An Open Letter to Palm, Inc.

Posted on June 1st, 2003 in Product Reviews,Technology by EngineerBoy

Way back in the dark ages, I bought my first Palm device – the PalmPilot Pro. It immediately became as indispensable to me as my cell phone, as it enabled me to view, edit, change, and delete calendar appointments, contacts, and tasks while I was out and about, and then synchronize them when I got back to my computer. I used the heck out of it until I lost it, and immediately bought a replacement (used, same make/model) for about 25% of what I originally paid. I used the replacement for several years, then lost it, too. Palm had just announced the forthcoming Palm V, so I waited a couple of months for it to be released before purchasing it.

The Palm V was sleek and small, with a stylish metallic case, sharper graphics, and more memory. I once again used the heck out of it for a couple of years, and then (as you may have guessed, given the pattern so far) eventually lost it. I very badly wanted to replace it immediately, but rumors had begun circulating about a new wireless Palm (the i705, not the Sputnik-sized Palm VII), so I vowed to wait until the release of the new model before making my purchasing decision.

So I waited. And waited. And waited. For almost a year. Palm-less, writing things on sticky-notes, having to *remember* commitments and tasks. It was not fun. Finally Palm announced the upcoming i705. It looked pretty good, bigger than the Palm V, but smaller than the Palm VII, which seemed about right. Integrated, internal antennae, as opposed to the Palm VII’s flip-out, plastic, auto-breaking one. So I weighed my options, between the new color Palms and the wireless, non-color i705, and finally decided that the convenience of wireless won out. I placed my advance order and got my i705 the day after it was released.

It was love at first sight, let me tell you. I activated the wireless service, synched up my information, took it out for a test spin, got my first pro-active, wireless email notification and knew I could never go back to non-wireless. *This* is what a PDA was supposed to do. And I used the heck out of it. *And* we got one for my wife.

And then I began to notice some little, nagging problems. I had to recalibrate my screen every couple of days, because the place I would touch on the screen would be translated by the device to a place near where I touched, but not exactly. And over time it would drift further askew, until it was impossible to do anything. But, recalibration was a 30 second chore, so I figured I could live with it. Also, the gray case was just painted plastic, not metal, and the paint started to flake off almost immediately. This made the device look old and cheap. Eventually the case cracked, right along the edge of the media card slot, which Palm had illogically place directly behind the power button, so that the card slot was compressed every time the device was powered on or off.

Eventually the warranty expired, and the screen was so bad that I was having to recalibrate several times a day. I don’t think I recalibrated all my previous Palms, in total, more than 10 times. But the wireless convenience still made it worth it.

But then things started to go sour for Palm, from my perspective. Out of the blue I got a Certified letter from Palm telling me that they were changing the pricing of the wireless service and eliminating the Unlimited plan, to which I had been subscribing since I activated. Instead all usage would be metered, and Palm was nice enough to calculate what my bill would probably be, based on my previous usage. It would have effectively tripled my monthly charges. Also, they were giving me only one month’s notice.

Now, I’m a businessman, and I understand that things change, and that Palm really has the right to do whatever they need to do keep their business afloat. I didn’t appreciate these changes, as they were inconvenient to me, personally, but I understood that it was just business. Also, I received a letter from Palm saying that all Palm i705 users would be getting a nice, steep discount on the upcoming new wireless Palm, the Tungsten W. This sounded like a nice piece of customer maintenance news, and I was mildly hopeful.

Still, I couldn’t justify continuing my Palm wireless service at the new rates, so I called Palm to explore options. The customer representative could not have cared less about my previous purchases of 4 new (and registered!) Palms, my years as a loyal Palm customer, or my desire to remain a paying Palm customer. There was simply nothing that could be done. I said that left me no choice but to cancel my wireless service. His response was interesting, in that it did not include *any* of the normal ploys used by companies to keep their paying customers. What he did was very quickly and helpfully assisted me in performing the cancellation within about a minute. No attempt to talk me out of it. No attempt at an up-sell. No attempt to address my concerns. No transferring me to some other department for the cancellation, hoping I would hang up. Nothing but a quick, clean cancellation of a recurring, subscription revenue customer. Actually, *two* paying customers, since we also cancelled my wife’s service. Unheard of.

