The Dark Knight Transcends

I just got back from seeing The Dark Knight, and it is eons better than any previous Batman movie, or, for that matter, any Superman or other movie made of a comic book character. In fact, The Dark Knight is as far away from comic book tropes and exaggerations as The Grapes of Wrath is to a nursery rhyme.

Heath Ledger as The Joker was stunning and unforgettable - more like Brad Pitt in 12 Monkeys than Jack Nicholson's Joker in a previous Batman movie, and Nicholson was pretty good. A fitting last bow for Ledger indeed, and all the more tragedy that he won't be with us for more.

But Ledger's was not the only brilliant performance. Gary Oldman is truly in a class of his own in acting, playing radically different characters in different movies with the same ease and also unforgettable perfection. This time Oldman was James Gordon - and Gordon and the audience never had it so good.

Aaron Eckhart as the "White Knight" Harvey Dent was powerful, Maggie Gyllenhaal as Batman's and Harvey's love was perfect, and you can never miss with Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman (whose Lucius Fox takes a stand against Orwell's Big Brother). Lost's Richard (Nestor Carbonell) plays the Mayor, and our real Senator Patrick Leahy even puts in a nice cameo.

Christian Bale as Batman/Bruce Wayne was fine - but I wouldn't put him ahead of George Clooney and Val Kilmer's performances of the role.

But the story was so powerful, the supporting acting so extraordinary, that Bale really shined, too. I'm rarely surprised in a movie - I did guess one minor bad guy sitting in the driver's seat - but the complex story of The Dark Knight was packed not only with punches but real twists and surprises.

Most of all, despite its advertised "darkness," the movie had hope and soul. When you see it, I think you'll agree that the real heroes were the people of Gotham, and in a soft-spoken, understated, but memorable and heart warming way. I don't know, is it too much to say they evinced a distinctly Democratic, humane capacity, resisting the baser impulses of a people under attack? Yes, they did. Gotham - that mixture of New York and Chicago, the quintessential American city - shown bright in The Dark Knight tonight.

---

The Plot to Save Socrates

"challenging fun" - Entertainment Weekly

"a Da Vinci-esque thriller" - New York Daily News

"Sierra Waters is sexy as hell" - curled up with a good book

more about The Plot to Save Socrates...





Read the first chapter of The Plot to Save Socrates .... FREE!

Suggestion for New Snorg Tee from Paterson NJ Councilman "We're Tired of Seeing Your Behind"

Not your behind, necessarily, unless you wear saggy pants, below the buttocks, in Paterson, New Jersey. If you do, Councilman Anthony Davis apparently has had his eye on you - or, at least, your backside - and is sick and tired of seeing it. So much so, that he's pushing for fines for indecent exposure for anyone parading around with such low cuts.

To be clear, I don't think anyone is actually showing a complete, naked rear. It's big baggy underwear, with maybe a little of the top of the bottom line.

But to tell you the truth, I'm not really the best person to testify about this, because, the few times that someone wearing such an outfit has crossed my path, I didn't particular look. So maybe because I'm not particularly interested in seeing those behinds, and therefore haven't seen all that many for all that long, I'm not tired of seeing them.

Councilman Davis presumably was, and is, and that's his business. But not the Paterson City Council's, not any government's, which isn't and shouldn't be in the business of telling us how to dress.

I won't go so far to say this is a bonafide First Amendment issue, but, hey, clothing is a kind of communication, I talk about modes of dress when I teach nonverbal communication, so maybe I wouldn't be that much of a smart ass if I said it was...

All right, the puns are endless. "We're tired of seeing your behind" has to be one of the funniest lines that has come down the pike since O'Reilly's "We'll do it LIVE!" If there's not a Snorg tee-shirt out with "We're tired of seeing your behind" in the next week, I'd be amazed.

But Councilman Davis really needs to get back to doing the people's business ... and stop cracking down on the people's business line...

Suggestion for Next New Yorker Cover: Cartoonist and Editors with Heads Up Their...

