Government with a splash of humor

The Illinois board of tourism created this video in honor of Abraham Lincoln and the attention he will be receiving at the Academy Awards this evening as a result of the Spielberg film.

It’s a bizarre film by any standards but even more so considering it comes from a governmental agency responsible for bringing tourists to their less-than-touristy state.

Government is so often devoid of humor. I love it when someone working in the bureaucratic machine manages to be creative. 

Octopussy

I realize that it was based upon the Ian Fleming novel, but how does the movie Octopussy get made with its original title?

My million dollar deal

When George Lucas visited Steven Spielberg on the set of Close Encounters of the Third Kind in 1976, he was so impressed by the movie's huge sets and Spielberg's vision that he bet Spielberg that the film would become a bigger hit than his own space movie that he was just completing at the time.

The bet was an exchange of 2.5 profit points on Close Encounters of the Third Kind for 2.5 profits points on Lucas's film -- titled Star Wars.

This actually turned out to be a good deal for both men. The money earned from Close Encounters of the Third Kind helped to keep Lucas’s studio afloat in a times of need, and the profits from Star Wars are still being realized by Spielberg today.

My friend and I have a similar bet. Several years ago we agreed to pay 10% to the other person if we ever made one million dollars on a single transaction. My friend is a landlord and property owner and I was school teacher with a dream of finishing his first novel.

It seemed like a great deal for me at the time.

When I told me wife about the bet a few years later as I began publishing novels, she was none too pleased.

Unfortunately, neither one of us has come close to having to fulfill our end of the bet, nor does it look like we will be doing so in the near future, but if I am ever required to hand over $100,000, it won’t hurt too much.

The other $900,000 will be comfort enough.

Ninjas to the rescue. Seriously.

I enjoy the movies a lot, but I have begun to enter movie theaters with great trepidation, knowing that it takes just one moron to ruin the experience.

The idiots who text during the movie are bad enough, and the people who actually make and receive calls on their cell phones make the experience untenable.

Then there are the extreme, albeit seemingly common, cases:

On Valentines Day this year, I found myself sitting next to a couple and their infant. The baby was noisy, cried at least twice, and at one point the couple changed the baby’s diaper while still sitting in their seats.

I don’t care what anyone says. Infants do not belong in movie theaters.

Then there was the toddler sitting in the front row for Cloverfield until the parents finally decided to act responsibly and remove their terrified child from the theater. 

There was the roving band of teenagers who I had to threaten in order to convince them to leave and the time I rallied an entire theater of moviegoers against two women who would not shut up.

All I ask is to watch a movie in peace and quiet, but people seem so willing and capable of screwing this up.

Unfortunately, movie theaters do little to prevent these distractions even as they watch their ticket sales decrease year after year. They have no policy against bringing a baby into a theater and they rarely monitor the behavior of their patrons as they are watching the film. And even if a person wants to complain, it means missing a significant portion of the movie to do so.

I’m happy to report that someone is finally doing something about this problem, and the solution is almost too good to be true:

Ninjas defending your right to a quiet, distraction-free theater.

The Prince Charles Cinema in Leicester Square has joined forces with Morphsuits — a manufacturer of skin-tight zentai suits — to launch an army of volunteer "cinema ninjas" who get to watch the movie for free in exchange for donning a black body suit and pouncing on misbehaving moviegoers from behind the cinema's shadows.

The "ninja taskforce" stunt has been met with critical acclaim, and was recently picked up by two other British movie theaters.

While I would prefer that the ninjas be professionals, capable of actually removing unwanted patrons from the theater (and inflicting a modicum of  pain in the process), this is at least a step in the right direction.  

It’s also the only step I’ve ever seen any movie theater to ensure that their customers enjoy a disturbance-free experience.

I have a few suggestions as well:

1. Install cellphone jamming devices in a designated number of theaters in the establishment and declare them phone-free zones. Even though people went to movies, plays, concerts, sporting events and monster truck shows for decades without the benefit of immediate access to the outside world, I understand that some people feel the need to be connected to babysitters and other outside entities at all times in the event of an emergency. I think it’s a little crazy, but I’m willing to accommodate their need. Place jamming devices in half of the theaters and make the rest jammer-free.
   
