CleverDonkey.com …Musings, Commentary, Opinions, and Drivel

We are a pet-intensive household.  Currently we have three dogs and a cat, but we used to have two dogs and three cats.  Having three cats teaches you that maintaining a litter box is an endless, thankless, hopeless, gross, stinky, unhealthy, unending chore.  We used to use the LitterMaid, and went through three of them over the course of five years.  They worked…okay.  However, they had some significant engineering flaws, such as the fact that the rakes became caked with kitty poo, the receptacle filled up super quick when three cats were on the job, and they simply wore out after a year or so.

When we moved to our current house we decided to forego yet another LitterMaid and search for a newer, and hopefully better, solution.  The search led us to the Litter-Robot, pictured to the right.  It’s kind of space-age looking, and looks kind of big, and looks like it might freak out a cat or something, and maybe, just maybe, might refuse to open the pod bay doors.

The good news is that the Litter-Robot works, and it works extremely well.  It’s hard to describe the mechanics of it, but the large, round part on the top is simply sitting in place by virtue of gravity, it’s not attached or connected to the base in any way.  The orb has a couple of windows on the side (you can see one of them in the picture, it’s the black blotch on the side), and when in the normal position those windows are blocked by panels from the inside. 

The orb sits on the base, and the base beneath the orb is open to the drawer below.  Sensors in the unit determine when your cat has used the litter box, and seven minutes later little wheels (hidden from view underneath the orb) start turning and spin the orb counter-clockwise.  Inside the orb is a mesh grate and retaining pocket for the litter, and as the orb rotates the litter flows through the mesh grate and into the retaining pocket.  Anything a little bit bigger than a couple grains of litter can’t go through the mesh, so continue to roll along the inside of the orb as it rotates.

After the orb passes the rotation point where all the litter is contained in the pocket, the movement of the orb engages a lever that starts opening the panels that block the windows.  When the orb is fully rotated, the windows are completely unblocked allowing free access for any dropping droppings to fall into the drawer below.  After a short pause, the orb rotates back clockwise, the panels close the windows, and it eventually returns to the fully upright and locked position. 

Note that on this return turn, it over-rotates by about 15-20 degrees, then comes back to completely vertical.  This movement leaves the inside with perfectly level litter, but the first time it happens it doesn’t make sense and, if you’re like me, you might think the thing has slipped the chain and gone into rotational hell.  They say a picture is worth a thousand words, so I guess that means a video must be worth a million, so here’s a video of what I just tried to describe:

It’s not nearly as noisy as the LitterMaids were, and there is zero, and I mean *zero*, smell of litterbox in our house.  With two cats we had to empty the drawer twice a week, with one cat we empty it once a week.  Standard garbage bags can be used as a liner for the drawer to make cleanup even easier.  And it only uses a tiny bit of litter each changing, because you only have to replace the litter that falls out clinging to the refuse.

Some caveats – the floor must be level, and it works best on a hard floor as opposed to carpeting.  Also, don’t overfill it with litter – the whole system works by sensing a cat’s weight stepping into and out of the litter box, and the whole unit rocks forward and back about a 1/2 inch during ingress/egress.  If there’s too much litter it can falsely trigger the sensors, and carpeting can dampen the rocking motion and make the unit not sense usage.

Also, the people at Litter-Robot are very nice and their support is very helpful.  When we first got ours I had a lot of trouble getting it working (due to unlevel floors and overfilling!), so I stuck it in the garage for a year.  When I pulled it back out I realized I had lost a part of it that I had loosened while tinkering, and the Litter-Robot folks were happy to replace it, free of charge, even!

Our cats took the the Litter-Robot within a couple of minutes, no hassle at all.  It takes up about as much floor space as a large litter box, but it’s about 2′ tall and requires the freedom to rotate, so you can’t smash it up against the wall or pull the drapes over it or anything.

The bottom line is that the Litter-Robot works great, it has a fabulous design, it’s easy to clean, our cats love it, there’s no smell, and it’s actually a conversation piece instead of being a sh*tbox.  What’s not to like!??

• Leave a comment... (4)

There have been a handful of movies that have changed me, meaning that they were so impactful that after I watched them I was a different person.  Apocalypse Now, A Clockwork Orange, Eraserhead, Full Metal Jacket – films like that.  Now add to the list an unexpected entry – Skidoo.

Skidoo is not like the other films on the list – they are dark, brooding, and profound.  Skidoo is…well, it’s….kind of…hm…like…well…indescribable.  It’s not really dark or brooding.  Any profundity is tongue-in-cheek.  It’s funny, both intentionally and unintentionally.  It has a bizarre story line.

That’s the word for it – bizarre.  If you’re like me, you’ve never heard of this movie.  I hadn’t either until it popped up recently on Turner Classic Movies one late-night/early-morning.  I consider myself a sort of film dilletante – not really a student of film, but a bit more well-informed than the average American filmgoer.  And I didn’t have a glimmer about the existence of this film, which is surprising, in retrospect.

If you are of a certain age and someone were to describe to you a film that starred Groucho Marx, Jackie Gleason, Carol Channing, Frankie Avalon, Michael Constantine, Frank Gorshin, Peter Lawford, Mickey Rooney, Cesar Romero, Slim Pickens, and George Raft, you might take that cast list, factor in the year it was made (1968), and think you could make an educated guess as to what the film would be like – maybe an undiscovered cousin of It’s a Mad, Mad, Mad, Mad World, or something. 

Well, you’d be wrong. 

Skidoo is…overwhelmingly unexpected.  I hesitate to describe it because watching it without any preface is a delicious experience, but I’m more concerned with doing whatever I can to help get a broader audience for this soon-to-be-cult film.  If you don’t want to know the basic plot then blur your eyes and scroll down until the following indented purple text is off the screen:

The basic storyline is that Groucho Marx plays a gangster nicknamed “God”.  He heads up a nationwide protection racket that controls just about all the criminals in the country.  He is a germophobe and lives in hermitic seclusion aboard his yacht, sealed off behind steel doors, communicating with the outside world via teleconferencing (in 1968!!?!?), and spending his time playing bumper-pool with his scantily clad, Amazon-like, willowy, nubian-ish, right-hand girl.