You've all no doubt heard about and seen The New Yorker cover with the inane cartoon of Barack and Michelle Obama in the White House, fist bumping, Barack dressed in mid-East garb, Michelle like an Angela Davis revolutionary, replete with AK-47, and the American flag burning in the fireplace decorated with a picture of the world's leading terrorist above it. You can see it in the video clip below, if somehow you missed it.

I can't see this having any adverse effect on the campaign. Who of Obama's supporters would change their vote because of this? Who of those who don't like Obama will be energized by this? I'd say no one. Those against Obama would have been, and will continue to be, whatever the New Yorker put on its cover.

But that doesn't mean that we should excuse let alone approve of this ridiculous cartoon. Yes, The New Yorker has every right under the First Amendment to put whatever it pleases on its cover. But we the world have every right to object.

And more than anything, this lame attempt at satire shows how out of it, how behind the times, The New Yorker was with this cartoon. Hyperbole has a role in satire, but putting together a kitchen sink of canards about Obama goes beyond humor - there's too much wrong in this cartoon to find it funny or sage in its attempted criticism of Obama's nutcase critics.

Well, The New Yorker has published some of the great cartoons of our age. Here's an idea for a new one: a cartoon about a cartoonist penning a cartoon, and editors approving it, all with their heads up their...

Paul McCartney Singing All Things Must Pass

Another YouTube gem - Paul McCartney singing George Harrison's "All Things Must Pass" at the Concert for George held at the Royal Albert Hall in London on November 29, 2002 one year after George's death...

My favorite line was always "daylight is good at arriving at the right time" ... not only good things, but bad things, don't last forever...

But there's a lot good in this song, and McCartney's performance. Look at the look McCartney gives Harrison's son, Dhani, at close to the end of the performance, followed by the look McCartney gives Eric Clapton.

All things must pass ... but perhaps not if they've been put up on the eternal golden playlist of YouTube....

Lovin' My Prius, Part III

Well, I've glowingly blogged and podcast about my Prius a few times in the past two years, but I was reminded again today just why I can't say enough good things about it.

I was sitting in my Prius at an intersection in Westchester County, NY. A big truck got stuck trying to make a turn. I missed about 4 lights before the truck was able to move again. For most of that time, my Prius wasn't costing me a cent of gas, because the internal combustion engine ("ICE") had automatically shut off, and the electrical engine had taken over.

Now, sure, I could have turned any car off, easily. But how many times have you ever really done that, sitting at a light for a long minute? Never, is my answer.

And when you drive in the city, you're stopping at lights, and sometimes stuck at them, almost as often as you blink. And every time that happens, you save a little gas money - that you otherwise would have spent, for literally moving nowhere.

I heard today that Toyota is shutting down an SUV plant in the US, and opening up a Prius production plant. Way to go...



Prius podcasts: My Sweet Prius, Part II ... Prius and Bluetooth

Prius blog post: Nine Reasons I Love My Prius

Sitting Shiva on Weeds and Laughing: 4.4

No, Weeds hasn't died - in fact, its sitting shiva episode was the best yet of Season 4, bursting with energy, humor ... and life.

Except for grandma. She may have survived being taken off life support in Episode 3, but not Nancy's pillow, applied off-camera. The pillow, by the way, is a good example of why no technology is inherently always evil or good. The evil gun can save lives and help us hunt for food, the good pillow can be used for murder and euthanasia (ok, not as bad as murder, but I'm just saying).

Now, in the Jewish religion, the custom is for the immediate family of the departed loved one to sit at home, on wooden boxes (not comfortable), for seven days - "shiva" is Yiddish for seven. You can't play, you can't work, you can't prepare or buy food. So compassionate friends and relatives bring it to you. It's tough going - when I was kid, I thought it was sitting "shiver".

You can talk, though. And the seven little clips of the Botwins talking for seven days were hilarious. One of the best sequences in all of the seasons.