And then it dawned on me…they *wanted* people to cancel. That’s the reason the entire episode was handled so poorly…they were actually trying to get rid of their i705 customers. A little research showed that the probable cause was that Palm’s contract with their wireless service provider had expired, and the new agreement was pricier and didn’t allow Palm the flexibility to offer an unlimited usage plan. Also, their new wireless Palm (Tungsten W) used a completely different wireless network, so their incentive to add people to the old network was very small, and their incentive to get people off of it was very large.

Okay, so they were dealing with a very sticky issue. They sure seemed to handle it poorly, but the promise of a steep discount on the Tungsten W soothed my crotchety-ness. However, when the supposed “discount” arrived, it was nothing more than reduction of up-front cost if you chose a more expensive wireless plan. Either way Palm would get your money, it just might take 12 months or so. Also, this great “discount” was being offered to anyone, not just i705 owners. So much for doing right by their i705 customers.

If I might speculate a bit, I think a better explanation may be that Palm rushed the i705 to market in order to try to head off the tidal wave of BlackBerry and other related devices. This explanation perfectly fits the facts, in that the unit was cheaply made, it plugged into the Palm.net network, the prices fell quickly and dramatically after release, and Palm very quickly abandoned the platform with virtually no hesitation about alienating the i705’s user base. It feels, to me, that Palm designed this product as a stopgap, and their only real purpose was to delay people from purchasing competitor’s products until they could get their *real* product (Tungsten W) out the door. Time will tell if this was an intelligent strategy for Palm.

And so now I use my crappy, cheap looking, plastic, cracked, jittery-screened i705 without wireless service. Palm gets nothing from me, and they won’t get anything from me in the future, as I’ve bought my last Palm product. Once this one fails or gets lost, I’m getting something else. Palm had every opportunity to do right by their i705 owners, to admit the product was poorly conceived, to admit they got screwed on their wireless contract renegotiation, to offer a *real* discount to get us to their new, preferred platform. To prove they valued us as customers.

They didn’t. That is their choice, and I’m sure it was hard for them, but oh well. After a decade as a happy Palm owner, they lost me. Me, who loved their products, sang the praises of their devices, convinced dozens of customers (and thus thousands of end users) to purchase Palm products, and gave their products as gifts. All that goodwill and all those real dollars, thrown away. How’s that business plan working out for you, Palm?

Cafe Red Onion – Highly Recommended

Posted on May 3rd, 2003 in Houston,Restaurant Reviews by EngineerBoy

Three Houston locations:

3910 Kirby Dr, Houston, TX 77098
(713) 807-1161

12440 Northwest Fwy, Houston, TX 77092
(713) 957-0957

1111 Eldridge Pkwy # 100, Houston, TX 77077
(281) 293-7500

http://www.caferedonion.com

We eat here a couple of times a month, and are constantly amazed at the combination of great food, good prices, pleasant ambiance, and excellent service. The menu has a Latin (Mexican-Honduran, actually) American theme, but the dishes are all sort of non-traditional and Americanized (in a good way). I am not a fan of food that is fancy and/or complicated solely for the sake of being fancy and/or complicated. The food here is neither overly fancy, complicated, nor trendy, but it *is* interesting, unexpected, and delicious.

For example, both of us have the same favorite dish here, which is Mayan Chicken. The chicken is a boneless breast that is coated in tortilla crumbs then fried, and is served over queso with black beans (I get the rice instead), fried plantains, and mango salsa. At around $10, this is one amazingly delicious bargain.

In fact, you can eat at Red Onion for around the same cost as a generic Chilis/Bennigans/TGIFridays, but you get food that is orders-of-magnitude more interesting, well-prepared, and delicious. The ambiance is nice, friendly, and casual. My one trivial complaint is that when the place is hopping (as it usually is at mealtimes) it can get a little clattery, noise-wise, and the tables are just a touch too close together for my tastes. That’s really just nit-picking, however, as the food, prices, and service *more* than make up for any cosmetic blemishes.

Do yourself a favor and check out Red Onion. Tell them that the guy who always eats three bowls of pineapple salsa sent you.