Jackie Gleason is “Tough Tony”, a former hit-man for God who has long-since retired from the biz.  But God reaches out and strong-arms Tony into doing one last hit, or “kiss” as they call it in this film.  Tony is reformed and doesn’t want to “kiss” anybody for God, but he’s backed into a corner.

Carol Channing plays Tough Tony’s wife, and she spends the film sleeping her way up the chain of command to get to God and find out where her husband is and what he’s doing.

Frankie Avalon plays a mid-level mobster who eventually leads Mrs. Tough Tony and her daughter out to God’s yacht.  God’s yacht is captained by mobster-film-legend George Raft.

Burgess Meredith is the warden of the penitentiary where Tough Tony gets himself sent to so that he can “kiss” one of the other inmates, played by Mickey Rooney.  Tough Tony’s cellmates are played by Michael Constantine and Austin Pendleton.  Pendleton’s character actually sends Tough Tony (plus, eventually, the entire prison population) on an LSD trip, complete with surreal imagery including a Rockette-like dancing number by a bunch of trash cans (really).

There are many other familiar faces, as well.  Roman Gabriel (former QB of the Rams), Harry Nilsson, and Slim Pickens play prison guards, Peter Lawford is a senator with presidential ambitions, Frank Gorshin is God’s man on the inside at the prison, and Richard Kiel (“Jaws” from the Bond films) is his muscle. 

For added strange-itude there are also film clips of Kirk Douglas and John Wayne.  And the whole thing was directed by Otto Preminger.  The finale of the film is a huge song-and-dance number involving Carol Channing leading a hippie invasion of God’s yacht, the denouement is God sailing off in a Hobiecat with Austin Pendleton while they share a joint (yes, Groucho with a joint), and the cherry on top is that the end credits are sung…even the boring ones, like Director of Photography.

 

Put that all together and Skidoo is one long, strange trip.  And it’s a trip worth taking, if for no other reason than the curiosity value.  As the film progresses, your eyes can’t believe what they’re seeing.  The images and actions of the characters are so unexpected and strange that you end up having to expand your mind to be able to take in what you are experiencing.  And that’s where the change comes from.  You have to open your mind, throw out a metric butt-load of preconceptions that you didn’t even know you had, and make room for the existence of something utterly unique and unexpected.

Not that Skidoo is without flaws.  It’s not really “great” in any one area, except maybe for its concept.  The acting, directing, screenplay, effects, and music are all good, but not remarkable in and of themselves.  It’s the combination of inspiration and execution that make Skidoo a film that should be seen by anyone with even the slightest interest in movies.

• Leave a comment... (0)

I am not a Batman fanboy.  I am usually bored and confused by films based on comic books (calling them “graphic novels” is the ultimate in geek denial).  If I recall correctly, I have enjoyed one, or maybe two, of the films in this franchise, but not to any great extent.  I couldn’t really pick Heath Ledger out of a lineup and don’t really recall anything he was in before his untimely passing.

I had also gotten tired of hearing all the hype about this installment, and about the amazing, Oscar-worthy performance by Heath Ledger.  I went in skeptical, to say the least. 

I walked out a believer.

Heath Ledger gives a miraculous performance as The Joker.  The character is completely original, although I kept expecting him to come across as Nicholson (either in The Shining or as The Joker) or as Malcolm McDowell (A Clockwork Orange), but he didn’t.  Ledger’s Joker has to be seen to be believed.  His performance is absolutely worthy of an Oscar nod, and if I were a betting man I’d say he’ll end up winning.  He’s that good.

Most of the rest of the cast is solid, as well.  Michael Caine is dependable as Alfred, Maggie Gyllenhaal is a refreshing change from Mrs. Tom Cruiscientologist, Morgan Freeman and Gary Oldman are spot on, and Aaron Eckhart gives a good performance as Harvey Dent.  And, believe it or not, Eric Roberts (yes, THAT Eric Roberts) gives a great performance in a smallish mobster role.  There’s even a pinch of gratuitous Anthony Michael Hall and a fleeting dash of Cillian Murphy.

The weak link in this installment is Christian Bale, unfortunately.  It’s not so much that he’s bad, it’s just that he’s…lukewarm.  Tepid.  Translucent.  As Bruce Wayne he’s simply boring, and as Batman they’ve really pumped up the bass on his growl, to the point where it’s distracting every time he talks through his bared, gritted teeth.  I think the problem with his performance is more directorial than thespian, but his character just doesn’t have the requisite impact for a near-superhero.

It was also distracting how clearly it was seen to be Chicago standing in for Gotham.  They even had a cop played by Ron Dean, who was one of the two Chicago cops in The Fugitive (and then again in Chain Reaction), which simply added to the Chicago-osity of the mood.

The story is, well, simply a Macguffin to get the pot stirred up.  The action is good, the fights are good, and the effects are good, with the exception of the motorcycle, which just doesn’t move realistically (even allowing for the suspension of disbelief necessary for this type of film). 

Also, the ending of the film seemed tacked on and/or cut down.  After all of the machinations of the film, at the very, very end, just before the credits roll, Batman volunteers to be falsely accused of crimes so that he can be hated by the public and pursued by the cops, because, er…well, because…um…hm, well, he and Commissioner Gordon both seem to think it will help make Gotham a better place, because…uh…let’s see…so, if Batman is now seen as bad, while still trying to do good, but is despised by the public and hunted by the cops, that’s good because…er…well…hm.  I have no clue, but I guess it had to end that way because of something in the comic book, but it was really shoehorned into the end of the film abrubtly, and it was almost clumsy enough to spoil the whole thing.

Luckily, Heath Ledger as The Joker is good enough, and bad enough, to transcend idiotic Hollywood studio machinations and make the film memorable and a near-classic.

• Leave a comment... (0)

Just over a year ago we purchased a Westinghouse 47″ LCD HDTV (Model TX-47F430S) from Best Buy.  This model is priced at the cheaper end of the spectrum, but it seemed to fit our requirements (reasonably good picture, reasonably cheap, from a trustworthy brand name).

The bottom line is that we love the picture and the features, but some of the fit, finish, and quality are lacking.  We expected this because of the lower price, and are happy (so far) with the price-performance compromise.

The Good
First, the good things.  The picture quality is excellent and sharp, and the highest resolution is 1080p, which is the highest HDTV standard resolution.  I’ve heard rumors that Westinghouse has changed to a different LCD panel for this same model number for the new sets being produced, and that the new panel isn’t quite as bright and sharp, but don’t know that for certain.

