Friday Family Blogging 2

In keeping with my near constant yearning for summer during these cold winter months, here's a photo of a bevy of bathing beauties:

Doesn't that water look inviting (well, I mean if it were actually sunny and warm outside)?

Friday Family Blogging

Let's go way back for this one. I believe this is from Thanksgiving of 1957, although I could be wrong. I think I know everyone here with one, maybe two exceptions. This isn't the weekly quiz (that's coming up a little later), but I'd like to know who the toddler is in the high chair at lower left (cousin Brian?) . If you know, put the answer into the comments.

Also, if anyone has any memories to share about this or any other family gathering, by all means toss that in too.

A Daily Dose of Philosophy

The heading of this blog promises some philosophy, but so far that has not been a staple feature. To rectify that, let me share a a few words of wisdom from the great Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu.

"Be Content with what you have;
rejoice in the way things are.
When you realize there is nothing lacking,
the whole world belongs to you."

I think that's pretty good advice. Let's see if I can find something equally profound tomorrow.

Beware the Mummy!

This is mostly for Ben (I hope he's reading), who is something of an amateur Egyptologist, but perhaps others will enjoy this too. At this site you can actually wrap a mummy the way they did on the good old Giza Plateau. Enjoy!

Favorite Films of 2008

Last year was kind of an off-year for me and movie-going. I suspect that I saw probably 30% fewer films in 2008 compared to other recent years. Partly this was due to the high gas prices, as I must drive more than two hours to have a selection of films that goes beyond the current blockbusters or family fare that are the bread and butter of the one theater (two screens) in Dillon. Since my tastes generally run a bit more eclectic than that, I either have to make special trips to Bozeman, Missoula, or Idaho Falls, or catch up on things when I travel back east (as happened over the recent Christmas break). Not only did I see fewer movies last year, but I also think the general quality of what I saw was somewhat lower, which further dampened my enthusiasm to make those long drives, especially in the first half of the year. Anyway, here's a breakdown of what I liked (and didn't like). Some may have actually been released in 2007, but I saw them in 2008. Your tastes may vary (and feel free to offer comments on any agreement or disagreements my list might prompt).

Favorite Film of the Year:
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button

The Rest of the Top Ten (no particular order):
In Bruges, City of Men, Slumdog Millionaire, The Visitor, There Will Be Blood, No Country for Old Men, My Blueberry Nights, Appaloosa, Anita O'Day: The Life of a Jazz Singer

Other Movies I Liked:
Atonement, Charlie Wilson's War, Doubt, Iron Man, Tropic Thunder, How to Lose Friends and Alienate People, Valkyrie, Cadillac Records, The Counterfeiters, Miss Pettigrew Lives for a Day, Milk, The Changeling

Guilty Pleasures (Not really very good, but I enjoyed them):
Forgetting Sarah Marshall, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull, War, Inc.

Forgettable:
Wall-E, Journey to the Center of the Earth

Disappointments:
Burn After Reading, Savage Grace, Hancock, Dark Knight*, Leatherheads, Son of Rambow

*I feel obliged to say that this is despite the truly great performance by Heath Ledger which deserves all the accolades he has (and likely will) receive for his portrayal of the Joker.

Again, feel free to take issue with any of these-- though remember, I'm only telling you what I like, not necessarily saying your tastes should align with mine.

Remember This?

Curtis sent me a bunch of pictures from the Blizzard of '77, and I thought this one was especially interesting, looking over a snow-covered downtown Buffalo. What I remember best about the blizzard was that it meant all my midterm exams at Cardinal O'Hara High School were canceled. I'm not sure I'd be quite so sanquine about such a thing today, being on the other side of the teacher's desk (then again, maybe I would ;-)

Cheap Entertainment

Here's a computer game to test your... well, I don't know what it tests, but its a nice little diversion if you're trying to avoid doing something else (as I well know).

