, though, the credits finally come on and then – after the credit are over! – we are treated to a bizarre montage of scene that we will see in the upcoming episode. Talk about spoilers.

M*A*S*H
There’s nothing wrong with the music…if this was a drama. My sister used to watch this show all the time, and after sitting with her through the opening credits, I’d get up and leave because I was so depressed. Some people claim this is a comedy, but I’ll never know because I can’t get past the first thirty seconds.

Futurama
Just a big, bloated, confusing mess. It nearly induces a seizure.

How about you – any TV show openings you particularly like or dislike?

New Year's Resolutions

2008-01-01T16:28:00.000-06:00

I've made new year's resolutions for years, but I've never documented them anywhere. They've just been something I've kept in my mind and strove for as the twelve months unfolded. One year (1991?) I made it my goal to read everything by Dr. Seuss. Another year (2004), I made it my goal to learn to juggle and to read all the canonical Sherlock Holmes stories.

Of course, there are always the 'big' goals: eat better, exercise more, and - on a more personal note - move out of this house. Those are all good things to strive for, but I don't consider them new year's resolutions. I usually reserve the fun stuff for new year's resolution. So here's some fun stuff I want to accomplish this year:

1) Learn to yo-yo.
I can do the boring part, where you let gravity grab the yo-yo and then let momentum bring it back into your hand. But I want to learn the fun stuff. Owen loves his two yo-yos, and I am now the proud owner of one myself. I used part of my Xmas gift (a certificate to Amazon.com) to purchase a book on yo-yo techniques, so once it arrives I'll begin in earnest.

2) Brush up on my German
I used to be pretty decent at travel German. Alas, I let it slide. It's time to get some tapes and listen to them in the car once again.

3) Read "Tom Sawyer" and "Huckleberry Finn"
My wife tells me they're good reads, and I do like 19th Century fiction. So I guess it's time I tackle these.

4) Run in a race
Yeah, I've done this two years in a row now, but I want to do it again. In early November, the company I work for organizes a 6K race, so that's my race of choice, if possible, again this year.

5) Edit the wedding video
Our wedding was video-taped by two people, for a total of 4 hours of footage. My goal is to finally dump all that into my computer and edit it down to a watchable 1 hour (or less) video. I hope to have it done by our anniversary. Maybe we could give a copy of the video to our friends and family members as kind of a reverse anniversary gift. If I can do this by August, then I hope to...

6) Preserve other old videos
Specifically, my graduation party, a for-the-heck-of-it party I attended in 1988 and something called "Explorations in Videotaping" are all languishing on VHS tape, degrading more and more with each passing year. I'd like to at least get these into digital format by year's end.

And, finally...
7) Finish my book
If you know me, you know I've been writing a book. I started writing it well over a year ago, and I still have several chapters left. I'd like to wrap up the epic this year.

I'll recap in 365 days.

Word of the Year

2007-12-21T22:05:00.000-06:00

Ever since I was a young lad working at the library, I’ve been aware of the American Dialect Society (http://www.americandialect.org/). The most interesting thing about the ADS is that each year, it’s members vote on what they call the “Word of the Year”. It might be a new word that was coined by a politician or singer, it might be a word that adopted a new meaning, or it might be an old word that suddenly resurged in popularity. Sometimes the ‘word’ of the year is actually two words that, when put together, have a new meaning.

I love this idea. The words they select for each year are quite a reflection of the times. For example, in 1992, they selected “Not”, the over-used put-down popularized by the Saturday Night Live sketch “Wayne’s World”. In 2000, they selected “Chad” – a word so defunct that Oxford was considering dropping it from the next edition of their dictionary, until the voting fiasco in Florida gave the word new life.

So, in 1999, I began selecting my own personal “Word of the Year”. Like the ADS, my choice can be a word I never heard before, or one that suddenly surged in popularity for me personally (for whatever reason). Since 2007 is all but over, I’ve once again added to my list. Here it is, with brief explanations…

1999 – Filmlet
I was tired of calling my short films “Zimmerscope Productions”, so I flipped through the dictionary looking for a new film-related word. I found “filmlet”, which is a term used to describe any motion picture under 60 minutes long. I loved how underused it is – I swear I’ve never heard anyone else use this word besides me.

2000 – Viscosity
I’m sure I’d heard this word before, and I’d definitely heard its root word, viscous. But until I took a class on laboratory technology, I never appreciated this word for all it was worth. I loved performing viscosity tests – both in college and at my previous job. I throw this word around whenever I can. [runner-up: Flyboat]

2001 – Denouement
Another word I learned in college. Despite reading dozens of books about motion pictures, I never knew what to call that last part of the film, you know – the part after the climax. I used to just call it “the ending”. But then I was taught this word, which practically screams ‘pretentious!’, and all was right with the world.

2002 – GMP
Okay, so it’s not a word. But by ADS guidelines, I can still use it. It’s an abbreviation for Good Manufacturing Procedures, which is a nice way of saying the FDA forces food and drug manufacturers to be anal to the point of neurosis. I hate the yearly GMP classes I have to attend, and I hate laboring under its rules. Nevertheless, it’s been a big player in my vocabulary from 2002 onwards.

2003 – Environmental Monitoring
Worried about a possible lay-off at my job, I offered my services in the microbiology lab, hoping to make myself twice as useful. It worked, and I never did get laid-off. For several days out of each month in 2003 (and into 2004), I ventured with the microbiologists as we went out environmental monitoring.

2004 – Big Lake
Despite the fact that I never lived more than 2 hours from Big Lake, I’d never heard of it until our realtor began showing us property there. By mid-summer, I was living there. [runner-up: Doula]

2005 – Cephalohematoma
Nothing says smarmy health care professional like knowing the technical name for a lump on a newborn’s head. When I told people my son was born with cephalohematoma, most of them immediately adopted an air of sympathy, as if I’d just given them the gravest news ever.

2006 – Cognitive Dissonance
Thanks to the Watchtower Society’s inability to answer questions, provide supporting documentation and misquote, I knew the old farts in Brooklyn were throwing up a smokescreen for years. But it was in this year that my wife helped me appreciate what a Watchtower apologist I’d become. She explained it using this term. [runner-up: Love Bombing]

2007 – Apraxia
Another medically related term, only this time, it sounds like a planet the Star Ship Voyager would land on. It sums up my son’s speech delay (and other quirks) so nicely, my wife and I began wondering if other people we knew also had un-diagnosed apraxia.

Lovers Quarrel

2007-12-05T11:21:00.000-06:00

From the "You never know what's gonna happen next" Department:

My wife and I walked into our spare bedroom last night and my wife asked: "Is it dead?" She was referring to one of our Love Birds. After examining the body from several angles, I responded in the affirmative.

Here's a brief history of our lovebirds: In 1997, we purchased a Love Bird on a whim, from a private breeder who, on the same day, sold us a cockatiel. Within weeks, we felt sorry for pretty Tango. She was lonely. So we returned to the bird breeder and purchased a friend for Tango, whom we named Tequila. A funny thing about Love Birds is that they are, like Killer Whales, improperly named. They are extremely territorial, and they only bond to a human if they are given oodles of contact. They don't even love each other. They are quite finicky regarding their mates, and even if they choose to bond with a mate, they will frequently bicker to the point of drawing blood.

Anyway, Tango died in 1998. Coincidentally, at this same time, my wife and I had been raising and feeding a baby female love bird by hand, whom we named Twoey. Twoey bonded to me quite nicely but, when Tequila was widowed, we placed Twoey in the cage next to hers to see if they would get along. They fell in love; it was not uncommon to walk in on some hot lesbian fornicating.

Sometimes, we'd notice blood on one of their faces, or on their feet, but it was nothing serious. Their love-hate relationship proceeded fairly stable for nearly a decade.

Yesterday, around 5 in the evening, I went into the spare room, noticed the two birds hiding under some chewed up paper (as they are wont to do) and made a mental note to clean the cage this coming weekend. That was the last time I saw them both alive.

Six hours later, we found a Love Bird corpse on the floor of the cage.

Did I mention that the #1 cause of death among Love Birds is...cannibalism? Maybe now would be a good time to mention that.

The dead bird was not lying in peaceful rest. She was mangled and bloodied, her feathers were wildly out of place, her beak was hyper-extended and her head was tucked under at a frightening angle. Her yellow feathers were pink from blood. Her mate had blood on her face and chest.

Funny thing is (not 'ha-ha' funny), we're not sure who died and who lived. Although we've had all manner of colorful birds in the past, it just so happened that these two torrid lovers had exactly the same coloring and disposition.

So now, our house is home to one, single, Love Bird. She's sitting on her perch right now - a cold-blooded fratricidal psycho. Seething...waiting...waiting...she's coming for you next.

And Now For Something Completely Different...

2007-11-16T20:38:00.000-06:00

Recently, I received a phone call from an elder in the local congregation of Jehovah’s Witnesses. He wanted to arrange a meeting with my wife and me. I inquired as to the nature of the meeting and he stated that “certain accusations” had been made against me. He said a meeting involving my wife, me, and a couple of elders should be held as soon as possible in an effort to “sort out the facts” and to make sure we hadn’t “enticed” anyone else.

Strangely, though, regardless of anything I might or might not have ever done, the Watchtower Society does not recognize me as one of its members. The Watchtower Society reported the number of Witnesses worldwide to be 6,741,444 last year. In order to be counted amongst these ranks a person must be an active publisher. That is, they must go door-to-door at least once a month. I have not performed this activity for well over a year, and my wife has not done so for over two years; neither of us, therefore, are counted as members of the congregation. Consequently, I fail to see why the elder felt he had any jurisdiction over me or my wife. It’s as if I walked out of a job a year ago and only now does my ex-boss call to inform me I may be fired for conduct unbecoming his company.

Nevertheless, I inquired as to who made these accusations. The elder initially resisted providing me with any information, but as I reasoned with him, he divulged that four people had written letters to the elders stating that they were concerned about some of my recent actions. I reminded the elder that if his primary concern is to follow Theocratic order, he should provide me with the names of my accusers so that I may contact them in person. His response was that the people did not live nearby, upon which I said I was not adverse to making long-distance calls to speak with the accusers in the hope of sorting out the matter. He then went back to his original intent, saying again that it would just be best if we met with them. I reminded him that the correct course of action would be for those people to contact me directly if they have issues with me, and that, by going directly to the elders, they violated the very teachings they claim to support. Since, according to that elder, the accusers are all members of Witness congregations, they are the ones “dirtying” the congregation by their willful refusal to follow the Watchtower’s direction.

