- Jesus! The First Lady?
- Yeah, I know.

About 15 minutes into The Sentinel I started having high hopes for it. It's a movie about how there's some mole in the secret service who is somehow involved in a plot to kill the president. Michael Douglas is also in the secret service, and very unwisely banging the first lady. Douglas get's ID'd as the possible mole because refuses to tell the truth about the affair, but people know something is up. This is a totally preposterous scenario that the movie generally handles poorly.

What the movie does really well is give us some insight into the crazy amount of work that happens behind the scenes to provide security for the President. This was really interesting for me and well done. But then the plot started and the whole thing started to go downhill.

This is one of those movies where all the characters' actions and their motivations seem to be entirely dictated by what the plot needs them to do. The Michael Douglas/Kiefer Southerland relationship is perhaps the worst offender (besides the ridiculous notion that the whole first lady affair could happen.) Also, when the mole is eventually revealed there's no background or depth to it all - and it just feels like a silly plot device.

And I'm showing concentrated restraint to keep from rattling off the security mistakes the secret service people make in the final act when things get ugly.

This was a relatively short movie, that was sometimes choppily cut. It felt to me like the original version was about 20 minutes longer, and those 20 minutes were almost entirely character interaction and development. Maybe with all of the characters would have made more sense, but I don't think that would have salvaged the movie.

Overall the biggest problem with The Sentinel is it started out feeling like it was a smart movie, but couldn't sustain that. That's a bummer, because I'd love to see a smart movie about the secret service (I should go watch In the Line of Fire again, I think that's the best I'll do.)

Father: How did you convince her(mother)?
Son: I made it an argument, not a negotiation.
Father: That's my boy.

I was all worried going to Thank You For Smoking that it was just going to be a liberal propaganda feel good machine that preachily poked at big tobacco. My politics skew heavily liberal, but I still get turned off by propaganda and preachy movies (I'm hit an miss with Michael Moore for example.)

But to my delight Thank You For Smoking didn't do this at all, not even a bit. This is not a movie about the evils of big tobacco, big tobacco only serves as the bad cause which gives the movie it's purpose. It's really about Nick Naylor, a lobbyist and the public face of the tobacco conglomerate. It doesn't matter that he works for tobacco specifically, it matters that he works for a multi-national corporation that the public generally despises but also wants around (other less clear options: fast food, pornography, gun manufacturers, oil companies, big pharmaceuticals.) This movie isn't really about lobbying either, it doesn't explore the question of whether lobbying is a good thing to have around. It's really about Nick. It light-heartedly explores the kind of person who does that job and the way it can be done very, very well.

Of course, this isn't a real look at the kind of person who does this. Nick is a fabrication. That's why this is a satirical comedy, not a drama. But let me tell you, he sure is fun to watch. He rambles though his job, fast talking everyone, always knowing just how much truth to tell in each situation to have things work out the most benefitial to him.

This movie was a delight to watch. It had fast paced, witty dialog, with lots of humorous moments all over the place. It also had a fair amount of truth to it. This could be an instructional movie about how to reframe discussions to be on your terms, terms that are of course more favorable to your position. Nick teaches his 12 year old son some of his tricks, which gives the movie an excuse to have him explain his craft to the audience.

I had a great time watching this movie, and have no doubts that I'll watch it many more times.

Note: The one significant flaw I noticed is that Nick would be smarter than that when dealing with the reporter, but that's ok. It makes for interesting parts of the story, and in a comedy characters can get away with doing out of character things for the sake of the story. There's also a great continuity flaw when two MOD squad members are sharing a piece of apple pie with a slice of cheese on top - one mauls it trying to take a bite and then in the next shot it's nicely put back together (only us true movie nerds spot stuff like that...)

Chris, I don't know what the problem is... I have all these guy friends but when they find out I have a boyfriend, they don't want to hang out!

An old friend of mine (an ex, actually) wrote that to me last week. I was writing up a reply, and as I got into it, and it got longer, I decided I liked it too much to just share with her, especially as it spiraled out of control into what you read below.

Last year I wrote about He's Just Not That Into You. The big point of that book is that Men know how to show you that you're a priority to them and if you're dating a guy who makes you question that (like, he allways seems to be busy with other things in his life) then you should take that as a sign that you're not a priority in his life and kick him to the curb so you can find someone who will treat you like a priority.