   
2. Prohibit infants from all movie theaters except for those showing rated G films.
   
   
3. Prohibit all children 5 years old and younger from all movie theaters after 6:00 PM except for those showing rate G films.     

I think these three suggestions are reasonable in scope and would be fairly simple to enact and would be greeted with near-universal appreciation.

Most important, these three steps (in addition to heavily armed ninjas) would go a long way in providing movie theater patrons the kind of experience that the high cost of a movie ticket should guarantee. 

Tickets prices and fatherhood are not the reasons that I see fewer movies today

TIME reports that “Last summer’s blockbuster movie season was considered a bust, with the fewest movie tickets sold at theaters since 1997. Despite recent hits such as “The Avengers” and “The Dark Knight Rises,” by the time Labor Day rolls around, the summer of 2012 will fare even worse.”

TIME attributes this loss to the rising cost of tickets. While ticket prices may play a role, the average ticket price in the US in 2012 is $8.12. In 1995 it was $4.35.

Has $4 really created a barrier to keep audiences out of the theaters?

Maybe.

I haven’t seen as many movies this year as in previous years, but there is one primary reason why my attendance is down:

A decline in the quality of the movie-going experience

Patrons using cell phones during the film and bringing babies into the theater have created an untenable movie experience for me. While I am still willing to risk these two potential distractors in order to see a movie that I am excited about, I am far less likely to risk two hours of my life on on a less appealing movie if I’m concerned about being confronted by a person texting or talking  in the middle of the movie or a baby sitting next to me.

It’s that simple. These inconsiderate idiots have ruined the movie-going experience for me.

I’ll also add that the lack of television viewing, combined with the fact that everything I watch is time-shifted, has also resulted in my complete lack of awareness over what is playing at the movie theater. There was a day when I would see a movie trailer on television and potentially become excited about the film. Today I only see movie trailers while watching sports, which is the only television program I watch that is not time shifted.

For me, the issue has less to do with cost and much more with the inconsiderate morons who I find myself sitting beside at an alarming rate. When movie theaters are ready to get serious about the actual movie-going experience by eliminating infants from the theater and finding ways to reduce cell phone use (I would not be opposed to the use of a cell phone jammer inside every movie theater), then I will return to the movies with the frequency that I once enjoyed.

The Rocky Horror Picture Show: Sadly, tragically, lamentably not for everyone

After 28 years at the AMC Harvard Square theater, the Rocky Horror Picture Show will move its weekly midnight screenings of  to the AMC Loews Boston Common 19 theater, with shows starting Saturday, Aug. 4.

Though I am sad to see the show move from Harvard Square, where I have seen it many times, I am happy that it lives on in New England. As a card-carrying member of The Rocky Horror Picture Show Fan Club, a two-time performer in the show and someone who saw the Broadway version of the show twice, I am desperately hoping that the show lives on long enough for me to take my children someday.

When they are much, much older.  

If you are not familiar, a midnight performance of the Rocky Horror Picture Show is much more than just a showing of the 1975 science fiction/horror musical starring Susan Sarandon and Tim Curry. It is a live performance that demands audience participation that includes such things as dancing the Time Warp along with the film and throwing toast, water, toilet paper, hot dogs, and rice at the appropriate points in the movie.

Fans often attend shows in costume, while an onstage "shadowcast" act out the movie. Audience members also use newspapers to cover their heads and squirt guns for rain during the "Over at the Frankenstein Place" musical sequence, and use noise makers during the scene in which Rocky is unveiled.

Most prevalent, however, are the call-backs: lines that audience members shout back at the film at appropriately timed intervals. They are often hilarious, occasionally vulgar, and an ever-present element of any midnight showing. Many of these call-backs have been canonized over the years and can be as tightly scripted as any play, though new lines involving recent pop culture references often find their way into the script as well. You can actually buy audio versions of the film that include recordings of the audience call-backs in order to learn them before attending the show.

In truth, none of this accurately describes The Rocky Horror Picture Show. It’s the kind of thing that must be experienced firsthand to be fully understood.

