It's Oscar time again. How do you make a fluffy extravagance relevant in the face of hardening times? Make it about triumphs over adversity. I have no doubt that will be the theme of these awards, and I also have no doubt that for some reason I really don't care about who is honored this year and who goes home empty-handed. For the first time I've actually seen all five best-picture nominees, as well as most of the other nominated films/performances, and I have to say that 2008 was a mediocre year for movies indeed. Any of the nominees for best documentary are better films than the best picture nominees, which is saying something about the state of fictional storytelling in this culture. Having said that, here are my guesses:
Best Picture and Best Director: Slumdog Millionaire and Danny Boyle. This is only fine with me in that it prevents both The Reader and Benjamin Button from winning. I thought BB was Forest Gump with makeup (and that it will win for makeup), and a gross mismanagement of a terrific short story, and that The Reader just wasn't very good. If the decision were up to me the award would go to Frost/Nixon. It's hard to adapt a play for the screen, and this was a terrific adaptation. Slumdog, though, has the momentum, is a little film that had to fight to get distributed, and is in fact about the triumph of love and intelligence over horrifying odds. Feel good, folks, feel good.
Best Actor: No one has overcome more than Mickey Rourke, so he gets the Oscar. His performance was the one interesting thing about a mediocre film, so there is that. Frank Langella should win this, but he won't.
Best Actress: Kate Winslett for her body (of work). Not for The Reader, although her performance was predictably good, but because she's overdue. Melissa Leo should take this, but she won't. Feel good, Kate's finally getting her due.
Best Supporting Actor: Heath Ledger overcomes death. The Dark Night should get cinematography, editing, and a host of other technical awards. It should have been nominated for best picture. Oh well.
Best Supporting Actress: Nate Silver thinks this will go to that woman from Benjamin Button, and he's usually right about things. However, since overcoming adversity is the theme, I'm going to predict Penelope Cruz overcoming the fact that she was nominated for a Woody Allen film. Plus, she was better.
Screenplays: I'm too lazy to double-check who's nominated. In an ideal world, Frost/Nixon for adapted, Frozen River for original. And maybe this will be the case. Frozen River is, after all, a little film that could, and screenplay is the category where little films that could get recognized. It would also be a feel good award.
Best Documentary: Man on Wire has momentum and was one of the best pictures of the year. This is a competetive category, though, and Herzog will probably get the Kate Winslet treatment. He's overdue, and it would be an award we can all feel good about.
A bunch of other awards will also be handed out, but I can't bring myself to care. My final prediction, and the one that will absolutely be true: someone will be wearing a dress so awful, so cringe-worthy, that the hours of my life spent watching the telecast will have been hours well-spent.
Showing posts with label guesses. Show all posts
Showing posts with label guesses. Show all posts
Friday, February 20, 2009
Thursday, February 19, 2009
How to Solve Everything
Accusing someone of keeping "banker's hours" is to insult his or her work ethic, since the phrase intimates a short work day. Bankers never actually worked less than other people, though; before banking became computerized, a certain number of hours needed to be spent counting money out to get ready for the public, and then reconciling accounts manually at the end of the day. Banks were only open to the public from 10 to 2 or 3 because it took the rest of the day to keep track of things.
I just drove 11 hours in two days, and during long drives random thoughts tend to crop up. For some reason I began contemplating banker's hours, not why banks were once open only at the most inconvenient times, but what the net result of those hours might have been. For example, when banks were only open to the public five hours a day, a run on a bank could only last five hours. Today, a panic can go on 24/7, as people electronically attempt to withdraw their funds whether or not the branches are open. In a way, the short hours probably helped keep the system stable.
[And here, I present as an aside my main pet peeve about It's A Wonderful Life: As George and Mary are leaving for their honeymoon, they drive past a run on Bailey Brothers Building and Loan. A realistic scenario during the Depression, yes. However, the scene takes place in the late afternoon, and much is made about staying open until 6 PM. A bank open until 6 PM during the 30s? I don't think so.]
If not for banker's hours, we probably would never have witnessed the cliched free toaster for opening an account. Toasters and other small kitchen appliances must have been chosen as premiums because women did the banking, and women must have done the banking of necessity in the post-WWII period because the men were off at work during the hours when the bank was open. Men may have taken the mortgages and paid the bills, but it was women who deposited their checks in the bank. Banker's hours in effect helped keep American toaster makers in business.