Bibas (One’s a Meal) – Highly Recommended

Posted on May 2nd, 2003 in Houston,Restaurant Reviews by EngineerBoy

607 W Gray St, Houston, TX 77019

Phone: (713) 523-8432

First of all, I do not know the meaning(s) of the name(s) of this restaurant. Second of all, what I do know is that they have really good food at really good prices. The menu is typical Greek diner, and includes everything from gyros to calzones to pizza to hamburgers. My personal favorite meal starts with the tzatziki appetizer (served with delicious crunchy breadsticks for dipping) followed by the cheeseburger and fries.

Most of the times we’ve been there we’ve been waited on by John, the owner/waiter/resident comedian. If he waits your table be ready for repartee, wisecracks, asides, innuendos, and great service. The other waitstaff have all been very friendly and efficient, and the patrons are usually laid-back regulars. There’s ample outdoor seating, and inside are some huge, 6-person booths.

And if that’s not enough, it’s open 24 hours a day. Do yourself a favor and visit this deservedly legendary Houston institution.

Shanghai River Restaurant – Highly Recommended

Posted on April 6th, 2003 in Houston,Restaurant Reviews by EngineerBoy

Shanghai River Restaurant
(713) 528-5528
2407 Westheimer, 2 blocks east of Kirby

http://www.shanghairiverrestaurant.com

Houston has an overwhelming selection of Chinese restaurants, and many of them are good. A few of them are excellent, and Shanghai River is one of them. From the outside, this restaurant is the unassuming-looking inhabitant of one end of a standard strip center. But once you get inside, you find that the decor is sumptuous and well-maintained, the tables have white tablecloths and cloth napkins, the service borders on perfect, and the food is excellent.

Try the mu shu pork appetizer and the honey walnuts…both fabulous. We recently had the wonton soup, shrimp with asparagus, Four Delicacies (scallops, shrimp, beef, chicken with chili peppers and peanuts), and shrimp and chicken with cashews, and all of the dishes were virtually perfect. Also, for the quality of the food and the ambiance, the prices are right in line.

Beck’s Prime – Highly Recommended

Posted on March 3rd, 2003 in Houston,Restaurant Reviews by EngineerBoy

Currently seven Houston locations.

Houston has a plethora of great sit-down, fine-dining restaurants, and also has the requisite number of fast-food chains and Chiligan Fridays-type establishments. Easily lost in this cornucopia is Beck’s Prime. From the outside it looks sort of chain-y and fast food-y. From the inside it sort of looks like a burger joint. But the reality is something completely different and unexpected.

Yes, the ambiance is fast food (no table service), but the food, while not fancy, is composed of astonishingly fresh, tasty, and well-prepared ingredients. My particular favorite is the swordfish sandwich. I like to get it with a side of wild rice. Marie likes to get the veggie burger with a side of grilled veggies (which are actually flame-grilled and tasty). You won’t find any of that on a 99 cent menu. Beck’s also has an array of Angus steaks and chicken dishes, all available at the counter or the DRIVE THROUGH! Yes, you can drive through Beck’s on your way home from work and show up at home with some delicious rib-eyes cooked to order.  The french fries are freshly sliced and fried potatoes, not chopped/formed. The milkshakes are sinfully delicious, guaranteed to contain 10% butterfat. And it all comes at very reasonable prices (higher than fast food, but lower than sit-down).

It’s actually taken us a while to get into the groove with Beck’s. When we would eat on the cheap or need super-fast service, we would opt for traditional fast food. When we wanted better food or service we would opt for traditional sit-down dining. Also, none of their seven locations is right nearby (although they aren’t really far away, either, just not as convenient as fast-food). But every time we would go there we would simply be amazed the great food, good prices, and superbly knowledgeable/efficient/polite/helpful/friendly staff. So now we make it a point to spend the few extra minutes in the car, and spend the few extra dollars on the food to bypass the fast-food grind to have a MEAL, and not just some food. Beck’s fills a perfect niche in our dining repertoire, and they continue to move up in the rotation by always providing consistently fresh, delicious, reasonably-priced food. Give them a try.