As proof, consider these excerpts from the October 15, 1999 Watchtower, in the article titled “You May Gain Your Brother”:

“If your brother commits a sin, go lay bare his fault between you and him alone. If he listens to you, you have gained your brother." Clearly, this is not a step based on mere suspicion. You should have evidence or specific information that you can use to help your brother to see that he committed a wrong and needs to set matters straight. It is good to act promptly, not letting the matter grow or letting his attitude become entrenched. And do not forget that brooding over it can damage you too. Since the discussion is to be between you and him alone, refrain from talking to others beforehand to win sympathy or improve your self-image.
…
Jesus showed that after the first step, you should not give up trying to gain your brother, to keep him united with you and others in worshiping God acceptably. Jesus outlined a second step: "If he does not listen, take along with you one or two more, in order that at the mouth of two or three witnesses every matter may be established."
He said to take 'one or two more.' He did not say that after taking the first step, you are free to discuss the problem with many others, to contact a traveling overseer, or to write to brothers about the problem."

Clearly, then, if the elder is worried about the cleanliness of the congregation, his first order of business should be either to inform me of the names of my accusers, or – in case he wishes to protect their anonymity – to contact them and remind them of their error in not following the Watchtower’s direction and to recommend that they approach me regarding any issues. I said as much to the elder, and he twice agreed that I was correct on this point.
Finally, he said he was unsure how to proceed. I exhorted him to do the right thing. He said he would confer with the other elders.
Less than an hour later, he called me again. I missed his call, but he left a voicemail stating the situation was “more than I can handle”. I returned his call. He said that the elders were unwilling to give me the names of the accusers (and, though he didn’t say, I assume the elders were unwilling to remind the accusers that they should have approached me directly). He insisted, instead, that we address ‘some’ of the accusations. These included two things: 1) Writing to the Watchtower Society and 2) Celebrating my son’s birthday.

Let’s take these one at a time:
1) I am unable to find any indication that writing to the Watchtower Society is considered an offense. I had questions, the local elders were unable to answer them, the Witnesses’ literature was unable to answer them, thus I wrote to the Watchtower Society. My letters were a sincere desire to learn the truth; something every Witness ostensible places in high regard. The Watchtower Society’s periodicals contain articles titled “Questions from Readers” and “From Our Readers”, thereby encouraging correspondence between them and their readers. Also, if writing the Society is some kind of sin, I am dumbfounded as to why no one has attempted to ‘correct’ my error during the twenty-one years that have elapsed since I first wrote the Watchtower Society.
2) It is true that I willfully celebrated my son’s second birthday, a fact easily discovered on the web. For the record, I also celebrated his first birthday. It has never bothered my conscience that each year, on my birthday, my parents and grandparents (all active Witnesses) called to wish me a happy birthday. Nor did it bother me when, in 1994, I attended a birthday party for the son of a close Witness friend. Nor did I feel there was any sin in allowing friends and family (all active Witnesses) to host birthday parties for my son shortly after he was born.
If it isn’t clear already, my issue here is not whether or not I did celebrate a birthday (clearly I did) but whether or not it was wrong in the first place.
I was an active Witness for approximately 25 years and during that time I was perpetually vexed that there was no sufficient explanation as to why Witnesses do not celebrate birthdays. Watchtower rationale on why birthdays are sinful can be boiled down to the following reasons:
a) Two birthday parties are mentioned in the bible. Neither of the birthday boys were worshippers of Jehovah. At both birthday parties, someone was killed. True, most birthday parties don’t end in murder, but since everything is in the bible for a reason, we must conclude that birthdays are not for true Christians.
b) Birthday celebrations involve giving undue attention to the individual; setting them up in a place of importance.
c) There is no indication that first century Christians celebrated their birthday.
d) Birthdays often include pagan traditions, such as cakes topped with candles and an encouragement of materialism via the giving of gifts.

Okay, let’s break these down.

First, the two biblical birthday party-related deaths: It is noteworthy that both of the deaths fulfilled prophesy, so the deaths weren’t all bad – had the deaths not occurred, God and Jesus’ words would have not come true! Also, if God really wanted us to abstain from birthdays, doesn’t it seem reasonable to conclude that he would have said so somewhere? After all, he spent pages and pages detailing sex crimes and proper disposal of human waste, so surely He didn’t leave out anything important. Why is there no law in either the Old or New Testament that simply says: “Thou shalt not celebrate birthdays”? He even saw fit to command women not to braid their hair, yet Witness women routinely flout this dictate. If we are to assume that all birthdays are evil because two birthdays (19 centuries apart) are mentioned in the bible under negative connotations, then what about dogs? Dogs are mentioned in the bible 40 times, and never once are they spoken of in a positive way. They are described as low, unclean animals that eat corpses and their own vomit. Anyone who condemns birthdays on the basis of the two bible citations, must likewise condemn dogs. And pigs. And hair-braiding.
Next, what is so wrong with giving an individual special attention on one particular day? If this truly is a reason to avoid birthday celebrations, then why are graduation parties, retirement parties, wedding receptions, wedding anniversaries and baby showers acceptable? Incidentally, a baby shower is a birthday party. What Witnesses really condemn, then, is technically not birthday celebrations, but the anniversaries of birthdays. This is especially bizarre considering they celebrate the anniversaries of weddings. I once asked an elder why wedding anniversaries were acceptable practices, while birthday anniversaries were not. He said: “Because marriage is God’s arrangement”. So then what is a birthday? Satan’s arrangement? God commanded humans to be fruitful, thus creating billions of birthdays. Never once did he command people to marry.
Next, while first-century Christians may not have celebrated their birthdays, neither is there any record that they insisted upon clean-shaven faces, or that they used birth control, or that they attended meetings three times a week, or that they produced their own literature, or that they held wedding anniversary parties or graduation parties. Yet all these things are practiced by twenty-first century Witnesses. Why the inconsistency?
Finally, the pagan tradition of candle-topped cakes surely can not be that sinful as I myself have had such a dessert placed before me on numerous wedding anniversaries. Each time I have been presented with such a cake, it has been from an active, faithful Witness. The same is true of gift-giving. While I by no means condone the rampant materialism in this country, Witnesses do not frown upon the giving of gifts on special occasions for anything besides birthdays. During my graduation party, at which every attendee was a Witness, I received 54 gifts. At our wedding and every subsequent anniversary, my wife and I receive scores of gifts, usually from faithful Witnesses. Some Witness parents even use the occasion of their wedding anniversary to give gifts to their children, as a way of making up for not celebrating their birthdays. At any rate, a birthday can be celebrated without the giving of gifts. My wife recently mentioned that, for a future birthday party for our son, she would like to invite all the kids to arrive with food or toys for animals and then all the children can go together to an animal shelter together and donate the items to the unwanted animals. To which I replied, “SINNER!”
At any rate, the elder never did provide me with the names of my accusers and, to my knowledge, he willfully chose not to inform my accusers of my desire to speak with them directly. So here, now, I give you that chance. Let’s be honest, you visit this site regularly even though you feel guilty doing so. Please address the comments above, including your justification on knowingly violating Watchtower dictates by going first to the elders instead of approaching me and what your specific scriptural reasons are for taking offense at letter writing and birthday parties. As the above Watchtower article outlined, I require specific information to help me see that I committed a wrong and to set matters straight. If you do not wish to make yourself known on a public forum such as this, please email me. If I do not hear from you within two weeks, I will assume you agree that you violated the Watchtower’s policy regarding reporting ‘wrongdoing’, that you agree letter-writing to the Watchtower Society is an acceptable avenue for finding answers, that the Witnesses’ belief regarding birthday anniversary celebrations is erroneous and that everything in this post is totally correct and reasonable.

P.S. For the record, no one was beheaded at any birthday party I ever attended.

My Two Favorite Motion Pictures

2007-11-09T06:48:00.000-06:00

2. Rope (1948)
The first color film directed by Alfred Hitchcock, and one of only two in which he served as producer, Rope is a flawlessly executed experiment in film-making. I’ve seen a lot of film “experiments”, and this stands out above all others in that it not only contains a narrative, but a spellbinding narrative at that.
But getting back to the experiment – the first thing I ever heard about this film was that it contained no cuts and, therefore, transpires in real time (i.e., during the 80 minutes it takes to watch the film, eighty minutes transpire in the lives of the characters). My initial reaction was: “Cool idea, but probably boring”. But I was wrong. Hitchcock experimented with long cuts (e.g., Under Capricorn) and confined sets (e.g., Lifeboat) on other occasions, but in Rope, he uses them both to perfection
For one thing, Rope does contain cuts, and part of the fun is spotting the cuts, especially before they happen (it’s fun to see how the furniture and characters have to line up for a cut to be “hidden”). For another thing, those 80 minutes take place during sunset, and the skyline out the apartment windows makes for a more interesting film in itself than some Oscar winners I’ve seen.
Then there’s the story. Only Hitchcock would have the bravado (back in ’48) to put such arrogance on film; wherein two college students kill a third just “to see what it feels like”. It’s the ultimate for-the-hell-of-it act, and these boys justify it by claiming their own superiority over the mass of humanity. That in itself isn’t very satisfying, but throughout the next 79 minutes, we are treated to all manner of rationalizations and arguments that supposedly led to that moment of homicide.
Jimmy Stewart stars in this film, and though he is only one-third of the unholy trinity here, he’s still just as great as always. Did he ever give a bad performance? I don’t think so. Even in so-so movies, he manages to shine above the mediocrity. Incidentally, he’s the only person to star in two films in my top ten. In Rope, he’s given the best roll and he gets many of the great lines, including the best one: “Did you think you were God, Brandon?” (It’s better in context.)
And what Hitchcock would be complete without dark humor? His cameo appearance, the double-entendre of snippets of conversations, the decision of where to serve dinner, even the binding used to fasten the stack of books – all keep a viewer raptly attentive.
In most motion pictures with suspense, the suspense tends to rise and fall in episodic fashion throughout the story, culminating in a grand bit of suspense called the “climax”. But Rope is, yet again, different in this regard; the suspense never falls. While this makes for an exhausting filmic experience, it is fun to feel the suspense mount higher and higher until at last a resolution (of which the viewer is never certain) occurs. With each viewing, I revel in the fun of watching the guests, like pawns, being manipulated by their hosts.
When it comes to well-made and enjoyable motion pictures, it is my opinion that Rope stands out as one of the best ever. Maybe even the best. Except for…

