Jeremy Fink and the Meaning of Life **1/2

By Wendy Mass.
Published 2006 by Little, Brown Books for Young Readers.
Hachette Book Group.
1st Paperback edition 2008.

I put the website address of the publisher just for fun.  Don't know if it will really work.  I think I tried to put a link in previously in other entries and it didn't work.  I guess we'll find out.

Again, it's almost unfair to use the same rating system for kid books that I use for adults.  Becasue this is a much better book than most for young adults.  But as said before, young adult books rarely have the same profundity or nuance as adult books.  Neither do they have the same content as an adult book.  They just can't go there.  The last young adult book that I gave 3 or more stars was Alexie Sherman's  Part Time Indian (Not complete title)  That was aimed at high school kids and  had content that would not be appropriate for junior high kids - Sex , drugs domestic violence etc.  Sherman is also first and foremost, a novelist for adults.

So anyway, this book is about Jeremy Fink and his best friend Lizzy and their adventures over one summer.  The adventures start with Jeremy receiving a package in the mail.  It was from Jeremy's father who had passed away ten years previously.  It was sent by someone who was charged with the responsabilty of sending the box to Jeremy on his 23th birthday.  When it was opened, they found a wooden box with the keys missing.  Engraved on the box was the mesage that says the meaning of life is within.  But there are no keys, so Jeremy and Lizzy go searching for the keys and in one of their attempts, they run a foul of the law and end up having to serve community service.  An old rich man, who started his life as a pawnbroker, gave them jobs returning items to people that had pawned them long ago.  Jeremy and Lizzy meet these people, and each one of them sits down with them and discusses their own philosophy, or what life means to them.

I really liked how the novel is structured. Each visit is an opportunity to hear a different opinion of the meaning of life.  And the author gives the reader, and Jeremy, different types of philosphy.  Three to be exact.  One religious, one more new agey or spiritual and one more scientific.  It was very engrossing reading, though I wonder how my students from a low income community dealt with all those heady ideas.  They don't have a whole lot of experience with existentialism, or perhaps they do, seeing how difficult their lives are, but they haven't had these ideas articulated before.

And the characters are realistic and likeable.  Both have had tragedies in their lives which they are trying to cope with and the emotions seem real.  And there was some humor in the story as well as between stories.  The kids do, on some level, really behave like kids.

I was disappointed in the ending.  Without spoiling it, I'll just say that it seemed forced or too contrived (in fact part of the narrative is this contrivation).

Okay, here's a trailer for the book, just to give you a better idea of what it's about.  I know - Trailers for books!?!?!!?

Suna no onna / The Woman in the Dunes ***

Directed by Hiroshi Teshigara.
Screen play and novel written by Kobo Abe.
Released 1964.
With Eiji Okada, Kyoko Kishida, Hioko Ito, Koji Mitsui, Sen Yano and Ginzo Sekiguchi.
Shot in Black and White.  Seen on DVD.

Having read the book, a comparison is inevitable.  Seeing as the screenwriter and the novelist are one and the same, it's not surprising that the film follows the book pretty rigorously.  It does dispense with much of the inner thoughts and musings of the lead character which is the novel's opportunity to wax philosophical, but otherwise it is a faithful reproduction of the novel.

The director of the film does add a visual style to the book.  While the novel does a good job of painting a picture of the settings, this director adds some interesting visuals.  Some objective close ups of the sand that has graphic elements as well as showing the different characters of how sand looks and flows.  The setting is very claustrophobic as is appropriate, and the shack is shown in as an integral part of the characters.  The characters are shot through windows, between posts etc.  It demonstrates the importance of their home, which is a major theme of the film.  (Discussed in detail in the review of the book). The woman stays where she is because it's her home, and her life and self are intertwined with this structure.  To the man, I think it seems more menacing.

So perhaps its time for a short summary, which has been done once already in my review of the book. An amateur entomologist goes to the sea to look for a rare insect.  He is invited and more importantly convinced to stay over the night by the villagers.  He is then led to a hole in the dunes, and thinking that this residence, inhabited by the woman of  the title,  is temporarily, he happily and gratefully climbs into the hole in the dunes.  He later finds he is trapped in this hole in the dunes by the village, who expect him to move, carry and shovel the endless sand that persecutes him and tortures him with it's constant presence.

The movie is more erotocized than the book. The book had some erotic moments, but the film accents these moments more forcefully.  In one scene when they first make love, they are covered in sand (which is always the case) and it made me wonder just how comfortable that love making was.  Wasn't there any chafing with all that sand?

Here is that scene.


In one pretty surrealistic scene, the villagers gather around the hole and he is told he can have a short leave for a short walk, if he will have sex with the woman in front of them.  Why they want this is pretty unclear, what's the point of this public humiliation?  It doesn't go with my theory that the endless sand and entrapment is a symbol of modern working mankind daily drudgery and its struggle with the monotonous work a day life they lead.  Mankind is held to this slavery with the promises of home family and a few material trinkets.  So why this public humiliation?  Clearly the villagers are morally bankrupt as is demonstrated by their capturing of  the innocent entomologist.  Does it represent the authorities and their dominance over the everyday person and the willingness of the authorities to humiliate  people to keep them in line.  It's an idea.

In this scene, the man decides it's worth it just so he casn get out of the hole even for a brief moment and struggles with the woman and tries to even assault/rape her.  His efforts are rebuffed and during this struggle, the villagers are watching with all sorts of weird masks and there is a drumming soundtrack, like the beating of a heart.

Ther is some more interesting imagery at the opening and closing sequences.  Bits and scraps of official Japanese documents are shown on collage form and make for some very pretty imagery.  The idea is that the man who has been entrapped eventually becomes an official missing person, hence the use of official documents for the collages.

Also the soundtrack was interesting.  It was very experimental  and modern.  It reminded me of early King Crimson with acoustic instruments att heir most dissonant moments. I want to say that it was like John Cage, but I don't know his material enough, I can only say that it was definitely experimental.  It was spooky and droning at times, and then sudden and noisy at other times.

Overall a very interesting film experience.

Here's another clip.


And here's a trailer.

The Woman in the Dunes ***1/2

By Kobo Abe.
Published 1964 by Alfred A. Knopf.
264(est) pages

This is a book with a big idea.  It's full of metaphors and symbolism.  It about philosophy as opposed to the minutiae of a day.  The narrative could never happen in real life, so everything has to be thought of as an allegory, to understand the book properly.  If your looking for realism, one needs to look elsewhere.

So the story goes that a man, an everyman - a teacher, decides to take a retreat to pursue his favorite amateur hobby - entomology.  He hopes to find a rare insect so that it can be named after him in the field guides and be immortalized  in the world of entomology.  This insect lives in the sand, so off to the dunes he goes.  Meanwhile he has left no clue of his whereabouts back at home so as to not be bothered on the trip, or to escape or whatever reason.

The villagers of  the sand dunes invite him to stay over night and he sleeps in the home of a  woman who lives in a hole in the sand. So he climbs down, never to climb up again.  The villagers have imprisoned him, so that the young woman, a widow, would have help in her chores and so that she might have a family.  The man of course is outraged and tries to escape, but he can't.

There are many, many themes in the book to discuss, but it has been about a month since I read it and details are shaky, though I will try to tackle a few of the ideas.

The first symbol or theme is the sand.  The book starts out with a discussion of the properties of sand - how it's like water because it flows, but then it's a solid.  It marvels at the physics of the material.  Then, the sand becomes a trap for the man.  It is everywhere.  The characters are continuously covered in sand and protecting their food, possessions and selves from the sand.  It reminded me of a car ride coming home after a day at the beach.  One can never make that sand go away.  And it's always flowing into the widow's and man's living place.  They are constantly working to clean out the sand.  In fact their role in the community is to clear out and gather the sand.  (The villagers sell it in the black market - it's illegal because it doesn't have the proper composition to use for building materials).  This is a signal to how morally bankrupt the village is, as if keeping an innocent man prisoner, wasn't enough to signify that.

