Monday, May 30, 2005

Bombs bursting in air...

Bombs don't actually burst in the air, do they? I mean, if they did, they wouldn't be very effective tools of murder. I'm pretty sure they blow up on impact. Impact with buildings full of people, buildings like schools and hospitals too.

Is that so different than what those planes did when they hit the money towers in NYC?

Today there was some parade I didn't go to in Manchester. They had jets flying overhead, military marching, fired cannons. Hurray for stuff we use to kill people with. Hurray for guns and tanks and bombs.

My mom was there, with two children from Liberia whom she is tutoring in English. The older girl - must be around ten - told her when they see or hear things like she saw today, they would usually run away.

America the beautiful. Everything is backwards and we gather around our WMDs waving flags and shit.

Stick a yellow ribbon round the old SUV
It's been 300 long years of perpetual war, do you still want me
If I don't see a ribbon round the SUV
I'll stay on the war, forget about peace, put the blame on me
If I don't see a yellow ribbon round the SUV

Tuesday, May 24, 2005

I read the other day that the NFL player Tillman's family is all pissed now because the army lied for a while after he died, making up some sweet story a la Jessica Lynch, who was miraculously rescued.

So anyway it turns out there was no fancy patriotic crap. Rather, Mr. Tillman was killed by friendly fire.

That's MILspeak for "shot by confused U.S. soldiers."

In a subsequent story another euphemism was "fratricide." In case your Latin is off, that's killing one's brother (or sister.) I hate to say it and I haven't been in the army to comment on the FRATERnization, but if some meathead psychotic spittle-mouthed brain-stem-operatin' fuck of a human being overzealously riddled me with bullets intended for some goat-farmer or whoever happened to not be me, but then got me instead, I ain't callin' the motherfucker my brother as I go.

Friendly fire. A really great example of how the U.S. media shapes issues in the minds of people by redefining what's really happening. Some other examples: The name-fight over the senate squabble was either "the nuclear option" if by Dem or the "constitutional option," if by Rep. Luckily both of these militant fundamentalist organizations are being supplanted by the G-14, a new insurgent group that has openly embraced Dempublicanism or Republicratocracy, already the unspoken modus operandi.

More word tips for reporters and Americans who don't want to throw this one to the Muslims, who are the unholy trifecta ~ militant, fundamentalist, and insurgent: the U.S. military is not militant. People who fight them are the militants. The U.S. soldiers are forces: like Jedis, but more like a surreal Buddhist paladin or chevalier. Enemies can also be called communists, terrorists, or Chinese. Oh yes and another media favorite, insurgents.

Main Entry: in·sur·gent
Function: noun
1 : a person who rises in revolt against civil authority or an established government; especially : one not recognized as a belligerent

Bad guys are also fundamentalist.

As part of CT media's love affair with Jodi Rell, they were also quick to parrot her term when the Feds announced they were shutting down the sub base in Groton. They were quick to announce Ms. Rell was rapidly forming a STRIKE FORCE of pen-wielding insider lobbyists. A strike force, for chrissake.

Last week a local radio personality who switched from journalist to government cheerleader referenced Thomas Jefferson, Karl Marx, and George Orwell in support of Darth Dubya. I have decided we should call all people we don't like Darth _______.
(insert name or nickname)

Friday, May 20, 2005

Star Wars

THE FOLLOWING ENTRY REVEALS INFORMATION ABOUT SPECIFICS OF Revenge of the Sith!

Well, I just got out a few hours ago from seeing R.o.t.S. and the rumors you've been hearing are correct. The movie was great.
This isn't really any effort to be a comprehensive review, but some thoughts:
-- The reason this movie is great, whereas the last two sucked, is because it finally returns to the feel and style of the original trilogy. In the previous two movies I felt like the franchise somehow looked more like the mailman than the father. Not so in RotS.
--Ewan MacGregor does a LOT for this movie. The acting all around is not bad, as many have suggested. Even the lines, which old-school Star Wars aficionados can appreciate, are not painful except in a few spots.
But MacGregor really puts on Alec Guinness in this one, albeit years younger than the Obi Wan we know. He lends real acting credibility. Hayden Christiansen is not nearly as bad as many critics have said. The emperor is true to form, although admittedly a relatively shallow typecast. By contrast we have Vader -- we get the breadth and depth of what leads to his supervillainy in the original trilogy.
-- Which leads me to a minor disappointment. (STOP HERE IF YOU DON'T WANT MOVIE INFO.)

-- When Anakin dons the Vader suit after the action peak of the movie -- simultaneuos duels between Yoda & Sidious and Kenobi & Skywalker -- the viewer is treated to the only humanism you'll get out of the big black lug until the culmination of Return of the Jedi. He asks the Emperor what has become of Padme and is told that he killed her. Vader begins to rage, and I reasonably expected to see some serious fireworks and a good primal scream. No such luck. There's just a corny "No!" that even Howard Dean coulda done better than.

-- The animation is much better in this movie than the previous two, although I still prefer the elaborate costumes of the original trilogy. The characters look more real and aren't caricatures. Justice is done with Yoda's character, who seriously brawls without the midget-wrestling sideshow feeling given when he battled Dooku in episode II. Facial expressions are right on. Like with Kenobi, we get a great sense of the character we know, at a younger age.

-- The references to this movie being anti-Bush are a big stretch. Aside from a few ultra-basic and warped statements by Sidious on democracy, peace, and security, there are no developed allegories going on in this movie. While these lines are easily identifiable with our own dark lord Darth Dubya, they're a passing shot and totally undeveloped -- thank God.


-- Another triumph of this film was to really tie the two series together, which it did admirably. When considering how much more identifiable with the original trilogy it is, the denouement is nearly seamless, ending with the placement of Luke and Leia. At this point even the film's artistic styling - the grain, the appearances, etc - shift noticeably into old-school mode. It's well done and made me leave the theater wanting to go ahead and start with the first Star Wars (A New Hope).

-- There is no letdown with action and violence! I vaguely object to the opening scene, a space fighter sequence that's hard to follow and carries little weight. I also felt somwhat disappointed in how Lucas carries out the extermination of the Jedi -- somewhat graceless and I feel sells the Jedi somewhat short (shot in back by droids, etc.).
But I meant to focus on the good here - lightsaber battles galore, dream matchups - one of the highlights of the film is the fight between Mace Windu and Sidious. Windu gets dissed a bit by critics and it's unwarranted. Jackson plays the part understated but well, and the actual scene -- which is where Skywalker goes bad -- has great parallels to the Emperor/Vader/Luke scene at the end of Return of the Jedi.

-- There has been talk about the movie's "darkness" but that's a load of hooey. It's not scary and not disturbing. The only really deep-end part is Anakin's assault on the Jedi Temple, in which it is implied (and later confirmed) that Anakin slaughters children training as Jedis. But it's off-camera and therefore only vaguely horrifying, and it's overall good as a benchmark for the depths of Anakin's fall.
And that's what this movie is about, really, so throw in the action and even a bit of suspense, and it's a winner.

It's not as quite as good as any of the original trilogy, but it's very, very close -- at least it deserves to be put alongside them.

Ultimately I think critics were dying for something to criticize because let's face it, this isn't Shakespeare. It must offend their cinematographic sensibilities. But this ain't a movie to live up to movie standards. It's a Star Wars. And finally, thank God, it lives up to Star Wars standards.