Literary Meme

A friend tagged me with the following literary meme

The rules:
1. Pick up the nearest book.
2. Open to page 123
3. Find the fifth sentence.
4. Post the next three sentences.
5. Tag five people, and acknowledge who tagged you.

Hey, if you're gonna steal, might as well steal it all, right? Actually, this friend has tagged me several times, and this is the first time I've responded. I'll get around to those others eventually, but this one was simple and interesting enough to get me off my butt and post. Anyway, on to my quote:

"Bricusse's treatment surmounted one major hurdle when it received the enthusiastic approval of Hugh Lofting's widow, who called his work 'a complete surprise...he has caught the spirit of the Doctor himself. The lyrics are...right in the vernacular of Dolittle. I predict nothing but success.'"

From Pictures at a Revolution: Five Movies and the Birth of the New Holllywood by Mark Harris.

I'm really loving the library right now. I don't know why I've ignored this fabulous resource for so long. I've loved picking up cheap books at thrift stores for years, but more often than not they go unread. Sure they're intriguing, but they are usually just whims. Now that I can get on the library website and request a book, everything is so much easier. And I'm reading books that I want to read, not just that I happened to find for 50 cents.

Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull

This won't be a review of Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull as much as just a discussion. As a huge fan of the character, I have a lot of thoughts on the subject (as evidenced by my previous post).

First, my nutshell review: I didn't like it. It's a pretty good action movie, but not a great Indiana Jones movie. I went in with very low expectations. It surpassed those. There were many things in the movie I liked, but just as many that I didn't. As I was watching it, I was enjoying it. Then as the movie wore on, I started to like it less. When it was over, my feeling was it was pretty good. As the days wore on and I thought about it more, again I liked it even less.

Regarding my predictions, I was pretty spot on for most of them.
My expectation for Crystal Skull is more "unrealism."
Yep, got that. I mean, surviving a nuclear explosion? Can't get much more unreal than that. And aliens? Please. Actually, though, I didn't really mind the aliens, per se. I guessed correctly about them from the trailer. My problem was that a) Indiana Jones didn't seem to have a problem with them and b) they were still around. I would have much preferred for Indy to have debunked them as a myth, or to have discovered the long dead remains of aliens (as opposed to the long dead but somehow still alive remains).

Prediction for Crystal Skull: more comedy, more one liners from Jones.
I think I was only half-right on this one. Although there were definitely more one-liners from Jones, the comedy in the movie on the whole seemed more restrained and in line with the tone of the others. I was quite worried at the beginning, however, as it seemed as though all Indy could say in the first 15 minutes were one-liners.

Prediction for Crystal Skull: lots of CGI.
Right on the money. It started less than 30 seconds into the movie with the prairie dogs. Ugh. It was fairly restrained for most of the movie (with obvious but acceptable exceptions), until we got to the Brazilian jungle. From then on, it was like watching a bunch of CGIs CGIing other CGIs. Extremely disappointing.

Things I hated:
-CGI prairie dogs
-Super magnetism
-Tumbling refrigerator
-Tarzan Mutt
-Three waterfalls
-CGI
-Aliens

Things I loved:
-Indiana Jones
-Wilhelm scream in library
-Reference to Pancho Villa & Young Indy
-Marion

Overall, it was entertaining. Nothing will ever live up to the first one, and that's okay. If I were to sum up my feeling for the the movie, it would probably be "wasted opportunity." There were several, which I'll probably address in a later post.

IJ Day!

Well, this is it. The big day. The new Indiana Jones movie opens today! Sadly, I'm not going to see it until tomorrow. I actually have very low expectations for it, which I think is the way to go. I might even go as far as to say I think it might suck. But, we'll see.

In preparation for the new movie, I watched the original one last night. I love this movie. I can't count how many times I've watched it. That being said, there are a few things about it that have always bothered me. These are definitely nit-picks, and several of them are probably going to sound ridiculous. In a movie where natives create light-sensitive booby traps out of stone and people get their faces melted off, you would expect a certain suspension of disbelief. I have no problem with any of that stuff. No, my complaints are about niggling little details that have bothered me from day one.