To me, this imprisonment is a symbol of how society tries to suppress man's free-will for the sake of the society.  When asked why the woman stayed in such a horrible situation, she replies (the gist anyway, I don't remember the exact words) that this is home and one stays where the home is.  Man(kind) is made to work in mind numbing and physically exhausting work, seemingly never ending and inconsequential as the couple's job of removing sand.  Wht is it that enslaves man to this lifestyle?  Home, family and the few trinkets that they can buy with the money.  The woman says herself that she is saving for a mirror or a radio.  These material items is what keeps her working harder.

Eventually after several attempts to escape, one of them particularly humiliating, the man resigns to his situation.  Now the people in the book club thought this was  positive ending, showing that man (kind) can tolerate and survive anything.  I beg to differ.  I think it is a demonstration on how easy it is for man (kind) to lose their free will and independent spirit.  How easy it is to conform to society with out thinking for one's self.  When the woman become pregnant, and is taken away because the baby's and mother's life are in jeopardy, he has a chance to escape.  The ladder has been left in the hole.  He chooses not to.  Perhaps he feels a responsibility to his home and family.  One might say that is a good thing, but one must remember, he was innocently ensnared into this trap and gradually had the will sucked right out of him.  Coincidentally, the radio arrives here at the conclusion of the book.

The Boy in the Striped Pajamas ***1/2

Seen on DVD.
Directed by Mark Herman.
Based on novel written by John Boyne. 
Screenplay by Mark Herman.
With Asa Butterfield, Jack Scanlon, Zac Matoon O'Brian, Domonkos Nemeth, Henry Kingsmill, Vera Farmiga, Cara Horgan, Zsuzsa Hoil, Amber Beattie, Lazlo Aron, David Thewlis.
Released in 2008.

I have often bemoaned the fact that media for children should have a different rating scale as it is almost impossible for any book or film to have the subtlty, nuance or profundity that an adult work has.  Here is a case in which my theory is proven wrong.  This is one powerful movie.  I feel that it transcends the childrens' film genre.  Of course it should be said that this is hardly a kids film.  You don't want to set your 8 year old in front of the Tv and let him/her alone.  It would either bore them becasue of the complexity or scare the dickens out of them.  The only thing about this film that slightly resembles a typical kids' movie is that it is told from the point of view of an 8 year old.

Why do I like this film?  Just becasue it is so hard hitting.  The childrens' part are very believeable and there are lots of small, subtle moments in the film.

A German boy, Bruno, is taken to the country during WW II so that his soldier dad can take over his duties at his new assignment.  That of commandant at a concentration camp.  Bruno discovers, unwittingly, the camp and attempts to make friends with a Jewish boy on the other side of the fence.  Both boys are especailly good at portraying their innocence, but the boy in the camp is especailly good at portraying a mix of  innocence and hopefullness, while also demonstrating a wary, traumatized persona.  The two boys just don't understand, even the Jewish boy who has gone through scads of trauma doesn't understand the enormity of the situation.  I'll skip the ending, but I'll just say that it's gut wrenchiung tragic.  The hope is that the adults have learned a heavy and hard lesson.

And I think the mother does.  When she first moves into their new abode, she is wary of the Jews.  She saw no problem in the idea of the camps, though she didn't want it in her backyard.  When one of the Jewish servants helps Bruno with a cut on the knee, she reluctantly thanks him and reluctantly becomes a little more human.  She is very upset when she finds out the true mission of the camp and she and her husband have a serious argument over it.  I guess it was ok to imprison the Jews, but not to massacre them.

A strongly reccomended film!

Here's a trailer...

Waltz With Bashir (Vals Im Bashir) ***

Seen on DVD.
Released in Isreal 2008.
Directed and written by Ari Folman.

This is a flawed film in many ways. It's slow, and confusing. But I admire the intent and the ambitions of the director to make this film the way he wanted. For that reason i rated this film 3 stars in stead of 2 1/2 stars.

First off, it's a documentary but it is an animated film. This animation allows the film to show some eerie and spooky, settings. It's also an interesting premise. The director is trying to remember his involvement in the invasion of Lebanon and subsequent massacre that happened in 1982. He does an excellent job of getting to the psyche of the people he interviews and their memories of the war. For some reason the limits of the animation techniques they used, made people move very slowly which contributed to the slowness of the film. The film makers understood this and instead of trying to hide this fact, they embraced this limitation. The characters tend to float off into space making them seem ghostly. This adds to the level of psychological confusion and angst of the film.

So, the story is that the director is interviewing old veterans of the Invasion of Lebanon. He seems to have forgotten the whole incident, especially those moments of the massacre. He is curious or perhaps more precisely, haunted to know (he doesn't remember) just what his role in this massacre was. So we learn the stories of many of his comrades and the emotional trauma they had went through during the war. Eventually he closes in on the people who were there ( I believe the Lebanese town was laid to siege) at the massacre. What is discovered is that the Christians were mostly responsible. They entered the town and took care of things themselves. There's a hint that it might have been a retribution for the assassination of their Lebanese presidential candidate Bashir (hence the title of the film). But the Israeli army is not entirely off the hook. After all, they witnessed it all. The foot soldiers and lower ranked officers did try to report it, but the upper echelons of the Israeli army either told them not to worry and that nothing was happening, or they said they would do something and instead looked away from the atrocities.

One of the most interesting aspect of this animation as documentary is the ability to reenact the stories of the veterans. Because it was animation, the filmmakers could craft how they thought the incidents really happened and could dramatize it with out silly actors or such. It actually added a dimension of reality to it.

Here's a trailer...

It Feels So Good When I Stop ***

By Joe Pernice.
Published in 2009 by Penguin Books.

I'm so far behind in this blog. I read this book about a month ago and the library wouldn't even let me renew it because I had renewed it too frequently. So I have forgotten names and details. But it's Thanksgiving weekend and I'll have a little time so maybe I can catch with some short and sweet entries.

Joe Pernice (the author) is part of the musical group The Pernice Brothers, who were before that called The Scud Mountain Boys. I should say a few words about what I know about these groups. My impression was that these groups were Americana or alternative country music. When I bought my first Pernice Brothers' CD, I was disappointed. It was too smooth and poppy for me. I was expecting something grittier. Their earlier incarnation, The Scud Mountain Boys was only slightly better.

So I wasn't sure what to expect from this author, but I was happy to read this book.

It's the story of an everyday man / slacker and his romantic life. At the beginning of the book, he had just broken up with his wife of 3 days, and simultaneously, his sister was divorcing her husband who our hero was still friends with. In fact he helps the ex-husband take care of his nephew (the ex's son) though he had never had any responsibility of any kind previous to this.

So our slacker man ( I do remember he was never named in this book so as to give him a feel of everyday man) tells his tale of two times. He tells both what happens to him AFTER the break up and the events that transpire BEFORE the break up. A nice structure, though it was confusing at first.

He describes how he and his future wife get together and then details their life together. Nothing traumatic happens that point to the future break-up but there are signs that there is trouble. His girlfriend seems to circulate in more sophisticated circles than him. She works for a fashion magazine. Though when she is with him, she seems to be pretty down to earth. The narrative eventually leads to the day they break up, but it's not clear why, though we do find out that it was his idea. Was it nerves? A feeling of inadequacy? (they were in Paris - a fancy place for an everyday man). The ending only hints at these possibilities.

Then there is the narrative that follows the break up. He starts to look after his nephew and he meets a woman who has had a tragic event happen. She lost her son (I think he drowned). She wants to make a documentary honoring her lost son. Our hero decides to help her (he is conveniently unemployed - a slacker). During the course of making the video, they learn about themselves and each other. And even though romance does happen, it is certainly doomed from the start, though I think both characters came out better for it. And I think the characters would agree that though doomed, the relationship was worth their time and effort.