I attended my first Rocky Horror Picture Show in the early 1990’s after arriving in Connecticut, but that show quickly shut down. Soon after, I discovered the midnight show in Harvard Square and began making the trek a few times a year for several years, though it’s been a while since I have returned. 

The problem with the show, or more accurately, the problem with potential audience members, is that the show begins at midnight, meaning that audiences don’t exit the theater until well after 2:00 AM. For someone like me, who lives in Connecticut, this means that I am probably crawling into bed just as the sun is peeking over the horizon  (or not sleeping at all), making it exceedingly difficult for me to find friends who are willing to attend a performance.

As you may know, I am a constant advocate of putting yourself out there, but I am also a frequent complainer about the lack of friends who are willing to drive into the city on a weeknight for a Moth show, arrive home in the wee hours of the morning after a Monday Night football game and are otherwise hampered by an incessant need to be home at a reasonable hour.

For these people, The Rocky Horror Picture Show is an impossibility, even though it runs on a Saturday night. Admittedly, this is partly the result of an aging base of friends who simply cannot stay awake all night as they once could, but it also take a certain type of person who is willing to drive into Boston for a midnight showing of a movie where you will be asked to dance in the aisles, dodge toast and toilet paper, absorb a shower of water and rice and possibly be dragged on stage to perform. 

My greatest hope is that my children will be this kind of people.

Life is a hell of a lot more fun when you are willing to try the ridiculous and sacrifice sleep for the sake of possibility.

A new, perhaps bladder-inspired ending to Tiny Furniture

Has you seen Lena Dunham’s film Tiny Furniture?

I heard great things about this movie, and over the weekend, my wife and I finally had a chance to sit down and watch it.

It’s an excellent movie. The writing is very good, the cinematography, while not visually stunning, is interesting and different, and the acting is excellent. I like Lena Dunham. She’s brave and honest and funny.

My issue with the film is its ending. In fact, it has no ending. It’s one of these movies that make you wonder if the director simply ran out of film or lost the last few pages of the script and decided to yell, “That’s a wrap!” in hopes that the last pithy line of dialogue will be suggestive enough of an ending to allow art house critics and hipsters conjure meaning in their minds while arrogantly assuming that only they are capable of understanding said meaning.

The movie just stops. There is no respect for story arc or even the sense that a story should have some kind of beginning, middle and end.

I can’t tell you how much that annoys me.

Would I recommend that you see Tiny Furniture?

Yes, actually I would. It’s an excellent film.

But do me a favor. Since you will be watching it at home, stop the movie wherever you think it should end. Choose any pithy, suggestive line of dialogue that feels right to you. Or stop it when you need to pee and shout, “That’s a wrap!”

Make your own ending to the movie rather than being surprised like me when the credits begin rolling and you are left wondering what the hell just happened.

Some of the toughest parental decisions that I'll ever have to make may be about Star Wars

There are many decisions to make when it comes to your children and the Star Wars franchise. When should a child first watch Star Wars?

In what order should a child view the movies?

Should existence of the three prequels be concealed as long as humanly possible?

Which versions of the movies should be shown? The digitally re-mastered versions or the original?

In other words, who do you want your child to think shot first? Geedo or Han Solo?

Okay, that might be an easy one.

Still, so many decisions to make as my daughter gets older.

But this is one I can get firmly behind.

Gratitude journal: Just the right movie for a workout

Most of the elliptical machines that I use at the gym are equipped with televisions. I often spend my 30-45 minutes of cardio listening to podcasts, audiobooks and music, but occasionally, AMC, Spike, FX, or even ABC Family will run just the right movie to watch while working out. And sometimes that movie will be in just the right spot when I start working out.

Today the movie was Coach Carter, the true story of coach Ken Carter (played by Samuel Jackson) and his decision to bench his undefeated high school basketball team for academic reasons.

I’d never seen the film, but I’ve seen enough sports movies to understand the formula.

Sports movies make for an excellent workout.

Even better, I began working out during the last 45 minutes of the film, which features the Dead Poet’s Society moment when the team stands up for their coach, followed by the final game of the team’s season.