Torture and Murder Sell Sandwiches and Mints

Posted on February 1st, 2003 in Commentary by EngineerBoy

Over the last couple of weeks I have seen two television commercials which startled me with their inhumanity.  The first was from Quizno’s Subs, and featured their chef who was so focused on his job that he was shown walking by the cage of his pet bird, and the bird was apparently dead on the floor of the cage.  The message I got from this commercial is that he was so dedicated to his job that he ignored and neglected his pet to the point that it starved, dehydrated, and died while trapped in its cage.

The second commercial was for Altoids, the Curiously Inhumane Peppermint ©, which depicted a young student in science class feeding one of the new, strong Altoid products to the class guinea pig.  The mint is so strong that the guinea pig literally explodes on the screen.  I almost couldn’t believe what I saw.

I have been a consumer of both Altoids and Quiznos for a long time, and have enjoyed products from both.  Also, I’m no PETA-belonging animal rights activist.  But the above commercials were such incontrovertible depictions of animal cruelty that I have sworn off products from both companies.  I have contacted both companies with my concerns and have received canned platitudes in response.

Now, I eat meat and wear leather, and I am comfortable with the food chain.  However I don’t think it hypocritical also to be against unnecessary and/or gratuitous animal cruelty.  Although I hunted and fished as a boy, as I got older I lost my taste for it, finding it cruel and barbarous, since it was not a matter of survival for me, only sport.

There is also a strong correlation between cruelty to animals and psychopathic behavior.  Notorious serial killers Ted Bundy, Albert DiSalvo, and Jeffrey Dahmer (among many others) all got their start by torturing and killing animals.  Unless Quiznos is starting to open up snack bars in prisons and mental wards, and they sell Altoids at the counter, I think both companies should rethink this particularly distasteful marketing strategy.

Mankind’s Destiny

Posted on February 1st, 2003 in Commentary by EngineerBoy

I am currently watching CNN and seeing video of the disintegration of the Space Shuttle Columbia, replayed over and over again. There are many eyewitness accounts, speculation, and denial that it was sabotage or terrorism. I’m also hearing that, upon take-off, debris had struck the left wing of Columbia and small pieces of insulation had broken loose. I am beginning to wonder if this ultimate fate was known to be more probable because of the damage. I wonder if the ground and flight crews had gnawing trepidation during the mission, worried that there might be problems on re-entry. I wonder if they explored options, such as docking with the space station, or launching another shuttle for rescue, but found those options to be unrealistic. I wonder if NASA made sure the crewmembers spoke with their families one last time with the knowledge of the upcoming risks during landing. I don’t know which fate is more tragic – to have known all through the mission about this risk, and have the opportunity to prepare yourself, or to have it be a total surprise.

So NASA has suffered another tragedy. So has the US. So has the world. But, these events notwithstanding, human spaceflight represents man’s ultimate achievement. The complexity, danger, and risk involved in sending humans into space and bring them safely home boggles the mind. After space-related accidents, there is typically a hue-and-cry about the money wasted on spaceflight, and the continuing problems with NASA, and the need to focus the resources used in these lofty pursuits on more earthbound matters, such as hunger, disease, poverty, war. Those issues need addressing, but it is not a zero-sum game, where we either address them or continue the human exploration of space. The world has the resources for both, even though sometimes these resources are not used efficiently.

For those who do not understand the necessity of human spaceflight, please put yourself in the position of early humans, huddled together in a small tribe somewhere, staring out at the wide world in awe and wonder. Everything outside of your territory is unknown and unknowable. The only way to learn about those things over the next hill is to go there. Go there. Go. Man’s third most driving impulse, after procreation and survival, is to go and learn. What’s over that hill? What’s on the other side of that river? What happens if I just sail west into the heretofore endless ocean? What does the bottom of the ocean look like? Go, see, learn.

That drive has a less-apparent secondary effect, which is that it promotes the ongoing survival of humanity. If all of humankind lived in one valley then it could easily be wiped out by disease, flood, fire, or other catastrophe. But once a few intrepid explorers leave the safety of the known world (the valley) and establish a permanent, sustainable presence somewhere else, then it is now exponentially more difficult to wipe out humanity. And if a new generation of explorers leaves the continent of the valley, it becomes nearly impossible to wipe out human life without wiping out virtually all life on earth. So our unstoppable curiosity has helped increase our chances of survival as a species.