The connections are also great.  There are four HDMI connectors for HD content.  There is a PC monitor port which allows you to drive it has a super-high-resolution PC/server monitor, and also takes the sound output from the PC as well (great for PC gaming).  It has composite and component/S-video inputs as well.  You can get more technical specifications here.

We have several things hooked up to our TV, as follows:

Regular definition cable TV via TiVo: We get regular cable TV programming through a cable box, which feeds our dual-tuner TiVo, which feeds into one of the component inputs of the TV.  Movies that are broadcast in widescreen can be expanded to fill the entire screen and look really good (but not as good as true HDTV, of course).

HDTV via DirectTV: We also have DirectTV in order to get the NFL and other (selected) sports in HD.  DirectTV only goes up to 1080i, which is interlaced and not quite 1080p, but is still super sharp looking.

Computer: We have a computer hooked up which we can use with a wireless keyboard/trackball, allowing us to display anything PC-based on our television in very sharp resolution.

Wii Console: The Wii console is connected via the component interface and looks good, but not great.  This is a function of the Wii, however, not the television, as the Wii doesn’t support any native high-resolution formats nor HDTV, so it looks a little pixellated when scaled up on our 47″ TV, but still fun and playable.

Overall, the good is really good on this television.  But unfortunately it’s not all good…

The Not-So-Good
There have also been some annoyances with this set, as follows:

• The Closed-Captioning simply does not work.  It gets a few of the words/text, but it’s very jumpy and misses random parts and just doesn’t work.  We rarely used captions, but sometimes it’s nice to have the news on with the sound down and the captions up, so that you can still read what’s going on without the noise intrustion, or when watching a quiet movie that you don’t want to blast the sound way up.  This is a nagging issue, but not bad enough for us to have tried returning the unit, and we didn’t discover until about 90 days in, meaning we couldn’t just go back to Best Buy and exchange it, we would have had to have done some kind of swap with Westinghouse, and would have almost certainly gotten a refurb unit to replace our brand-spanking-new one.
• The PC input doesn’t auto-center the input.  When we switch to view our PC, the video is about 25% of the way moved to the left, leaving a fat wide black bar on the right.  We can jump into the TV’s menu and hit “Auto Adjustment” under the PC options, and it quickly centers the picture properly.  However, we have to do this EVERY SINGLE TIME WE SWITCH TO THE PC INPUT, which gets very annoying.  Again, it’s annoying but fell into the category of “to be expected at this price” for us.  Also, the audio input from the PC has a background buzz if you turn the sound up.
• The remote control doesn’t work well from 10 feet away.  You have to be really close, like 7 feet, for it to work reliably.  This tends to defeat the purpose of a big television that you sit back from to enjoy the splendiforous big picture.  It’s even worse if you’re off to the side and not dead-on center when using the remote.  Again, something to be expected on a cheaper television, but annoying.
• On the regular TV component input, the televison occasionally doesn’t sense that there is a sound channel input, and so sets the status as “no input detected” (or something like that) and won’t play the sound.  We have to switch away from the TV input and then back to get it to recognize the input correctly.  Annoying.
• The audio is two-channel stereo only, so no 5-channel surround experience.

Overall the not-so-good parts are more annoyances than anything else, and each of them individually could be expected for the low price.  However, combined together they make us unsure if the annoyance was worth any cost savings.  However, all these annoyances could be moot because we are now having a REAL problem…

The BAD
Two weeks after our warranty expired (that’s right, two weeks), our television developed a bright green line of pixels down the left hand side, which shows on all inputs and even shows when the TV is powering up.  I have been on the phone with Westinghouse and they have confirmed that it’s a repair issue, but only after first telling me that it was “pixel memory” and making me turn the TV off and unplug it for 24 hours.  A bright green line is NOT pixel burn, but they wouldn’t proceed until I tried it.  Now I’m going to have to fight with them to see if I can get a waiver to get this repaired for goodwill or something, since the it’s out of warranty.  I don’t have high hopes.  I’ll post the results back here when all is said and done.

• Leave a comment... (3)

I just got done watching Dennis Kucinich introduce 35 Articles of Impeachment against President George W. Bush live on C-SPAN.  My take is that the Bush administration has run rampant, wielding Executive power as if it were a light saber, cutting and slicing through the Constitution, US Law, international law, valid treaties, common sense, human dignity, logic, reason, and morality.  That makes these Articles long, long overdue, and makes Dennis Kucinich a patriot and a hero (I never thought I’d say that about him!), in addition to being kind of a doink.

After 7 years of this administration, the US is despised around the world, and rightly so.  The good news is that if we act to show the world that this administration did not speak or act for our Republic, but instead acted against what we stand for, then we can take the first steps in the journey of a thousand miles to reclaiming our moral high ground.  We will also send a message to subsequent administrations that the US is not a monarchy, and the President is bound by the rule of law just like the rest of us.

I think the chances are slim that these Articles of Impeachment will result in the removal of Bush or any of his administration from office.  However, they need to be taken seriously by Congress.  Pelosi has stated repeatedly that the House will not attempt to impeach Bush, but I think she needs to rethink that position.  The ONLY way to heal the festering sore that is the Bush administration is to rip off the bandages, examine the wounds, scrub, clean, and disinfect.  Keeping them under wraps will simply turn it into political gangrene, slowly poisoning this great country.

Here is the full list of the Articles of Impeachment:

Article 1:  Creating a secret propaganda campaign to manufacture a false case for war against Iraq.

Article 2:  Falsely, Systematically, and with Criminal Intent Conflating the Attacks of September 11, 2001, With Misrepresentation of Iraq as a Security Threat as Part of Fraudulent Justification for a War of Aggression.

Article 3:  Misleading the American People and Members of Congress to Believe Iraq Possessed Weapons of Mass Destruction, to Manufacture a False Case for War.

Article 4:  Misleading the American People and Members of Congress to Believe Iraq Posed an Imminent Threat to the United States.

Article 5:  Illegally Misspending Funds to Secretly Begin a War of Aggression.

Article 6:  Invading Iraq in Violation of the Requirements of HJRes114.

Article 7:  Invading Iraq without a declaration of war.