In the aftermath:

Lenny takes Nancy's money and decamps - we may not see him again.

And Doug is moving in permanently.

Trading Lenny for Doug. Not bad ... but I'm going to miss Albert Brooks as Lenny. A classic performance.

See also: Showtime's Sassy Hour of Sin ... Weeds 4.3: Nancy by the Endless Sea

---

The Plot to Save Socrates

"challenging fun" - Entertainment Weekly

"a Da Vinci-esque thriller" - New York Daily News

"Sierra Waters is sexy as hell" - curled up with a good book

more about The Plot to Save Socrates...





Read the first chapter of The Plot to Save Socrates .... FREE!

Obama and His Family Created Excellent History on Access Hollywood

I'm really surprised about the flack Obama has been catching about the recent interview of him and his family - Michelle, and daughters Malia (age 10) and Sasha (age 7) - by Maria Menounos on Access Hollywood.

I found the interview heartwarming and delightful. It was a pleasure to see a family joking, quipping, even complaining about Obama leaving his suitcase on the floor. Maybe I'm not objective, but this reminded me of my wife and our kids, when they were younger, and seemed refreshingly normal in a candidate for President.

So why the uproar?

Anderson Cooper, on CNN, was the first I saw expressing some displeasure, griping the night before last that the questions Ms. Menounos asked were softballs. Cooper expected, what, hard-hitting questions of children? Menounos conducted an excellent interview. As Dan Abrams (still my favorite on MSNBC) observed last night, Cooper was just jealous.

And what's vexing Andrew Sullivan? In his Daily Dish today, Sullivan says he was "was gob-smacked by the Obamas' decision to include their children in a soft-focus TV interview," and ties this to concerns about Obama's positions on FISA, the Second Amendment, Iraq, and deciding to give his acceptance speech in a huge outdoor stadium!

Talk about a laundry list. Much as I like seeing the word "gob-smacked," what on Earth is Sullivan talking about? Obama didn't change his position on Iraq or the Second Amendment, he did on FISA - I don't see that as such a problem, but even if I did - what does that have to do with having your family interviewed and wanting to accept your nomination in an outdoor stadium? Sullivan says it's all "hubris" for Obama - but, frankly, the hubris here looks more like Sullivan's.

Obama himself has said he regretted the family interview - but, I've got to say, that's one thing that I do disagree with Obama about. I predict Maria Menounos' interview of the Obama family will go down as an illuminating piece of history of a Presidential family to be.

Because, the fact is, we really don't have any others. Wouldn't you love to see one of JFK and his family right before he was elected? Of course, the timing wasn't quite right, Caroline was not even three, but you know what I mean.

But good for the Obamas and Access Hollywood and Maria Menounos for making this happen.

Secret Service Owes America an Explanation for Violation of Librarian's 1st Amendment Rights at McCain Townhall Meeting

You've all likely read about this, and/or seen the video below (my student, Mike Plugh, first brought this to my attention):

A 60-year old librarian in Denver was carrying a sign with the message, McCain=Bush, as she waited to attend a McCain town hall meeting at the Denver Center for the Performing Arts (a public venue). Some guy in a beige jacket asks her to remove the sign. She refuses. An onlooker asks him why she's been asked to remove the sign. The beige jacket responds that he was "asked" to do this, "by representatives of the Secret Service." Soon after, a Denver policeman starts talking, and informs the librarian that she has two choices: keep the sign, and be issued a ticket for "trespass," or get rid of the sign, in which case she can continue to stand in line to attend the McCain town hall event. Carol Kreck, the brave librarian, takes the ticket. She's escorted off the public premises, and tells the camera that she's been told that, if she returns, she'll be arrested.

This is one of the most outrageous violations of the First Amendment I've seen in a long time. Not a case of allegedly indecent broadcasting, in which there is at least a confused (and unconstitutional) Federal Communications Act to back it up. Not a shield law issue, which, although profound in its threat to the First Amendment, is not a direct assault upon it.