But if looked at from a larger perspective, we are still in a very fragile position. A rogue asteroid (or nuclear power) could conceivably snuff out human life. And that would be that. We gave it the old college try, but oh well, it took a global catastrophe to kill us off, so what could we have done?

What we could have done is to continue our natural progress. When early man started spreading and hit the ocean, that was that, for the time being. Then, over time, extended ocean travel became possible. New lands were discovered. Mankind expanded. Now we face the ocean of space. It is orders-of-magnitude more daunting than an earthbound ocean, and represents a moat that contains humanity in a stranglehold on a tiny island (planet) in a vast ocean (space). It is imperative to the survival of mankind that we get off this island.

There are those who will argue that mankind is not worthy of preservation, and that the plethora of earthbound problems illustrates our inherent flaws. To those who are convinced of this, I can offer no argument. If the essential goodness of humanity as a whole is not apparent to you, then I cannot sway you, because it is, at heart, a matter of faith. I have faith in the inherent goodness of humanity, and I believe that if I have any higher purpose in life, it is to contribute to the survival and betterment of the species. And I see human spaceflight as the single most important undertaking of mankind, because it is inarguably the only means for our survival.

Someday the sun will burn out. Let’s hope that our descendents witness it on their version of CNN.

M-P-G…It’s Low On My S-U-V…

Posted on January 2nd, 2003 in Commentary by EngineerBoy

(to the tune of A-B-C by the Jackson Five, apologies in advance)
M-P-G…it’s  low on my S-U-V…but don’t say that you’re better than me, unless you  regular-ly, commute bi-ped-al-ly while hugging a tree!

I read a story  recently about a television commercial that equated driving an SUV with  supporting terrorism. The ads are using the same idea as the the ones about  drugs supporting terrorism (I actually sort of agree with the drug ads). The  logic is that a) SUV’s are less fuel effecient, so b) SUV drivers buy more gas,  and c) most gas comes from Middle-Eastern oil, so d) the dollars we spend on  gasoline support Arab terrorism. I drive an SUV. A big old four wheel drive Ford  Expedition. It gets about 13 miles to the gallon during my regular commute. I  would prefer that it were more fuel efficient, but fuel efficiency was just one  of my selection criteria.

Safety
My first selection criteria  was the safety of my family. The Expedition outweighs the majority of personal  vehicles on the road, which means that it transfers more energy than it absorbs  if there is a collision. If you’re unsure about the physics of that, think of an  18 wheeler colliding with a VW Bug and think about which would sustain the most  damage. This means that in most accidents the occupants of my vehicle would have  a slightly higher survival rate. Also, I sit way up high while driving, giving  me very good visibility of the traffic around me. This provides slightly better  odds of not getting into an accident in the first place. I live in Houston,  which is prone to flooding, so the four wheel drive provides slightly better  capabilities of slogging through racing water in order to escape danger. Also,  the high ground clearance provides the ability to handle higher water without  the engine dying. Also, being such a big vehicle means that people are more  likely to be able to see me, and thus not run into me, if avoidable. And, while  Fords are not nearly as reliable as some other cars, the Expedition is a  reasonably reliable vehicle, according to Consumer Reports, so there’s a  slightly lower chance of being stranded compared to some other  makes/models.

Now, none of this guarantees anything, but it’s all about  playing the odds. I have stacked the deck in favor of me and the occupants of my  vehicle (usually my family) being more likely to avoid an accident, and to  survive an accident if it occurs, than someone in a smaller, lighter, lower  vehicle.

Comfort
The second most important factor in selecting  the Expedition was personal comfort. I’m 6′ 5″ and not small and I fit  perfectly in an Expedition. I fit okay in my wife’s Toyota Tundra pickup,  but am a bit cramped and not comfortable on longer drives. We have done a bit of  vehicle shopping over the years, and the list of vehicles that I am comfortable  in is very short. And that’s comfortable as in physical comfort and not being  cramped, not comfortable from a  how-do-others-perceive-me-because-this-is-what-I-drive perspective. I care very  little about any status conveyed by my vehicle.

Convenience
The  third decision factor was convenience. We have two big old dogs, and they fit  perfectly in the back when we take them places. Plus the Expedition is great for  hauling around a bunch of folks, picking up groceries, lugging home bounty from  Home Depot, etc.