1. Psycho (1960)
At last I get to discuss what has been my favorite motion picture for the past 16 years. At the time I first viewed it, I realized that no film more fully enraptured, thrilled, excited and intriqued me quite like Psycho. Ever since, I have weighed all subsequent films against this one, and, though some have come close, I just can’t honestly rank any film higher. No other motion picture excels in absolutely every aspect. Psycho, in my opinion, is the most perfect film ever created, or, if you prefer: Psycho contains the least amount of stuff I did not like. Even the opening titles are brilliant!
This film stands in contrast to all others for not one, but several reasons. Allow me to delineate the outstanding features of Hitchcock’s pièce de résistance…
1. The entire story itself is totally changed from what it appears to be at the outset. I love when I can’t guess what’s gonna happen next, but this takes it to a whole new level. I’ve never seen a movie devote so much time to throwing a person off the main trail (except maybe The Sound of Music).
2. Symbolism! I love symbolism in motion pictures, and Psycho has it in full measure. From the opening credits chopping from name to name, to the hanging sickles in the hardware store, to the positioning of the hotel in relation to the house, to the changing color of Crane’s clothing, to the pictures on the wall, to the record on the record player, to the license plate number, to the avian references, to the names of the main characters…symbolism is everywhere here. Heck, Bates’ name alone carries two pieces of symbolism.
3. Dialogue. The often strange, stilted dialogue brings these characters to life. There are so many great lines that, after multiple viewings, serve as hilarious bits of foreshadowing: “We all go a little mad sometimes, haven’t you?”, “A son is a poor substitute for a lover”, “12 rooms, 12 vacancies”, “We're always quickest to doubt people who have a reputation for being honest”, “Mother’s not quite herself today”, and so on…
4. The music. There are only a handful of movies in which I even notice the music (I’m excluding musicals here, obviously). Star Wars, Jaws, Vertigo, The Godfather and The Third Man are all examples of non-musicals in which the music is first rate. Psycho, with its screeching violins sans percussion, easily makes this list.
5. The acting. No one here does a bad job, and a few actors do so well, I wonder if they were born to play the part. Anthony Perkins is primary in this regard, but, to a lesser extent, so are Vera Miles, Martin Balsam and Mort Mills.
6. The camera work. I know I’ve droned on about the camera work in other films here, so let’s just say that Psycho’s is pretty darn good, too. My favorite pieces are probably the opening shot where the camera goes through the blinds, allowing us to peek in on the lovers, and the sweeping track up the stairs to the Bates’ house.
7. The calendar. It’s weird, I know, but I tend to get preoccupied with the flow of time in movies. Just the other day, I was commenting on the appearant time inconsistency in Mary Poppins. Not only is time given it’s due in this movie, it’s scrupulously attended to; the date at the outset cues us in to the appearance of Xmas decorations in the summer, and the wall calendar at the end shows us a passage of nine days – all logically accounted for.
8. The climax. While other movies have more sweeping climaxes, Psycho’s was totally unexpected. Other movies on this list, such as Return of the Jedi, Back to the Future, Rear Window, Ingen Numsil and The Princess Bride all have very satisfying climaxes, but in those cases, I probably could have guessed how it was going finish. The fun of those movies was just watching how the climax would play out. With Psycho, I had not idea what the climax would be, much less how it would play out. This was largely due to…
9. The twist. I love a film with a secret. Again, other movies reveal great secrets: The Usual Suspects, The Empire Strikes Back, Citizen Kane, Fight Club (to name a few) but in every one of those examples, the story is not fundamentally altered by the revelation, it’s more of a clever trick, leaving the viewer saying: “Oh, that’s so cool!” …and then rolling the credits. In Psycho, the twist’s revelation forces one to go back and rethink the entire film (okay, I guess Fight Club is sort of like that, but that movie didn’t have near as great a story).
10. The Denouement. Critics often lambaste Psycho’s denouement as unnecessary at best, stupid at worst. I find the therapist’s breakdown of his conversation with Bates to be most fascinating, particularly in how he so causally dismisses the money (that we had cared about so much!) and insists that it was Bates’ mother who told him the truth. But it gets even better: the film then cuts to Bates’ mother thanking the guard for the blanket, and then we hear her disdain for her dutiful son, and her assurance that she would not even hurt a fly (and, indeed, she doesn’t). Finally, in a triple-exposure, Bates wryly grins for the camera, as if he is coming for us next, which ever-so-briefly fades to a skull and then a chain pulling out his heart. Finally, the car in the swamp, which we realize was only there to dupe us.
Allow me, too, to mention one other thing. Although this does not affect the quality of the movie at all, I find it funny that Psycho originally was not rated, then was rated Approved, then M, then PG, and currently resides at R. I grew up in a religion where people believed all movies rated R were violent, immoral, foul piles of crap…and I had lots of fun asking them about this movie. Many who saw it in the sixties and seventies felt ashamed that they saw (what became) a rated-R movie. I would usually explain this to them following a conversation wherein we extolled the virtues of this wonderful bit of celluloid.
...Whew! All that I never even mentioned the infamous shower scene.
My list is constantly changing (in fact, I’ve altered it since I began posting here). This is just a snapshot of my motion picture preferences on this day. But Psycho? Psycho has withstood the test of time in my books. Though I am always on the lookout, I would be very surprised to find a film I consider superior. Surprised, but also delighted!

My 3rd to 5th Favorite Motion Pictures

2007-11-02T12:15:00.000-05:00

5. The Sting (1973)
Don't blink! You just might miss something! George Roy Hill's story of two small time con artists trying to hit the big time is thoroughly entertaining. Several shifts in the plot keep you guessing until the climax, and even that has a surprise ending.
Winner of 7 Academy Awards including Best Picture, The Sting, is an intricate comedy caper deals with an ambitious small-time crook (Robert Redford) and veteran con-man (Paul Newman) who seek revenge on the vicious crime lord who murdered one of their gang. How this of charlatans puts "the sting" on their enemy makes for the greatest double-cross in movie history.
The first time I viewed this film, I enjoyed it, but I was thoroughly confused. I even said to my friend, “The bad guys won?” And he said: “No, don’t you get it?” And I said: “I guess not.” So we watched it again. After that, I loved the film and enjoyed it more with each subsequent viewing.
Right from the start, the movie let’s us know we’re in for a treat. The title cards, that start out by giving us a brief glimpse of the tale, and then proceed to divide the movie up into chapters (much like Babe), which is very much in keeping with the 1920s “feel” that The Sting is going for. Then there’s Scott Joplin's ragtime accompaniment – one of my absolute most-favorite soundtracks.

4. Memento (2001)
Here we have the epitome of “original screenplay”. Most notably, this entire neo-noirish film plays out in reverse order; that is, the very first scene you see is the last one to happen chronologically. In fact, the very first scene is entirely played backwards – so the very first frame you see on the screen shows the last thing to happen to the characters in the story. Like Citizen Kane, Memento is brilliant not just for its great plot, but for the way the story is told.
This would be good enough for my top fifty, but Memento really outdoes itself in that the main character, Leonard Shelby, (sorry if I’m spoiling something here) has amnesia, and is unable to create new memories. In that way, we experience the disorientation and vulnerability Leonard feels. We are not sure who to trust, or what will come next, and with each scene we must take a few seconds to reorient ourselves as to where things are in the stream of time.
Memento also features stellar cinematography – chromatic changes during flashbacks, great camera work and a gritty feeling for the haunts Leonard finds himself in.
Isn’t it weird that I had no trouble following this film, and yet couldn’t figure out the Sting? The biggest complaint I hear about Memento is how tough it is to follow…but I had no difficulty. In fact, I even enjoyed given it the extra thought and attention it demands. Backwards seems to suit me, I guess.

3. La Vita é Bella (Life is Beautiful) (1998)
“An unforgettable fable that proves love, family and imagination conquer all.”(tagline)
When my wife and I first went to see the film at the theater, there were twenty people in the audience. Once everyone realized it was a non-English film, and that they would have to read subtitles, exactly half the people in the audience got up and left. I was glad for myself, because I like a theater as empty as possible. But I gotta think those people who left made the dumbest decision ever in their history of film watching.
This is one of those movies that have a lasting effect on you. While watching it, I found that it has less to do with the war and more to do with the human feelings and the beautiful relationship between loved ones. The holocaust provides the ultimate context, that brings and highlights the story and adds yet another deep dimension to the movie. No such piece of art has ever before combined laughter and tears of sadness in me before and that is the miracle of the movie.

In the first half of the film, we can and delight at the immense comedy talent of Benigni, who plays Guido. Unlike so many modern movies there is nothing crude or course, his is simple innocent humor, making it all the more effective. The way he ties together little strands in the film to create comedy elements shows a great writing ability, and a mastery of timing when it comes to their execution on screen. Various incidents related to the rise of anti-semitism and fascism in Italy show that there are sinister forces at work which come to the fore in the second segment. Even the two segments themselves are melded together perfectly, and I have never seen a more clever way of showing the passing of time.
During the second half, the emphasis shifts. The comic moments are still present - Guido's translation of the rules of the camp is particularly notable - but it becomes somewhat more difficult to laugh when we consider the gravity of what is going on. We see that this is a film about human spirit above all else. Guido not only appeals to the audience due to his comedy and sheer pleasantness, but also in the way that he loves his family and the measures that he will go to to protect them.
Some have decried the addition of humorous elements to something as grave as World War II and the Holocaust. Those people are idiots. Benigni is not here making fun of the plight of those who suffered in the camps, he is showing what it means to be human, and how we can find happiness(and beauty, I guess) in life no matter what may happen to us. Life is really beautiful as you watch Guido's relentless efforts to make a lovely exciting experience of the concentration camp to his son. You get exhausted just watching him going through his painful day and yet you smile as he speaks to his son and makes him laugh. One can go on forever describing the creativity of this movie, but one will not be able to capture all its beauty in writing.
From the moment the credits rolled, I proclaimed this to be the best non-English film and the best motion picture ever created during my lifetime. I laughed, I cried, I loved this film. If you only ever see one subtitled film in your life, this is the one to see.