No, this is about as straight-up an attack on the First Amendment as you can get - an attack on exactly what Jefferson and our Founding Fathers were protecting in the very First Amendment to our Constitution: the right of every citizen to express her or his political views, unobstructed by the government.

What's to be done?

1. The Secret Service owes America an explanation. If they indeed put the beige jacket and the Denver police up to harassing and preventing Ms. Kreck from exercising her First Amendment rights, then those in the Secret Service who did this should be fired and brought up on criminal charges.

2. If the beige jacket was lying, and was not told to do this by the Secret Service, then he should be brought up on harassment and other criminal charges.

3. The Denver police in either case were pathetic. If the Secret Service ordered them to harass Ms. Kreck, they should have refused to follow the order, and should be reprimanded for such ignorance of the First Amendment. If the Secret Service gave no such order, and they harassed Ms. Kreck on the basis of what the beige suit told them, then they should be fired.

It's time we started standing up for our rights.

Obama's Acceptance of Nomination in Stadium Resonates with Democracy

Good for Barack Obama for deciding to accept the Democratic Party nomination for President this August in a huge outdoor football stadium in Denver.

Stadiums are usually thought of nowadays as platforms for sports and celebrity concerts. But they have a history that hearkens back to the very roots of democracy.

In ancient Athens, the birthplace of democracy as far as we know, the ideal size for a democratic state was thought to be the number of citizens who could sit in a public arena or stadium and debate the issues.

Ancient Athens put Socrates to death - they had no First Amendment back then - but not every aspect of our democratic system is better than theirs. In place of the direct democracy of Athens, we elect representatives who debate and vote on our behalves. Rather than seeing our speakers in person, we see them on television, where members of the press - another kind of representative - ask them questions for us.

YouTube has taken some of the press out of this process, and put videos in our own hands (or, at least, laptops and cell phones), but we still do not get to see candidates, or each other, in person, as we all pursue the democratic process.

Obama's decision to move his acceptance speech from inside the convention to Invesco Field at Mile High, in Denver, is a powerful and important symbolic move. Like JFK, who also accepted his party's nomination in 1960 in the big outdoor Memorial Coliseum in Los Angeles, Obama's nomination in Denver will be a crucial step in moving our democracy a good mile higher in responsiveness to the people than it is today.

Vantage Point: Flawed but Fine

Hey, I just saw Vantage Point on DVD. The critics didn't much like it, but, once again, I didn't much agree with them.

In fact, I thought Vantage Point was pretty good. Kept me guessing with good twists and lots of action. A refreshingly different kind of assassination movie - especially in tune with the complexities of our age, in which the bad guys are far from dummies.

Two points I did have a little trouble with -

1. William Hurt played both the President and his double. Now, I can understand the people in Spain, in the crowd, not knowing the difference. But the event was televised on GNN - a CNN equivalent - with close-ups to boot. How would the double, however much he looked and sounded like the President, have fooled the American people and everyone in the news business? (This flaw could have been dealt with by setting up the news coverage as unable, for whatever tech or security reason, to deliver close-ups of the President with decent sound.)

2. I guessed Matthew Fox (Agent Taylor) was the bad guy as soon as he told Dennis Quaid (Agent Barnes) that he, Fox, would check something out. Now, I think making Fox the bad guy was an ingenious move, given that we know him best as Jack Shephard on Lost, who is good, through and through. But something in that scene between Fox and Quaid gave it away, at least to me.

Nonetheless, if was a fine movie. With an especially good part played by Forest Whitaker, who never disappoints. (Also good to see Richard T. Jones - Agent Ellison from The Sarah Connor Chronicles - playing Agent Holden in Vantage Point.)

PS: My wife had trouble with an additional point in the movie: Why did the terrorists want to take the President alive? Didn't bother me, though. I thought that, with these more intelligent than usual terrorists, we're supposed to assume that they understand that holding a US President hostage gives you a better hand to play than killing the President.