Preparing for the Celebrity Life

Emma seems to have already developed the skills to thwart unwanted invasions of privacy:



Think I could sell this to TMZ? It seems to be the kind of thing they like...

The Most Underrated Rock Star

As some of the readers of this blog know, I'm a huge music fan with pretty eclectic taste ranging across virtually all genres and eras. I've been thinking lately about who I would consider the most underrated rock star of all-time, and after careful consideration I've arrived at what I think is an obvious answer-- Dion DiMucci. I just listened to his newest album, which came out a couple of months ago, called Heroes, in which he pays tribute to a number of artists who started their careers around the same time he did in the 1950s, paying particular attention to the guitar work on their classic songs. This is not your typical "oldies" set, performed by an artist locked in an earlier age. Instead, Dion makes this material fresh and delivers stellar performances, both vocally and on guitar.

Of course, one album does not explain why I consider him the most underrated rock star of all time. I'm sure most of you reading this remember his classic singles from the late fifties (with the Belmonts) and early sixties, like "Teenager in Love," "Little Star," "Runaround Sue," and "The Wanderer." What you may not know is that he has remained consistently active as a performer and recording artist in all the years since, moving easily from doo wop to folk-rock (another big hit-- "Abraham, Martin & John") to Christian music to blues. He's done incredible versions of songs written by everyone from Bob Dylan to Bruce Springsteen, and also written some classics himself, and though they never achieved the chart success of those early hits, they are every bit as good. Prior to the Heroes album, he released two incredible blues albums which critics raved about, and represented a return to his own self-proclaimed roots. He also put out a great live album a few years back on which the music is supplemented by some great stories, both funny and touching.

I can't think of anyone who has sustained as long a career over the same period with absolutely no drop-off in quality (with the exception of Sonny Rollins, who works in a different genre). The reason why I call him underrated is that he does not seem to be mentioned as one of the pantheon figures of rock and roll, even though I think his artistic accomplishmentse warrant consideration for any such list. Since his work has given me such pleasure over the years, I just want to tip my hat to Dion and say that I hope he's got a lot more music to give us in the years to come, and that more people pay attention to it.

Ah, Summertime!

Everything is so cold and gray around here that I just thought I'd post something green and sunny. Spring can't come too soon for me!

Friday Family Quiz

Well, first of all, no one got the right answer in last week's quiz, so I'm going to leave it open for a few more days (c'mon Lil Sis, you're usually the first one on these and last week, no guess?).

Here's this week's quiz, and it's more of a "creative" than "objective" question: who (or what) does Helen look like in this picture?

Post your answers in the comments, and the winner will be announced next week (remember-- it's the most creative/funny/weird that we're looking for).

Friday Family Blogging

Here are three photos I took at the Burchfield-Penney art Center in Buffalo. They give you a little idea of what a cool space it is, and the kids could enjoy it even if they weren't necessarily paying attention to what was hanging on the walls. Here's Helen getting tactile with a glass block window:

Here are Ben, Helen, Nicky, and Sally in the "Flower Room:"

And one more, of Ben acting bored on some of the coolest stairs you'll ever see:

I'm really looking forward to re-visiting the Burchfield-Penney Center on my next trip to Buffalo-- it's sure to be a treat, no matter what they decide to put on display.

More Seasonal Comparisons

I took this picture the day before I left NY to head back to Montana. It is the winter equivalent of this image (minus the people, for good reason), which I posted several months ago. I like the way the fog causes the fade-out effect in the background here, but I definitely prefer this spot (Nia-Wanda Park) when its bustling with joggers, bikers, strollers, etc.

The Last Movies I Saw

The last two films I saw over my holiday break in WNY were Clint Eastwood's Changeling and John Patrick Shanley's Doubt. Both continued my run of good movies seen, which lasted the length of my vacation, though that probably has more to do with it being "awards" season when the studios trot out their best for consideration at the Oscars, Golden Globes, etc. In other words, I had a lot of good films to choose from, and never felt tempted to see something just to be seeing something (which does happen to me on occasion when I just want to watch a movie).