My 6th to 8th Favorite Motion Pictures

2007-10-23T09:59:00.000-05:00

8. Rear Window (1954)
The best motion picture of the 1950s (argued by some as the decade to produce the greatest films), Rear Window is a deep and entertaining classic with many strengths. A fine suspense story is combined with romantic tension. There are numerous sub-plots, some funny; some moving, all with many psychological overtones. The characterizations are flawless and three-dimensional. Jimmy Stewart (though perhaps a tad too old) is completely believable and Grace Kelly does what she does best…looks and acts perfect. The simple setting of a Greenwich Village apartment complex is developed into a world filled with intriguing and sometimes unsettling possibilities. This confined world comes to life with a wealth of lavish visual detail and interesting minor characters. Unlike far too many movies these days, the director assumes his audience will pay close enough attention to appreciate the many subtleties with which he has filled the movie. It rewards both careful attention and repeated viewings, since there is much more here than merely a suspenseful plot (as good as that story is in itself).

The dialogue is filled with clever, subtle, humorous meanings. And what the main characters see in the lives of others is an interesting reflection of the tensions and possibilities in their own present and future.

But this is also a film about films. We are sucked into this story much as Jimmy Stewart (who may as well be sitting next to us as we watch the events) acts out our voyeuristic predilections. When, finally, Mr. Thorwald looks up and discovers he is being watched, it is chilling not just because our hero is now in danger, but because he actually looks at us – and we feel guilty for having peeped in on his life too.

7. Lola Rennt (Run Lola Run) (1998)
This post-modern film presents the same story three times at rapid-fire pace. From the opening titles, we are swept into the life of Lola – a young woman who has a very important task to accomplish very very quickly. There is so much happening every split-second, it’s impossible to catch it all during the first one or two viewings.
Every trick of film-making employed here: jump-cuts, fast-motion, slow-motion, animation, overlapping dialogue, oblique angles, non-linear story-telling and split-screen, among others.

The plot itself is based upon a simple concept: how do tiny actions affect eventual outcomes. As we see the story unfold repeated times, we become aware of the minute changes in the outsets that result in big finales. It is, essentially, a study in chaos theory - the Butterfly effect. But unlike so many other movies that explore this effect, Lola Rennt doesn’t just extrapolate on how tiny changes alter the course of the main plot; it continually takes us off on fast-paced tangents that show how Lola’s course changes in turn alter the entire life courses of those with whom she comes into contact.

Try not to blink if you watch this flick, especially those scenes that show three things happening at once. If you do, rewind it to catch what you missed.

6. The Wizard of Oz (1939)
“Some people without brains do an awful lot of talking” (a line from the film, and one of the truest statements ever captured on celluloid).

Here, by a small margin, is the oldest motion picture on my list. Like Mary Poppins, The Sound of Music and Babe, I realize it’s not a “guy movie”. But I hate to use gender-bias in ranking a movie. Like those other three, I have to rank The Wizard of Oz in my top fifty because, well, there’s nothing wrong with it.

For one thing, it’s the best musical ever, hands down. The story is actually enhanced by the often silly, but always clever, songs. That's a rarity in itself. But add to that a believable performance by all & you've got a very good movie. The story is compelling, and the “bookends” at the outset and conclusion of the film only serve to enhance the story, characterizations and emotions of the main story (quite the opposite of The Princess Bride, in which the “bookends” bog down and detract from the main story). And on the subject of cinematography, hardly any movie has ever made such good use of color. And that’s saying something for a movie that is so old.

The Wizard of Oz is enjoyable on many levels. As a kid, my family and I watched it during its traditional yearly televised showing. Later, I watched it after being told about its gay undertones (“Of course, some people do go both ways”). Then I read about the numerous gaffes and continuity errors (e.g., Dorothy’s ever-changing hair lengths) and watched it in an attempt to spot the flaws. Like the storm trooper that hits his head on the doorway in Star Wars, and the blind guy wearing a wristwatch in The Ten Commandments, the many tiny mistakes in Oz just make the flick that much more enduring, and fun. And then there’s the Pink Floyd connection. My wife and I went to a friend’s home one evening with the sole purpose of queuing up Dark Side of the Moon with Oz. And, for like the tenth time, I rediscovered the wonder of that movie (and the album). There are certainly movies that I’ve seen more often, but there are none that I’ve viewed from so many different perspectives.

I suppose I enjoy this fairy tale as much as I enjoy The Princess Bride. Only this movie doesn’t have Fred Savage, so I have to rank it higher.

My 9th to 11th Favorite Motion Pictures

2007-10-19T11:42:00.000-05:00

11. Balance (1989)
So here’s not only the best animated film I’ve ever seen, but also the shortest film on this list. It’s only a quarter of the length of the second-shortest film on this list (see la Riviére du Hibou, #28, below). In fact, it’s so short, you can watch it during your lunch break by visiting here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZJWT3p7uM6Y
This short film immediately captures attention by virtue of its unusual setting and obscure circumstances. As we try to figure out how things will end for the “fishermen”, we are strung along with mystery, suspense and one of the best endings to any film I’ve ever seen, regardless of length.

10. Le Fabuleux Destin d'Amelié Poulain (Amelié) (2001)
Le Fablah bla bla bla, otherwise known as Amelié, was an unexpected find for me. My wife and I went to the theaters to see this film at the insistence of some friends. And we were not disappointed. The many simple stories, woven together, form an intriguing look at Paris, romance, and one shy girl’s search for happiness. The cinematography is wonderful – the sets look cartoonish and perfectly enhance the mood and storylines of the film. There are unexpected twists, unique special effects and great asides that momentarily take the viewer from the story briefly and show them a larger world. This film makes us wish that our little actions could have so great an impact on the world around us, and at the same time, it reminds us to just sit back and enjoy the little things.
Oh – and it also makes a great jab at the media coverage of Princess Di’s death, which, in my opinion, was one of the most overblown, over-rated news stories of the 20th Century. Good call.

9. The Princess Bride (1987)
“Heroes. Giants. Villains. Wizards. True Love. - Not just your basic, average, everyday, ordinary, run-of-the-mill, ho-hum fairy tale." (tag line)
This romantic tale of adventure, revenge and redemption succeeds by adding just the right amount of humor, and just the right amount of pathos. There are many characters to care about here, and the movie plays with the audience by keeping the true heroes of the film secret for as long as possible. This is one of those movies, like Mary Poppins, that has entire scenes that are memorable: Pirate vs. swordsman, Pirate vs. giant, Pirate vs. Vizzini comes to mind as the most fun series of challenges a hero has ever faced to win what he wants. My favorite subplot is Inigo Montoya’s – he gets the most memorable line of the whole film (which takes place in a very exciting and satisfying scene of revenging family honor).
The theme of The Princess Bride is that true love can conquer all. Throughout the movie, there are hardships and trials that true love must endure. The movie keeps the viewer guessing until the very end whether or not there will be the classic fairy tale ending.
It is both a classic fairy tale style and a modern comedy with well choreographed action sequences, and intense instances of suspense.
When I first saw this movie, I went right home and placed it at #3 on my all-time favorites list. But then I watched it again, and I realized just how annoying Fred Savage’s character is. I can’t stand the whole modern-day portion of the movie. I mean, the Peter Falk narration is okay, but everything else about it seems to interrupt to story rather than help it along. And what’s with the Rodents of Unusual Size? Really cheesy stuff. It’s like the Jar-jar Binks of The Princess Bride. I cringe whenever that scene comes up.

My 12th to 14th Favorite Motion Pictures

2007-10-12T11:27:00.000-05:00

14. Serenity (2005)
From start to finish there are no wasted moments. The first ten minutes present such a wealth of information and excitement that, if you blink, you’ll have to rewatch what you just missed. All your emotions will be engaged. You'll laugh, you'll cry, you'll gasp in shock. What you won't be is bored. There's plenty here for everybody: Good writing, witty dialogue, memorable lines, excellent acting, plot, action (not just gratuitous – I’m talking about action that actually makes sense in terms of the plot) and excellent effects.
Note to future sci-fi film-makers: Hero kicking ass while rescuing a heroine from disaster = cute. Having that heroine kick ass right along side the hero = awesome.
Why not rate this one higher? Like the Star Trek series, this motion picture is no where near as exciting if you haven’t first seen the television series on which it was based (Firefly).

13. Amadeus (1984)
Here is a stunning, captivating tale of a competent, talented, first-class musician who had the misfortune of being a contemporary of the greatest musician who ever lived. Loved the story, loved the acting, loved the set decoration and costume design. It’s an emotionally charged story of jealousy with quite possibly the greatest soundtrack of any motion picture ever. And anyone who declares war on the heavens is okay in my book.
Why not rate this one higher? Okay, here’s the deal – from here on out, these movies have no serious flaws. I can’t think of one thing I disliked about Amadeus. Sure it’s a long movie, but since it’s so engaging, it’s not toooo long. I think Tim Hulce is a bit over the top at times, but that’s how Mozart was (I guess), so his acting is appropriate for the part. From here on out, the only reason why I’m not rating a movie any higher is because the movies higher on the list were ever so slightly more thrilling for me. (One exception = the Princess Bride. I can tell you in a heartbeat why I don’t rank it higher. But I’ll get to that one soon.)

12. Airplane! (1980)
If the idea of a comedy is to laugh, than surely (shirley) this is one has the right idea. In fact, it has the best idea: dead-panned dialogue delivered in humourous situations with clever antics happening rapid-fire in the back ground. So many jokes (both visual & in dialogue) are packed into Airplane! that it takes several viewing to catch them all. Unlike so many comedies since then, the actors here don’t need to act over-the-top or divulge in gross-out humor to get easy laughs. I have watched this movie at least twenty times, and everytime I find myself laughing until I am crying. This movie has consistently been on my “All time favorites” list for twenty years now. Of movies that are purely comedic, there is none finer than Airplane!

My 15th to 17th Favorite Motion Pictures

2007-10-04T14:48:00.000-05:00

17. Star Wars (Trilogy) (1977-1983)
Okay, so these are probably the most written-about movies in the history of cinema. But they do deserve the bulk of the attention they get. They are just plain fun film-making. From start to finish, there’s always something new, some new world or species waiting to grab your attention. Absolutely everything is original – think about it: there are very few movies out there that do not take place on Earth or involve people from Earth.
Why not rate this one higher? Mark Hamill = lousy, whiny actor (at least in Episode IV). And Return of the Jedi? Too much Ewok.