Banker's hours perhaps also contributed to a higher rate of savings. The lack of easy credit and the absence of credit cards undoubtedly had more to do with this, but the fact remains that, in the past, if you spent all your cash Friday night, you had no more cash until Monday morning. If you had five bucks to spend for dinner, that's all you could spend. Restricted access to your funds would keep more of your funds in the bank.
Perhaps one way of stemming our current economic crisis would be a return to banker's hours, not only for banks but for monetary transactions of any kind. The market would only have five hours in which to fall. People would only have five hours in which to rack up debt. Bankers would only have part of the day in which to package worthless debt into worthless securities. Toasters would be free again, and Americans would be put to work manufacturing them. Hey, this is as good an idea as any I've heard coming from Washington.
I just drove 11 hours in two days, and during long drives random thoughts tend to crop up. For some reason I began contemplating banker's hours, not why banks were once open only at the most inconvenient times, but what the net result of those hours might have been. For example, when banks were only open to the public five hours a day, a run on a bank could only last five hours. Today, a panic can go on 24/7, as people electronically attempt to withdraw their funds whether or not the branches are open. In a way, the short hours probably helped keep the system stable.
[And here, I present as an aside my main pet peeve about It's A Wonderful Life: As George and Mary are leaving for their honeymoon, they drive past a run on Bailey Brothers Building and Loan. A realistic scenario during the Depression, yes. However, the scene takes place in the late afternoon, and much is made about staying open until 6 PM. A bank open until 6 PM during the 30s? I don't think so.]
If not for banker's hours, we probably would never have witnessed the cliched free toaster for opening an account. Toasters and other small kitchen appliances must have been chosen as premiums because women did the banking, and women must have done the banking of necessity in the post-WWII period because the men were off at work during the hours when the bank was open. Men may have taken the mortgages and paid the bills, but it was women who deposited their checks in the bank. Banker's hours in effect helped keep American toaster makers in business.
Banker's hours perhaps also contributed to a higher rate of savings. The lack of easy credit and the absence of credit cards undoubtedly had more to do with this, but the fact remains that, in the past, if you spent all your cash Friday night, you had no more cash until Monday morning. If you had five bucks to spend for dinner, that's all you could spend. Restricted access to your funds would keep more of your funds in the bank.
Perhaps one way of stemming our current economic crisis would be a return to banker's hours, not only for banks but for monetary transactions of any kind. The market would only have five hours in which to fall. People would only have five hours in which to rack up debt. Bankers would only have part of the day in which to package worthless debt into worthless securities. Toasters would be free again, and Americans would be put to work manufacturing them. Hey, this is as good an idea as any I've heard coming from Washington.
Tuesday, November 18, 2008
High Atop the Grassy Knoll
It's the week before Thanksgiving, which means it's time for our annual reconsideration of the Kennedy assassination. PBS got things started last night by rerunning Oswald's Ghost, a documentary that's useful in that it outlines the day's events and all explanations of said events, both logical and illogical, in a mere hour and a half. Lone gunman, magic bullet, grassy knoll, CIA/Bay of Pigs/Castro, FBI/mob, David Ferry and a band of not-so-merry gay men, Oswald as government agent, Oswald as KGB agent, Oswald and his mother as nut cases: it's all there.
I'm just young enough that November, 1963 means nothing to me personally. I can tell you exactly where I was when Kennedy was shot: in a bassinet in Brooklyn, sleeping or crying. I was about a month old. What's interesting to me is our culture's absolute and resolute refusal to put the "mystery" of who was behind the tragedy to rest. If anything, the intervening years have only added more and more layers to the onion, rather than providing answers.
Could Oswald have acted alone, out of a desire to enter history? I guess. Sure, he was apparently dyslexic and failed his sharpshooter exam, but everyone gets lucky once in a while, and maybe that was his day, where he could get three shots off in six seconds and hit his moving target. Could a shadow government have used him as a patsy? I guess. Sure, all sorts of things happen beyond the knowledge of the public. What's interesting is that the public believes lone gunmen were responsible for every other assassination, or at least most of the public believes this. John Wilkes Booth, acting along. Sirhan Sirhan, acting alone. James Earl Ray, acting along. John David Hinckley, alone and obsessed with Taxi Driver. Each of these men could just as easily have been patsies and part of a larger conspiracy, but most of us don't go there. For some reason, though, we've decided the Warren Commission was part of a larger cover-up and that there's more to this particular story than meets the eye.