Well choreographed, well scored, nail-biting hoops with more dunks, alley-oops and three pointers than in a week of NBA games.

It could not have been a better moment to step on that elliptical.

Movie crusade update

In regards to my crusade to ban infants from all movie theaters comes this small update: It would appear that AMC Loews closest to my home (Plainville, CT) has policy that bans children under six from R-rated movies shown after 6:00 PM.

I am checking to see if this policy is company wide or theater specific.

While I am not completely satisfied with this policy, it’s a start. And this theater will most definitely receive my business over all Rave Motion Pictures theaters, which have no policy regarding infants.

Ideally, I would like to see all children under two years of age banned from all non-G rated movies except those theaters that show movies specifically designed for mothers and infants.

National Amusements, for example, has a program called Baby Pictures. During these specific movie times, the theater offers “dim lighting to allow for easy child care in the auditorium; lowered movie volume for babies' sensitive hearing; baby changing stations and stroller area.”

In my humble opinion, this should be the only time that an infant should be permitted into a non G-rated film.

But again, I’m willing to compromise. Slightly.

If you attend a movie in the near future and would be kind enough to inquire about their policies regarding infants, I would appreciate any information you could provide me. I have inquiries pending at the corporate offices of four major theater chains and will update you when and if I receive a response.

Weeping, I tell you. WEEPING.

One more note on my Valentines Day movie experience:

The trailer for the new 3-D release of Titanic preceded our film. Halfway through the trailer, I heard a sudden weeping to my right.

It was Elysha. Weeping. Crying hysterically. Balling her eyes out. Doing that odd flutter-her-hands-in-front-of-her-face gesture that she does when she cries, as if she is attempting to brush away the paralyzing emotions with her hands. 

“What’s wrong?” I asked, thinking she was feeling ill. Thinking there might be something wrong with the baby. After all, how could anyone weep over the trailer to a movie that she has already seen more than once? 

But no, it was the trailer.

“Is it pregnancy hormones?” I asked. “Is that the problem?” 

“No,” she repeated. “It’s the movie. It’s just so sad.” 

I could barely understand what she was saying between the gut-wrenching sobs. 

“I don’t think I can ever watch that movie again,” she said, tears streaming down her cheeks. 

I can’t imagine what it must have been like the first time she saw the movie.

Baby-in-the-movie follow-up and the start of a new crusade

I contacted the manager of the theater where my wife and I saw The Descendants on Valentines Day. I explained our experience in detail and spoke for quite a while about it.

In summary:

1. Rave, the company that owns the theater, does not have a policy prohibiting infants in any movies, regardless of time or subject matter.

2. Children under three do not pay for seats in the theater.

3. If a patron reports that a baby is disturbing the film, a manager will request that the parent remove the baby from the theater until he or she has quieted down. When I explained to the manager that all babies make some noise, even if it’s a cooing or a babbling, he said that some noises are more disturbing to patrons than others. 

4. He also admitted that requesting that a baby be removed from the theater is a potentially volatile encounter. Just in the past week, he had been accused of racism and sexism in two separate incidents when asking a customer to remove a baby. 

5. He rejected the idea of a policy against babies in the theater under any circumstances, claiming that the theater would receive too many complaints to make the policy sustainable. When I suggested that the fifty people who shared a theater with me on Tuesday night also had a complaint about the policy of allowing babies in the theater, he said, “But no one actually complained.” 

Yes, I admitted, but only because people who leave their babies at home with babysitters are more civilized and rationale than those who bring their babies into movies. We sit in our seats, not wanting to miss a second of the film, hoping that a fellow audience member will compromise their viewing experience in order to complain. We pray that the baby will remain silent throughout the film. We rationalize our inaction by assuming that this is a once-in-a-lifetime event, thereby making any complaint after the fact irrelevant. We rush out of the theater with no time to seek out a manager because we have a babysitter at home and the clock is ticking.  

We do not complain, but when we find out that this happens with regularity (as it apparently does based upon the manager’s comments), we don’t come back.

6. The manager offered me free passes, popcorn and soda to our next film. I asked if he would also reimburse the cost of babysitting. He declined.