The Real Cost
So, I get 13 MPG. Let’s compare  that to the mileage of a fairly standard vehicle, let’s say a 6 cylinder Honda  Accord sedan, shall we? According to EPA estimates, the Honda Accord EX V-6 gets  21 MPG in city driving. So, compared to this fairly standard vehicle, I get  eight fewer miles per gallon. I drive about 10,000 miles per year, so that works  out to about 293 more gallons of gas over the course of a year. That’s less than  one gallon a day. That’s not insignificant, but let’s get the whole  story.

The Whole Story
I live less than five miles from my  place of work. That is not an accident. We pay a premium to live where we do  (close to downtown). If we moved to the suburbs we could get an equivalent  residence for about half what we paid. Also, if we lived in a suburban school  district, we wouldn’t have to pay private school tuition because the public  schools are safer/better than the inner-city schools. So we pay a big monetary  cost to live close to our places of employment. We also love that living in town  means we’re closer to movies, shopping, arts, nightlife, dining, etc. We live  where we live because it’s worth it to us. One of the side-effects of this  choice is that we have a very short commute. My commute is less than 10 miles  total each day. Less than 5 miles each way. And I’m not sitting in any  bumper-to-bumper traffic, either. I toodle right along the whole way. Compare  that with the average commute and it more than makes up for the one  gallon a day. So, why do most people have a longer commute than I do? Because  they chose to live in the suburbs because a) it’s safer and/or b) it’s cheaper  and/or c) it’s more convenient and/or d) they’re more comfortable in a suburban  environment.

So, for their convenience, comfort, safety, and  lifestyle ($$), suburbanites use much more fuel than I do. Where is the hue  and cry to eliminate suburbs? Where is the demonization of suburbanites? Can you  imagine the laughability of claiming that living in the suburbs equates to  supporting terrorism?

The Real Solution(s)
The real solution is  for each of us to do what we can to conserve fuel, and for the government to  force the hand of automakers to create better engines. I would gladly pay  a reasonable premium for a more fuel efficient vehicle that met my needs, but  there isn’t one. And don’t even get me started on how government and industry  should be working together to move away from internal combustion engines  altogether (and into the Age of Hydrogen).

And before you ask me  to sacrifice my safety, comfort, and convenience by buying a smaller vehicle,  you must first be willing to sacrifice your safety, comfort, and convenience by  moving in from the suburbs. Or by carpooling. Or by riding the bus. Or by  telecommuting. Or by buying the smallest, most fuel-efficient econobox that you  can squeeze into. Or by leaving for work earlier to avoid sitting in traffic. Or  leaving for home later to avoid sitting in traffic. Are you doing those things?  If so, then you are setting a great example. And I think I am, too, by spending  my hard-earned dollars to live close enough to my job so that I don’t burn  excess fuel commuting. Feel free to send me a thank you card.

Otherwise  I suggest you park your car and start doing your daily commute on your high  horse, because he seems to be raring to go.

Hot Bagel Shop – Highly Recommended

Posted on December 12th, 2002 in Houston,Restaurant Reviews by EngineerBoy

2019 South Shephard – between Westheimer and West Gray

While  growing up in Texas, I never developed a taste for bagels. In my small hometown,  the only bagel options were store-bought, like Lender’s, and I found them to be  unremarkable.

Then I moved to the Northeast and worked for 6 years in the  New York/New Jersey area, and learned what bagels were *supposed* to taste like.  And boy oh boy, did I fall in love with bagels. There was a bagel shop a couple  of blocks from my home, and for years I started the day with a fresh, hot bagel,  usually toasted with either chive cream cheese or with butter.

Then I  moved back to Houston. I *love* Houston and moved back because I knew I missed  everything about it (except for the relentless heat), and I have never regretted  moving back. However, I did miss the hot, fresh, real-deal bagels that I had  grown to love. I tried some of the chains (Einstein Brothers, various donut  chains), but found them to be pale imitations and not worth the  trouble.

