Yesterday Donald Trump tweeted it was basically Pueto Rico's fault that Hurricane Maria had virtually destroyed its infrastructure because its economy was in a mess to start with, so they had no one to blame but themselves. Doubtless the citizens of that beleaguered nation are hurt by this travesty, but they have far bigger problems on their hands right now, and besides, who cares what they think, right Donald?
We have seen him excoriate Meryl Streep when she had the temerity to criticize his policies (calling her the "most overrated actress in Hollywood" as I recall), and then we heard him say there were many "fine people" among the numbers of the white supremacists at Charlottesville, people who only hours before the confrontation with protestors had been seen holding torches and chanting "Blacks wil not replace us! Jews will not replace us!". It made us worry that he, the leader of the Free World, might actually be a racist himself, deep down. Now we know this to be true.
But when he took on the entire NFL for their protests about racism within the US, saying they were disrespecting the Flag and ignoring the real reason for their protest, he took on one of the most powerful lobbies in America. Not just the black players, but even some of the billionaire white owners of these clubs, people who have supported Trump in the past, and why not, his tax changes have been targeted at benefiting the rich, even these people have joined the protest.
I think this is marvellous. It gives me hope for America when I see all these disparate groups coming together to point up one of the most pressing problems afflicting it to this day. Trump has taken on his own supporters in a way that can only hurt him in the short and longer term. What next? Will he attack the National Rifle Association for being unAmerican? That sounds ridiculous, but if you'd told me a week ago he'd be trashing the entire NFL I'd have said that was ridiculous.
What I'm most worried about is that Trump will win the election in 2020 and feel mandated to launch a war with North Korea and/or Iran, while presiding over the destruction of the environment of his own beautiful land and the rest of the world too. But when I see him make such a disastrous mistake as he has with attacking the NFL protest, I feel a bit better. Slowly but surely the American people are beginning to realize what a terrible error they made when they voted him in. And surely, surely, they won't make the same error again. Will they?
Tuesday, 26 September 2017
Monday, 11 September 2017
I guess "A Boy Named Sue" isn't their favourite song
A couple in the Isle of Wight have withdrawn their 6-year-old son from school because he came home one day expressing his confusion over the fact that one of his classmates turned up in boy's clothes one day, then the next in a dress.
They felt it was wrong to have their child confused in such a way, even though the school, a Christian one, was carrying out the church's guidelines of promoting gender equality. They have said they are now going to home-school their son, and part of their teaching will doubtless be along the lines of:
"God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve, and He certainly didn't make anyone who was Adam one day and Eve the next."
They have form. They did the same thing with the child's older brother not long ago, for similar reasons. "Boys are boys and girls are girls", is their position.
I can understand their little boy being confused. It's a confusing world. Even tiny babies find the world confusing: that's why they cry their eyes out when they don't get something they want. Slowly they learn that the world is not a perfectly ordered place where everything happens exactly the way they want it.
For as long as there have been human beings, there have been those who wish to have sex with their own gender group, and those who have not been happy in the gender nature appears to have chosen for them. And for almost as long, certain groups have reviled these people. Homosexual sex was a serious crime in Britain as recently as 1967, and in some parts of the world it remains a capital offence. But slowly the world is becoming a more tolerant, accepting world. But not everywhere. Donald Trump recently announced that transgender people have no place in the US armed forces.
And then we have families like the Rowes, who want to inculcate their child, not with the fact that the world is indeed a complex, confusing place which it is our duty to come to terms with, but a place of black and white, where only heterosexual sex is OK, and there is no place in it for someone who wishes to change their sex. Just one thing: where in the Bible does it say anything about transgender issues?
They felt it was wrong to have their child confused in such a way, even though the school, a Christian one, was carrying out the church's guidelines of promoting gender equality. They have said they are now going to home-school their son, and part of their teaching will doubtless be along the lines of:
"God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve, and He certainly didn't make anyone who was Adam one day and Eve the next."
They have form. They did the same thing with the child's older brother not long ago, for similar reasons. "Boys are boys and girls are girls", is their position.
I can understand their little boy being confused. It's a confusing world. Even tiny babies find the world confusing: that's why they cry their eyes out when they don't get something they want. Slowly they learn that the world is not a perfectly ordered place where everything happens exactly the way they want it.
For as long as there have been human beings, there have been those who wish to have sex with their own gender group, and those who have not been happy in the gender nature appears to have chosen for them. And for almost as long, certain groups have reviled these people. Homosexual sex was a serious crime in Britain as recently as 1967, and in some parts of the world it remains a capital offence. But slowly the world is becoming a more tolerant, accepting world. But not everywhere. Donald Trump recently announced that transgender people have no place in the US armed forces.