In general, the manager handled the phone call well. The only time I became irate was when he rejected the notion that a no-baby policy would make his job easier.

Paraphrasing, he said that I am fortunate because I have the means to hire a babysitter and know people responsible enough to watch my child.  But not everyone has the means to hire a babysitter or knows a capable babysitter who they trust, but they still have the right to attend a movie.   

“Yes,” I said. “I have the means and access to a babysitter, but attending a movie is not a Constitutional right. If you cannot afford a babysitter or cannot find a babysitter, then you rent a movie at home. You don’t make fifty people suffer so that you can see The Descendants on the big screen.”

After hanging up the phone, I told my wife that this is not the end.

It’s only the beginning of my new crusade to expunge infants from movie theaters. 

My first step is to contact the other movie theaters in the area and determine if they have policies regarding babies in the theater. 

Next, I plan to contact the corporate headquarters of these companies and speak to someone in a position to change policy. I will argue my case and attempt to affect change.

I will also transform this blog post and the previous blog post into a piece that I will attempt to get published in print.

Yes, I have enough to do already, but this is a cause that is just and right. Excluding infants from movie theaters, even if the ban is predicated on the show time or rating of the film, will not only benefit moviegoers but will also help these infants, who do not need to be bouncing on parents laps at 9:00 PM, watching and listening to a rated R film. 

The movie lover in me wants this policy changed.

The parent in me wants this policy changed.

The teacher in me wants this policy changed.

And I suspect that a great majority of moviegoers want this policy changed, too.

I went to see The Descendants and found myself sitting beside two morons and their baby.

Elysha and I went to the movie last night for Valentines Day.  We saw a 7:35 PM showing of The Descendants, which we liked a lot. We arrived to the theater at 7:15 PM and were the first people to enter the theater.  We had the luxury of choosing our favorite seats.  It’s so nice when you and your spouse agree on the optimal view location in a movie theater.

Slowly the theater began to fill up.  At 7:35 PM the movie began.

At 7:50 PM a couple walked in and sat one seat to my left.  The woman, who was sitting closest to me, leaned over and asked how much they had missed.

“Not much,” I said, and it was true.  They had missed the movie trailers and about five or ten minutes of the actual film. Still, don’t walk in late and disturb someone who managed to arrive on time.

Then she extracted her six-month old baby from the baby carrier strapped to her chest and placed it on her knee.

Yes. A baby.

The baby began making baby sounds almost immediately.  Coos and whines and the occasional whimper.  Once or twice the baby began to fuss and actually cry.

Fifteen minutes later, the woman, with the baby still sitting on her lap, learned over and asked me to clarify a plot point.

Two minutes later she asked for another clarification.

Five minutes after that, she began changing the baby’s diaper with the help of the husband/boyfriend/lunatic moron sitting beside her. Then she began to nurse the baby.

Five minutes later, Elysha and I finally ceded our optimal seating and moved to the back, away from the baby.

Twice during the film, the baby began seriously crying and had to be removed from the theater. Both times the woman returned with the baby after a few minutes.

My wife and I debated saying something during or after the film. I have frequently confronted people in theaters who are talking on phones, texting or talking to their companions.  Once I forced a band of wandering teenagers to leave the theater and find another movie under threat of violence.

So I am not averse to confrontation. Nor is my wife.

Had these selfish, stupid, negligent parents entered the theater on time, I would have told them to leave. Had they refused, I would have insisted that management remove them.

Had they entered the theater during the trailers or even one minute into the film, I would have done the same thing.

But they entered ten minutes into the film, which left me with few options.

If you are willing to bring a six month old baby into a 7:35 PM showing of a rated R film on Valentines Day, you are clearly beyond reason. Arguing with them, debating with them or telling them how incredibly selfish and stupid they were would have been pointless.

Satisfying, but pointless.

Most important, it might have resulted in a full blown altercation, thus compromising the viewing of the movie for myself and those around me.

It’s different than telling a jackass to get off his phone. He can be easily be shamed into turning off his phone and watching the film.  But you can’t turn off a baby.  The only solution is to leave the theater, and convincing selfish, stupid people to do this is considerably more difficult.