Article 8:  Invading Iraq in violation of the U.N. charter and international law.

Article 9:  Failing to provide troops with body armor and vehicle armor.

Article 10:  Falsifying accounts of US troop deaths.

Article 11:  Establishment of permanent bases in Iraq.

Article 12:  Initiating a war against Iraq for control of that nation’s national resources.

Article 13:  Creating a secret task force to guide our nation’s energy and military policy.

Article 14:  Misuse and exposure of classified information and obstruction of justice regarding Valerie Plame.

Article 16:  Wasting public funds on contracts to close associates, people guilty of government fraud, and awarding of no-bid contracts.

Article 17:  Unlawful detainment of prisoners indefinitely and without charge.

Article 18:  Secretly authorizing and encouraging the use of torture on prisoners in Afghanistan, Iraq, and Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

Article 19:  Rendition, or kidnapping people and extraditing them to other countries to perform torture.

Article 20:  Imprisoning Children.

Article 21:  Misleading Congress and the American People about threats from Iran with the goal of overthrowing the Iranian Government.

Article 22:  Creating “Secret Laws.”

Article 23:  Violation of the Posse Comitatus Act (using the military as a domestic police force).

Article 24:  Warrantless spying on US citizens.

Article 25:  Having telecom companies create illegal database of email addresses and phone numbers.

Article 26:  Announcing the intent to violate laws with signing statements and then violating those laws.

Article 27:  Failing to comply with Congressional subpoenas and instructing former employees not to comply.

Article 28:  Tampering with free and fair elections.

Article 29:  Conspiracy to violate the Voting Rights Act of 1965.

Article 30:  Misleading Congress and the American people in an attempt to destroy Medicare.

Article 31:  Failure to adequately plan for Hurrican Katrina and failure to adequately respond to the civil emergency.

Article 32:  Misleading Congress and the American people and undermining efforts to address global climate change.

Article 33:  Repeatedly ignored and failed to respond to high-level intelligence warnings of planned terrorist attacks in the US prior to 9/11.

Article 34:  Obstruction of the investigation into the attacks of 9/11.

Article 35:  Endangering the health of 9/11 first responders.

[Update 6/10/2008 at 8:30am Central time]  Unbelievably, this story has still not hit the major news outlets (CNN, Fox News, NY Times, BBC, etc).  The wire services (Reuters, AP) have the story, some smaller/local news outlets are carrying it, and the blogosphere is on fire about it.  Even if one sees Kucinich as simply a flake, he’s still a US Representative and former Presidential candidate, and he’s introduced orders of impeachment against the sitting President and provided extensive details to back up each of the 35 Articles, so this should be breaking news everywhere, even if just to mock/dismiss it.  Surreal.

• Leave a comment... (1)

First, a disclaimer:  I am not a true believer for any side, team, party, PAC, religion, or single-issue demographic.  My political and social views include both “Conservative” and “Liberal” policies, I’m not a registered Republican or Democrat, and I have no need for the President to be an older, white male.  I love America, I revere the Constitution, I think our three-branch system of government is the work of genius, and I’ve been around long enough to know that the pendulum always swings one way, then back the other way – all you have to do is wait long enough.

I also think that it’s time for a change, and that the current administration has been arguably the worst in the last 75 years.  Bush came from the oil bidness, Cheney came from the defense contracting world, and after 8 years of Bush/Cheney which two industries have had record, burgeoning profits as a direct result of the actions of this administration?  When these last two terms are studied by future generations they will scarcely believe that we, the people, stood idly by during these deadly, absurdly obvious shenanigans.

But now that era is over.  And while McCain is a reasonably competitive nominee, I don’t think there is any way the American people will put the Republicans back in charge.  So that means that the Democratic nominee will be our next president, barring a major scandal or some other Act of God/Rove.  And as of today, the Associated Press has called the Democratic race for Barack Obama.  This means that as long as he avoids mistakes, he is virtually assured of being the next President of the United States.

Yes, Hillary could continue to fight.  She could run as an Independent, which could put the election in McCain’s hands.  She could take the fight to the convention and end up poisoning the public on the Democrats altogether.  However, as much of a street fighter as she is, I don’t see her going so far as to risk putting the Republicans back in charge in order to win a Pyrrhic victory.

So, it’s going to be President Barack Obama.  And I’m scared.

Why am I scared?  Not because he’s black.  I don’t think he’s a secret Muslim.  I don’t care if he wore a lapel pin or put his hand on his heart.  My issue is that he’s an almost complete unknown, and the things that are known about him seem to be in conflict with the public persona he has created around his campaign, as follows:

 