Dr. Marcus Brody - This is actually a complaint about The Last Crusade, but I mention it here because it was the first thing that riled me when watching last night. In Raiders, Dr. Brody is a competent, knowledgeable colleague of Dr. Jones. For some reason, in Crusade they turned him into a bumbling idiot. I have no idea why they did this. Comic relief? For a few gags? It really bothers me. Is Dr. Jones' ego so fragile that he has to be the only competent person on the screen at all times? In Raiders, this was certainly not the case. Belloq, Marion, Sallah, Toht. Everyone of them appeared to be reasoning human beings with skills and personalities of their own. By Crusade, the returning characters are almost laughable. To me, this pattern does not bode well for Crystal Skull.

Shot glass tinkle - Okay, now you know I'm really talking trivial stuff. I have great admiration for foley artists. They're the guys who add sound effects to movies. You would be surprised by the sheer volume of work they do on any typical movie. If they do their job right, the sound effects sound natural and are unnoticeable. Sure, Indy's gun sounds like a small cannon, but that's for effect. Here's my problem. Indy comes to Nepal to pick up the headpiece for the staff of Ra from the Ravenwoods. Marion is holding a couple of shot glasses to her temples to cool her head. Indy walks in, and she dashes them against the floor. The sound they make is so incredibly wrong. Have you ever dropped a shot glass, especially one of the heavy glass kind as shown in the movie? They do not "tinkle" like a fragile wine glass. They "cackle" more like the sound of billiard balls hitting one another. This has always bothered me. Not only because the sound is so wrong, but because it so obviously sounds like a very standard, stock sound effect. Come on, guys! You're the people who hit guy wires with wrenches to make laser blasts for Star Wars. Are you telling me you can't break a few shot glasses? I cringe every time I hear it.

"Belloq, Belloq" - This one is stupid, I know, but it just bothers me because it doesn't make any sense. Indy is visiting with his old friend Sallah, who is describing the German operation. He says, "They have not one brain among them, save one-- a Frenchman. They call him 'Belosh.'" At which point, Indy laughs and corrects Sallah's mispronunciation. The problem is, Sallah said that's what they call him, meaning he had heard it. That means that it's the Germans who are mispronouncing it. But how could they do that if Belloq is right there to correct them?

Well, that's enough nit-picking for now. Clearly, they are trivial. Were I not such a fan of the movie, they probably wouldn't bother me at all.

Regarding the new movie, I have a few more things to say (before having seen it). Upon watching Raiders again last night, I was able to reflect on the changes the other movies made to the franchise.

• Realism - In Raiders, they made a serious effort to somewhat ground it in reality. The Ark of the Covenant is real; Tannis is real; the legend of the mystical powers is real. However, the next two movies became more mystical and much less grounded in reality. Shankara Stones? The Holy Grail? Not real. My expectation for Crystal Skull is more "unrealism." This is a great shame, actually, for a couple of reasons. First, there are many fascinating, yet real, historical mysteries that could be explored. Second, the Young Indiana Jones Chronicles went to such effort to be historically accurate and introduce Indy to real historical figures. What a waste that the movies have gone in the opposite direction.

• Comedy - As mentioned above, there seems to have been a shift towards making Indy's friends and allies more comedic relief. This is regrettable, but fairly easily overlooked with the minor characters. However, it is also true of Indy himself. In Raiders, he had some comedic moments, but they were mostly situational; Dr. Jones himself rarely said anything funny. This changed in the later movies (particularly Last Crusade). While it is nice to laugh with the hero, it is also hard to take the story seriously if the main characters in it do not. Prediction for Crystal Skull: more comedy, more one liners from Jones.

• CGI - I lamented this months ago when I first viewed and reviewed the trailer. It's just a simple fact when dealing with Lucas-- he likes CGI. It doesn't matter whether it looks good or not. Again, this is almost a complete reversal from the Young Indy series, where they took pains to shoot on real, exotic locations. Ironically, it was also in that series that Lucas started toying with digital compositing. I accept the fact that CGI is a permanent effect process of filmmaking today. I expect it to improve over time. However, it isn't there yet. As good as many effects look, they are all still almost immediately recognizable as effects. I will always prefer real effects. Prediction for Crystal Skull: lots of CGI.

I'll write more once I've seen it.

Water Cooler Ethics

I drink a lot of water at work. I have a nice big Saint Arnold pint glass that I fill several times a day. Now, because I am visiting the water cooler frequently, it stands to reason that my chance of having to be the one to replace the bottle is increased. I accept that. I don't really mind replacing the bottle at all. But what really bugs me, and what prompted this rant post, is how often I have to replace the bottle before I can get my water.