And then I was introduced to The Hot Bagel shop. Ohhhhh, baby.  This is the real deal. The good stuff. Authentic, legitimate, tasty, hot,  fresh bagels. If you’ve never had anything but grocery store-bought or  Einstein’s, I urge you to head to the Hot Bagel Shop and try their fantastic  bagels. They also have freshly prepared flavored cream cheeses that are  wonderful. Prices are rock bottom.

The place is really a  hole-in-the-wall, and it’s kind of hard to find. I go there regularly and I  still sometimes drive right by it. It’s on the east side of Shephard, just about  halfway between Westheimer and West Gray. It’s in a smallish white two-story  strip center that also contains the River Oaks Nail shop.

Dr. Strangelove (****)

Posted on December 2nd, 2002 in Commentary,Movie Reviews by EngineerBoy

The River Oaks Theatre here in Houston showed Dr. Strangelove on the big screen at a midnight showing last night. There was a surprisingly large crowd of very appreciative filmgoers. Although I’ve seen Dr. Strangelove many, many times on TV, VHS, and DVD, it was an exhilarating experience for me to see this film on the big screen for the first time while in the company of other fans. The print was slightly scratchy and the sound was slightly fuzzy in parts, but the River Oaks showed the film in the cavernous main theatre with its faded-but-still-impressive old movie palace ambiance, so the overall experience was quite satisfying.

 

The film itself is not only still a masterpiece, but it just keeps getting better and better with age. Not only am I getting older and understanding more of the darkly comedic, political, military, and sociological themes, but the world continues to blindly stumble down the unwise and destructive paths that are the grist for Kubrick’s mill.

 

********** SPOILERS AHEAD **********

 

For those unfamiliar with the story, the premise is that some time in the late 1950’s an American Air Force base commander has…well…gone a little crazy…and has ordered his wing of B-52 bombers to attack their targets within Russia. Attack as in drop nuclear bombs upon. The base commander has become convinced that there is a massive Communist plot currently causing harm to all Americans (I won’t reveal the hilarious details). In the film, there is a loophole in the chain of military command that gives Ripper the ability to unilaterally send his wing in for the attack, and to prevent the bombers from being recalled by anyone other than himself. His plan is that once the President and Joint Chiefs figure out that there’s no way to stop his initial surprise attack, they will have no choice but to commit the entire US nuclear capability in support of his bomber wing. If they don’t, the Russians will retain enough retaliatory capability to destroy the United States.

 

The film focuses on three locations. The first is the War Room, where the President (Peter Sellers), the Joint Chiefs, and various military and political advisers are gathered, including General Buck Turgidson (George C. Scott) and the eponymous science adviser Dr. Strangelove (Peter Sellers again). The second is Burpleson Air Force Base, where commander Jack D. Ripper (Sterling Hayden) and his executive officer Captain Lionel Mandrake (Peter Sellers yet again) are stationed. The third is the interior of one of the B-52s of the bomb wing, piloted by Major (King) Kong (Slim Pickens) and his crew (including the debut of a young James Earl Jones).

 

********** END SPOILERS **********

 

The film moves between these three locations, deftly showing the dawning realization, the hard decisions, and the inherent hypocrisy and insanity of military organizations in action supporting their motto of “Peace is Our Profession”, while possibly hastening the end of life on earth. It’s shot in black-and-white, even though it was filmed well into the color age, but black-and-white sets the perfect mood for the story. The film also contains some of the darkest and blackest humor ever put on the screen. Dr. Strangelove was nominated for Oscars in the Best Actor (Sellers), Best Director (Kubrick), Best Picture, and Best Adapted Screenplay categories, but did not win any of them. George C. Scott should have been nominated for his performance, one of the best of his illustrious career, and certainly the funniest.

 

I have found that most people either love or hate Kubrick films, with very little middle ground. I’ve never really understood this reaction. I, myself, love almost all of his films, with the glaring exception of Eyes Wide Shut, but I don’t love them because they are “Kubrick films”, I love them because of what they are, which are some of the most well-made, entertaining, and thought-provoking films I have ever seen. If you’ve seen one or two Kubrick films and been unimpressed (2001 is very austere, Clockwork Orange is hyper-violent, etc), do yourself a favor and check out Dr. Strangelove. It is, like all Kubrick films, different from all other Kubrick films, and it is a darkly funny satirical masterpiece.

« Previous Page — Next Page »