• His message of “Hope” and “Change”.  Well, hope is what losers have right up until the final out, and change can be good or it can be bad.  It worries me both that he would choose such ephemeral slogans, and also that the American voting public fell for it.  I “hope” the “change” he brings is for the better.
• His portrayal as a political outsider.  A big part of Obama’s message is that McCain and Hillary represent the old guard, the political insiders, and that Obama represents a fresh, new wind that exists outside of politics-as-usual.  However, trace back the rise of Barack Obama, and if you’re like me (and not from Illinois) the first time you heard of him was when he was tapped to give the keynote speech at the 2004 Democratic Convention.  And when you’re a junior, one-term Senator and your party taps you to give the keynote address at the national convention, you are, by definition, a political insider.
• His lack of a proven track record.  I will freely acknowledge that Barack Obama could turn out to be a great president.  However, he could also turn out to be a horrible president.  The issue is that he is a blank slate, and voters are able to project their own hopes and dreams onto him, because he’s never had to really do anything or take any stands.  He’s like a new-found infatuation who has never disappointed us – it’s so easy to dream of the perfect relationship.  But all relationships must mature, bills have to be paid, children raised, daily challenges faced.  And while he is undeniably charming, handsome, and articulate, we simply don’t know enough about Obama to know if he can be a dependable head of the household when it comes time to deal with the day-to-day grind and the long-term strategic planning necessary to be a successful leader.
• His smoking.  Does smoking show the level of character and long-term decision-making ability we want in a national leader?  Do we want our children to be able to say to us, “Why shouldn’t I smoke, the President does!??”  Obama claims to have quit smoking during the primaries, but that just makes it worse, in my opinion.  So, he smoked up until the time that it could hurt him politically, then quit?  So does that mean that, as president, he will do things that are harmful in the long-term and will only quit when it threatens him politically in the short-term?
• His wacky church and preacher(s).  On the one hand, you can say that Barack Obama is not responsible for what the preacher says at his church.  On the other hand, you can say that when it worked to his advantage, Obama was very happy to have the support of Reverend Wright and the Trinity Church.  And then when Wright and the church became a liability, Obama quickly distanced himself and quit the church.  I’m not saying that makes Obama any worse than any other politician.  In fact, I’m saying it makes him exactly like most other politicians, and not some squeaky-clean, fresh-faced outsider riding into town to clean things up.  Also, if I were a betting man I’d have to say that I think Obama is an atheist, or at best an agnostic, but that he keeps up his church-going because there’s no way to advance politically in this country if you aren’t overtly Christian.  So, that makes him a hypocrite, in my opinion.  You may condemn me for calling him a hypocrite over something I can’t possibly know, but, c’mon, don’t you also think he’s a non-believer, or at least a doubter?
• His “no-lobbyists” bullshit.  Obama’s campaign makes a lot of noise about not taking money from lobbyists.  The funny thing is, that message is being delivered in part by his top strategist David Axelrod, who owns a political consulting firm in Chicago that specializes in “astroturfing”, which is double-speak for creating fake grass-roots movements to support big businesses.  For example, his firm launched Citizens Organized for Reliable Electricity (CORE) using money from Commonwealth Edision, an Ohio utility company.  CORE ran a scare campaign that warned that if a rate hike was not granted for ComEd then Ohio could face California-like electrical blackouts.  CORE was not grassroots and didn’t represent people, it represented ComEd trying to get higher revenues, but masqueraded as a grass-roots group of concerned citizens.  That, my friends, is lobbying.  Also, Obama accepts donations from the spouses of lobbyists, and from individual employees of lobbying firms who aren’t personally registered as lobbyists.  Also, any lobbyist can (and have, and do) join the Obama campaign or donate to the cause simply by de-registering as a lobbyist (and then simply re-registering later when it’s more politically expedient).  If you’re going to throw out the lobbyists, throw them out, don’t use sleight-of-hand to try to fool us.  Again, no different from any/all other politicians, but not really in keeping with Obama’s claim to be the clean and pure outsider.
• His annoying wife.  I don’t really know Michelle Obama, and she might be a great person, personally.  But so far she hasn’t figured out how to be the likely first lady.  How is she annoying?  Well, she’s very focused on minority issues and equal rights, which is great – but she has an all-female staff.  I guess men are fair game for discrimination?  She has also done a lot of work in the public sector, and comes across as a hybrid mom-slash-public-servant.  However, until very recently she was also a paid board member of TreeHouse Foods, a huge supplier for Wal-Mart, and she only resigned after her husband made some anti-Wal-Mart comments at a union rally.  Now, how well does it fit with Barack Obama’s public persona that his wife was a board member for a major supplier for a low-wage-paying, benefit-denying, small-town-destroying, union-busting, borg-ship-like retailer like Wal-Mart?  Again, I’m not saying that in-and-of-itself it is wrong to profit from supplying Wal-Mart.  However, I’m saying that it’s very annoying when you try to mold your public persona into that of a caring public servant focused on changing the world, when you were actually part of the status-quo machine until it became politically expedient to change your stripes.
• His connections to Zbigniew Brzezinski.  Brzezinski was Jimmy Carter’s National Security Advisor, he helped arm the mujaheddin in Afghanistan to fight the Soviets (the mujaheddin later became the Taliban and sheltered al Qaeda), was a founding member of the Trilateral Commission (along with David Rockefeller, Alan Greenspan, and Paul Volcker), is/was part of the ultra-secretive Bilderberg Group, worked in the administrations of both Ronald Reagan and George Bush Sr., has been a board member for Amnesty International and The Council on Foreign Relations, and has generally been involved in most major world affairs from the 1960’s until the present.  He is one of the ultimate insiders, definitely part of of the world political machine – a mover and shaker.  He’s “them”…he’s “they”…one of the men behind the screen that influence and control geopolitics like puppetmasters.  And guess what?  He was an instructor at Columbia University when Barack Obama was a student.  And now he’s Obama’s foreign policy advisor.  And Brzezinski’s son Mark is also an Obama advisor.  So, tell me again how Obama is an outsider who’s coming in to bring hope and change and a bright, shiny new America for us all?

There’s more, but they aren’t as important as the above list.  The bottom line is that Barack Obama is almost a complete unknown, and what is known about him is wildly at odds with his publicly crafted and marketed persona as a pure outsider.  He *could* be a good, or even great, President.  However, I think the Democratic Party has taken another swing at snatching defeat from the jaws of victory, because they are making a very risky wager – that Barack Obama can come from nowhere and become the most powerful person on the face of the earth, based on a couple of years in the US Senate, good looks, great speech-writers, oratorical genius, and a shell-shocked American voting public looking for a savior.

Four years from now I will happily come back here and post a mea culpa if Barack Obama is able to deliver.  I don’t dislike him, and I don’t know that he won’t be a good President.  However, after eight years of Bush/Cheney/Rove I think the American voters should have chosen a more known, stable leader, and not rolled the dice on the sweet-talking stranger in town.  As always, America courts both greatness and failure – let’s hope we get lucky this time.

• Leave a comment... (3)

Wall*E is the story of a little robot who does a big job – cleaning up the Earth and saving humanity.  He’s the last of his kind, left behind by the entire human race who have gone to live in the stars, at least for a while.  It seems that man had finally filled up the Earth with so much trash that it wasn’t fit to live on any more, so they built an army of Waste Allocation Load Lifters – Earth-class, or WALL*Es, and set them to gathering and stacking all the garbage.  Meanwhile, the humans blasted off to live in luxurious, automated, sterile, giant space stations while the robots put the Earth back into a livable state.

Unfortunately, the job was too big even for an army of robots, and over hundreds of years all the machines started breaking/dying/shutting down, until only one is left.  Wall*E spends his days gathering trash, compacting it into cubes in his belly, and stacking it in gigantic, skyscraper sized rows of refuse.  Wall*E is happy in his work, sentient, romantic, and a collector of stuff.  When he finds interesting things he takes them back to his house, and watches old movie musicals to pass the time.  Think “The Omega Man”, only with a plucky robot instead of Charlton Heston, and no mutants.  Oh, but there is at least one cockroach, and he and Wall*E share a symbiotic relationship.