Undoubtedly the times had much to do with this. The same administration that rushed out the Warren Report was also lying to the public about Vietnam. The intervening years didn't exactly engender a larger trust in government, what with Watergate, Iran/Contra, Whitewater, Lewinsky, WMD and the rush to Iraq. On the other hand, it's not as if 190 years of scandal-free government preceeded the assassination; Teapot Dome, anyone?
What probably makes the events of that long-ago November stay with us as a mystery and a controversy is the fact that, in many ways, the hegemony of the post-war era ended with the flight of those bullets. I don't mean the cliched end of Camelot, end of idealism here, I mean the beginning of distrust, unrest, and disaffection that lasted for the next 20 years, until everyone decided they'd had enough and it was morning in America again. Whether or not he acted alone, Oswald accomplished his purpose. He entered history.
I'm just young enough that November, 1963 means nothing to me personally. I can tell you exactly where I was when Kennedy was shot: in a bassinet in Brooklyn, sleeping or crying. I was about a month old. What's interesting to me is our culture's absolute and resolute refusal to put the "mystery" of who was behind the tragedy to rest. If anything, the intervening years have only added more and more layers to the onion, rather than providing answers.
Could Oswald have acted alone, out of a desire to enter history? I guess. Sure, he was apparently dyslexic and failed his sharpshooter exam, but everyone gets lucky once in a while, and maybe that was his day, where he could get three shots off in six seconds and hit his moving target. Could a shadow government have used him as a patsy? I guess. Sure, all sorts of things happen beyond the knowledge of the public. What's interesting is that the public believes lone gunmen were responsible for every other assassination, or at least most of the public believes this. John Wilkes Booth, acting along. Sirhan Sirhan, acting alone. James Earl Ray, acting along. John David Hinckley, alone and obsessed with Taxi Driver. Each of these men could just as easily have been patsies and part of a larger conspiracy, but most of us don't go there. For some reason, though, we've decided the Warren Commission was part of a larger cover-up and that there's more to this particular story than meets the eye.
Undoubtedly the times had much to do with this. The same administration that rushed out the Warren Report was also lying to the public about Vietnam. The intervening years didn't exactly engender a larger trust in government, what with Watergate, Iran/Contra, Whitewater, Lewinsky, WMD and the rush to Iraq. On the other hand, it's not as if 190 years of scandal-free government preceeded the assassination; Teapot Dome, anyone?
What probably makes the events of that long-ago November stay with us as a mystery and a controversy is the fact that, in many ways, the hegemony of the post-war era ended with the flight of those bullets. I don't mean the cliched end of Camelot, end of idealism here, I mean the beginning of distrust, unrest, and disaffection that lasted for the next 20 years, until everyone decided they'd had enough and it was morning in America again. Whether or not he acted alone, Oswald accomplished his purpose. He entered history.
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Rock, Meet Hard Place
Here's a real-life political question. You live in a small city with depressed property values that has been almost entirely built-out. Tax revenue holds steady, while the cost of services continues to rise. With no new revenues, the only way the budget can be balanced while retaining necessary services (fire, police, street cleaning and maintenance) is to increase taxes every year.
The state has a program to encourage development in distressed municipalities. If voted for, it eliminates all state and local taxes for new or adaptive reuse projects in certain zones. On the one hand, passing these tax breaks is a way of encouraging redevelopment in the urban core, and when the breaks sunset promises the potential for increased revenue to the municipality. In 2011. On the other hand, for the 2009 budget to be balanced, both property taxes and earned income tax must be increased for the rest of us.
Do you support this program? Do you give tax breaks to developers while taxes go up for the rest of us? Or do you say no, and hope that developers will undertake projects in your city nonetheless? I'm completely on the fence on this one.
The state has a program to encourage development in distressed municipalities. If voted for, it eliminates all state and local taxes for new or adaptive reuse projects in certain zones. On the one hand, passing these tax breaks is a way of encouraging redevelopment in the urban core, and when the breaks sunset promises the potential for increased revenue to the municipality. In 2011. On the other hand, for the 2009 budget to be balanced, both property taxes and earned income tax must be increased for the rest of us.
Do you support this program? Do you give tax breaks to developers while taxes go up for the rest of us? Or do you say no, and hope that developers will undertake projects in your city nonetheless? I'm completely on the fence on this one.
Monday, September 29, 2008
On the Road
Spend a weekend on your college campus, act 18 again. It happens every time. I'm still recuperating. The main way I felt 18 again was being completely cut off from the rest of the world for over 48 hours: no internet, no TV, no newspapers. I didn't see the debate, nor hear any of the incessant recaps of it. Paul Newman died? What do you know. The Northeast was drenched? Huh. It's hard, now, to believe I spent four years living in such a bubble.