I could have exited the theater, found a manager, explained the situation and had the parents removed, but doing so would have also compromised my viewing of the film. There is no pause button in the movie theater. I would have missed significant portions of the movie in an effort to have these selfish morons and their baby tossed from the theater, and even then, there was no guarantee that management would have sided with me.

There is a solution to this problem, and it is a simple one:

Movie theaters should not allow babies into films like The Descendants.

In fact, movie theaters should not allow babies into any film that are not rated G and made specifically for children.

Actually, I don’t think that infants belong in a movie theater at all.  If your child is not old enough to sit up in his or her own seat, then your child does not belong in a movie theater.

But I’m willing to let this rule slide for rated G films.

Seems like an obvious solution, and yet these two selfish morons were allowed to purchase tickets and enter the theater with a baby, thus diminishing the movie-going experience for the fifty people around them.

And before you try to tell me that this is a once-in-a-lifetime problem, it’s not. My wife and I once found ourselves sitting next to a couple and their infant while watching Cloverfield, a PG-13 monster movie that was so violent that Elysha was worried about our daughter being exposed to the film from inside the womb. In that instance, the movie was so loud and so terrifying that the morons sitting next to us managed to activate enough brain cells to realize that bringing their baby to a monster movie was not a good idea and left.

Last night’s couple not only failed to come to this realization, but they also had the audacity to ask me questions during the movie, change a diaper and breast feed.

Best of all, when I arrived home that night, I handed $50 over to our babysitter, because we decided to leave our three-year old at home on Valentines Day rather than drag her into the movie theater. These jackasses compromised the enjoyment of everyone around them and avoided the expense of a babysitter as well.

I have decided in the course of writing this post to call the theater this afternoon and speak to a manager. I will explain what happened last night and ask for the company policy on bringing babies into films like The Descendants.

Basically, I want to know if this couple snuck their baby into the film or were allowed to enter with it.

If the couple snuck their baby into the film, so be it. There is nothing that the movie theater could do absent frisking every person who enters, but even that would be fine by me. I am frisked every time I enter Gillette Stadium to watch the Patriots play and would be more than willing to submit to a search at the movie theater as well.

But if there is no company policy regarding bringing babies into a film like The Descendants, then I don’t know what I am going to say.

But it should be interesting.

I’ll keep you updated.

Close Encounters of the Third Kind: A great movie tragically marred by Steven Spielberg's failure to engage in unprotected sex.

I’ve been watching Close Encounters of the Third Kind again.

I have always thought of this film as flawless.

Slate’s Bill Wyman recently watched all of Spielberg's films and rated Close Encounters of the Third Kind as one of Spielberg’s best.

While I still agree that the film is excellent, fatherhood has unexpectedly changed one component of the movie for me, and unfortunately, it’s a big one.

Richard Dreyfuss’ character, Roy, in case you don’t remember, is the protagonist whose brief encounter with alien spaceships leaves an image implanted in his mind of the location where the aliens intend to land and make contact with representatives of the US and world government (an unnamed mountain in Wyoming). There are hundreds of people who are implanted with the same vision throughout the world, but Roy is one of only two people who actual make it to the mountain and manage to dodge the military in order to witness the arrival of the aliens.

It turns out there is a reason why the aliens want Roy at the landing site:

They want to take him with them. Although there is a team of jumpsuit-clad, government-trained soldiers ready to go with the aliens, these military bozos are rejected by the aliens.

Instead, Roy is the only one permitted to go.

He does. He boards the ship and the film ends with it lifting off into outer space.

One problem: Roy is married with kids.

Even though the marriage seems to have been going well until Roy becomes fixated on his vision of the mountain, I’ll give him a pass on abandoning his wife, since she leaves with the kids when Roy’s obsession causes him to build a ten foot tall dirt model of the mountain in his living room.

It’s not much of a pass, but I’ll give him a pass.

But Roy also has two kids. Sons. Boys who will not only never see their father again but will never know where he went.

Prior to being a father, this detail washed over me without notice. But with children of my own, this plot point now looms large in the film, and it causes a character who is supposed to be likable, honorable and revered to be considerably less so in my eyes.