Then, one day, out of the sky comes a huge rocket, which lands just long enough to leave behind a little egg-shaped robot to search for plant life.  She is Eve (Environmental Vegetation Evaluator, I think), and her sleek whiteness and technological advancement make Wall*E look like broken-down Tonka truck compared to the latest iPod/iPhone/iBot/iPhaser/iBrain.  She relentlessly combs the area for some sign of plant life, and blasts any perceived threats with what appears to be a phased-plasma flipper.  Wall*E is, of course, smitten, and manages to survive Eve’s defenses long enough for her to figure out that he’s not a threat.

And just as soon as Wall*E starts working his romantic mojo on Eve, she discovers a plant that he has been nurturing and then things get weird.  Eve goes into some kind of extended hibernation until the rocket returns and takes her away again.  Wall*E stows aboard and gets taken with Eve up to one of the human spacecraft, and that’s when the story really gets started.

Suffice it to say that both true love and the fate of humanity hang in the balance of the story, and the tale is funny, exciting, heartbreaking, and ultimately…well…happy.  What else would you expect from Pixar?

The animation of the film is flawless – not that it’s faking reality or anything.  You know that it’s animated, but it is achingly well done.  You don’t notice that it’s animated, and are quickly immersed in the reality of Wall*E.  It also takes quite a while to realize that Wall*E doesn’t really talk – he can sort of squeak and squeal in an electronic fashion, and kiiiind of form some simple words, but he sounds kind of like what I imagine R2D2 would sound like after a poorly taught crash course in English.  Coincidentally, Wall*E’s “voice” is done by Ben Burtt, who also did the beeping and booping for R2D2.

The story in the film is nearly epic – one pure soul’s quest for love, with the saving of an entire species as the mere backdrop.  My emotions ran the gamut, from happiness and laughter to awe and wonder to tension and excitement to…yes…even a sniffle or two.  And poor Mynagirl, about 15 minutes in I looked over at her and she was already sobbing at the mere anticipation of the perilous quest that Wall*E would surely soon be facing.  After the movie, Mynagirl chatted with her sister who had also just seen Wall*E and who had also sobbed through nearly the entire thing. 

It’s not that the film is maudlin, or anything, but it is emotionally powerful.  Wall*E is loveable and diligent, curious and intelligent, romantic and brave, and so pure of heart that he makes sure his pet cockroach gets a daily Twinkie (which you may never eat again after seeing this movie).  If you replaced the animated characters with human actors, Wall*E could easily be considered one of the greatest space operas ever filmed.  It probably should be considered as such, but the animated nature may make it so that the film establishment only sees this is a kid’s film, which would be a shame.  It could (and should) rank up there with Star Wars, Blade Runner, Galaxy Quest, Alien/Aliens, Idiocracy, and 2001: A Space Odyssey in the pantheon of great sci-fi.  Picture a stew of those films, with a dash of Charlie Chaplin and a pinch of E.T. and you’ll get the ingredients that Wall*E combines and even sometimes transcends.

But it will also still work for your kids, too.  The movie is hilarious and a sight to behold even if the young’uns don’t quite understand why the adults start laughing when “Thus Spake Zarathustra” plays during a key dramatic sequence, or when they figure out that the voice of the ship’s computer is none other than Sigourney Weaver.  Pixar has managed to walk the tightrope between the profound, witty, and poignant adult elements and the funny, loveable, scary kid elements, without doing a disservice to either.  However, know that if you were to change the right 30 seconds of this film, it would become one of the most tragic stories ever told. 

The bottom line is that Pixar has topped themselves yet again.  This is, by far, my new favorite Pixar film.  Take someone you love and I personally guarantee that by the end you’ll be smiling, you’ll be clapping, your eyes will not be dry…and you’ll be holding hands. 

Wallleeee!

• Leave a comment... (0)

When I heard they were making a big screen version of the Iron Man comic books (sorry, graphic novels don’t exist, losers) it felt like a body blow – yet another crude and artless raping and pillaging of our cultural history by Hollywood in pursuit of dollars.  Then I heard that the lead was being played by…Robert Downey, Jr!??!?  Um, I’m sorry, I’m afraid I didn’t hear that right…did you say Robert Downey, Jr. would be playing Iron Man????  That…doesn’t make any sense…at all.  I mean, once I thought about it, it sounded slightly interesting, but what in the world were the Hollywood studio execs thinking?  You have to have a big name star to go in your big budget picture with the big special effects and the big promotional tie-ins so you get the big box office with a big early summer season opener…

…right?

Well, then I found out that it wasn’t produced by a “major Hollywood studio”, it’s actually the first major motion picture produced by Marvel (the comic book folks).  And the director?  None other than Jon Favreau, who is about as unlikely a director of a big-budget, special-effects-laden, summer-blockbuster movie as Downey is as the star.

So then I started to get mildly interested.  But that always happens to me as the summer blockbuster season approaches, and I am disappointed about 95% of the time, so I was still skeptical.  Then I started hearing early reviews – and they were good.  And not the bought-and-paid-for-blurb-friendly-pabulum that gets associated with crap like Transformers, Cloverfield, War of the Worlds, King Kong, etc.  Actual positive critiques of the film by cineastes.

“Huh…”, I thought, with tremendous insight if I do say so myself.

When the film opened yesterday I found myself really wanting to see it – however Mynagirl was just returning from out of town, so schlepping out to see a movie would have been near-torture for her during her post-travel recovery.  But, we both wanted to see it and vowed to attend the first screening today (the Saturday after opening).

Which we did…and it was magnificent.  Go and see it right now – in fact, stop reading and just go see it.  Then come back here and finish this review.  One and only one caveat – this film is based on a comic book, so, well, don’t expect it to be super-realistic.  It’s a comic book story, right?  Go in with that mindset and you won’t be disappointed, because Iron Man transcends what I’ve come to expect from big-budget comic book films.  Robert Downey Jr. is perfectly cast in the lead.  The rest of the roles are also superbly cast, including Gwyneth Paltrow, Terrence Howard, and Jeff Bridges.