And then we have families like the Rowes, who want to inculcate their child, not with the fact that the world is indeed a complex, confusing place which it is our duty to come to terms with, but a place of black and white, where only heterosexual sex is OK, and there is no place in it for someone who wishes to change their sex. Just one thing: where in the Bible does it say anything about transgender issues?
Sunday, 3 September 2017
August 2017 media review part three
ARRIVAL (2016) D- Denis Villeneuve.
A number of alien spacecraft position themselves over various locations across the world. But unlike in Independence Day or War of the Worlds, these guys aren't out to subjugate the Earth, but to learn about our world and its inhabitants. The problem is, how to communicate in an alien language? Enter Amy Adams, a philologist with a flair for lateral thinking, who is recruited to attempt to start a dialogue with them. But others, including, predictably, the military, are suspicious and would be just as happy to blow them to oblivion.
There has been a slew of movies on this subject, Including Contact and 2001: A Space Odyssey, but this film does find a new angle to explore. Amy Adams is excellent as the linguistics guru, and is well supported by Jeremy Renner. Definitely watchable.
INNOCENCE OF MEMORIES (2016) D- Grant Gee.
A few years ago Turkish Nobel Prize winner Orhan Pamuk wrote a strange, surreal love story set in Istanbul called "Innocence of Memories" and later created a museum called "The Museum of Memories" which housed many artefacts mentioned in its pages. Grant Gee's fascinating movie wanders the streets of Istanbul, re-tracing the steps of the protagonists in the book and also examining the museum exhibits themselves, creating in the process a unique take on a famous book.
Grant Gee has form. In his film "Patience" he dissects out W.G. Sebald's seminal text The Rings of Saturn, in which the author describes a number of hikes around Norfolk and Suffolk, allowing his mind to wander over a number of apparently unconnected themes. Both films have a curious, languorous quality which is really rather hypnotic. Which book will he tackle next? Intriguing.
DETROIT (2017) D- Kathryn Bigelow.
In 1967 Detroit, racial tensions boil over into destructive and lethal rioting. The Detroit police, known for their institutional racism and brutality, put down the blacks in the traditional manner: with billy-clubs, waters cannon and live rounds from rifles and shotguns. And when they think sniper-fire is coming from a down-market apartment house, they roil in and threaten the tenants with death unless they reveal the name of the shooter. They know there was a shooter, but he was only using a starting pistol to scare the cops. No matter. What follows is a harrowing account of apparently true events, as the residents are subjected to the most appalling violence.
Kathryn Bigelow is one of the most skilful directors in America, and here she shows with horrifying realism the extent of racial hatred that was endemic in the police at that time. Perhaps most horrifying of all is the fact that as recent events have shown, in some ways not a lot seems to have changed in 50 years...
A number of alien spacecraft position themselves over various locations across the world. But unlike in Independence Day or War of the Worlds, these guys aren't out to subjugate the Earth, but to learn about our world and its inhabitants. The problem is, how to communicate in an alien language? Enter Amy Adams, a philologist with a flair for lateral thinking, who is recruited to attempt to start a dialogue with them. But others, including, predictably, the military, are suspicious and would be just as happy to blow them to oblivion.
There has been a slew of movies on this subject, Including Contact and 2001: A Space Odyssey, but this film does find a new angle to explore. Amy Adams is excellent as the linguistics guru, and is well supported by Jeremy Renner. Definitely watchable.
INNOCENCE OF MEMORIES (2016) D- Grant Gee.
A few years ago Turkish Nobel Prize winner Orhan Pamuk wrote a strange, surreal love story set in Istanbul called "Innocence of Memories" and later created a museum called "The Museum of Memories" which housed many artefacts mentioned in its pages. Grant Gee's fascinating movie wanders the streets of Istanbul, re-tracing the steps of the protagonists in the book and also examining the museum exhibits themselves, creating in the process a unique take on a famous book.
Grant Gee has form. In his film "Patience" he dissects out W.G. Sebald's seminal text The Rings of Saturn, in which the author describes a number of hikes around Norfolk and Suffolk, allowing his mind to wander over a number of apparently unconnected themes. Both films have a curious, languorous quality which is really rather hypnotic. Which book will he tackle next? Intriguing.
DETROIT (2017) D- Kathryn Bigelow.