As Roy prepares to board the ship, the lead scientist turns to him and says, “I envy you.”

Sitting alone in my living room, I actually said aloud, “Don’t envy the bastard. He’s abandoning his children. Probably forever.”

It’s an example how how parenthood can change your perspective on life forever.

Spielberg was not married and did not have children in 1977 when Close Encounters of the Third Kind was released. He would not have children for another decade, so it’s likely that the prospect of children had not even entered his consciousness yet.

I can’t help but wonder if things might have been different for Dreyfuss’ character if Spielberg had children at the time he made the film. Roy’s sons could have easily been removed from the film entirely with nothing substantial lost in terms of the story.

I suspect that Spielberg had a blind spot in 1977, and that allowed him to send his protagonist to space while his protagonist’s family remained behind, utterly forgotten.

There isn’t a single moment in the film when Roy even thinks about the prospect of leaving his family.

In a 2007 interview, Spielberg confessed that if he had a chance to make this movie today, Dreyfuss’ character would never have abandoned his family to go to outer space.

Was Spielberg blind to this flaw in his film because he did not have children of his own?

I suspect so. I suspect that I might have done the same thing.

If asked if I would abandon my wife and daughter today in order to be one of the first human beings to visit an alien world, I would say no without having to think twice.

But if asked ten years ago, prior to my marriage and the birth of my daughter, if I would have considered abandoning a hypothetical family in order to make a historic visit to an alien world, I might have said yes. I can envision myself making arguments about the magnitude and scope of such a journey in comparison to the commonality and frequency of fatherhood and marriage.

And I would have been foolish and naive and wrong.

Just as I suspect Spielberg was in 1977 when he sent his protagonist into space, leaving a family behind.

Perfect descriptor

My wife is very funny, but she gets little credit for her sense of humor and scoffs at any attempt to assert that she is funny. 

But she is. 

This is a perfect example:

We drove by a billboard advertising this movie a couple weeks ago, and she said, “That sounds like a movie about my family.”

Very funny.  Very true.

The Emperor might have been better off with Han Solo and Luke Skywalker foiling his plans

Star Wars fans, I have a question: What exactly was the Emperor's endgame?

Let’s say that he managed to crush the rebel alliance and turn Luke to the dark side.

Then what?

So he rules the galaxy? Was his ultimate goal to be the boss of everyone?

It seems a little anticlimactic to me.

Did he really want to be the one to determine marginal tax rates, the legal drinking age, and sentencing guidelines for white collar criminals?

Because once the rebels are gone, aren’t these the only kinds of decision left to make?

Or did the Emperor have a grander vision? Perhaps a Tea Party or Occupy Wall Street view in terms of the direction that the galaxy’s economy should be headed?

Even then, should this really be the concern of a Sith Lord?

It seems to me that the worst thing for the Emperor would have been the complete elimination of the rebel alliance.

Eliminate the opposition and what are you left with?

Determining the import tariffs on bantha meat? Assigning patents on droid technology? Christening unnecessary Death Stars?

There’s something to be said for having enemies.

Boy learns that Darth Vader is Luke Skywalker’s father for the first time

This is hilarious, and I will certainly make a point of doing the same someday when my children discover the secret of Darth Vader.

Better still, it makes me wonder what other reactions might I want to record.

Thoughts?

Elmo

I would’ve never given this film or its trailer a moment of my time prior to the birth of my daughter. After witnessing the insanity of the Tickle Me Elmo craze, I had nothing but negative feelings for the stupid orange puppet. But now that I’ve seen him in action, I love the little guy. I want to be his friend. He makes me wish that I could live on Sesame Street.

There’s something so innocent and kind and joyous about Elmo that I am forced to stop and watch every time he is on the screen.

I can’t wait to see this film.

The lesson: You can kill mothers, fathers, and children galore. But don’t ever kill the dog.

I Am Legend is a post-apocalyptic science fiction film loosely based upon Richard Matheson’s novel of the same name. It stars Will Smith as one of the few survivors of a plague that has killed most of humankind and left many in a zombie/vampire-like state. It opened to the largest ever box office for a non-Christmas film released in December and was the seventh highest grossing film of 2007.