16. Shine (1996)
Flashbacks were never so artistically put to celluloid. The story of pianist David Helfgott is at times touching, suspenseful, humorous; but at all times intriguing. Follow closely, the story fabulously uses mostly visuals to tell itself. The scene of Helfgott (almost) performing the Rach 3 is one of the best ever! And Mr. Rush does a top-notch job of portraying the pianist.
Why not rate this one higher? Some scenes are just plain awkward. I wasn’t sure if I was supposed to laugh or feel pity. Weird stuff.

15. Super Size Me! (2004)
Here’s the highest-ranked documentary on my list. Director Morgan Spurlock takes his cues from Michael Moore by placing himself in the action and spicing up an important topic with loads of humor. Spurlock one-ups Moore, though, by not allowing his own agenda to overshadow the big issues. This film was informative, funny, moving and relevant. I haven’t eaten at McDonald’s since then.
Why not rate this one higher? The beginning of Spurlock’s 30-day experiment gets off to a slooow start. And though the segment about public school lunches was captivating, I didn’t see how it supported the main theme.

My 18th to 20th Favorite Motion Pictures

2007-09-27T10:36:00.000-05:00

20. Bowling for Columbine (2002)
Moore excels at placing himself in the action and orchestrating events while filming them (a rarity for documentary film-makers who do most of their manipulating covertly while editing). Bowling is the best of the bunch. While I don’t always agree with his tactics, Moore makes some very valid points here: America is a violent county, guns do need to be controlled better, and Charleton Heston makes for a lousy spokesperson for any organization. Despite the nature and heavy tone of the main issues, Moore manages to spice his film with humor (loved that animated history of the U.S.) and sets a fine example of responsible citizenship. If more people in the world had more passion to fix the ills of the world like Moore, the world would be a much better place.
Why not rate this one higher? Did I mention I don’t always agree with his tactics? While I don’t think that disagreeing with his tactics makes, in itself, for poor film-making, the whole scene of accusing Kmart for selling the bullets that were eventually used at Columbine was wholly unfair.

19. North by Northwest (1959)
Okay, I know there’s a lot of Hitchcock on this list, but let me explain. For one thing, I’ve seen three times more Hitchcock-directed movies than those directed by anyone else. The reason why I have seen so many is because I enjoy his work. Not all of his stuff is that great, though, and I could name off several very mediocre films he directed (The Trouble with Harry, Lifeboat, Vertigo, Marnie, Family Plot) and even some I absolutely despise (Under Capricorn, for example). Still, there are plenty of good ones. Like North by Northwest…
Ah, yes, the epitome of all things Hitchcock. This film brings in everything Hitchcock perfected over the prior 30 years of his career. This action-packed, suspense laden flick is chock-full of memorable scenes. A crop duster may not be the most practical way to kill a man, but it's a great visual representation of the great Hitchcockian examination of "nowhere to run, nowhere to hide". The climb down, around and back up to Mount Rushmore is also memorable. Did I mention the innuendo – possibly the best comedic ending of a film ever?
Why not rate this higher? I just can not get over how old Cary Grant is for this role. And, there’s a few minor logistical holes to get the story going in the beginning; I wish the writer’s would have polished it up a little bit.

And now for five movies in a row that start with the letter ‘S’:
18. Strangers on a Train (1951)
Suspense! Suspense! Suspense! Hitchcock creates another gem in this 1951 classic. The hero seems partially to blame for all his woes, so you are continually debating whether to side with him or not. A murder scene filmed like none you've ever seen before (through the reflection of the victim's eyeglasses) & a climax that's equally unique (on a merry-go-round), make for one of the best dramas ever.
Why not rate this one higher? I used to rank this as one of my ten favorite films of all time, but subsequent viewings increasingly weaken the ending for me. The carousel sequence is great, but otherwise the final few minutes stretches believability a little bit.

My 21st to 23rd Favorite Motion Pictures

2007-09-19T07:47:00.000-05:00

23. Best in Show (2000)
I wasn’t too keen on seeing this picture. After viewing Christopher Guest’s earlier mockumentary – the overly-hyped This is Spiňal Tap – I was afraid this would not be that great either. Well, I was wrong. Guest and his troupe have all the elements of both halves of the contraction “mockumentary” down pat: the film looks and feels as if it’s a documentary, but the people are not real – they are actors. And those actors flawlessly capture all the little eccentricities of dog owners. This is probably one of the biggest crowd-pleasers on this list; when I’ve shown this list to friends, this is one of two films that they all agree should be on their lists, too.
Why not rank it higher? Sometimes the laughs are a bit awkward – I’m not sure if I’m supposed to laugh or feel sorry for the characters. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing (it shows the actors are convincing), but it does detract from the comedic element.

22. Star Trek (series) (1979 – 2002)
Okay, I’m throwing this whole series together as one entry – all ten motion pictures. It’s a mixed bag, really, but they do flow together quite well from one to the next. When this series is good, it is awesome. The action, dialogue and story-lines are exciting, witty and clever, respectively. Humor and pathos – all whilst saving the universe. If you love the television series (and I do love the television series), you’ll love these movies as they further the stories of the characters, and wrap up the loosed ends left by the TV episodes.
Why not rank it higher? Did I mention it’s a mixed bag? Part one is dreadfully slow, part five is simply an exercise in Shatner’s ego, and while the first seven enhance the TV series from which they are gleaned, the more recent three only detract from what was a perfect story arc in The Next Generation. Also, it’s tough to rate this series of movies without referencing the TV shows. As such, it seems unfair to rank this any higher, as the movies themselves are not as great without first having watched the TV shows from whence they were gleaned.

21. Back to the Future (1985)
Here we have the perfect plot. So many loose ends are left hanging, you wonder how they will all fit together. But in this sci-fi/comedy they do, well, perfectly. Watch closely; everything that happens in the first 20 minutes comes back around at the end. But even on a simpler level, this fast-paced picture is pure cinematic enjoyment. Yes, there are two other movies in the Back to the Future Trilogy, but we’re gonna pretend they don’t exist. I would easily put this motion picture in my top ten, except…
Why not rank it higher? There’s a whole ten minute segment – from the time Marty McFly is freed from the trunk of a car, until he arrives back downtown with Dr. Brown – that is just plain poor story-telling. It’s gratuitous and ignores temporal causality (an area at which this movie normally excels) for the sake of a few laughs. Worse, this portion of the movie throws in unnecessary mini-stories wherein George McFly inexplicably decides not to stand up for the girl he just stood up for while we watch Marty quickly ‘fading’ from life in nonconformance to his sibling’s prior, slower fades. And why does Lorraine suddenly ask if she’ll ever see Marty again? Why would she think that she wouldn’t? Nevermind, it’s just thrown in there for a (failed) attempt at a laugh.

My 24th to 26th Favorite Motion Pictures

2007-09-07T08:23:00.000-05:00

26. The Iron Giant (1999)
Here's one of only two animated films on my list. This film (directed by Brad Bird, who later went on to direct The Incredibles) shows that cartoons need not be relegated to the dustbin of history, as Disney noew seems to think. But besides the cool, colorful animation, this animated tale goes one step futher than all those princess-falls-in-love pieces of crap by actually telling an intriguing, relevant story. There was suspense, excitement, romance, action and mystery - and this is a kid's movie! The big mystery, actually, kept me guessing right up until the climax. And the denouement is just about the most perfect ending I've ever seen in any film, animated or not. If I only ever buy my son one animated movie ever, this will be it.
Why not rate it higher? Some of the dialogue was unfortunately trite, and the film seems to wander a bit during the first quarter.

25. Trekkies (1999)
The final year of the 20th century was a good one for motion pictures (see #26, above and #42, below). The best documentary of that year, and one of the best documentries of all-time is Trekkies. What I loved most about this documentary was how unexpected it was. I assumed this would be just a light-hearted romp through the lives of people who were way more interested in Star Trek than is healthy. But instead, it was a poingiant, insightful, meaningful look at how Star Trek has shaped the lives' of its fans and how they deal with an often non-understanding society. Especially touching was the story of the handicapped man who wrote to Gene Roddenberry thanking him for helping him forget he was confined to a wheelchair and, conversely, the man who purposely confines himself to a wheelchair (similar to Captain Pike's) just so he can identify more fully with that character. Oh, and it's good fun too - if my dentist office actually looked like the Enterprise (like the one detailed in this documentary), I would actually make an appointment.
Why not rate it higher? Because a couple of the stories are uninteresting and/or too much time is spent on them.

24. The Birds (1963)
This episodic neo-noir thriller is, at the same time, both a continuation of what Hitchcock was creating at the time and something completely original. The action/suspense/stroyline continue to rise and fall every twenty minutes or so as if it is a series of short films rather than one long one. The characters are bizarre, the birds' attacks are horrific and the soundtrack...well, it's not there. Coming from the same person who directed Vertigo, Psycho and Rebecca, it's hard to believe there no music here, but there isn't. And that makes the film that much more frightening - the birds themselves furnish the 'music'. Another quirk I really like: the story doesn't really end, we just see our heroes driving off for what they think will be a safe spot, but which the radio voice-over tells us is not. The words "The End" do not appear on screen.
Why not rate it higher? That's easy. The first half hour or so is spent setting up the characters, but it's annoyingly slow. And Tippi Hedren isn't exactly the best actress I've ever seen.

My 27th - 29th Favorite Motion Pictures

2007-08-31T09:02:00.000-05:00

29. Riviére du Hibou, La (An Occurence at Owl Creek Bridge) (1962)
This short film has about as near-perfect camera work as any film I’ve ever viewed. Well-timed close-ups and long shots, dolly-shots, French angles, and other camera trickery are all employed within the mere 28 it takes to tell this story.
But…this is more than just a study in how to use a camera; it also tells a captivating story. From the moment we see the first troops approaching the bridge, we are scarcely given a moment to breathe. The story is gut-wrenching, edge-of-your-seat Hitchcockian fare that made me gasp more than once, all leading up to an amazing denouement. I used to exclude this film from my list of all-time bests due to it not being a feature-lenght film. But I think that was a bit of an arbitrary exclusion, so I have placed it here, amongst all the 'big' films.
Why not rank it higher? There's this really corny part where we hear wat the lead character is thinking ("I'm free! I'm free!") and then a really losuy song begins playing. It makes me cringe. In a film that's not even a half-hour long, that three minutes really wrecks things.