So over all the book has a positive, hopeful feeling, which I liked also. I might have to go back to the Cd's and at last listen to the lyrics, even if I didn't care for the music. He clearly knows how to tell a narrative. I be this songs have good narratives too.

Here's an excerpt from the book.



And here's a song that may or may not be a soundtrack for the book.

The Plan of Chicago: DAniel Burnham and the Remaking of the American City *1/2

By Carl S. Smith.

Published by University of Chicago, August 2007.

202 pages.



I looked forward to reading this as I greatly enjoy history, architecture and learning about Chicago. The book certainly has some of that and had some interesting parts, but I found a large portion to be kind of dry. I could recommend parts of this book for reading if it was fresher in mind. I haven't read it for about a month now.



What I do remember that was interesting were the sections about antecedents for city planning. Paris was one example discussed and Burnham worked in several American cities previous to making his great plan in Chicago.



Some of the discussion about Chicago in the 19th century was interesting as it illuminated many of the problems that Chicago had at that time - filth, squalor, chaos. And the book also discussed the solution that the plan suggested for these problems.



And finally some of the comparisons that were made between Chicago prior to the publishing of the plan, the plan itself and contemporary Chicago were very interesting. It was very interesting, but I feel there could have been more. The author even states that to do all that comparing would be a very difficult task. I think it would have been worth the effort. This was the book I was expecting.



The book falls flat for the rest of it. This book is more about the plan itself then Chicago history. It spends quite a lot of time discussing the organization of the groups that supported it - The Merchants Club and The Commercial Club of Chicago, which Burnham and Bennet (his partner) were a part of. These were groups of wealthy , conservative and influential men and some famous names do crop up such as Wacker (got his own street). It's no wonder they got most of their ideas passed since they had all this influence (including some shady aldermen and mayors). I think this influence was essential to the plan becoming realized.



The book discussed who was responsible for what part of the production of the plan. And that's the thing, the book talks a lot about the production of the plan. How it was printed and bound for example. Or how it was marketed to the public (it was part of the Junior High curriculum in Chicago). Or the description of the fancy, high fallutin' special editions. As you can see, much of this, while it did have some interesting tidbits, were not about city planning, or architecture.



There were some dissenters to the plan, though most people supported it then and now. The book only mentions these dissents in passing and does not give much sway to their arguments.



One problem was that the monumental size of the project was dehumanizing. Some of the drawings seem futuristic and sterile. There are no people to be seen in the streets of these drawings.



Another criticism of the plan was that it was centered on the lake front and did not address issues in the surrounding, and often squalid neighborhoods. The hope of the plan was to unite everyone, rich and poor etc., to marvel at the wondrous awesomeness of the city. That smacks a little of propaganda in which the masses should all come together for the sake of good (ie. a war or in this case the pride of Chicago). Look at how people now unflinchingly support government policies out of patriotism, even if it means their sons and daughters are dying in wars overseas.



Though like I said, the title is about the plan of Chicago and not necessarily so much about the city itself. So the book does not falsely advertise it's contents. It delivered what it said it would. I was just a little less interested in the content that it delivered.



Here's some pictures and more information in the following videos.

The Hangover **

Released June of 2009.
Directed by Todd Phillips.
Written by Jon Lucas and Scott Moore.
With Bradley Cooper, Ed Helms, Zach Galifianakis, Justin Bartha, Heather Graham, Sazha Barrese, Jeffrey Tambor, Ken Jeong, Rachael Harris, Mike Tyson, Mike Epps, Jernard Burks, Rob Riggle, Bryan Callen.

Okay, this film caught me by surprise in the opening scene. It starts out on a dusty desert Nevada road, to the sounds of Danzig's Thirteen, ( a great cover of that song was done by Johnny Cash by the way - he did some fantastic covers in his later years). The Cramps' version of Fever is here too. Unfortunately the rest of the soundtrack is exceedingly mundane.

So here is this gritty, dusty and dirty opener and I'm thinking this has potential. But alas, it just turns into another one of those "boys behaving badly" films that are so wildly popular now a days partially to the credit (or fault) of Judd Apatow.

There's some good jokes to be sure and the film definitely has it's moments. The boys are a little older here so it has a more mature feeling than say a typical "boys behaving bad" film and again there are some unique ideas here.

I know this is supposed to be a film in which crazy things happen, but the outcome is too convoluted and ridiculous at times. I say outcome because the events of the previous night of the hangover are revealed to us slowly. It turns into a sort of mystery. But that mystery is compromised by the pure silliness of it.

My least favorite part of that wild night was the Asian heavy who also was stylish and talked with a lisp. It was supposed to be funny, but it was just silly. It would have been better if the heavy was a true heavy with some good comedic lines and some character development.

So the plot is that the boys are getting together for one last hurrah in Vegas before the friend gets married. They wake up and find that they have forgotten everything and that they don't know where the groom is. He has disappeared. Now again, this had some appeal for me as a mystery, a comedic mystery. But when I find out what really transpired, I was disappointed. In fact, even at the end I was still unclear about what happened even after the candid photos were shown. The rest of the film is the remaining guys retracing their steps trying to figure out what happened.

There is one interesting character in this film. You have the usual archetypes. There's the geek, the suave guy and the bland good looking guy who is getting married. But the brother-in-law (played by Zack Galifianakis) is interesting. He's this sort of man-child that goes along for the bachelor's party trip and his mix of naivete and sexual creepiness makes the viewer downright uncomfortable.

Overall worth the $3.50 i paid for my son and I to go, but not more than that.

Here's a trailer, the r rated one - don't let the kiddies watch it.



Johnny Cash's version of "Thirteen".


And the original version by Glenn Danzig.



And finally, the Cramp's version of Peggy Lee's Fever, with pics of Bettie Page to boot!

The Motel Life **1/2

By Willy Vlautin.
Published by Harper Perrenial 2006.
First UK Paperback published 1999 by Faber and Faber Lmtd.
206 pages.

This is Vlautin's first novel. I had already discussed his later book, "Northline", several weeks ago. It is similar in many ways to that novel, though I think "Northline" is a better book. The problem with this one is that it tends to plod along after a while. Not that "Northline" doesn't have it's plodding moments - it's episodic in nature, but "The Motel Life" seems to be more so.

But "The Hotel Life" still has those aspects that I liked so much about "Northline". The characters are gritty and desperate. Yet there's a pervading humaneness and kindness that they display under their gruff exterior. It a portrait of the working and not so working poor. The reader becomes empathetic with these characters.

The story takes place in and around Reno, Nevada. The main character, Frank, is visited in the middle of a cold, snowy night by his older brother Jerry Lee. Jerry Lee is very upset. He had a hit and run accident in which a young boy had been killed. He states that he is not to blame since the kid just appeared out of nowhere on his bicycle in the middle of a snow storm, but he was drunk and he thinks that the police won't see it his way.

So they go on the lam. But they don't make it to their destination. Jerry Lee is wracked with guilt and he deserts his brother in the woods and shoots himself in the leg. Frank is forced to return home and brings him to the hospital.

Back home Frank does some thinking, especially about his ex-girlfriend who he still loves. Jerry Lee is not doing well, because his leg was in very bad shape previously to the shooting. The two brothers decide to go on the lam again, and go to a motel.

This book is compared to "Of Mice and Men" because the one brother seems to take care of the other, though Jerry Lee is not mentally challenged. At the motel the resolution of the story is very different for these men - tragic for one and hopeful for the other.

A trailer for the book. The end says it's going to be a movie!?!?!? Really?



A reading by the author...

Fun Home - A family Tragicomic**

By Alson Bechdel.
Published by Houghton Mifflin Company 2006.

Here's another memoir/Graphic Novel. They seem to be all they make these days. I read this right after I read "Blue Pills", and it's strength compared with that book is the depth and detail it has. On the negative side, it could be a bit more whimsical and entertaining. It's overall mood is pretty grim.