The film also sold 7 million DVD's, making it the sixth best selling DVD in 2008. However Warner Bros. was reportedly “a little disappointed” by the film’s performance in the DVD market.

And I’ll tell you why sales were disappointing.

The dog.

While helping to save Will Smith’s character from certain death, his dog becomes infected with the virus, and after much consternation, Smith’s character is forced to put the animal down.

It is the scene that prevents me from ever watching this film again, and I suspect it’s the scene that has suppressed DVD sales and has kept the film from being plastered all over the basic cable channels like so many other of Will Smith’s blockbuster movies.

It’s not the violence or gore of the scene, because there is none.

It’s because no one wants to see a dog die.

It’s that simple.

Kill mothers and fathers and children galore, and people will be more than happy to watch the movie again and again.

Smith’s blockbuster Independence Day is a perfect example. Millions of people are killed in that movie, including the President’s wife, who dies tragically under the watchful eyes of her husband and daughter.

A father gives up his life while his son listens on and a best friend dies while Smith’s character looks on and can do nothing.

And like I Am Legend, there is a dog in that movie, too. Once again, it’s a dog owned by Smith’s character. In fact, the two dogs look so much alike that they could be the same dog.

Perhaps they are.

And guess what?

The dog in Independence Day survives.

It appears in the final scene of the film.

And Independence Day airs on basic cable all the time.

Warner Bros. left a lot of money on the table when they decided to kill that dog in I Am Legend.

For a great many people, including me, that film became unwatchable the second time around.

Wikipedia: I could read this stuff all day long

I love Wikipedia. I think it is one of the single greatest creations in human history. Reading Wikipedia has become a bit of a passion for me. Though there is always a reason I find myself plowing through a passage, I am never disappointed with what I find.

A couple days ago I read the entry for "Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da", one of my favorite Beatles’ songs, looking for the origin behind the phrase Ob-La-Di, Ob-La-Da.

It turns out that Paul stole it from an African conga player and was later sued for royalties.

I also learned that Paul wrote the song but John hated it, eventually forcing a more up-tempo beat after a heated exchange.

Also, the line, "Desmond stays at home and does his pretty face" was a mistake. Paul sung the line incorrectly during a recording session (Molly was supposed to be at home, doing her pretty face), but the rest of the band liked the mistake so much that it stuck.

Yesterday I read the entry for Dirty Dancing, learning among other things that Jennifer Grey and Patrick Swayze did not get along during much of the filming of the movie, something you might have never guessed based upon the final product.

Also, Dirty Dancing is in large part based on screenwriter Eleanor Bergstein's own childhood. She is the younger daughter of a Jewish doctor from New York, spent summers with her family in the Catskills, participated in "Dirty Dancing" competitions, and was herself called "Baby" as a girl.

Bergstein was apparently talking about herself when she wrote, “Nobody puts Baby in the corner.”

See what I mean? Every entry is a fascinating story waiting to be discovered.

For all it’s greatness, however, Wikipedia does have it's problems. The most glaring (other than a lack of an entry for me) is its frequent need for a professional editor.

This morning I was researching New Jersey Turnpike rest stops for the book I am writing. The Turnpike names each of its rest stops after famous people from New Jersey, and I needed the name of a northbound rest stop close to New York.

Naturally I found it on Wikipedia.

But the list (pasted below) needs an editor badly. The blinding repetition and unnecessary redundancy contained made me want to pull my hair out.

Clara Barton Service Area named after Clara Barton. Molly Pitcher Service Area named after Molly Pitcher. Thomas Edison Service Area named after… you guessed it. Thomas Edison.

And yes, I know that I could edit the list myself and thus contribute a small part to the greatness of Wikipedia, but I am in the midst of writing at least three books (not to mention this blog, a children’s book, a short story, and a dozen other smaller pieces), so my time and energy are best directed elsewhere.

And besides, I try to avoid writing for free at all costs.

Also, there are people in the world who actually enjoy writing, editing and otherwise maintaining Wikipedia.

I enjoy benefiting from their efforts.