In 1967 Detroit, racial tensions boil over into destructive and lethal rioting. The Detroit police, known for their institutional racism and brutality, put down the blacks in the traditional manner: with billy-clubs, waters cannon and live rounds from rifles and shotguns. And when they think sniper-fire is coming from a down-market apartment house, they roil in and threaten the tenants with death unless they reveal the name of the shooter. They know there was a shooter, but he was only using a starting pistol to scare the cops. No matter. What follows is a harrowing account of apparently true events, as the residents are subjected to the most appalling violence.
Kathryn Bigelow is one of the most skilful directors in America, and here she shows with horrifying realism the extent of racial hatred that was endemic in the police at that time. Perhaps most horrifying of all is the fact that as recent events have shown, in some ways not a lot seems to have changed in 50 years...
August 2017 media review part two
MOVIES
DUNKIRK (2017) D- Christopher Nolan.
May 1940. The British Expeditionary Force, numbering nearly 400,000 men, is being driven into the sea, literally, by an advancing and relentless enemy. I say enemy, because at no time during this exceptionally fine war film, is the word "German" ever used. Shows how times change. One soldier, cut off from his comrades, finds his way to the beach and tries to secure his place on a boat to take him home. This proves trickier than he had anticipated...
Christopher Nolan's recent films have been characterised by intricate and sometimes labyrinthine plots (Inception, Interstellar), but here he has opted for an eminently simple story of survival. This film can be understood, and enjoyed, by a six-year-old: one guy among hundreds of thousands, trying to escape from a beach where an enemy is doing its best to kill him, and everyone else.
There are comparisons to be made with the very good 1958 film of the same name, directed by Barry Norman's dad, Leslie. In both the focus is on the grunts, the ordinary privates, as they struggle to escape the hell of the beaches, and also on the civilians back home who mount an armada of small boats to take the trip across the Channel to rescue them. Nolan's film enjoyed a far larger budget, and we see it all on the screen, but both have a vividly authentic feel, and both do a very good job of putting us in the shoes of the soldiers on the sand, waiting, waiting, for rescue. See both if you can.
DOCTOR STRANGE (2016) D- Scott Derrickson.
A full-of-himself surgeon (Benedict Cumberbatch) is forced to re-evaluate his life when a car crash leaves him unable to operate. He seeks help from an obscure group of zen-like monks, only to find that they are engaged in a battle to the death against dark forces (led by Madds Mickelsen) who are bent on destroying everything that is good in the Universe. Will he assist them in their great struggle, or do the selfish thing and concentrate on his own career? Come on, you know what he's gonna do...
Benedict Cumberbatch has joined that small elite of British actors (Patrick Stuart, Ian McKellen, Judi Dench for example) who are classically trained and so damned good they grace any project they're associated with, even if it's an overblown superhero blockbuster. Which this is. I saw it on TV, though it would probably have been better on the big screen (though not in 3D, which would only have spoilt it) where we could have seen exactly how all that money got spent. I thought it was all a bit too much, though my wife enjoyed it hugely, so I leave it to you to decide.
CASQUE D'OR (1952) D- Jacques Becker.
In the Paris of the 1890s, an ex-con with an array of nefarious skills is quickly recruited into a criminal gang. He is attracted to charismatic "Casque D'or" ("Golden Helmet"), a prostitute, played by an exceedingly sultry Simone Signoret, currently dallying with one of the other gang members. She likes the cut of his jib too, and he steals her, much to the other guy's ire. But the gang's leader also would like to snag her for himself, and that may be a problem...
This film caused a storm at the time, with its amoral narrative and naturalistic feel, and some say it was the film that launched the famous "New Wave" in France which changed cinema forever. And it is certainly true that it casts its spell without any need to spend hundreds of millions on special effects. Brilliant.
MOANA (2016) D- Ron Clements and John Musker.
A young girl living on a Pacific island is selected by the Ocean itself to go in search of a precious amulet stolen from a goddess by a naughty demigod. Without it their island is cursed and all the crops begin to die. So it's kind of an urgent thing... Various obstacles stand in her way. The demigod has himself lost it, and a fire god now has it, and it isn't about to give it up without a fight.
Computer animation, it is fair to say, has completely transformed the "cartoon movie" and today most of them use the technique, which has reached astonishing heights. Moana looks good from first frame to last, and even more importantly, the story line is strong and the voice characterisations live up to it. I have to say I was entranced.
DUNKIRK (2017) D- Christopher Nolan.
May 1940. The British Expeditionary Force, numbering nearly 400,000 men, is being driven into the sea, literally, by an advancing and relentless enemy. I say enemy, because at no time during this exceptionally fine war film, is the word "German" ever used. Shows how times change. One soldier, cut off from his comrades, finds his way to the beach and tries to secure his place on a boat to take him home. This proves trickier than he had anticipated...