28. Dial 'M' for Murder (1954)
Here's another Hitchcock faithfully adapted from a play. And you can tell, too - almost the entire movie takes place in a single room in a single house. Still, in true Hitchcock fashion, the camera is used to the fullest extent, taking an active role in the story. The excitement of what is, initially, a perfect crime and how it goes awry kept me engaged throughout. This was the first of three films Grace Kelly starred in for Hitchcock, and she plays the best role in this one. Her defense against her attacker is original and unexpected (I fully expected her to be killed the first time I saw this film, even though I knew she was the main character).
Why not rank it higher? The film was shot with the belief that it would be distributed in 3-D. It wasn't, and as a consequence, it suffers somewhat seeing it in basic 2-D. Also, Ray Milland, the lead actor in the film? He's a bit stodgy.

27. The Ten Commandments (1956)
This mega-mother-of-all-epics holds my attention like no other 4-hour movie I've seen. The narration ties it all together until the climax of the penning of the commandments. The special-effects are awesome & the basic theme of a people being rescued from a horrible life are spectacularly displayed. There are so many characters and so much going on over so many years, it's amazing they were able to keep it down to four hours. Also, great acting from Yul Brenner, Cedric Hardwicke and Anne Baxter.
Why not rank it higher? Some of the dialogue is (unintentionally) laughable. And Charleton Heston appears to have gone to the William Shatner school of acting. It's also odd that, during the last three hours of this film, which take place over the course of 80 years, Moses is the only one who ages.

My 30th to 32nd Favorite Motion Pictures

2007-08-22T12:01:00.000-05:00

32. Napoleon Dynamite (2004)
Okay, if it seems kind of blasphemous to rank this movie higher than Citizen Kane that’s because 1) it is blasphemous and, 2) this is a list base on how much I enjoyed viewing a particular movie. If this list was based on how much respect I have for a movie, or how influential it is, then the rankings would be decidedly different. But, nope, this list is just based on how much I enjoyed spending my time in front of a screen watching a piece of celluloid And to that, I say, Napoleon is flippin’ sweet.
A small movie such as this is fun for its details; I loved watching each character go about their own little bizarre – and yet, somehow familiar – worlds. The quirky humor started right off after the clever opening credits. I instantly liked this movie and often had to wipe the tears off my face from laughing so hard.
Why not rank it higher? ‘Cause, I’ll rank it however I want. God.

31. The Godfather, parts I and II (1972 – 1974)
This pair of movies – essentially one movie cut up into two parts – has everything going for it. Every actor is of the highest quality, and yet they all look so different from one another that I did not spend the bulk of the film trying to keep track of who was who. The movies have so many great, iconic scenes, it’s tough to narrow the list down. These are absolutely flawless, refined pieces of entertainment. And, in a very rare move, part two not only enhances and enriches the story begun in part one, but it actually surpasses the first part.
Why not rank it higher? All its brilliance aside, I’m just not into gangster movies. Like westerns, I don’t eschew them simply on account of their genre, but it takes a lot more for me to “get into” them. Also, they’re a little on the long side; I think both movies could be made better by chopping out about twenty minutes.

30. Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind (2004)
This is one wild head trip. The story is surreal and non-linear. I’m such a sucker for non-linear story-telling. The plot is unique; I have never seen anything similar to it either before or since. 'Eternal Sunshine' manages to dazzle you with it's originality and it's poignancy. The fact that this movie was able to wrap such profound loss, emotional tenderness, and hope in such a self-consciously stylized package of science fiction is absolutely amazing. The use of vibrant coloring and quick camera movement give the film a very involving first hand feeling. On a personal note, by the time I saw this movie I was sick of Jim Carey and his Ace Ventura routine. This, coupled with The Truman Show showed that he can put that crap behind him and make some good flicks.
Why not rank it higher? Way too much hand-held camera! I think I was nauseous when I saw this on the big screen. And too many people in their underwear.

My 33rd to 35th Favorite Motion Pictures

2007-08-02T20:29:00.000-05:00

35 - Babe (1995)
Talking animals generally don't equal a great time at the theater, but Babe somehow manages to rise above the genre and become a memorable, one-of-a-kind film that runs a lot deeper than one would first suspect. It's poiniant, positive, beautiful and original. And it's spliced up into bite-sized chapters with mice coming along to narrate. James Cromwell is the lead (human) actor and, as his first name implies he is very good as what he does. One more great reason to see this film: It was banned in Malaysia.
Why not rank this higher? That's a tough one. I'd have to go with the fact that it's a bit slow in places and the story, while certainly very well-crafted and likable, is a simple one. Man, maybe I should rank this higher.

34 - Mary Poppins (1964)
The best-selling film of 1964 was the final film Walt Disney himself produced (and it shows - before 1964: Disney = good; after 1964: Disney = lousy). So many elements combine to make this a success that it's impossible to single out one reason why I love it, but I think I can name three: Great songs, great human-animation segment and a very anti-capitalism message.
Why not rank this higher? Because it's just a fun movie. Well-made, and fun, but nothing more.

33 - Citizen Kane (1941)
Citizen Kane is a masterpiece. Nearly every critic loves this film, and many place it on the top of their lists of all-time best films. And it is awesome. It's brilliant. Thre's so much to love about the cinematography: the opening gothic scenes of Kane's fog-enshrouded mansion, the bizarre filming of Kane's death, the news-report reel that explains his life and death, the scene that takes us through a neon sign, the deep-focuses, the over-lapping dialogue, the oblique angles (in one scene, we witness the action from below the floor), the montage of Kane's failing marriage depicted by an ever-growing distance at the breakfast table. And the story itself is gripping, too: the title character dies in the first five minutes, the mystery of his final words, and on and on and on.
Why not rank this higher? Like other films from that era (such as Gone With the Wind), Citizen Kane suffers on the small screen. I've viewed it twice on TV and once in the theater and the difference was stunning. Also, much of the love given to Citizen Kane is due to its not being sentimental (a rarity at the time) and its innovative filming techniques. These are noteworthy things, to be sure, but here, in 2007, they don't make a film stand out as much as they did back then.

My 36th - 38st Favorite Motion Pictures

2007-07-25T21:02:00.000-05:00

38. Dr. Strangelove, or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb (1964)
Stanley Kubrick gets a lot of attention for films such as "2001", "The Shining" and "Eyes Wide Shut". While I'm not saying those are bad films, I am saying they all pale compared to the over-the-top insane juggernaut of a motion picture that is Dr. Strangelove. The absurdity of superpower posturing is never more focrefully - and hilariously - brought home. The inestimable Peter Sellers plays not one, not two, but three roles, to which I say: More! As the films escalates in suspense and parody through its 93 minutes, it only gets more and more and more nutty, culminating in what is quite likely the ultimate trigger-happy male's fantasy...which I won't give away for those who haven't seen this flick.
Why not rate this higher? It's a one-trick pony, to put it gently. The film suceeds because it know when to end, but it still could use a little more depth.

37. Schindler's List (1993)
Steven Spielberg gets a lot of attention for, well, everything he ever touches. But for "Schindler's List", he really deserves the accolades this time. The layered picture immediately drops the viewer in the panic of the moment in history that was Nazi Germany. The black-and-white graniness and the hand-held shots lend an immediacy and chaos that instantly compliments and enhances the storyline. I found myself gasping in horror at the senseless murders, the lack of human rights and the fight for every life that so many good people had to go through on a daily basis.
Why not rate this higher? Okay, it's a little long. In comparison to the book of the same title, it just doesn't hold up as well. Worst of all, Spielberg seems to be beating us over the head with an over-glorification of Schindler himself during the final 15 minutes of the film. Chill out, Stevie, I get the picture: Schindler did a great thing.

36. The Abyss (1989)
James Cameron gets a lot of attention for Titanic and the Terminator movies. But in between the chick-flick and the testosterone-driven action movies, there's one that stands above the others: The Abyss. I didn't expect much when I first sat down to watch this picture, and it more than made up for my low expectations. Great suspense, great story, great special effects. There are so many great scenes in this film, especially the scene depicting the ship's accidnetal fall into the (what else?) abyss and the drowning of Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio's character. Oops, have I said too much? Guess I'' stop there.
Why not rate this higher? The dialogue in The Abyss? Like every Cameron picture it's very very very corny. It's about an 8 on the cringe-worthy scale, with 1 being "not cringe-worthy at all" and 10 being "The Phantom Menace".

My 39th - 41st Favorite Motion Pictures

2007-07-16T14:08:00.000-05:00

41. Roots (1977)
Clocking in at 540 minutes puts an immediate strike against any motion picture, but this engaging story here kept me entralled from beginning to end. And here's the amazing thing: this is a made-for-TV movie. Almost as a law of the universe, made-for-TV is synonymous with crappy, but yet again Roots rises above. The camera work is unprecedented for television, and there's nary a second-rate actor in the whole (enormous) cast. I also appreciated the graphic depiction of the events, again a rarity for television.
Why not rate this higher? Well, maybe 540 minutes is a bit long. The series loses a little momentum once Kunta and Kizzy have left the scene. Oh - and Kizzy? Annoying.

40. One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest (1975)
I viewed this film becuase it had been the second film in history to win the 'top five' Oscars (Best Picture, Actor, Actress, Director and Screenplay). Normally, when I watch a film with such high expectations, it doesn't hold up - but this one did. Great acting, a great story, and just about the best ending of any motion picture. Ever.
Why not rate this higher? Oh, look, it's Jack Nicholson playing himself again. Man, I get so sick of that guy. Also, what happened in the 70s that caused cinematographers to forget what natural color was?

39. Notorious (1946)
Another classic Hitchcock, this one is filled with memorable scenes: The long kissing scene that skillfully subverts the production code of the time, the camera pan to the key in Bergman's hand, the wine bottles, and especially the suspenseful, slow walk down the stairs of the mansion as Raines' character looks on powerless. Even the very end, as Grant locks the car door - I smile in sheer delight at these skillfully crafted scenes. Laila Valente once said: "Notorious is one of the most romantic and sensual movies ever made. The continuous and rising tension between the two antagonists is almost tangible. Their desperate need of each other explodes in the ever-lasting kiss and the revelation of his love on Alicia's death bed. Cary Grant has never been so dark and vulnerable." Good call.