That may seem insignificant, but in reality it is fairly meaningful. You see, when I have to replace it before, that means that the last person to get water finished off the bottle. This also means that they chose not to replace it, and preferred to force whoever came after them (me) to do it. And since they are far from the scene when the crime is discovered, they get away with it in anonymous impunity.

Now, you may think, "Perhaps they didn't notice the bottle was empty." This sounds like an honest defense, but actually it is nearly impossible. When I find the empty bottle, it is bone dry. The previous drinker drew every last drop out of that bottle. There is simply no way they didn't know they had emptied it.

Why is this a big deal? In the larger scheme of things, it really isn't. I don't mind changing the water bottle, and I do it without complaint (well, except for this blog). The big deal comes from how this reflects on the character of the person or persons I work with. This is the essence of ethics, really. How one deals with seemingly trivial choices reflects how they would deal with more significant ones.

In this case, it shows to me someone who is more selfish than selfless. This person is willing to take (water) but not willing to give (replace the bottle). The fact that this is a closed community (everyone using the water cooler works in the same building for the same company) makes it worse. I can somewhat understand not wanting to "give" to a complete stranger, but this person is screwing over his/her co-workers. Is this a product of our age? Is it a characteristic of software companies? Is it just one person? Who knows.

The real test will come if I'm ever in line for water and the person in front of me leaves it empty. Then I will have met the culprit! I suspect that this would never happen, however. I believe societal pressure (i.e. a witness) would override the usual selfishness and force the person to change the bottle. We shall see.

Crusader for Postal Justice

Man, I really don't like people. I really like postal workers. Especially the ones at my local station. I'm always polite to them, and we've actually shared jokes about other irritated customers in line. So this morning, when I found myself in the presence of two self-centered asses, I was compelled to speak up.

I supposedly had a package fail to deliver on Monday. I say supposedly because I didn't get the package or a failed delivery notice, but the tracking number online says it happened. So I went to the post office to see if I could get the package without the notice. After thoroughly searching, no package. Sucks for me, but this is all ancillary to the real story.

There was only one lady at the counter when I walked in. She greeted me and helped me right away, which entailed going to the back. Right behind me was some young business guy on a cell phone (of course). He continued to talk loudly, as all cell phone users do, but surprisingly he finished his call and didn't make another. Perhaps he actually read the sign forbidding cell phones while in line.

Next came a young lady who probably doesn't have to work. She was dressed sort of grunge-soccer-mom-chic. As soon as she walked in she saw me at the counter, the young man waiting, and no postal workers. "Oh, I see they're working at their usual pace." snide snicker.
Dude: "Yeah, that's for sure," snort, snicker.
Me: I just shook my head and looked away.

Some time passes as the worker helping me continues to look for my package. Clearly not able to just wait patiently in silence, the young lady feels it's time to express her irritation again. After all, she can hear people talking somewhere in the office, and she's already got the business dude on her side.
Bitch: "Something selfish and bitchy." I don't really remember what she said, but I'm sure you can imagine something approximate.
Jerk: "Yeah, that's the way it always goes. Must be nice to not have to work." Or something like that.
Me: "You know, just because they're not out here doesn't mean they're not working."

What?

There was a minuscule pause as they took in what just happened. Did that guy, did he just contradict us? Did he actually defend the postal workers?

Bitch: "Well, there are stereotypes and generalities, but that's because generally they're true." That wasn't it exactly, but seriously it was something that inane and nonsensical. I guess she wasn't mentally prepared to defend her bitchiness. I caught her off guard.
Me: "They're job is to deliver the mail, not so serve you." That's exactly what I said. I wanted to add more to it, but I couldn't think how to phrase it just right. In my mind, I kept thinking things like "Do you expect there to be 3 or 4 workers at the counter, twiddling their thumbs most of the morning, just on the off chance that three people come in at once?" or "Are you really so important that they should stop everything they're doing to help you?" I even wanted to make some comment about whether she was always on call at her job, but then I figured she was just a housewife. Oops, I mean "Stay at home Mom."

That's really pretty much the end of the story. It didn't come to blows, and I just decided to ignore her. I was tempted to say something snide about them to the postal worker, but thought better of it. I know people are in a hurry, and I know people expect employees in a service industry to be at their beck and call, but I'm just tired of this crap. Show a little patience. Show a little kindness. I'm quite intolerant of intolerant people.