Jun

30

Possum.

Filed Under Olympia | 1 Comment

Apparently the near-Eastside of Olympia is awash with mid-sized mammals. First, D found a rat in the compost. Later, D and I saw a raccoon exploring our backyard. Now, from several sightings and bumps in the night, we’re pretty sure an opossum has moved into the crawl space beneath our house. Oh, Possum, your end is in the road!

Jun

29

Introverts and sun-avoiders.

Filed Under Science & Technology | 1 Comment

Query: are introverts more likely than extroverts to be sun-avoiders? I myself am moderately introverted, as well as moderately shade-drawn. Coincidence? Or pattern. Because I’ve noticed the sorts of “energizing” extroverts get from other people seems similar to the energizing Apollo-worshipers get from the self-sustaining nuclear chain reaction in the sky.

Jun

28

Funny Games.

Filed Under Film | 1 Comment

More often than not, film remakes fail to live up to expectations, especially when the retread is too close to the original. True, the 1954 Judy Garland A Star Is Born and the 1986 Little Shop of Horrors work very well as updates of the 1937 Star and 1960 Little Shop, respectively, by transforming very good non-musicals into very good musicals. Yes, the Mary Wahlberg The Italian Job manages to create a heist film ultimately more satisfying than the Michael Caine original, largely by abandoning nearly everything but the name.

But the practice of taking old (e.g. King Kong or foreign (e.g. Les Diaboliques) classics and updating them for modern audiences almost always disappoints. There’s a reason why someone thought to remake these films: they’re already great. And while you might end up with something pretty good (including, in my mind, Peter Jackson’s Kong), what are the odds it will be good enough?

Even worse–and here’s where the title of this post comes in–are the (mostly) shot-for-shot remakes that come along every so often. One more prominent modern example is Gus Van Sant’s abomination, Psycho. This sort of exercise really hammers home just how collaborative moviemaking really is. Even with the same script, and same shot construction as the marvelous (if flawed and somewhat overrated) Hitchhock original, the update completely failed to evoke anything worthwhile.

The same can be said for the Funny Games remake. Here the crime is even worse, because the director Michael Haneke actually directed the original only a decade prior. And somehow, while the original is a brilliant, funny, evocative, and startlingly chair-gripping experience, the remake provides only an emotionless, humorless, and occasionally boring time. If I hadn’t heard from others who have never seen the 1997 effort, or if I hadn’t seen the original twice myself, I may have convinced myself that Funny Games only works for one viewing. But that’s not it. Nor do I believe e.g. Susanne Lothar is a vastly superior actress to Naomi Watts that explains the difference. Also, given that Haneke has worked effectively in languages other than his native German (see e.g. the French-language films Cache and The Piano Teacher), I don’t blame the remake’s being Haneke’s English-language debut. No, there’s just something about the film that doesn’t work. It could have happened just as easily and just as inexplicably with the original. But it didn’t. So now that a masterpiece has been put to celluloid, in part by good luck, why fuck around and tempt the Gods? Why put yourself in a position where you’re almost certain to fail, at least by comparison? Did anyone think improvement was possible?

*1/2

Jun

27

Solstice!

Filed Under Personal, Transportation | Leave a Comment

Last weekend, D and I canceled our plans to attend Oly Pride with A, and instead went to the Solstice Parade in Fremont. The crowded festival atmosphere, the humidity, the painted-on costuming of some of the participants, the giant paper mache puppets, the music, the long-basket begging. Should have been fun, no? However, we arrived about 45 minutes after the parade had begun. Which meant we spent a fair bit of time trying to locate a place to stand with some sort of view of the street, and a fair bit more time watching the parade while cramped and jostled. Not Neumo’s crowded, but getting there. Sort of unpleasant. Indeed, after the parade completed, rather than stand on line to get into one of Fremont’s drinking establishments, we hightailed it back up to Phinney Ridge and had a couple at Sully’s.

So why were we late, you ask? Why didn’t we plan better and bring folding chairs and be damned comfortable when watching the floats pass us by? We made the mistake of counting on the Metro. After a lovely breakfast at Pete’s, we moseyed out to the bus stop to wait for the 5 at about 11:20 AM. The parade was supposed to start around noon. Three fives were supposed to come before noon, according to the schedule at the bus stop. One came. And it didn’t stop, because it was overfilled. So we decided to walk. A two-and-a-half mile walk. With the parade starting in ten minutes. That’s why we were late. As we walked along the path of the 5, another bus passed without stopping. That’s two. After two miles or so, we diverted from the bus route, so another could have passed during that time. But that’s two completely full buses over a time when we should have seen between five and seven. So Metro, in its infinite wisdom, not only failed to stock extra buses on routes that lead to Fremont (which is notoriously lacking in parking) on one of the busiest Saturdays of the year, but also removed three to five buses that ordinarily would have served the route during that time from the road.