My 42nd - 44th Favorite Motion Pictures

2007-04-21T22:27:00.001-05:00

44. The Sound of Music (1965)
Yeah, that's right - The Sound of Freakin' Music. Go ahead, laugh at me.
The truth is, this is one great motion picture. As a whole, I don't like musicals. But I do have three musicals on my list, and this is one of them. Unlike most musicals, the songs in this picture do not seem to awkwardly retard the progression of the story; rather, they enhance it. The Sound of Music clocks in at a whopping 174 minutes. The first 100 minutes are just plain fun - the characters, the situations, and the music (of course). Suddenly, the film switches gears to a high suspense noirish drama. The songs vanish with the sunset, appearantly. I've heard people joke that it's like two movies in one, and I see their point. Still: both 'movies' fit together into one great tale.

43. The Indiana Jones Trilogy (1981-1989)
Ah, yes, another trilogy. When I first viewed "Raiders of the Lost Ark", I thought to myself: that was so much fun - that's how every movie should be! Okay, so I don't think every movie should be like that anymore, but if a studio is going to go through the trouble of financing a special-effects laden summer blockbuster with a big name star, they do well to emulate the tales of Dr. Jones. In fact, let me think of a better summer blockbuster trilogy...oh, that's right, there isn't one. Oh, wait there is one...but I'll get to that later. Anyways, these three movies are made of non-stop seat-of-your-pants excitement wrapped around the most amazing treasure hunt in cinema history. Indiana gets into scrapes approximately every five seconds, and yet still, unbelievably, manages to escape alive. Pure fun. Pure adrenaline. And a little bit of history thrown in.

42. Office Space (1999)
The first time I watched this movie, I wrote it off as good, but not great. Then I got a job where I spent much of my time in a cubical. Then I watched the movie again, and decided it was just about the funniest thing I had ever seen. So, I admit it may not have the mass appeal that other films on this list may possess; but remember: this is my list of favorites. That being said, it's worth a look for anyone who's ever had a job. The first five minutes are priceless comedic celluloid, and there's plenty more laughs during the next hour and a half. I, for one, even laughed at the lawyer's name (Rob Newhouse - ha!) This is probably the most quotable movie on my list:
Bob: Looks like you've been missing a lot of work lately.
Peter: I wouldn't say I've been *missing* it, Bob.

My 45th - 47th Favorite Motion Pictures

2007-03-02T11:24:00.000-06:00

47. 13 Conversations About One Thing (2001)
Hey, look! A film directed by a woman!
"Faith is the antithesis of proof" is just one of dozens of great lines in this motion picture featuring many (13?) diverse storylines that eventually overlap and merge. The movie is very unstylized: there are no special effects in the usual sense. Still, the different storylines are very well played out. Each and every storyline could have been a full movie in and of itself, but it's the interweaving of all the story lines that make it one of my favorites. The symbolism of red ink/blood in each storyline is a classic example of symbolism used to enhance the characters' feelings.
Why not rate this film higher? Did I mention it's not stylized? While that's not necessarily a bad thing, this film has a daytime-TV drama feel about it.

46. Suspicion (1941)
Hey, look! Another Hitchcock film!
Is Johnnie trying to murder his wife, or isn't he? No one could make answering this question as fun as Hitchcock. Cary Grant plays "Johnnie" so well, I couldn't decide if he was innocent or guilty up until the very end. So many things keep the viewer from figuring out the answer. For example, Johnnie seems like a nice enough gu, but why would he be purchasing poisonous powder? And what's with his late father - did Johnnie kill him? Hmm...
There are some great camera shots in this film, notably the tracking shot when Johnnie brings a glass of milk up a long, spiral staircase to his wife. His wife, by the way, is played by Joan Fontaine - who also starred in "Rebecca" - and was the only person to ever win an Oscar for acting in a Hitchcock film.
Why not rate this film higher? It took a while to grow on me. I didn't think it was that special the first time I watched it, notably because the first half of the film is s o s l o w.

45. Festen (The Celebration) (1998)
Hey, look! A foreign language film!
I don't speak Dutch, but I still loved this film. I was first introduced to this film in a film studies class, in which we watched a portion of it as a Dogme 95 film. What's a Dogme 95 film? ...you may ask. Essentially, it's a film that subscribes to certain rules about film making; rules that attempt to create a very realistic film. For example, no fake lighting can be used: the film can only contain sunlight or lights that are actually in the film itself. The same thing goes for music: only diegetic music - music that can be heard by the characters - may be used. Thus, it is okay to show a character playing a CD, but it would be wrong to dub in music while editing. Also, the camera must be handheld at all time.
Not only does this film succeed in it's attempt to be a Dogme '95, it does it very well. While watching the entire film, I couldn't help but think that the Dogme rules made the film even better. The raw, realistic style of shooting the film fit in perfectly with the raw, realistic sotry featuring a family reunion.
Oh yeah, the story itself totally rocks, too. It's the patriarch's 60th birthday party, but his children have not grown up in the way he had hoped. And one of his kids has some very dirty secrets to reveal during dinner.
Why not rate this film higher? Like "Suspicion", this film is in no hurry to get moving. It takes a while to draw you in, and the first half of the film shows us unnecessarily long scenes of the different family members getting ready for the party. Some of thes scenes are interesting, as they pertain to the main story that develops later, but some of these little forays into storytelling seem totally irrelevant.

My 48th - 50th Favorite Motion Pictures

2007-02-24T13:11:00.000-06:00

50. The X-Men Trilogy (2000-2006)
In between all the Lord of the Rings, Spider-Man, Hulk and Fantastic Four crap, there stands this trilogy of very very entertaining sci-fi flicks. Unlike Lord of the Rings, you don't have to be an expert on the source material to understand what's going on. And, unlike Spider-Man, Hulk and Fantastic Four, this series seemed to realize that, while special effects are lots of fun, they are nothing without an intelligently written story. As absurd as this may sound when talking about a trilogy involving mutants, the characters are believable and the multiple stroy arcs all fit together and ensure that there's never a dull moment. The characters are not defined by their abilities, like in so many other sci-fi pictures, but by their personalities, and, indeed, many characters seem to embody such qualities as intelligence, coolness, insecutiry, sexiness and wisdom. Conversely, unlike much sci-fi drivel, no character is defined in terms of 'good' or 'evil'. There are differing ideologies, to be sure, but no one is totally pure and wholesome of motives, and no one is there simply to be 'the bad guy'.
I saw all three of these movies at the theater and, each time, I found myself wishing for more. I wish I could say that about more movies.
Why not rate this film higher? One reason why I wanted each movie to last longer was because a few of the storylines are frustratingly underdeveloped. There are so many loose ends that the third film seems to have trouble tying them all together. Oh - and that third film, while certainly a respectably entry in the series, is notably the weakest of the three. The great charcterizations of the first two take a back seat to explosions and quick-fixes.

49. Rebecca (1940)
My list is very Hitchcock-heavy (pun intended). So let's start off with one right here at #49: Rebecca. Often cited as a "chick flick" in the Hitchcock canon, this black-and-white picture is the only Hitchcock film to win the Oscar for Best Picture.
The film begins in a humorous tone, and gets steadily more serious as details of the characters' lives are revealed. It is, basically, the sotry of a young wife finding herself living very much in the shadow of her husband's former (and now deceased) first wife. While the husband, Max, seems to love his new bride, it is the housekeeper that seems to have trouble accepting the new lady of the house. In between this triable of characters are plot twists, symbolism, and slases of humor typical of a Hitchock offering.
Fun game:Try to figure out the name of Joan Fontaine's character.
Why not rate this film higher? Like I said, it's a "chick flick" or, as much of a "chick flick" as Hitchcock ever made, and I am no chick. Also, time has been unkind to certain aspects of the dialogue and story; it's a little bit dated. Oh, and it's also a little too long, in my haughty opinion.

48. Ingen Numsil (2003)
During the first few minutes this film shows us just how vital the camel is to the well being of the family. So, it’s somewhat of a problem when one of the newborn camels is rejected by its mother. The remainder of the film is spent showing us the different ways in which the family tries to get the mother to accept its calf. The different approaches progressively get more extreme and time consuming. Some of the family’s efforts are comical, but most were quite frustrating.
The final fifteen minutes or so is the best portion of the film. And, if you’re gonna have a “best portion of the film”, it’s a good idea to put it at the end. I don’t want to give away the denouement, but suffice it to say the infant camel is only marginally hanging on to its new life by this point and the situation has become desperate. The fact that camels can cry was a revelation to me. Coupled with the somber music (the only soundtrack in the whole film!), the conclusion was quite emotional.
This film has to be one of the best examples I’ve seen of the style of cinematography perfectly matching the story being told. The slow, plodding intro gives us a glipmpse into the family’s pace of life. The bleak, minimal soundtrack and sparse editing match up nicely with the barren landscape upon which the story is told. The shots are often hand-held, giving it a more documentary feel, again befitting the life of the characters’. Indeed, the documentary feel is best exemplified by the fact that on a couple of occasions, non-actors in the background actually look right at the camera (typically a no-no). To give the viewer more of a “this is our family” feel, like so many home-made videos, the camera is, a couple of times, struggling to get the best shot of the action. A good example is during the camel’s birth: while shooting the scene, family members run right in front of the camera and the cinematographer is forced to dodge and weave around them in an effort to get the footage.
If you do see it, know that the film fades back in. Twice. And you’ll be glad you stayed for those two “footnotes”.
Why not rate the film higher? Well, as I've said, it's a little on the slow side. A little too slow for my liking. And while it is a moving, passionate, story, it is just a smiple story. Not that that's a bad thing, but it does lessen the impact on further viewings.

My Fifty All-Time Favorite Motion Pictures

2007-02-19T21:00:00.001-06:00

I love making lists, and one list I always wanted to make was a list of my all-time favorite films. I actually made such a list about 8 years ago, but for some stupid reason I divided the list by short films, animated films, comedies, dramas and silent films. This, plus the fact that my wife and I have watched about 500 motion pictures in the eight years since, has made me realize that I should make a new list.

So I did.

I didn’t show many people the list, because I was afraid of offending some people who may have a stricter conscience. But then I remembered, “the taking of offense is what rests in the bosom of the stupid ones” (Ecclesiastes 7:9). What strikes me as funny, anyways, is why someone who is – of feels they will be – offended would continue reading. So here’s the deal, if you are the kind of person who gets offended, then you are, by default, stupid. So stop reading this right now and go do whatever it is stupid people do.