The author/artist of this book is already famous for her weekly strip "Dykes to Watch Out For", which can be preachy but also kind of humorous. So there's a large portion of about sexual identity in this book. In fact one interesting part is how when she learned her father was gay, and when she came to the conclusion that she was a lesbian, there were many , well, gender reversals between her and her father. They tended to bond over these "interests" even though both were unaware of the others sexual identity at the time.

So it's basically the story of the author's relationship with her father. He turned out to be gay, as well, as is well known, as the author. But the father, who lived in the small town that he lived in his whole life, had to remain in the closet. Apparently this made him repressed and bitter. Bechdel describes him as a cold and stern father who did not seem all that interested in his children, but was interested in literature and art and of course young boys. But she does make several attempts to bond with him over her life and had some mild success. They bonded over her literature class in college. Another attempt at bonding was his attempts to dress her like a pretty girl, which gave him satisfaction, but she wasn't interested.

So what's the relation between his and her gay sexuality? Is there a cause and effect here? Gayness, we're told is something you are born with and not learned. It seems to "run" in this family. Is there a genetic disposition for the "gay" gene, or was it learned? She does mention in one scene how she was taken to a fashionable part of a big city (New York?) and is exposed to a display of "cosmeticized masculinity." Though her lesbian characteristics were deeply rooted before this event as a teenager, this event did seem to open up a world of possibility for her.


Heres the author describing her drawing technique.

and...



and...


And a reading of the book.

Blue Pills - A Positive Love Story **1/2

By Frederik Peeters.
Translated from French by Anjali Singh.
Swiss Edition Published by Atrabile 2001.
English Edition published by Houghton Mifflin Company 2008.

This is apparently a memoir about a guy that meets and a girl that has HIV. He falls in love with her (actually he had always loved he but she just recently became single so they started dating) and accepts her HIV son as his own son. So it's basically about him learning to live with the disease and learning how to be an adult and a father under extreme stress. Once the condom breaks and he starts to freak out. They have to pay several visits to the doctor to insure that he is ok. And his girlfriend has extreme anxiety and guilt because she fears that she might infect him also.

I think one of the themes of this book is that it is, now, possible to live with HIV in a relatively safe way these days. Of course that wasn't the case 10 or 15 years ago, but things have changed. In one scene the doctor explains to the main character that it is a complicated system to become infected.

Most of the virus in concentrated in the sperm and blood. Since his girlfriend is NOT giving him sperm, he's relatively safe. There is some but less of the virus in a woman's vaginal secretions and even a pittance in her salive. The main concern is the blood entering his body. Sores can help the virus transfer this way, but even then it's complicated. Even if he does contract the disease, it can be erased/cured if it hasn't gotten to the glands yet. This is all from the doctor in the story.

I've also heard that timing is important. The more a partner has been on medications, the less chance of contracting it. If the HIV count is low, but still existent, in the partner, then it's difficult for the other partner to contract it. Of course certain precautions have to be taken. After all this is said, one would be a fool not to use a condom.

There is a symbolic section at the end of the book that I did not really get. He's riding a mammoth in which he has conversations about mortality and the illness. Perhaps it was just a graphic way for the author to convey some philosophical meanderings, but I had a hard time following it, and I enjoy philosophical meanderings.

Brick Lane **

Directed by Sarah Gavron.
With Tannishtha Chatterjee, Satish Kaushik, Christopher Simpson, Naeema Begum, Lana Rahman, Lalita Rahman, Harvey Virdi.
Based on book by Monica Ali. Screenplay by Laura Jones.
Released 2007. Seen on DVD.

Having read the book before seeing the movie, of course I enjoyed the book more, so it's hard to get a idea of how good this movie was. One thing I noticed was that there seemed to be too many ideas and they all seemed scattershot. Perhaps they tried to fit too much from the book into the film. Also the romance part seemed too obvious. The leading love interests were making goo goo eyes at each other almost from the start. The love affair was not allowed to grow naturally. Little was done to demonstrate why the wife would even bother partake in such a love affair.

On the other hand, the film is very beautiful to look at. There's lots of vivid reds and oranges displayed in the textiles that were abundantly shown in England and in India. Another pro for this film is the presence of Ms. Chatterjee. She's an alluring and charming actress and I now have a new crush.

For a summary of the story, I think I'll guide you to the review of the book which was written several weeks earlier. Suffice it to say that the movie does a lot of condensing of plot points from the film, as most films are wont to do. It just seemed to bug me a little more than usual.

Also, in the film, the husband is a less sympathetic character. In the book, I felt bad for him even though he was arrogant and pompous. Here he shows the arrogance but little of the sympathetic side. That fact makes it difficult for the wife to be torn between her lover and her husband. She does demonstrate this confusion about who she really loves in both the book and the film. It's just less convincing in the film since we see little of her husbands good side. But I guess in the limitations of film, one has to use a broader brush to paint their characters, and I think the husband loses out in this broadness.

Here's an interview with the lovely young lady.

Northline ***

By Willy Vlautin.
First published by Faber and Faber Limited, 2008.
This edition published by Harper Perrenial
192 pages.

Willy Vlautin is the lead singer and songwriter of the alternative country-rock group Richmond Fontaine. His songs are known for the dark tales he tells. This book is like that also. It's gritty and dark, my favorite genres (OK not genres, perhaps they're my favorite moods or tones). But this book, unlike his songs (Vlautin admits this himself - something to do with the length of the tales he tells. The shorter format of the songs doesn't allow for moments of sunshine and hope) there is a persistent feeling of hope, humanity and small kindnesses.

It's the story of a young, thin, plain girl who is pregnant with her boyfriend's baby. The problem is that her boyfriend is abusive and racist. So she runs away to a town where she knows no one. There she gets a job as a a waitress and a telephone marketer. She is completely depressed, suicidal and self-destructive. Along the way, she meets people who show her gentleness and kindness. Specifically she befriends her boss at the telemarketing company who is obscenely obese and one of her clients at the diner who has a slightly deformed eye. I mention these 'faults' to demonstrate the type of characters in the book. They are faulty, but good people.

It should also be noted that the book is set in the deserts of Nevada, where the author comes from which lends it its particularly feeling of grittiness. Everything is wore down and fading. Allison is also a drop out from school and has very low self-esteem. Hence she makes many poor choices. Yet her character,in fact all the characters are sympathetic. Even her Nazi boyfriend is shown as human and not ALTOGETHER evil. And let's face it, the most heinous people in history, the criminals, the killers, the gang bangers and the everyday jerks are all human, though sometimes we think of them as animals because of their actions. Usually those actions are a result of poor choices and screwed up mental chemistry.

There is a Cd that comes with the book that is a 'soundtrack' for the book. On first listen, it sounds like a typical soundtrack. It's all instrumental, so it's on the softer side. It's all acoustic also. But is seems nice.

This is Vlautin's second book, and I read his first book a couple of weeks later. I don't want to compare it too much since I'll be reviewing that one later, but I will say that I think it's a better book. It's narrative is a little more linear, though both books are unconventional narratives. Not much really happens in the books. They're episodic. They wander from episode to episode with out much connection and very little happening really. This latter effort is a bit more structured, and hence, I think, better.

here is an excerpt from the book accompanied by a film and music from the soundtrack.

Near Dark ***

Directed by Katherine Bigelow.
Written by Katherine Bigelow and Eric Red.
With Adrian Pasdar, Jenny Wright, Lance Henriksen, Bill Paxton, Jenette Goldstein,
Tim Thomerson, Joshua John Miller and Marcie Leeds.
Released 1987.

Katherine Bigelow is the same director that did "The Hurt Locker" that was just released this year. She's well known for being one of the best directors of action films period! And she's a woman to boot. One critic, Mark Kermode of the BBC said (paraphrasing here) that she was the most macho film director of any macho film director.