An interesting offshoot of my trip was that I drove smack through the middle of Virginia, the last leg on back roads filled with campaign signs. I'm not sure what yard signs tell you, not sure how effective an indicator they are as to what will happen in November. However, the placement of a yard sign does indicate effort and dedication on the part of the person who placed the sign, and in that sense display the sentiments of at least one voter.
Rural Central Virginia must trend Republican these days. However, I feel comfortable predicting that Mark Warner will win his Senate race. Based on yard signs, the guy doesn't even have an opponent. Warner signs proliferated, yet I didn't see a single indication that there is a Republican nominee running against him. Some properties even featured both McCain and Warner signs, which was to me the real indicator that this particular race is over.
Based on signage, the Presidential race is harder to call. Crossing the Blue Ridge Mountains on Routes 151 and 6, through Afton, Rockfish Gap, and Nelson County, McCain/Palin definitely dominated. On the other hand, it would appear that the Obama campaign lacks an office in this part of the state, because I passed a number of hand-made Obama signs. Yes, hand-made, a true indicator of dedication. One sign, ok, but on the trip back I counted: 15 such signs on a 35-mile stretch of road.
Once I got to Route 29, a major north/south state highway, Obama took the lead in signage. McCain still had supporters, but the majority of yards sported signs promoting the entire Democratic ticket for that part of the state: Obama, Warner, and the Congressional candidate whose last name begins with a "P" (sorry, I was driving, I couldn't write it down).
Conclusions? It could be that the Obama campaign is correct in believing that Virginia is in play. It could also be that, in the end, yard signs along state highways only mean that a couple of crazy partisans went driving around in a pick-up one night, drinking beer and illegally posting. My main conclusion is that this remains perhaps the most interesting Presidential race in recent memory. And that it's a bad idea for an early middle-aged woman to party like an 18 year-old.
An interesting offshoot of my trip was that I drove smack through the middle of Virginia, the last leg on back roads filled with campaign signs. I'm not sure what yard signs tell you, not sure how effective an indicator they are as to what will happen in November. However, the placement of a yard sign does indicate effort and dedication on the part of the person who placed the sign, and in that sense display the sentiments of at least one voter.
Rural Central Virginia must trend Republican these days. However, I feel comfortable predicting that Mark Warner will win his Senate race. Based on yard signs, the guy doesn't even have an opponent. Warner signs proliferated, yet I didn't see a single indication that there is a Republican nominee running against him. Some properties even featured both McCain and Warner signs, which was to me the real indicator that this particular race is over.
Based on signage, the Presidential race is harder to call. Crossing the Blue Ridge Mountains on Routes 151 and 6, through Afton, Rockfish Gap, and Nelson County, McCain/Palin definitely dominated. On the other hand, it would appear that the Obama campaign lacks an office in this part of the state, because I passed a number of hand-made Obama signs. Yes, hand-made, a true indicator of dedication. One sign, ok, but on the trip back I counted: 15 such signs on a 35-mile stretch of road.
Once I got to Route 29, a major north/south state highway, Obama took the lead in signage. McCain still had supporters, but the majority of yards sported signs promoting the entire Democratic ticket for that part of the state: Obama, Warner, and the Congressional candidate whose last name begins with a "P" (sorry, I was driving, I couldn't write it down).
Conclusions? It could be that the Obama campaign is correct in believing that Virginia is in play. It could also be that, in the end, yard signs along state highways only mean that a couple of crazy partisans went driving around in a pick-up one night, drinking beer and illegally posting. My main conclusion is that this remains perhaps the most interesting Presidential race in recent memory. And that it's a bad idea for an early middle-aged woman to party like an 18 year-old.
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Career Institute
Cicadas have already arrived. It's mid-July, but summer has begun its slow fade. I've sold my business, and I gave myself the arbitrary deadline of Labor Day to decide what I want to be when I grow up. I get up every morning determined to determine something and then get distracted by the day, by the Times and by the pool, by whatever reading I'm doing, by a warm evening on my porch. I watch dusk come just a little earlier each evening, hear the cicadas, know something has to be decided, sigh, and turn back to the pages of my book.
What will I be when I grow up? All I know is that my friend's pool beckons. Maybe life is just randomness. If I let it go, something will come to me. That's my hope on a morning in the middle of July.
What will I be when I grow up? All I know is that my friend's pool beckons. Maybe life is just randomness. If I let it go, something will come to me. That's my hope on a morning in the middle of July.