Anyway, I enjoyed both of these films, which once again turned to some degree on a common element-- the faith placed in traditional figures of authority. In Changeling, it's the police, who assert a rather brazen contempt for anyone who questions their version of the facts. When its violent criminals who challenge them, well, maybe the cops do deserve the benefit of the doubt; but when it's a mother who claims the child returned to her is not the son who was abducted, that's another story. There's some really fine period detail in the film, and although Angelina Jolie overacts (I think) a bit in the early scenes immediately following the abduction, for the most part she gives a solid, sympathetic portrayal. The rest of the cast, virtually all of whom are unfamiliar names (though not necessarily faces), is stellar, which I suspect ultimately helped keep Jolie from completely going over the top (though Eastwood generally keeps all his actors on an even keel, so maybe that was the key factor). The story unfolds at a deliberate pace, allowing considerable identification with several of the characters, so that each becomes fleshed out enough for us to fully grasp the defining qualities of their nature, which makes their subsequent actions appear natural and somewhat inevitable even as we know they are fruitless or an outright mistake. Needless to say, that adds to the tragedy of the story.

In Doubt, it's the authority of religious faith and the paternalistic hierarchy of the Catholic church (far from the same thing, as posited in this story) that comes into question. The pretext for the story is taken from all too frequent recent headlines, but that is only a pretext. The conflict arises from one nun's unshakable belief that a parish priest has done something wrong, and the priest's efforts to maintain some degree of privacy (for himself and a schoolboy) that may or may not involve inappropriate behavior. The movie (which originated as a play, and it kind of shows) plays with the audience's sympathies which are only somewhat motivated by the strict facts of the narrative. Certainly a contemporary audience would know something of the events widely reported over the past few years, and perhaps be inclined to believe the worst about the priest. But the performances by Philip Seymour Hoffman and Meryl Streep as the accused and accuser generally serve to draw one's sympathy to the former (he's a good guy and she's a bit of a shrew)-- which makes the viewer wonder to what degree they're being played, which I suppose we are. But if you accept that the subject here is not molestation, but the means by which we arrive at and perpetuate our beliefs, spiritual or otherwise, then it makes for a keenly engineered exercise demonstrating the validity of skepticism. It would have packed more of a wallop if it could have engaged the soul as much as the mind (and maybe that was more my personal shortcoming than the film-maker's), but even so it's something of a rarity in American movies, prompting thought instead of just visceral gratification.

All the World's a Stage...

... and it looks like Helen is the director:

Also, sometimes you have to get down real low to really see what's going on:

It may be a couple days before I post again, as I'm traveling back to Montana tomorrow. In the meantime, I hope everyone stays warm and happy.

Followup

I got around to reading the F. Scott Fitzgerald short story "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button," on which the recent movie is based. As I guessed, it involves few of the specific events used so effectively in the Fincher film, though it does mirror them at least in passing (the Spanish Americaan War, for example, instead of World War II). The short story is much more satirical in nature, and Fitzgerald actually referred to it as an intentionally comic piece. While the film's more powerful drama is leavened with a fair amount of humor, it obviously has more important ideas to convey (though again, those ideas are not exactly alien to the original story-- there just not so overt). Fitzgerald said that he was prompted to write "Benjamin Button" by Mark Twain's famous comment that human aging ought to be reversed, and there is much that is "Twainian" about the short story, not the least its slightly biting sense of humor. Anyway, I'd recommend that you see the film and read the story for two different, though clearly related, approaches to the tale.