This is, I believe, her first feature film and her cast is relatively unknown, though I believe the creepy Joshua Miller goes on to play other creepy kids in other films in the next few years.

The pros of this film are many. There are some great action sequences and beautiful photography. The characters are unique and interesting. Especially, the character of Jessie Hooker and Diamondback.

I thought the romantic leads of were a little wooden, but perhaps they were trying to show the awkwardness of meeting someone for the first time. Some of the attempts at being poetic fall a bit flat and the Tangerine Dream soundtrack goes on a little too long, though did provide a pulsing feeling through some of the scenes and was especially appropriate for the scene in which the girl, Mae played by Wright, allows Caleb to drink the blood from her own arm.

So the film goes like this. Caleb, played by Pasdar, sees a cute young blond thing and goes over and flirts with her. He doesn't know it, but she's a vampire. In the course of their flirtation, she says some pretty silly stuff about "listening to the night" and other enigmatic sayings which were supposed to be profound but were really kind of silly. She bites him, and turns him into a vampire. She let's him go so that she can retire before the day begins. Her gang/family drive by to pick him up as he tries to walk back to his ranch (did I mention that this is a western styled movie) stumbling and smouldering from the rise of the new day's sun. Mae's family it a motley, punk group of vampires who want to get kill Caleb right off until Mae tells them that Caleb has been "turned". They back off, agreeing to give him time to prove that he can be one of them. Meaning he has to make a kill on his own.

Well, Caleb doesn't seem to have the heart to be a cold blooded murderer and he lets some opportunities escape. Mean while, he feeds off his girlfriend for sustenance. There is one scene where he is sucking the blood from her arm and they are sitting right next to an oil rig that is pumping. If this group is his new family, then Mae plays a maternal role in her nurturing of Caleb.

In one of the best set pieces of the film, the group goes to a dive of a country bar and raise havoc. They pretty much massacre the people in the bar to the soundtrack of Cramp's version of Fever. They save one victim for Caleb, who ultimately lets him escape.

This proves to have consequences because the police find them the next day in their hide out. Here is another one of the best scenes. As the police shoot holes through the shack walls, rays of burning light pierce the darkness of the interior. (Sun light burns the vampires) After many holes are shot in the wall of the shack, there is this kind of kaleidoscope effect and its simply beautiful.

They escape and are on the run. Caleb has bought some time since he was instrumental in their escape. One of the vampires runs into the little sister of Caleb and of course wants her. Complications ensue.

I loved this movie when it first came out. It was the era of punk rock, and this was a very punky film. The passage of time has had some negative effects, but there is no doubting Bigelow's ability to shoot action sequences and to tell unique and interesting tales.

Here's the trailer.

The Death of Bunny Munroe ***

By Nick Cave.
Published by Faber & Faber Inc.
An affiliate of Farrar, Straus and Giroux.
Copyright 2009.
Originally published by Text Publishing Company, Australia.
278 pages.

This is Nick Cave's second novel. The last one he did, "And the Ass saw the Angel", was written over 20 years ago. For the unitiated, cave is foremost a musician, but he has also written film scores and has acted and written films also. One great film he wrote was the Australian western, "The Proposition".

The first thing that should be said and has to be said is this is no "And the Ass Saw The Angel". Comparisons have to be made. That book was epic, grand, biblical and a minor masterpiece. This book is much more personal and simpler and probably not as good.

It focuses on father and playboy Bunny Munroe. Bunny Munroe is a traveling salesman and a cocksman. He is so obsessed with sex that he really can't help himself, even though it's killing his marraige and he really does love his wife. In fact his wife is so unhappy, she commits suicide.

This leaves Bunny distraught and on a self-destructive bent, though one could argue that he was already self-destructive before the death of his wife. It also leaves him and his son haunted. They think that they can see her or can feel her presence. In Bunny, this haunting intensifies the guilt he feels. In his son, this haunting brings the boy comfort.

So he has his boy in tow, and he continues selling beauty products while leaving the boy in the car to wait out Bunny's encounters.

The title tells us that Bunny is to die in this book, so saying so is no spoiler. But it seems that Bunny is dying a little bit as the story continues. Like in Jim Jarmusch's film "Dead Man", he's dead even before he actually dies. It's the journey he takes towards his eviction from this mortal coil.

The death scene is particularly well written. In it, all the women he had ever known are gathered and SEEM to be on the verge of forgiving him... In this scene he takes a psychdelic trip to his end. I'm having trouble remembering the details as I had read this book about 2 weeks ago, but I do remember it being particularly moving.

In some ways I think the story is autobiographical. Cave has written many songs about love which have a slight yet clear eroticism in them. I can't help from feeling that many of thoughts that Bunny thinks are quite similar to Cave's way of thinking. That he's constantly thinking about sex. I mean we're talking about the guy who dated Kylie Minogue, who by the way is brought up in the book as a fantasy figure along with Avril Lavigne.

Also, he paints a portrait of a father and son relationship, and no matter how screwed up the father is, the son still loves and admires his father. Cave, leading the life of a rock musician, perhaps has some guilt towards his sons and their relationships. The son's admiration for his dad, is perhaps what Cave is wishing for in his own relationships.

This is the weirdest thing, a trailer for a book. Weird but here it is.



And here is an excerpt read by the man himself.

Up **1/2

Directed by Pete Docter & Bob Peterson.
Screen Play by Pete Docter & Bob Peterson.
Voices by Edward ASner, Christopopher Plumer, Jordan Nagai, Bob Peterson, Delroy Lindo, Jerome Ranft, John Ratzenberger and David Kaye.
Released 2009.
Seen in theater.

Yet another film from Pixar studios. There are some things that I really like about this film, but some things that bug me too.

It starts off with a wonderful "news reel" animated in black and white with film specks and all. It describes the travails of world adventurer Charles Muntz. Then there's a montage of the lead character, Carl Fredrickson, growing up, starting from when he was a toddler and meeting his future wife-to-be, Ellie. As very young children, they connect because they are big fans of the f0re mentioned adventurer Muntz. While this scene is of course animated, it is completely charming and has the feel of early 20th century America.

The couple grow up and eventually become married and it seems they have the perfect marriage. Again, a very heartwarming scene. Unreal, because there is no such thing as the harmonious marriage they have, but it makes one yearn to fall in love again and dream.

As their marriage matures, they both have the adventurers dream of going to and living in a paradise located in South America. But the dream never happens because life takes over, yet they continue happily along in their marriage. They try to have a baby but lose it and grow old together childless. Eventually, the wife dies and so does the dream.

When the old man, Carl, is about to be evicted he has a plan. He ties 1000's of balloons to his house and decides to follow his dream by flying his house to South America and escape eviction. What he doesn't realize is that there is a young, fairly stupid boy scout in his basement that got caught up in the lift off of his house. Eventually they land in their paradise and an adventure ensues.

The balloons really bothered me. I was not able to suspend belief, though I knew that was necessary. Not that the balloons were able to lift a whole house, but that the old man and the kid were able to drag the house along like it was a light as a balloon it's self. Here there is this octogenarian and a young boy with ropes tied around their waists dragging around hundreds of tons of house.

Another thing that bothered me was the last 20% of the film where it becomes an action packed rock 'em, sock 'em blockbuster adventure. First of all, this is too predictable, though it was well put together and choreographed as any other action scene I have seen. I doubt there is any other way a Pixar movie can end, so I guess I'm asking too much when I say I would like to see something a little different for a change.

Also, it bothered me that this ancient guy was involved in such an action packed adventure. Sure the film makers referenced one time during the fighting sequence that he was old (his adversary was also very old and it was kind of a joke) but in real life, the man would have had a heart attack. I know, suspension of belief etc, but sometimes films ask too much of their audience.

The dialogue was great and the characters were wonderful. Some of my favorite characters were the couple as youths, the gigantic bird and the young and dumb scout that came along for the ride.