Christopher Nolan's recent films have been characterised by intricate and sometimes labyrinthine plots (Inception, Interstellar), but here he has opted for an eminently simple story of survival. This film can be understood, and enjoyed, by a six-year-old: one guy among hundreds of thousands, trying to escape from a beach where an enemy is doing its best to kill him, and everyone else.
There are comparisons to be made with the very good 1958 film of the same name, directed by Barry Norman's dad, Leslie. In both the focus is on the grunts, the ordinary privates, as they struggle to escape the hell of the beaches, and also on the civilians back home who mount an armada of small boats to take the trip across the Channel to rescue them. Nolan's film enjoyed a far larger budget, and we see it all on the screen, but both have a vividly authentic feel, and both do a very good job of putting us in the shoes of the soldiers on the sand, waiting, waiting, for rescue. See both if you can.
DOCTOR STRANGE (2016) D- Scott Derrickson.
A full-of-himself surgeon (Benedict Cumberbatch) is forced to re-evaluate his life when a car crash leaves him unable to operate. He seeks help from an obscure group of zen-like monks, only to find that they are engaged in a battle to the death against dark forces (led by Madds Mickelsen) who are bent on destroying everything that is good in the Universe. Will he assist them in their great struggle, or do the selfish thing and concentrate on his own career? Come on, you know what he's gonna do...
Benedict Cumberbatch has joined that small elite of British actors (Patrick Stuart, Ian McKellen, Judi Dench for example) who are classically trained and so damned good they grace any project they're associated with, even if it's an overblown superhero blockbuster. Which this is. I saw it on TV, though it would probably have been better on the big screen (though not in 3D, which would only have spoilt it) where we could have seen exactly how all that money got spent. I thought it was all a bit too much, though my wife enjoyed it hugely, so I leave it to you to decide.
CASQUE D'OR (1952) D- Jacques Becker.
In the Paris of the 1890s, an ex-con with an array of nefarious skills is quickly recruited into a criminal gang. He is attracted to charismatic "Casque D'or" ("Golden Helmet"), a prostitute, played by an exceedingly sultry Simone Signoret, currently dallying with one of the other gang members. She likes the cut of his jib too, and he steals her, much to the other guy's ire. But the gang's leader also would like to snag her for himself, and that may be a problem...
This film caused a storm at the time, with its amoral narrative and naturalistic feel, and some say it was the film that launched the famous "New Wave" in France which changed cinema forever. And it is certainly true that it casts its spell without any need to spend hundreds of millions on special effects. Brilliant.
MOANA (2016) D- Ron Clements and John Musker.
A young girl living on a Pacific island is selected by the Ocean itself to go in search of a precious amulet stolen from a goddess by a naughty demigod. Without it their island is cursed and all the crops begin to die. So it's kind of an urgent thing... Various obstacles stand in her way. The demigod has himself lost it, and a fire god now has it, and it isn't about to give it up without a fight.
Computer animation, it is fair to say, has completely transformed the "cartoon movie" and today most of them use the technique, which has reached astonishing heights. Moana looks good from first frame to last, and even more importantly, the story line is strong and the voice characterisations live up to it. I have to say I was entranced.
August 2017 book and film review
Welcome to this month's media blog. Apologies for my reduced number of posts: life has intervened, and I am concentrating more of my energies on writing a book. There has still been time, however, to read some books and see a few movies.
BOOKS
GUERRILLAS, by V.S. Naipaul
In an unspecified (though it has to be Trinidad), newly independent island in the West Indies during the 1970s, an idealistic white man and his girlfriend work with the locals to make a better life for them. But the place is something of a tinder-box: all it needs is a little spark and the whole country might descend into bloody revolution against the corrupt government. Our hero fears he might be the unwitting spark himself, as he is manipulated both by the establishment and the radical elements.
V.S. Naipaul is that unusual animal: he has earned his living exclusively by writing all his adult life. And he has done that by being a master of his chosen discipline. This tale of lust and betrayal amongst the palm trees and slums of the Caribbean shines with truth and beauty on every page. No one creates such believable characters as Naipaul, and no one expresses the feel of the place, its heat, its humidity and the atmosphere of fear as well as he does. Splendid stuff.
ANGELA'S ASHES, by Frank McCourt
A family of Irish emigrants finds life in New York intolerable, so make the unusual step of returning to their homeland. There they find the poverty and opportunities for advancement even less than in the Land of the Free, and hover on the edge of starvation as Dad drinks the meagre money he makes and his family go hungry. The boy Frankie knows only one thing: there is no future for him in Ireland, and his only chance is to get back to America as soon as he can. He does have one thing: an American passport (he was born there, you see) but very little else.