I was seriously thinking of sending Metro a stern, strongly-worded letter. But I’m lazy, and the bus driver on the way out of Fremont indicated he’d let his supervisors know how badly they fucked up. So this post will have to do.

Jun

24

Public meetings.

Filed Under Olympia | 1 Comment

Attended a hearing with the Olympia Planning Commission–a volunteer citizen board appointed by the Council to make recommendations regarding zoning and other city planning issues–this evening. Ended up leaving early in disgust, however. Whether the isthmus between Capitol Lake and Budd Inlet should be rezoned to allow (1) taller and (2) residential structures to be constructed thereon is a subject matter in which I have great interest.

But the whole idea of taking oral testimony from a select few publicmembers on subjects of this sort is insane. What good can come of it? Most of the testimony consisted of stating the obvious with emotion, or presenting numbers that would be better served in paper form with corroboration. Ultimately, on this issue the bickering came down to aesthetics: whether the present one- and two-story buildings and parking lots look better alongside the Inlet and the Olympics in the distance, or whether five- and six-story buildings would look better in their stead. But so many irrelevant issues were raised: whether construction should be allowed at all on the isthmus; whether all the present buildings (especially the former DOC headquarters, and possibly excluding the Bayview grocery store and the yacht club) should be razed to make way for an expanded Heritage Park; whether luxury housing should be built at all, and if so where it should be permitted; whether construction of tall buildings should be permitted at all.

And for what? Given the real issue involved, was there any real possibility of minds being changed? As a criminal defense attorney, I have a great appreciation for process. But I also recognize that process for its own sake is often expensive and unnecessary window dressing, designed to make everyone feel better about the decisions that are made. But when it comes to aesthetics and change, only the winners can possibly feel good about the decisions. This is not the sort of decision that will be appreciated as “fairly decided” by those that do not get their way. This is the sort of the decision that will build resentment, regardless of how it goes. The best way to make this sort of decision is quickly and without comment, so that the resentment doesn’t have legs.

Jun

22

Blue Train.

Filed Under Music | Leave a Comment

It took listening to a radio piece on John Coltrane to overcome a brain fart I’ve had for the past few years concerning the origins of the title of the great jazz album Blue Train. See, Mr. Coltrane’s nickname was “Trane,” after the last syllable of his last name. Which is a homophone of “Train.” And the album was released on “Blue Note.” Get it? Duh.

Jun

22

Violent Femmes’ “Crazy.”

Filed Under Music | Leave a Comment

As much as Violent Femmes have been generally irrelevant since the early 80s, the re-recording of “Gone Daddy Gone” by Gnarls Barkley seems to have brought the band back to the pop culture fold, if only somewhat. Which is why it makes a certain twisted sense that the Violent Femmes would have covered “Crazy” with a certain level of aplomb.

[From Critic's Picks.]

Jun

19

Michelle Obama’s “Whitey” tape?

Filed Under Humor, Politics | Leave a Comment

[From Will Hines.]

Jun

14

Honeymoon.

Filed Under Wedding | Leave a Comment

The following video is what happens when honeymooners (1) fail to bring a still camera to Puerto Vallarta, and (2) neglect to drag out the video camera for nearly all of the trip. Enjoy the jittery quadruple time:

Jun

12

Kozinski’s NSFW image collection.

Filed Under Humor, Law | 1 Comment

Apparently Judge Alex Kozinski, one of my favorite First Amendment jurists, has a slightly naughty collection of images stored on his personal website in an unmarked folder. Apparently someone stumbled upon the collection–which includes a “Bush for President” upskirt, an auto-fellatio shot, and a tranny striptease–and made it public…right at the start of an obscenity trial he was presiding over. That involved such titles as “Gang Bang Horse ‘Pony Sex Game’ ” and “Mako’s First Time Scat.” Of course this is much ado about nothing, but I still think it’s worth a chuckle or two. Don’t you?

keep looking »