The screenplay is intelligent and funny, and the story is engaging.  Yes, the bad guys are a shade stereotypical, but Tony Stark (Downey’s character) is a conflicted hero.  He’s the brilliant son of one of the key players in the Manhattan Project, as an engineer he’s a prodigy, and as a man he’s a charmingly arrogant lothario.  He takes over his father’s company and turns it into gigantic weapons manufacturer, always turning out the latest and greatest technology that the military needs (or at least wants badly after seeing his demonstrations).

Yes, he’s a merchant of death, but on the good side.  Or so he thinks, and thereby hangs the tale – I’ll say no more about the plot because even though this is a big-budget movie with dazzling effects, it’s actually kind of story-driven.

Speaking of the effects, they are also near-perfect.  They aren’t used too little or too much, they appear on screen in what felt like just the right proportions, and they are done with subtly understated mastery, meaning that you don’t get jolted out of the story by cheesy looking effects, they just work perfectly within the context of the story.  For those who want nothing but wall-to-wall effects, this film may not fulfill that jones, as the heavy rocking doesn’t get started until what felt like 45-60 minutes into the story. 

The final scene is particularly satisfying, and be sure to stay all the way through the end credits for a hint as to whether or not there will be a sequel (duh!).

All I can say is, if there is a sequel, I’ll be first in line.

Update 5/11/2008:  Iron Man kicked Speed Racer’s butt at the box office this weekend!!  And this was Iron Man’s second week in release, while it was Speed Racer’s opening weekend!  Hahahahaha!  You may wonder why this makes me happy when I have no direct involvement in either production, but I am filled with glee to see the Wachowski brothers (creators of Speed Racer) fail so spectacularly.  They created “The Matrix”, which SUCKED, but which somehow hypnotized unsuspecting moviegoers into thinking it was good, leading to several sequels and endless imitations – so many, in fact, that it derailed moviemaking for several years, much to my dismay.  Plus, if even half the rumors are true, the Wachowski’s are a couple of freaky weirdos.  So, a big-budget failure of such stupendous magnitude is just what I think they deserved, and maybe will stop them from making any more movies.

• Leave a comment... (0)

We live in a small country town (Brenham, TX – population ~13,000), and love it.  One drawback, however, is that there is only a single movie theater here, six-screens showing the absolute worst of Hollywood crap…we call it the Yokelplex.  There has been only one exception, which is when they showed Gone With the Wind on the big screen in partnership with a local community theater that was staging a play about the making of the movie.  But other than that – a constant parade of dreck.  For example, here's the current playlist:

• 21
• Dr. Seuss' Horton Hears a Who
• Drillbit Taylor
• Leatherheads
• Nim's Island
• Superhero Movie
• Tyler Perry's Meet the Browns

Not every movie on that list is execrable, but most are, and none are compelling enough to get my entertainment dollars.  We've been to see maybe 5 or 6 films at the theater, and we've lived here for a year and a half and I *love* going to the movies.

What does this have to do with In Bruges?  Well, nothing directly, except that we had to drag ourselves into downtown Houston (90 minute drive, to the sadly decaying Angelika Theater – more on that at the bottom of this article) in order to find a movie worth seeing.  And, to me, this is indicative of the drought of good films being produced by the mainstream American film community.  Are there occasionally good American films?  Yes.  However, most of the mainstream films are simply horrible.

At one point we were so desperate for movie entertainment that we took a couple of weekends to visit the Yokelplex and see the films that were most highly rated by the combination of RottenTomatoes and IMDB.  One weekend it was The Spiderwick Chronicles, which we knew was primarily a kid's movie, but I've got an open mind and have loved many "kid" pics, such as The Incredibles.  Well, Spiderwick was so bad that we walked out, something we rarely do.  It wasn't really bad, it was just incredibly derivative and boring.  As are most mainstream films that we are able to go see.

However, In Bruges, is a different story altogether.  We had seen some brief trailers for it, and it looked kind of like an action comedy, and it is…sort of.  But it's much more than that.  First of all, it's so well written that it shames virtually every American film we've seen in the last few years, with only a few exceptions like Michael Clayton, Superbad, and Stranger Than Fiction.  Second, it defies expectations at every turn – and not in the in-your-face, clonk-you-over-the-head, artless manner of most mainstream American films – but in subtle, unexpected, and even frightening ways.

I really don't want to talk too much about the film because I don't want to spoil it.  Suffice it to say that Bruges is the name of a city in Belgium, and Colin Ferrell and Brendan Gleeson (who also played the father with the little girl in 28 Days Later) are a team of London underworld types who head to Bruges to escape the heat from a recent job.  I'll say no more about the plot of the film, other than to say that it does contain more violence and intensity than is apparent from the marketing and trailers that I've seen.

Colin Ferrell, Brendan Gleeson, and the rest of the cast are superb…SUPERB.  I normally don't care for Colin Farrell – but I have to admit that he does an excellent job here – so good that he deserves an Oscar nom.  So does Brendan Gleeson.  So does the writer/director, Martin McDonagh.  However, I fear that this is the kind of movie that the Academy will overlook.  First, it's not from an American production company.  Second, it's both funny and serious – which tends to confuse Academy voters who seem to like to nominate movies for Best Picture only if they are NOT comedies and only if they are clearly serious films.  And third, well, the taste of the Academy sucks so far this century.  I'll love it if I'm wrong when the nominations come out next year, but I'm not holding my breath.

The bottom line – if you like films that are perfectly cast, tightly scripted, superbly acted, exquisitely directed, action packed, funny, and also serious, go see In Bruges.

A note to local Houstonians – what the hell has happened to the Angelika Theater?  We hadn't been there in nearly a year, and the last time we were there its glory was starting to fade.  Today it was simply a sad, empty shell of its former self.  The staff were surly and uncaring, the refreshments and snacks were unremarkable, the air-conditioning was broken (or set to a hotter setting to save money), and the quality of the picture and sound in the theater was horrendous.  The Angelika used to be an elegant venue in which discerning filmgoers could enjoy a sophisticated night out – and now it feels like a shabby suburban gigaplex.  They still show interesting movies, which is good, but, sadly, the thrill is gone.