Frank McCourt set new standards in the genre of "creative nonfiction" and the book has been a smash across the world, especially in the US where, having achieved his great ambition, he lived out his life. His descriptions of the grinding life of poverty lived by the majority of the Irish population in the 20s and 30s are graphic and often horrifying. There has been some criticism of the amount of creativity in his nonfiction, not least by his own mother, but nonetheless there is a loud ring of truth to his writing. One thing. At no point in the narrative is there any mention at all of Angela's ashes, as Frankie's mum, Angela, is very much alive by the end of the book. Perhaps I'm just being thick...
THE RED BADGE OF COURAGE, by Stephen Crane
At the height of the American Civil War, a young man, in truth scarcely more than a boy, decides it would be a great lark to join up and fight for the Yankees. He is soon revelling in his exciting new life with his new friends- until the fighting starts. Suddenly his comrades begin dropping around him and he realises with horrific force that war is dangerous: you could get a leg blown off, or half your face. You could get killed. With a display of logical thinking few of us could fail to identify with, he turns tail and runs. Then, away from the cannon-fire and musket bullets zinging past his head, he starts to have second thoughts...
The Red Badge of Courage is one of the most famous novellas ever to come out of America, and is without doubt an outstanding portrayal of the psychology of fear under fire. It was made into a highly successful film, starring Audie Murphy, who in real life was a fully paid-up war hero. Could he identify with the protagonist of this book? He never ran away from a fight, so it must have been something of a challenge. This notwithstanding, he makes a pretty good fist of it, and I recommend both the book and the film for your scrutiny.
See next blog for movies...
BOOKS
GUERRILLAS, by V.S. Naipaul
In an unspecified (though it has to be Trinidad), newly independent island in the West Indies during the 1970s, an idealistic white man and his girlfriend work with the locals to make a better life for them. But the place is something of a tinder-box: all it needs is a little spark and the whole country might descend into bloody revolution against the corrupt government. Our hero fears he might be the unwitting spark himself, as he is manipulated both by the establishment and the radical elements.
V.S. Naipaul is that unusual animal: he has earned his living exclusively by writing all his adult life. And he has done that by being a master of his chosen discipline. This tale of lust and betrayal amongst the palm trees and slums of the Caribbean shines with truth and beauty on every page. No one creates such believable characters as Naipaul, and no one expresses the feel of the place, its heat, its humidity and the atmosphere of fear as well as he does. Splendid stuff.
ANGELA'S ASHES, by Frank McCourt
A family of Irish emigrants finds life in New York intolerable, so make the unusual step of returning to their homeland. There they find the poverty and opportunities for advancement even less than in the Land of the Free, and hover on the edge of starvation as Dad drinks the meagre money he makes and his family go hungry. The boy Frankie knows only one thing: there is no future for him in Ireland, and his only chance is to get back to America as soon as he can. He does have one thing: an American passport (he was born there, you see) but very little else.
Frank McCourt set new standards in the genre of "creative nonfiction" and the book has been a smash across the world, especially in the US where, having achieved his great ambition, he lived out his life. His descriptions of the grinding life of poverty lived by the majority of the Irish population in the 20s and 30s are graphic and often horrifying. There has been some criticism of the amount of creativity in his nonfiction, not least by his own mother, but nonetheless there is a loud ring of truth to his writing. One thing. At no point in the narrative is there any mention at all of Angela's ashes, as Frankie's mum, Angela, is very much alive by the end of the book. Perhaps I'm just being thick...
THE RED BADGE OF COURAGE, by Stephen Crane
At the height of the American Civil War, a young man, in truth scarcely more than a boy, decides it would be a great lark to join up and fight for the Yankees. He is soon revelling in his exciting new life with his new friends- until the fighting starts. Suddenly his comrades begin dropping around him and he realises with horrific force that war is dangerous: you could get a leg blown off, or half your face. You could get killed. With a display of logical thinking few of us could fail to identify with, he turns tail and runs. Then, away from the cannon-fire and musket bullets zinging past his head, he starts to have second thoughts...
The Red Badge of Courage is one of the most famous novellas ever to come out of America, and is without doubt an outstanding portrayal of the psychology of fear under fire. It was made into a highly successful film, starring Audie Murphy, who in real life was a fully paid-up war hero. Could he identify with the protagonist of this book? He never ran away from a fight, so it must have been something of a challenge. This notwithstanding, he makes a pretty good fist of it, and I recommend both the book and the film for your scrutiny.
See next blog for movies...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)