If I had a rating scale for kid's movies, this would probably get a higher rating, like 3 or 3 1/2 stars. It is a really good film, but I don't use such a system. It must be rare, but I believe it is possible for a children's/family film to transcend it's genre.

Couldn't really find a trailer per se, but I found this, which concentrates on my favorite character the bird Kevin.

Never a City So Real: A Walk in Chicago (Crown Journey) **1/2

By Alex Kotlowitz.
Published by Crown Journeys, Crown Publishers, a division of Random House, Inc.
Copyright 2004.
156 pages (est.)

This is a very enjoyable and quick read. Kotlowitz focuses on some of the lower class inhabitants and areas of Chicago. He writes about the stories of peoples lives and the neighborhoods they live in. The stories are very engaging. He tries to show how tough Chicago is and that is what makes Chicago what it is. What I mean to say is that he is trying to identify Chicago's personality and prove his thesis on how Chicago is a singular and unique city which no city can compare to. Of course he discusses the concepts of neighborhoods, which is integral to any conversation about Chicago. Each chapter takes place in a particular neighborhood. Those neighborhoods are (if memory serves me correctly - again I am behind on the blog so time has passed since I read it) the West Side, Bridgeport, Cicero and Lakeview for starters.

He seems to take pride in the toughness of the city and comes off as wanting to be as tough as those people he interviews. In one section of the book, he describes when he was with some good friends, two tough African American women social workers, and there was gun fire right out side of the store front. So he comes off as a tough guy (on the cover of his book he looks nerdy) because he is such close friends with the African American women, and because he was present at a shooting. he comes off as a little of a wannabe.

The only other complaint I have is that the book should have been expansive. It should have covered more neighborhoods. It seems a little non-representational. And of course, it was such an invigorating read, I would have loved to read some more if it had been available.

here's an interview with Kolowitz. Does not really reveal much abou thim or the book, so take it for waht it's worth.

Old Joy ***

Directed by Kelly Reichardt.
Written by Jonathan Raymond & Kelly Reichardt.
With Daniel London, Will Oldham, Tanya Smith and Robin Rosenberg.
Released 2006. Seen on DVD.

There's several connecting reasons that made me want to watch this film. First off, Will Oldham is in it. He's an indie musician who is also an actor though I had never seen him act before this film. And then, I had seen another film, Lucy and Wendy, by the same director just written about here in this blog about a month ago. And I really enjoyed that film!

The film is a little slower then her previous film. Basically, it's a slice of life film and the story is about two old friends who reunite and decide to go to a hot springs site and camp out over night. There's a lot of talking. The two friends are quite different, though they clearly partied together in their hey day. One friend, Mark, played by London is a more straight and narrow guy liberal new ager who is married and expecting his first baby. The other friend, Kurt, played by Oldham, is a more relaxed roaming type guy who can't settle down and has seen his share of hard times. There's a tension between the two, but they love each other. Nothing bad happens, but by the end of the trip, one wonders if they will ever see each other again. Kurt at the end of the film, is seen lonely wandering about the city of Portland Oregon, where the film takes place.

Some of the scenery and camera work is beautiful. Obviously the scenes in the the mountains and nature are beautiful and lush, but the scenes in the city are also very nicely shot with the buildings in the broken down part of town saturated with color.

And while all they do is talk to each other, the tension is palpable. The actors are good at showing the strain in their relationship. It's very well acted and Oldham lives up to his reputation. They do tend to wax philosophical, while not focusing an any one theme which is entertaining. If there is a theme, it is about people who live in the lower strata of the social hierarchy. In the beginning of the film, there is overheard a radio talk show in which politics is talked about (this is during the end of Bush's first term, when he is seeking re-election) and there is some commentary on the treatment of the working class etc. This theme is explored to its fullest in Reichardt's later and most recent film Wendy and Lucy.

Reichardt has been stringing together some pretty good independent films. I look forward to her next one.



Oh Yeah, it has a great soundtrack by Yo La Tengo. Listen to it again in the trailer.

Brick Lane **1/2

By Monica Ali.
Published in England by Doubleday 2003.
This Edition: Scribner 2003.
369 pages.

Once in a while I like to look at what other people say about a book, so I went on Amazon and looked at some readers' reviews. Most people loved this book, which is not surprising since it won several awards, including Barnes & Noble's Discovery award, which is where I had heard of it first. So I went to the readers' comments who gave the book a bad review. The trend was that it was slow moving and too long (valid). Some said that it was too soapy (valid) and some said that the depictions of Bengladesh were inaccurate (wouldn't know if that was valid or not since I have never been there). While I agree with some of these criticisms, over all, I liked the book.

This is a story about a young girl, who was saved by 'fate' from sure death at infancy. Fate, or God's will, is what drives her philosophy her whole life, though she does occasionally fight againts fate. She has an arranged marriage to a middle-aged, overweight man in England who lives in the Brick Lane neighborhood, a poor neighborhood with a variety of immigrants. Meanwhile her older sister has run off, scandalized with a man and moves to a Bengaldeshi city. Her life, which is filled with a variety of failures and tragedies, is told to us by a series of letters that she sends to her sister in England.

The young girl, Nanzeen, doesn't really love her husband, Chanu, though he treats her relatively well, which she mentions often. T o make money, she starts a sewing business and meets a young man who brings her orders to work on. They have an affair and she falls in love for the first time. In the mean time, she has become more appreciative and affectionate for her husband. So she's torn. Her oldest daughter (some years have passed at the point of the affair) is rebelious and bitter. And she owes her neighbor money for the purchase of the sewing machine, but she can never seem to pay the debt off, since the interest is continously accruing.

While Nanzeen seems to have found herself and learned to be independent by the end of this book. I really feel sorry for her husband who is painted as arrogant, repulsive and a bit foolish, though he is an educated man. After quitting his 'real' job, because he gets passed over for the promotion everytime, he takes a series of dead end jobs until he finally settles for a taxi job and becomes at peace with him self just to go out and bring home money. He truly loves Nanzeen, after some time, and seems to understand that he has lost her with the gaining of her independence, though he apparently does not know about the affair.

Overall, I liked the characters, and the narrative went to some interesting places.

Here's a trailer of the movie.

Vertigo ***1/2

Directed by Alfred Hitchcock.
Released in 1958.
Written by Alec Coppel & Samuel Taylor.
With James Stewart, Kim Novak, Barbara Bel Geddes, Tom Helmore.
Seen in Theater.

School has started and I'm way behind in blogging. Must..... keep..... short! This is two films in one. It starts off as a kind of ghost/detective story and turns into a psychodrama for the last fourth of the film. The latter part of the film, I thought, was more interesting.

An idle detective with vertigo is grounded from duty to to an accident in which his vertigo got in the way of saving some one's life. He is asked by an old friend to watch his wife. His friend is convinced that his wife is possessed. This is the slower part of the movie, since we are privy to the slow and monotonous life of a detective on watch. As he follows her around, he begins to have feelings for her as she is of course, in the Hitchcock tradition, beautiful. He watches her jump into a river and proceeds to save her. From there, he falls in love and she (Novak) seems to return his affections. They proceed together to an old mission in the country that has a large tower and Madeleine (Novak) has an "episode" of other worldliness and runs up the tower in a panic. Stewart's character (the detective - "Scottie") runs after her, but of course since he has vertigo, he can't make it up to the top and he hears her scream and sees her falling body from the window.

At this point in the film, there is a beautiful shot of the church from a bird's eye view in which the audience can see the woman laying on the roof, the police hurrying in one side of the mission, while Stewart staggers out the other side of the mission. All in one shot. If I recall, there was many beautiful shots but after two weeks, I can't remember any of them - except for that scene. it was simply stunning! I should start taking notes!