• Leave a comment... (0)

I have a low-end little gas grill (Sunbeam Grillmaster 660) that we use for our weekend barbequing.  I used to be strictly a charcoal kind of guy, but I’ve been won over by the convenience and predictable heating of a gas barbeque grill.  There are some Texans who claim that *real* brisket can only be made over coals and/or wood, but I beg to differ.  I’ve been eating barbequed brisket my whole life, starting when we moved to a small Texas town in the 60’s, where my uncles would make brisket (along with ribs, chicken, and homemade venison sausage) for family gatherings.  Since then I’ve eaten brisket from just about every kind of barbeque joint and backyard cook you could think of.  And the brisket described here, cooked over a gas grill, ranks right up there with the best of ’em.

The brisket pictured here will give you an idea of what yours should look like.  Note the tray of charred wood chips on the left.  Also, only the left side of the grill is on, and the right side (under the meat) is off.  Also remember that the brisket cooks with the cover closed.  Click the picture for a larger version that shows more detail.

The Keys to Good Brisket

• Good meat – get a big chunk of uncooked, unflavored brisket, 10+lbs with a nice fatty side, just a big old slab of meat in a vacuum sealed heavy plastic package.  Do NOT use any of the pre-flavored, pre-smoked briskets for this recipe, and do NOT trim the fat off.
• Patience – prep time can extend overnight, cooking time is 6+ hours, resting time is nearly an hour and none of the steps can be rushed.
• Restraint – very little seasoning is needed, and the meat must cook virtually undisturbed (no forking, flipping, meat-thermometer-stabs, or manhandling – just gentle slow cooking and smoking).
• Non-violence – up until the time you’re ready to slice and serve the brisket, the meat should not be punctured or pierced in any way.  No forks, thermometers, unskilled tong use, flavor injections, slicing, scoring, tenderizing, etc.
• Practice – it will probably take a few iterations for you to get the hang of the nuances of your grill, tools, and preferences.

Tools and Such

• Gas grill with independent left and right side burner controls (only one side will be lit)
• Big roasting pan or foil pan, large enough to hold the brisket and tough enough to withstand grill heat
• Lots of aluminum foil (the extra-wide kind is better)
• Aromatic wood chips (mesquite, pecan, hickory all work good) plus small foil pan or metal tray to hold them
• Big, flat metal spatula to turn brisket while seasoning and move it without piercing the meat

Ingredients

• 1 beef brisket (10+ pounds), with a layer of fat at least 1/4 inch thick, preferably 1/2 inch thick
• 2 tablespoons coarse salt (kosher or sea)
• 1 tablespoon chili powder
• 1 tablespoon white sugar
• 1 tablespoon brown sugar
• 1 teaspoon freshly ground black pepper
• 1 teaspoon ground comino (cumin)

Remove brisket from packaging, rinse with cold water and pat dry.  Combine the dry ingredients in a bowl.  Sprinkle half the dry ingredients over one side of the brisket, then rub it into the meat by hand to spread evenly, including the sides and edges.  Gently flip the brisket over and use the rest of the dry rub on the other side the same way.  If you have the time, wrap the brisket in plastic wrap and refrigerate for 2-4 hours to cure in the rub – overnight is better (curing is optional, it will still be flavorful if you cook immediately).

Light only one side of the gas grill and set it to low heat.  Soak wood chips (mesquite, hickory, or pecan) in water for 30 minutes, then drain and place in small foil pan (or other heat-tolerant metal container) and set on the grill directly over the side that is lit.

Place the brisket FAT SIDE UP in a large foil pan, or large roasting pan lined with two layers of foil, and place it on the grill on the side away from the direct flame heat. If you use a foil pan it’s still a good idea to line it with two layers of foil to ensure you don’t get any punctures, rips, or creases that the drippings can leak out of.  Make sure the thicker side of the brisket is closer to the flames than the thinner side, that way it will cook more evenly.   DO NOT cover the brisket with foil at any time during the grilling process.  Now, close the grill and leave it alone for 2 hours (DO NOT OPEN GRILL DURING THIS TIME).  After two hours, use a turkey baster to baste the brisket with the juices that accumulate in the roasting pan.  Baste every 45 minutes or so after that.  After three hours of total cooking time replace the wood chips with a freshly soaked batch.  Let the brisket cook with the grill closed (except when basting) for a total of 6 hours from the time you put it on the grill.  Remember, the brisket should not be lifted, turned, or punctured/pierced during the cooking process.

Remove from the grill, cover the brisket with foil tightly sealed to the pan, and let the brisket sit for 45-60 minutes, during which time it will re-absorb a lot of the juices and also undergo tenderization.  This resting period is very important for juicy, tender brisket.

At this point, if you have been patient and the BBQ Gods are smiling, you will be ready to enjoy delicious, flavorful, fork-tender, juicy Texas-style brisket.  Make sure to cut across the grain of the meat when you slice it, not with it – this one mistake can ruin an otherwise perfect brisket.  It’s easier to spot the grain before you cook and get an idea of which way the striations run, and you want to slice perpendicular to the grain.

Traditional accompaniments include potato salad, pickles, onion slices, and white bread.  If you want BBQ sauce, try for something sweet and not-too-vinegary, like this:

[stextbox id=”grey” caption=”Texas BBQ Sauce Recipe”]16 oz can tomato sauce
1/2 cup water
1/4 cup vinegar
3 tbs brown sugar
2 tbs onion powder
1 tbs garlic powder
2 tbs Worcestershire sauce
2 tbs brisket drippings (if you have them)
1 tbs coarse black pepper
1 tbs Paprika
1 tbs salt
1 tsp Tabasco sauce
1 tsp chili powder

• Combine all ingredients in a heavy sauce pan on the stove
• Slowly simmer for 30-60 minutes, stirring occasionally
• Adjust water and/or simmer time to get desired thickness
• Serve warm on the side or over the meat, but do *not* use as a baste for the brisket while it’s cooking

Optionally, the onion powder and garlic powder can be substituted with fresh, use 1/2 an onion and 2-3 garlic pods, pureed.  If you choose fresh onion/garlic, I recommend preparing it the day before, chilling it overnight, then reheating the next day – this takes the edge off the fresh garlic and onion and leads to a smoother taste.  Also, since you probably won’t have drippings the day before making the brisket, you can substitute in a teaspoon of Liquid Smoke.
[/stextbox]
Enjoy!

• Leave a comment... (130)