This concept can be reversed as well. If a guy is making a lot of effort to have you in his life, you are a priority to him. Usually (not always, but don't bank on the exceptions) this means he's interested in you. When these guys find out you have a boyfriend and are unavailable, you become less of a priority. It doesn't mean they don't want to be friends anymore, it just means they aren't going to exerpt the same amount of effort to make it happen.

Side note: all of this works for women as well, if you keep calling her to go out, and she keeps not having time for you, that's a not-so-subtle sign about where you stand in her life.

Being friends with people takes effort. You have to make an effort to talk with them regularly, you have to make an effort to coordinate your schedules to see each other. Sure, it's not like moving mountains or anything, but effort and time are limited quantaties for all of us. I have lots and lots of friends that I really care for, but talk to about twice a year if I'm lucky. Some of my best friends fall into this category, they live far away and we just catch up every now and then. It's just too much effort to try to keep up with everyone regularly (if you're reading this, I'm talking to you Sigh, Julia, Colleen, Cronin, Adrian, Hed, Matt Brown, Matty H, Lisa, Kai, Karin, Erin, Fozzy, Stacey, Audra, Bubba, Kathleen, Guy, Sabin, Jill, most of my family, and others that I'm sure I missed.)

What this means is if two people aren't making an effort to see each other, it's not going to happen. In my friend's case are guys who were interested in her (I don't blame them, she's a cool chick) putting out a lot of effort. After they're big motivation is taken away things change, it's not that they don't want to be friends with her, it's just that they aren't going to put the same effort into it. If they're not putting effort in, and their lives don't cross naturally (like they play on the same soccer team together or something) then they're just not going to see each other. That's the way it works, things don't happen for free, and being social and seeing your friends takes effort.

This gets into one of my universal truth's of people. Our time is our most valued resource, and how we choose to spend our time is the single best indicator of our priorities. If someone isn't making time for you, you aren't a priority for them. Period. End of discussion. I know this is harsh, but you have to remember that being a priority to someone and them caring for you are two different things. I admit that all those friends I listed off two paragraphs ago aren't a priority in my day to day life, I don't make an effort to keep up with them regularly. But if they need something, or happen to be visiting Seattle, they bump way up the list. I still care about all of them, but just don't work to make them a part of my day to day life. I'm ok with that. I figure they are too, otherwise our friendships would have ended years ago.

One of the most interesting things about this is that what people want their priorities to be, and what they actually are, are often very different things. This is useful in two ways. I use this for evaluating my life frequently. There's lots of things I'd like to think are important to me, but if I look at the way I spend my time, it's clear to me that they aren't really that important to me. From there, I can either accept that I don't really care about those things or I can work to change my life to include them (and naturally, exclude others, because we're talking about limited resources.)

This also works if someone in your life isn't making you a priority the way you'd like them too. Sure, they may claim they want you to be a priority, but if you aren't, then you aren't. It's your call if you decide to wait around for them and see if they change their priorities to better include you. There's a classic line in Jerry Maguire that's essentially talking about this issue: I love him for the man that he wants to be, and I love him for the man that he almost is. At that point Jerry knows what he'd like his priorities to be, but that's not what they actually are, and Dorothy sees that rift before he does (it's hard for me to write a post without actually referencing a movie...)

This process of comparing priorities is a tough busienss, because in essense we're confronting our ideal of who we'd like to be with the reality of who we really are, and the reality almost never lives up to the ideal. It can be a hard process, but it's how we become better people, it's how we become comfortable with ourselves.

If you've never spent a day sitting down and thinking about how you spend your time, I highly recommend it. It can be a sobering experience, but it's a valuable one, and it really works.

If brains were dynamite you couldn't blow your nose.

American Graffiti is one of George Lucas' early films and is often hailed as an American classic. After watching it I read various reviews (many written be people of the generation portrayed in the movie) that talked about how it's a fantastic piece of historical fiction that really takes them back to that time, a time of American innocence before Kennedy's assassination and Vietnam.

For me it's harder to evaluate it on those terms. More to the point, the only experience I have of that period is through movies or stories. For me to try to talk about this movie as being a good representation of that time period essentially means I'm comparing it against other similar representations and making a guess at which is better.