Friday, February 22, 2008
Oscar Pick-A-Mix
Because it's snowing and I'm bored, here are the Synthetic Culture Oscar predictions (or at least my predictions as of this morning):
- The writer's strike will be the butt of a joke in the first 5 seconds of Jon Stewart's monologue
- Heath Ledger will be featured prominently in the Montage of the Dead
- The performances of the original songs and accompanying dance numbers will be the best time to go refill your drink
- 99% of the country hasn't seen four of the five best picture nominees, so the evening's focus will be on couture and the end of the writer's strike
- The writer's strike will be mentioned approximately 18 times during the broadcast
- The nominees are all depressing; let's talk about the writer's strike
Enough of that. Who will walk away with a statue? Take my advice and you'll win your Oscar pool:
Daniel Day-Lewis (Leading Actor) will be rewarded for his ability to chew up both scenes and scenery and spit while doing so.
Javier Bardem (Supporting Actor) will be rewarded for reminding America of the perils of a Price Valiant haircut.
Julie Christie (Leading Actress) will be rewarded for providing Hollywood a chance to pretend that good acting is appreciated in actresses over the age of 30.
Ruby Dee (Supporting Actress) will be rewarded for still being alive, and for being the best thing about a surprisingly boring film.
Ratatouille (Animated Feature) will be rewarded for being a Pixar product.
No End in Sight (Documentary Feature) will be rewarded because at this point everyone hates the war.
Juno (Original Screenplay) will be rewarded because everyone loves a literate stripper. See, they aren't all working their way through community college.
There Will Be Blood (Adapted Screenplay) will be rewarded for tremendous and sincere effort, plus a lot of spitting.
No Country For Old Men (Best Picture) will be rewarded for having a shorter running time than There Will Be Blood.
Best Director is a toss-up - will the Academy do a split in order to give PT Anderson another nod, or will voters line up behind the Coen brothers? My guess is the Coens sweep, but we'll have to wait until Sunday to see. Happy Oscar party to everyone!
Update! What will Atonement win, you ask? Costume design and Original Score and that's it. Give Film Editing to No Country. The Diving Bell and Butterfly needs to be recognized even though it was made in France by an artist wearing a sarong, so it will take Cinematography. I think that's it for the major categories, except all the shorts and Foreign Language Film. For those categories, you're all on your own.
- The writer's strike will be the butt of a joke in the first 5 seconds of Jon Stewart's monologue
- Heath Ledger will be featured prominently in the Montage of the Dead
- The performances of the original songs and accompanying dance numbers will be the best time to go refill your drink
- 99% of the country hasn't seen four of the five best picture nominees, so the evening's focus will be on couture and the end of the writer's strike
- The writer's strike will be mentioned approximately 18 times during the broadcast
- The nominees are all depressing; let's talk about the writer's strike
Enough of that. Who will walk away with a statue? Take my advice and you'll win your Oscar pool:
Daniel Day-Lewis (Leading Actor) will be rewarded for his ability to chew up both scenes and scenery and spit while doing so.
Javier Bardem (Supporting Actor) will be rewarded for reminding America of the perils of a Price Valiant haircut.
Julie Christie (Leading Actress) will be rewarded for providing Hollywood a chance to pretend that good acting is appreciated in actresses over the age of 30.
Ruby Dee (Supporting Actress) will be rewarded for still being alive, and for being the best thing about a surprisingly boring film.
Ratatouille (Animated Feature) will be rewarded for being a Pixar product.
No End in Sight (Documentary Feature) will be rewarded because at this point everyone hates the war.
Juno (Original Screenplay) will be rewarded because everyone loves a literate stripper. See, they aren't all working their way through community college.
There Will Be Blood (Adapted Screenplay) will be rewarded for tremendous and sincere effort, plus a lot of spitting.
No Country For Old Men (Best Picture) will be rewarded for having a shorter running time than There Will Be Blood.
Best Director is a toss-up - will the Academy do a split in order to give PT Anderson another nod, or will voters line up behind the Coen brothers? My guess is the Coens sweep, but we'll have to wait until Sunday to see. Happy Oscar party to everyone!
Update! What will Atonement win, you ask? Costume design and Original Score and that's it. Give Film Editing to No Country. The Diving Bell and Butterfly needs to be recognized even though it was made in France by an artist wearing a sarong, so it will take Cinematography. I think that's it for the major categories, except all the shorts and Foreign Language Film. For those categories, you're all on your own.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