Political Comment

I thought I might weigh in on the controversy surrounding the seating of the newly appointed junior Senator from Illinois, Roland Burris. You may be aware that the Democratic leadership has decided to deny him his seat as the replacement for Barack Obama named by the scandalized governor Rod Blagojevich. Harry Reid, Senate majority leader called Burris "tainted." I think Reid has botched this whole process, and I think it's unfortunate that Burris is the one who is being implicated by such charges. I understand why there is concern about Blogojevich, but this pick seems to have been made in an effort to restore something of his reputation-- in other words, there are no evident, valid concerns about Burris' suitability for the position, merely another example of strained guilt-by-association that has become all too familiar currency in our political process. I don't blame Burris for being upset as his reputation is being unnecessarily sullied by what can only be described as the inept political gamesmanship of Reid.

By the way, in a related matter, Al Franken has been certified the winner in Minnesota's Senate race recount, and has also been denied his seat just yet (there are legal challenges afoot). I heard that Mitch McConnell (R, KY) has threatened to filibuster Franken's seating, saying (paraphrase) that the "people in Minnesota need to resolve this dispute." Seems to me they already did that by recounting the ballots in an incredibly open fashion over the past few weeks. I wonder if McConnell remembers something that Franken wrote some years back, when he first floated the idea of running for the Senate. Franken said that should he win, since the new Senate takes office a few weeks ahead of the new president, it was his intention to bring articles of impeachment against G. W. Bush before he leaves office. Maybe the Republicans are afraid he'd carry through on that threat?

Is It Art? (or, A Blatant Stab at Validation)

A couple of days ago I visited the brand new Burchfield-Penney Art Museum here in Buffalo. Actually, the museum has been around for quite a long time, but it recently moved into new digs adjacent to the Buffalo State College campus, and the new building is a peach of a public place, with multiple galleries offering multiple contexts to display the works. The cornerstone of the collection is of course, the work of Charles Burchfield, who called Buffalo home for a number of years at the peak of his career. One of the exhibits currently on display is a collection of some of his works celebrating the Seasons. Another focuses on the work of a group of Buffalo photographers from early in the twentieth century, whose purported mission was to replicate classical subjects from painting (like still lifes, landscapes, etc.) on film.

Anyway, inspired by these two exhibits, I set out with camera in hand tot he Tifft Nature Preserve (along with Natalie, Ben & Tom) this afternoon, and while there, shot the above picture. I think it qualifies as a landscape picture, but what I want to know is, is it art? I'd be interested in any comments you'd like to share on the topic, keeping in mind that I, at least, would like to believe it is [ingratiating smile].

The Best Movies I've Seen

I was waiting for something to knock my socks off, and voila! it happened. In fact I've recently seen two movies that were both much better than anything else I've caught over my Christmas break (when I usually do a lot of catching up on new releases). So, here are a few comments about them:

First, it's worth pointing out that just as in the past when I've written about two movies in tandem, there is a very strong common element to these two that speaks to one of the cornerstones of the film arts-- the willing suspension of disbelief on the part of the audience. In a straightforward docudrama like Milk, this is less critical, since the film is propelled by the truth (whether literal or figurative) of its story. But when the story is wholly a work of the imagination-- especially if the intention is to use the artistic license granted by a movie camera (and its ability to, for example, play havoc with notions of time)-- then the audience must be willing to give the movie the benefit of the doubt when it challenges our normal limits of credulity. In large measure, those limits are a personal thing, and I'm sure many moviegoers just turn off their thinking caps when the lights in the theater are dimmed. But the real masters give you a reason to keep thinking, even in the face of information that on the surface is truly unbelievable. They do this by giving your brain something else to engage, something that provokes an emotional response that overpowers the normal filters, even as it forces you to work out the apparent contradiction.

The two movies I'm referring to here as successfully causing that willing suspension of disbelief are Danny Boyle's Slumdog Millionaire and David Fincher's The Curious Case of Benjamin Button. Both of these films turn on what are frankly ludicrous premises: the first, that an uneducated street kid from the slums of Mumbai could correctly answer a long series of questions on Who Wants to Be a Millionaire because each links to some specific event in his life of almost endless ordeals, both big and small; the second, that a baby is born with the infirmities of an elderly man, and as he "grows" he ages in reverse, becoming younger with each passing year. It's pretty clear from those brief summaries that they have little basis in what we generally consider reality.