Tangent: This really brings up an important point about the stories we have as a society and they way they can shape our view of the past. Clearly American Graffiti doesn't tell the whole story of the late 50's early 60's for American youth. But as we get farther from that time, the other parts of the story that aren't shown fade from our consciousness. Without representations of those things in a sense stop being true. And this idealized version becomes the truth we hold (Lucas is infamous for idealizing a wholesome past - it's also a big theme in the Star Wars movies.) Idealizing and distorting the past in this was is dangerous ground, because it causes us to long for that better time, but we often forget all the ways that time was not better. I believe that, in general, our society makes forward progress. Looking at certain things in the past that used to be better is healthy and constructive reflection, but looking at the past as a whole as a better thing can cause a dangerous suppression of our societal progress. (End tangent.)

So now I have this movie in front of, about teenage kids in the 60's. As I said, I can't tell if it's an accurate representation of the time, but I can tell that it's an accurate representation of teenage kids. That was the thing I noticed most watching this movie: status symbols may change from cars to iPods, but the trials of being a teenager seem to be somewhat constant. Negotiating that social scene, and exploring yourself as a person, those things in American Graffiti seemed pretty similar to my experience with it a decade ago and with friend's experiences more recently.

And that is why this movie is an American classic. Yeah, it's a classic partially for it's portrayal of that time period. But to really be a classic a movie has to tap into basic human truths. And at least in the US, being a teenager (or to be fair, a middle to upper middle class white teenager) is a basic human truth which this movie captures expertly.

Go watch it to take a tour through history, if not America's, then maybe just yours.

Marissa: Listen, I'm sorry I didn't call you on your birthday.
Frank: My birthday? What do you mean?
Marissa: Yeah, last Thursday. Oh, you forgot your birthday, didn't you, Frank?
Frank: Damn it. I'm such an idiot.

My sister passes the quarter century mark today, and I just wanted to wish her well. Normally she claims the whole week around her birthday as her "birthday week" but with it falling on a Saturday this year I'm not sure what her plan is - probably just claim both weeks.

Sorry I didn't make it down to visit, but you're doing great and I'm proud of you.

(Future dated since I'll be out rafting this weekend with no internet access.)

You know he's white, right?
Nah, he just light skinned!

Warning: Very Minor Spoilers

I really enjoyed Hustle & Flow. This makes sense, it was on many awards and top 10 lists this season, so I expected it to be an excellent movie. Although I guess there are lots of excellent movies that I don't enjoy.

The thing that caught me about Hustle & Flow is they were unrelenting about the environment the movie took place in. The movie is exclusively in this run down, and frankly depressing, neighborhood in Memphis. I feel this oppressive sense of despair watching it all - and then wonder why I get so stressed about which of my many upper-middle class career options I'll choose.

There's this thing about people who have big dreams and some talent, but not quite all the pieces lined up. They get all impatient, the concept of a big break is harmful. People think they'll be able to make it big and just instantly leave all that behind.

I think that's the toughest thing. The protagonist, Djay, has drive and talent and is able to hold his life together long enough to make something small, but good, happen. The story turns tragic when he can't parlay that good thing into an instant break. But if he'd been a little more patient and smart - he could have parlayed it into mild success at first, with maybe more later.

This is how most of the word ends up being successful. Do something good, enjoy some success. Get better at it. Do something a little better, get a little more success. Then just keep building that process until you top out at your ability and dedication level. This whole concept of instant stars is damaging, especially since we only see the instant aspect of it, we don't see the years of hard work most of those stars put in as foundation work.

Anyway, it's a good movie, and their Oscar winning best song is also excellent. Though the main plot of the movie is writing that one song, so I guess it better be good.

Public service announcement: If you're sensitive about domestic abuse or prostitution, approach with caution. There's plenty of both in this movie.

If you think America is dirtbag central, clearly you've never been to the skeeze nation of our queen mother.

I think the only reason I finished watching Domino is because I was jet lagged enough that I was too lazy to find something else to do. The DVD was in the player and playing, so that was good enough for me.

I really can't do better with this one than the editing room's abridged script for it. Go read that if you're curious about the movie.

Just for fun though, the root of my disappointment is I like watching movies about people in jobs like bounty hunting when they are professional and badass. These bounty hunters really didn't sell that to me. They were sloppy and reckless. And thus, uninteresting (aside from all the other problems the movie had.)

Still want more?
Read the Archives!