So now the second half of the film begins. Stewart has a nervous breakdown and is institutionalized. When he gets out, every one and every thing he sees reminds him of her. One day he sees a woman that reminds him so much of her that he pursues her. He bullies and coerces her to go out with him. When she does, he tries to turn the new girl into Madeleine, his love. Stewart starts to get controlling and manipulative. He's down right mean. Something you don't see often with him except for maybe in his roles in Anthony Mann's westerns. Meanwhile Novak's character (she plays both roles - so she really DOES look like his dead lover) is starting to get scared and nervous. It turns into this incredibly uncomfortable narrative that makes a person squirm in their seat.

There's a twist in the film, but I won't divulge it here.

Dear Zachary: A Letter to a Son About his Father **

Directed and written by Kurt Kuenne.
Released 2008?
Seen on DVD.

This movie starts off as a letter to the son of a man (Dr. Andrew Bagby) who was murdered, allegedly, by his crazy ex-girlfriend (Dr. Shirley Turner). The director of the film is a close and personal friend of the victim, so he wanted something to give to his friend's son, so that the boy could know who his father was. He drives cross country, interviewing and filming everyone who was friends or knew Bagby. Until he gets to New Foundland, Canada, the eastern most point of the North American continent. That's where the ex-girlfriend, also the mother of the Bagby's son has fled to. The grandparents (David and Kathleen Bagby) of the Andrew's son (Zachary Andrew Turner) go to New Foundland to facilitate the extradition of her to the states so that she can stand trial for the murder of their son. Though the evidence is convincing, the court releases her on bail several times and allows her to live freely while the legal process continues. This means, that the grandparents, who want to be with the grandchild, have to communicate and play nice to the woman who probably murdered their son. And this stretches out seemingly forever.

I'm going to leave the rest unstated as to not give away the spoiler, but the ending of the movie is pretty astonishing. This is why everyone should watch the film. It is an incredible story! Though I only give the film 2 stars. That's because as a movie, I think it's pretty flawed.

First is the fact of the lack of objectivity. Now of course this film was not intended to be a feature release for the theaters. It was supposed to be a love letter or a valentine to the victim's son - a memorial. So it makes sense that it's not an objective film. Still, I didn't care for the part when Dr. Turner or her lawyer was speaking. It was almost juvenile. They showed a still image of that person and then did a "Clutch Cargo" thing where the mouth moves while the rest of the image doesn't. And the narrator (the director?) would use a mocking voice as the still photos spoke those words. And then it was repeated several times.

And that's my other complaint with the film. There is so much repetition. The same things are repeated over and over as well as some of the scenes. I guess the film maker was trying to emphasis a point in the way directors emphasize points with jump cuts. Jump cuts are repetitions of the same action 2 or three times in a row. The reason is for emphasis. But this is different I believe. Keuune use this technique way too frequently. And the repetitions are not usually all in one place. The repetitions happen through out the whole film.

And then there's the politics. After the events that take place unfold, the grandparents decide that they want to be activists. Specifically they want to see the release on bail laws change so that it is not so easy for a possibly dangerous person to be walking on the street. At face value, this seems reasonable. But I worry, that a reformed law could lead to less civil rights for the prosecuted. What if that person was innocent. Remember, during the setting of bail, they have not proven that the person is guilty of the charge. Still, it's clear that Dr. Turner was allowed out too easily. I suspect that the laws are good enough as they are, but perhaps enforcement and interpretation of the laws are where the problems stem from. Add to the fact that this all takes place in Canada, I'm not really sure how the laws are the same or different than here in the states. Is the Bagby couple working on changing Canadian Law or U.S. law? That's not clear to me or I don't remember them mentioning it. And they even plug the grandfather's book.




And an interview with the director. Sorry about the repeating clips from the trailer.

Elephant Run **1/2

By Roland Smith.
Published 2007 Scholastic Inc. by arrangement with Hyperion Books for Children.
An imprint of Disney Children's Book Group.
318 pages.

It's kind of unfair to use the same rating scale for children's book as for adult books. If this were a book rated on say, a special scale for children's books, it would be at least rated 3 stars or more. Adult books are usually more complex and subtle and more profound. There might be a few children's book that that one could argue might garner a 4 star rating, but they are usually classics, and I would bet that part of their charm is the memory we have of them when we read them as children. Call me out on this, but I bet that after rereading some of these books as adults, we'd have to reassess our opinion of them if we judged them objectively (which is an impossibility).

The book claims to be a book for reluctant male readers. That's because it has action and adventure and all that. I would agree to a certain point. The beginning 20 - 25% might seem a little slow paced for a 'reluctant' reader, though certainly not for me, a patient and voracious reader. The book is set in war time Burma. Before the Japanese enter the book, there is lots of discussion about the Burmese culture and the training of animals. Fascinating for me, but I wonder if a 'reluctant' reader could get through this.

I've already given some plot points. Here is the summary. A young boy moves from London to live with his father during World War II. He moves there to escape the bombing of London, but soon learns that Burma has it's own set of wartime problems. The Japanese have come, some believe as liberators others as conquerors. Of course they proved themselves to worse than the English Imperialists.

The Young boy, Nick, is the son of the owner of a large tree plantation where they use elephants to help them with the harvesting of the trees. This is where the cultural lessons come. When the Japanese come, they take his father as a prisoner of war, and Nick stays at the plantations home as a servant. There is a deal made to help keep the prisoners compliant, but the Japanese re neg on that deal. After that is realized, Nick plans his escape with the help of an ancient, revered monk and the young daughter of one of the killed elephant trainers, who happened to be close to the father. After his escape, they plan to rescue the father which proves to be exceedingly difficult because he's an enemy and they are guarded and treated much worse than their Burmese counterparts. The Burmese are treated slightly better, but they have more freedoms.

One thing I liked about the book is that one of the Japanese soldiers is portrayed as a very humane, sympathetic character. In other words, not all the Japanese were monsters. That's an important concept I believe since the Japanese were known for their ruthlessness and ferocity. It makes them seem more human.

North by Northwest ***

Directed by Alfred Hitchcock.
Written by Ernest Lehman.
Released in 1959.
With Cary Grant, Eva Marie Saint, James Mason, Jessie Royce Landis, Martin Landau and Edward Platt.
Seen in theater



This is a film that everyone knows about so what is there to say? It's a fun, well made romp through America. There are lots of famous scenes or set pieces. Remember the attack of the airplane in the middle of no where - Highway 41 about a hour and a half out of Chicago. Then there's the chase scene on Mount Rushmore. There's a scene in the United Nations also. All good fun.

So, an advertising exec gets kidnapped because he is mistaken for a government agent by some foreign spies. No one believes him after narrowly escaping with his life, and he is accused of a murder. So he sets out to vindicate himself on his own. And he runs into trouble as well as the beautiful Eve Kendall, who may or may not be trouble also. Telling any more that this would be spoiling the end of the movie, but there's lots of twists and turns. Too many twists and turns for my 8 year old, but Penelope, my 11 year old said she could follow it.

This film is just too light to consider it as a 4 star movie (a masterpiece), maybe a masterpiece of fun. Even Rear Window tries to have messages or food for thought though it too is a basic thriller also.

Wendy and Lucy ***1/2

Released 2008.
Directed by Kelly Reichardt.
Written by Jonathan Raymond.
With Michelle Williams, Will Oldham, John Robinson and John Breen.
Seen on DVD.

This is a very lovely film in its simplicity. The acting is restrained and subdued and the story is heart wrenching.

A young girl, Wendy (Williams) and her dog Lucy are travelling cross country from Hammond Indiana to Alaska to take advantage of some perceived lucrative work opportunities. It's implied that she is moving to better her life and not for adventure or short term, between semesters work. She's a girl on the margins of society, yet not completely down and out as she has a car and some cash to help her make it there. It's clear that she was not in good financial shape previous to the trip because in a desperate phone call to her sister and brother-in-law, they tell her that they can do nothing to help her and seem, especially her sister, unsympathetic. Her car breaks down in Portland Oregon and she finds herself stuck there for a while. When she goes to the store to pick up a few items, she attempts to shop lift some very minor items and is taken to the police station. Meanwhile her dog disappears and the rest of the film is about her search for her dog (Lucy) a la "The Bicycle Thief" and her attempts to get her car functioning. Like the neo-realism of the post war Italian films.