The compensating factors (those that aid in the suspension of disbelief) in Slumdog Millionaire are its speed (especially in editing-- shades of Boyle's popular breakthrough, Trainspotting) and the exotic setting (at least for an American viewer) which contribute to a slight sense of disorientation that delivers a visceral kick, even as you are trying to keep up with the narrative (largely told in flashback, the story moves briskly and haphazardly, jumping from one event to another with minimal connective exposition). It also ultimately revolves around the kind of unrequited love story that provides the handle for audiences seeking some degree of familiarity-- and which allows for an emotional payoff that does not seem inevitable given the nature of the story as it unfolds. It's a dynamite picture, and one that is sure to reward repeat viewing.

The Curious Case of Benjamin Button is even better. Unlike Slumdog Millionaire, this film moves very slowly, very deliberately. It allows you the time to consider the implications of its premise in the service of a thesis-- in other words, the backwards aging bit is not itself the point of the story (as it might be if this were an Adam Sandler comedy, for example), but rather the picaresque means by which Fincher gets at the points he wants to make about age, growth, change, and development. The film is actually based on an F. Scott Fitzgerald short story which I have not read (though I intend to look it up as soon as I next visit the library), but it's evident that Fincher makes much more of the story, as he brings it into the present age, referencing real events like World War II, the flight to suburbia, and the youth movements of the 1960s (which Fitzgerald could only have imagined). It seems to me that Benjamin's experiences in World War II are particularly key, as he enters the conflict in middle age and comes out, well, not exactly youthful, but clearly more robust and healthy even despite the terrible things he saw-- suggesting personal possibilities restored rather than ruined, even as the experience itself has matured him, and left the world he knew much older. This gets at the heart of what Fincher wants to examine, raising the question of what truly constitutes growth and I suppose progress. I'll mention one other really nice touch that also prompts thoughtfulness on this point: it's a brief shot of Benjamin and his love watching the Beatles on Ed Sullivan right around the time that their ages finally intersect (in their forties)-- Benjamin is becoming younger, just as the culture is embracing the youthful exuberance of the Beatles, but in the process "growing" away from the woman he loves, just as the generation gap was coming to define society more generally.

I don't want to say anymore about the story, as I hope you will get the chance to see and think about it for yourselves (and if these notes seem somewhat rambling-- though I hope not incoherent-- it's because I'm still turning the thing over in my own mind). I will mention that the performances are uniformly grand (Brad Pitt in the lead, Cate Blanchett as Daisy, his love, are the stars, andl the supporting cast is first-rate), and that it is almost impossible for me to imagine that you will see a better photographed and shot movie anytime soon (some of the images are truly breathtaking, and often lingered upon). I'll also say that if you liked Tim Burton's Big Fish of a few years ago, then I'm sure you'll like this as well (the similarities are in tone and general approach, not so much in plot). I think I'll also mention that after this and Zodiac, I'm inclined to rate David Fincher as the best American director currently working in movies. No one else comes immediately to mind who so neatly combines the visual power, narrative drive, and thematic unity so evident in those two films.

Friday Family Blogging Quiz

I'm sure you all recognize the cherubic Emma in the above picture-- but who is that planting the smacker on her cheek? As always, put your guesses into the comment section.

Last week, Theresa correctly identified the swirly image of... Nikolaus! A mother can always tell. I'm a little behind on doling out prizes, so if you think you've been shorted (that is, you won a contest and I didn't actually send you something), let me know in comments and I'll make it right. I may though have to resort to the old Marvel Comics ploy of "no-prizes," which were nonetheless highly valued by the readers who received one (alas, not me).