I’m rather happy with my list. I have seen similar lists from other people and many of them seem skewed in a certain way; some lists have only major studio blockbusters, while other lists were are made by people who purposely exclude any popular motion picture. Some are heavily weighted towards drama, as if sci-fi and comedy are not worthy of being highly esteemed. Still other lists contain only movies from the last ten or twenty years.

In creating my list, I made sure not exclude anything simply because of its genre, age or length. Unfortunately, the list is still weighted towards films made during my lifetime, but I attribute that, not to a disdain for older films, but merely to the fact that I’ve seen newer films. I have every reason believe that if I were to see as many films from, say, the 1940s as I’ve seen from the 1990s, then there would be many more films from that decade on the list. As it is, there are multiple films from each decade since the 1940s.

To create the list, I sorted my list of feature length motion pictures I have seen by rank. I rank every motion picture I see on a scale of 0 – 10. On my list of over 1,100 motion pictures, there were only 22 that I assigned a perfect “10”. Those, of course, made the list. I then looked at the pictures I had assigned a “9”, and selected my favorites from those. I then looked at my list of short films I have seen, and selected my favorites from that list. This gave me a list of 63 pictures. I then had the difficult task of paring the list down to 50. The thirteen motion pictures that got chopped are (alphabetically): The Day the Earth Stood Still, Dumbo, Ed Wood, East of Eden, Falling Down, Gandhi, Monsters, Inc., The Ox-box Incident, Pee-wee’s Big Adventure, Roger and Me, The Shawshank Redemption, Superman (parts I and II), and Top Secret. Sorry, guys, you’re all excellent films in my opinion, but you just didn’t hold up against 50 others…

Oh – and one other thing, I took some liberties in lumping together series films. If my list contained multiple motion pictures from the same series, I listed them as one single entry. If I thought the series didn’t hold up well enough, then I just listed the film(s) from the series that were worthy. Thus, my list contains the X-Men trilogy as a single entry, but it contains only the original Back to the Future picture.

Over the next month or so, I’ll periodically make posts here discussing my fifty all-time favorite motion pictures. I’m gonna go in reverse order, starting at number fifty. I would love any comments regarding why you would or would not put these films on a similar (albeit hypothetical) list of your own.

Science Fair

2007-02-12T14:52:00.001-06:00

Don’t let the title mislead you, it doesn’t mean that I’m am fair judge of science; it means that I was a judge at science fair. I was such a judge on Thursday, January 18th at the Hopkins High School.

Three people judged each science project: two adults “in the industry” and one senior in an advanced science class. It appeared as though every single freshman had to participate, so the quality of each project varied greatly. I signed up to judge the students’ projects in the astronomy/physics division. The coordinator gave each judge around a dozen sheets of paper. Each sheet had a project number on it, telling us who to go judge, and a ‘checklist’ of about twenty items that we would judge the project on. Some of the items on the checklist were creativity, originality, appearance, clarity and accuracy.

After grabbing some of the free food available, I set off to go judge the projects. Each project was displayed on a cardboard triptych and students waited by their project until a judge came by. When I located the first project I needed to judge, there was a girl waiting for me, sitting on the table. When she saw me coming, she jumped up and shook my hand and introduced herself. Get this: she made a hoverboard. I had absolutely no idea how to make a hoverboard, or even what exactly a hoverboard is, but she was more than willing to explain it to me in a prepared spiel. Turns out, she was trying to find out what surface gave the hoverboard the best lift: grass or concrete. I was very impressed. While reading the info on her board, at one point she said to me: “You’re making me nervous.” When I asked he why, she said it was because I wasn’t saying anything. “I’m busy reading your stuff”, I told her. It’s funny to think that I was intimidating to someone.

I also got to judge a project involving the testing of fishing lines (most lines don’t hold up as well as they say they do), the best room for good guitar acoustics, how fast pop-corn dissolves, the best angle to launch an arrow, and what flooring provides the best basketball bounce.

The only other project that impressed me as much as the hoverboard was one involving paint balls. Although not as original as the hoverboard idea, the kid made up for it in thoroughness. He had attached a paintball gun to a table, and then received permission from the city to fire the gun in a local park. He ran a line straight out from the gun some 200 yards, then fired eight different name brands of paint ball ten times each and measured how far they deviated from the line. The goal was to see which brand strayed the least from the line, and, by dividing the distance skewed by the price per ball; he calculated which brands were the best for one’s money. His charts, graphs and diagrams were very thorough and eye-catching. It was very cool.

Next month I get to judge a regional science fair. It will feature the winners of all the school-level contests from all over the metro area.

Housekeeping

2007-02-12T14:50:00.001-06:00

So, I'm just gonna take this opportunity to talk about a few odds and ends.
First off, the wife and I are once again participating in the Humane Society for Companion Animal's annual "Fur Bowl" to help raise money for unwanted animals. So, if you'd like to contribute to the cause, send us some money. Make checks payable to HSCA. And don't forget to write it off on your taxes next month.
Second, I stated about a year ago that I was going to keep track of two things this year: the number of times I ate at fast food and the number of perfect-weather days that there were here in Minnesota. Click here to see my initial statement on this issue and my criteria for each item. I know it's not the end of the year yet, but I don't think either list will be amended in the last 8 days of the year.
On the topic of fast food: I am sorry to report that I gave up keeping track of this around mid-may, so I lack a complete list. But I believe the answer to the question "how much fast food do I eat" is this: TOO MUCH. In my defense, I only once ate at one of the really crappy dives (Taco Bell) and I never ate at Burger King, McDonald's, Hardee's, Dairy Queen or those kinds of places. Nevertheless, by May 8th of this year, I had eaten at 24 fast food restaurants, including Pizza Hut (once), LeAnn Chin (3x), Subway (2x) and Panera (4x). So a goal for next year is...not so much with the fast food, James.
On the topic of prefect weather days: Of the 365 days in this year, I spent 348 in the Twin Cities. Of those 348, my opinion is that there were THREE days of perfect weather (again, click above to read the criteria). Those three days were April 28, August 30 and October 1. Since the temperature had to be high enough to not require any coat, this ruled out about 6 months of the year. June, July and August are much too hot, and the other days either had wind or precipitation or were completely overcast. I know it sounds weird to say that October 1 was a perfect weather day, but it was true! I spent that day at an amusement park and wore shorts! I even went on a you-will-get-wet ride and didn't freeze! The sun was out, there was very little wind and all in all I have nothing to complain about. Goal for 2007: FOUR perfect weather days. Come on Minnesota, you can do it!

The Charts

2007-02-12T14:48:00.000-06:00

One of the many things I keep track of is the current number one song. I started tracking this in 1991, way back when I had to look up the information in an actual paper version of Billboard magazine. Now, of course, I just check it out on line.
Some of my friends have commented that the songs that reach number one are generally lousy songs and the whole idea of tracking art based on popularity is a terrible thing to do. To an extent, I agree. But it is fun to see how songs that I like are doing on the charts, and, every once in a while, a song that I like actually ascends to the top spot. I think it also gives a nice snapshot of the music industry and pop culture at that particular time.
And that’s why I wanted to mention an interesting development in the Billboard charts and what it says about radio stations.
In the beginning, Billboard tracked songs based on their sales: both to individual customers and to juke box designers. Soon, the juke box portion was dropped and Billboard stuck exclusively with record store sales. For the most part, this was a good idea. But two problems developed. First, some songs became very popular but were never released as singles. Starting in the late 1960s, music acts would sometimes not release songs as singles, in an effort to keep the album “together”. Thus, songs like the Beatles’ “Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds”, Derek and the Dominoes “Layla” and Led Zeppelin’s “Stairway to Heaven” – which are among the most popular songs of that era – never appeared anywhere on Billboard’s 100 because they were never released as singles. The second problem was that, as CDs became more popular, the price of singles was no longer that much lower than a whole album. That is, people who liked only one or two songs of an album just figured they might as well buy the whole album since it was only a couple dollars more than the individual songs. Essentially, the idea of a single – which used to dominate record store – began to die.
In an effort to keep the charts relevant, Billboard decided to begin tracking radio airplay of songs. As singles became less and less popular, more weight was given to airplay than to actual purchases.
You probably know where this is heading. Radio stations, regardless of what they tell us, have no variety. They play a song over and over and over and over again. When they find an ‘artist’ they like, they play that ‘artist's’ songs over and over again. Nowhere is this more evident than on the Billboard charts. First, take a look at how many songs went to #1 each year from 1984 and 1991:
Year...Number of #1 Hits
1984...19
1985...26
1986...30
1987...29
1988...32
1989...32
1990...25
1991...27
Look at that! Every year, there were at least 19 songs that became #1 hits, and in a few years there were more than thirty. Not one of these songs maintained the top spot for more than seven weeks. Some of these songs were hip-hop, others were rock, others were country. Once airplay began to be the deciding factor instead of the more democratic sales, look what happened:
Year...Number of #1 Hits
1992...12
1993...10
1994...9
1995...11
1996...8
1997...9
1998...15
1999...14
Starting in 1992 (the year airplay began to be factored in), there were only a handful of songs that went to number one each year; with some years having less than 10 new number one songs. Every year there were songs that stayed at #1 for more than 8 weeks, with some songs staying at #1 for 12, 14 and even 16 weeks (that’s four months without turnover)! Worse still, almost all of these songs were hip-hop/rap – often with an ‘artist’ replacing themselves in the top spot. For example, 4 of the 11 songs that went to #1 in 2004 were by Usher. And after an Outkast song spent 9 weeks at #1 in 2003, they were finally replaced by...Outkast . The variety had ceased to exist.
Needless to say, I was bummed. Checking out the charts each year was getting boring. Week after week, I would check the chart and rarely see a change. Would it ever get better?
Indeed, it did. Thanks to iTunes, the idea of a ‘single’ once again became popular. Suddenly, people were once again buying only single songs. By 2005, Billboard took notice and decided it was time to factor digital sales into the equation. Finally, the popularity of a song would once again be dominated – not by a handful of radio execs – but by the masses.
Was there a change? Yep. In 2006 there have been 18 songs that have gone to #1. That’s more #1s than any year since 1991 (and there are still two weeks left of the year - so there could still be more #1s). No song this year has spent more than seven weeks in the top spot. For the first time in years, I have actually heard of some of these songs and their performers.
So, here’s a tip of the cap to Billboard for redefining popularity to coincide with the times. Also, check out this page. I wrote a brief email to Fred Bronson (a column writer for Billboard’s charts) and he posted it, along with his response, on this page.