This film is a realistic portrayal of people on the edge of losing it all. It's easy to see how one can be homeless and destitute. We're all just a stone's throw away from poverty. Ok, those with less education anyway are much more susceptible to it. Even in today's economy, if a white class worker loses his job, he or she usually has something stowed away (excepting present company - If I were to lose my job, I might end up on the streets).

My eight year old daughter watched it with me (she's been mentioned before in other films I've discussed and is always an interesting measure of a film's quality) She "liked" it though she thought it was sad. I suspect she is struggled with the fact that she liked it at the same time as she was being made sad by it. It's also a testament to the simplicity of the story if she could follow and understand it well enough to appreciate it.



And here is an interview with the director and actor.

Shark Girl **1/2

By Kelly Bingham.
Published 2007 by Candlewick Press.
276 pages.

I "chose" this book as it was the only one left. The librarian at my school asked the teachers to do some reading over the summer and create questions about the books so that her Battle of the Books team can prepare for competition.

The book did not look so interesting. It has a cover of a young girl with a bikini on showing only ( this is relevant) one side of her torso. I was thinking when I saw it that it would be a 'tween romance.

It is better than I thought it would be. It is a story about a girl that was attacked by a shark (not a spoiler since this happens on the 3rd page of the book) and her efforts to cope with the changes in her life that resulted from losing her arm.

I think the young girl was a realistic character. Her concerns seemed real. She was not painted as a hero. She was moody and bitter. She was frustrated about her abilities and afraid to go to school with her friends. Eventually she does learn to cope with these issues, but it is a difficult struggle. For that reason, I think she was portrayed in a realistc way.

It is a quick read. The story is presented a variety of ways. The author uses letters, poems and newspaper articles to tell the story. Though the majority of the tale is told in poem form. Each poem has a title, but I would say that the poems are more terse and truncated prose than poetry.



A reccomended book for any young teenager in your family, even for boys.


Here's another summary about the book.

The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen Vol. 1 **1/2

Written by Alan Moore.
Drawn by Kevin O'Neil.
Color by Benedict Dimagmaliw.
Lettering by William Oakley.
Published by America's Best Comics, 2000.

Alan Moore is known for such well known comics such as "The Watchmen" and "V is for Vengeance" (or is it Vigilante?). I read in an interview, in the magazine "Under the Radar", that though he's now retired from comics, he still likes to keep involved with this book and continues work on it. So he holds a special place in his heart for this one.

So the story goes is that some mysterious government man in turn of the century recruits a bunch of misfits and washed ups for some operation that is never clear. These misfits include some infamous chracters such as Alan Quartermain, Captian Nemo, Miss Mina Murray, Dr. Harry Jeckyll/Edward Hyde and Hawley Griffin (AKA The Invisible Man). What is interesting about these characters is that while Moore keeps the legends intact, he makes them incredibly human anf flawed. Flawed in an almost epic manner. Quartemain is an opium addict, Edward Hyde is particularly gruesome in his monstrousness, and Griffin (The Invisible Man) is a particularly untrustworthy character, what with his power of invisiblity and all. He uses that power to gain an advantage for himself, let's say on an all girls school in which some of the young ladies think that they have acheived Immaculate Conception.

There's a lot of mistrust and bickering within the group, yet they manage to acheive and come through for each other when necessary.

After the group is finally assembled (this is an origin story after all) they set off on a mission to recapture a substance which will allow anyone the power to fly. Being still in the 19th century, this power seems too incredible and dangerous if it were to get in the wrong hands, which the league is told has happened. But there are double crosses and backstabbing and the government man does not appear to be who he says he is. An airiel attack is emminent over London, and the League does their best to stop it.

Apparantly, he also did a traditional serial adventure story starring Alan Quartermain, which I liked less becasue it involves other worlds and different realms of existence. I've never been one for that transcendental other/alternate world stuff. It always involves the invention of a new mythology which has to be understood with in the limited time and space of the text. It's too much for me to keep up with. And the language can be silly in those kinds of stories.

I liked better the grittier and violent main story of the book. It's more realistic (well as realistic as a story with ape monsters and invisible men can be).

So whats interesting is the blend of modern and old. The language of the book is old fashioned. Moore's clearly having fun with it. On the title page of the book which is set up like an advertisement in an old fashioned newpaper, the creators are introduced with interesting language and not just listed. For example, "At tremendous expense we are proud to present M. Alan Moore. The World famous Northamptonshire Nightingale famed for his verbal recitations and comical narratives."

So there's this old fashioned language paired and contrasted with a fairly violent and bloody narrative. The monster Hyde, tears people apart, limb from limb in a type of demon rage.

And as any one who follows comics know, Moore is know for his writing and this narrative is well written. The characters are developed and complex.

I look forward to volume 2 and 3.

A trailer of the movie.



And an excellent interview with Alan Moore with examples of drawings.

Rear Window ***1/2

Directed by Alfred Hithcock.
Released 1954.
Based on short story by Cornell Woolrich - "It Had to be Murder".
Screenplay by John Michael Harps.
With James Stewart, Grace Kelly, Wendell Corey, Thelma Ritter and Raymund Burr.
Seen in theater.


I haven't seen this film for over 20 years, and when I did, I believe I saw it on video. It was nice to see the camera work on the big screen with its vivid colors of the bulildings and gardens, etc.

Most people already know this film, but this might provide a reminder about what a great film this was. For that reason, I 'll keep the summary short.

A photographer and adventurer, James Stewart, is stuck in his apartmant all day becasue he has a broken leg. He spends all day watching his neighbors through the rear window of his apertment. Meanwhile Grace Kelly's character, an upscale high falutin' fashion executive, is trying to convince him to marry. The photographer is not so sure since he's a rough and ready adventurer after all.

While looking at his neighbors, he starts to invent narratives for them and watches them to see if his invented narratives come true. Eventiually, he begins to think that in one of the house holds something very fishy is going on. He's convinced that the husband, played by Raymond Burr, has killed his invalid wife and disposed of her in a particularly gruesome way. He becomes an amateur sleuth to get to the bottom of the mystery.

One minor complaint I have with the film is that it is kind of slow moving. It almost has to be becasue the narrative and the character development of the neighbors is almost played out in pantomime, like a silent film. So things take a while to develope. It's quite an inventive film technique that Hitchcock uses and there is no way that a film, with this pacing, could be made comercailly in these days. It's both intrigueing and a little slow at the same time. I admired it for this, but I was simultaneously getting antsy, and like i've said in a recent past blog entry, I feel my patience for films is way above the average film goer of today.

There are also some inetersting moral themes being discussed and presented. The whole concept of privacy is an issue. It's funny to me that it seems that the characters don't think that it's bad to spy on their neighbors. Stewart's character makes no bones about his spying, though he doesn't want to get caught, and is quite obvious about it. Grace kelly's character only seems bothered by it, becasue it makes her boyfriend distracted. The characters do discuss th eissue of privacy briefly, but seem to laugh it off.

But... this spying on the neighbors leads Stewart to make some judgements and conclusions about his neighbors based on sparse and imcomplete evidence that he has garnered from his watching. The privacy of the neighbors is being invaded and they are being judged on how they behave in certain contexts. I think that this is the moral of the story. Remember, this was also around the time of Jospeph McCarthy. I don't know if privacy was one of the issues at the time, there might have ben more immediate threats to people's civil rights, but i I would bet that the accused communists were not too thrilled to have their private lives and values exposed to the nation.