Review: Safety Last

On a rainy, cold, overcast Saturday, I caught my first Harold Lloyd movie at Film Forum's Harold Lloyd retrospective. Before the movie, another Harold Lloyd short, Get Out and Get Under, screened.


Safety Last, bits of which are available on this DVD (a DVD of the movie is not available, but you can log your interest for one here at Amazon), is Lloyd's most famous movie, and the shot of Lloyd dangling from the hands of a clock several stories up on the side of a city building is the most iconic image of his career. Even without having seen the movie before, the shot was familiar to me through references in other movies such as Jackie Chan's Project A.
Lloyd's signature character, who appears in Safety Last, is a clever rascal who always manages to stay ahead of the police, oppressive bosses, and the other social forces that would spoil his efforts to win the girl and get ahead. Safety Last is the American Dream as lived by Lloyd's small town boy looking to make it big in the big city. He hopes to earn enough money to bring his girl to live with him. But when we finally meet up with Lloyd in town he's a sales clerk at a fabric store, hiding from his landlord whenever she comes for the rent by crawling up inside his jacket that hangs on a hook inside his front door.
A series of events lead to the movie's climax, when Lloyd has to scale the side of a city office building in a literal metaphor for climbing the social ladder. It was his fearless friend who was to perform the stunt, but the moral here is picking oneself up by one's bootstraps, so fate conspires to trap Lloyd into performing the stunt. If he can reach the top, he'll earn a large promotional bonus from his manager and be able to purchase a house for his girl, who thinks he's actually the manager.
Lloyd's face is not as memorable as that of Keaton and Chaplin. Even now I struggle to picture the details of his visage; all I remember are his famous round horn-rimmed spectacles, a frame without lenses. And his physical pratfalls feel too rehearsed and polished. But these are minor nits. The stunts are set up and filmed with such precision that my palms were sweating as Lloyd bumbled his way up the side of the building, even though I knew Lloyd was simpling climbing an extension of a building built on top of a real building. And these Lloyd movies make great family movies. A row of young children behind me laughed with delight the whole time, the physical humor akin that of a Jim Carrey today, though not quite as manic.

"Underestimating the Fog"


King Kaufman mentioned this article before, and now so does the NYTimes sports page: "Underestimating the Fog" by Bill James (PDF). James writes that if the Baseball Research Journal were a scientific journal, he would have titled the article "The Problem of Distinguishing Between Transient and Persistent Phenomena When Dealing with Variables from a Statistically Unstable Platform".


James notes that many widely held sabermetric tenets, including the non-existence of clutch hitting, may be based on a faulty statistical method. Until now, sabermetricians have believed that if a player does own a skill, like clutch hitting ability, it should persist from year to year. Fluctuations in a player's hitting performance in clutch situations from year to year has been taken to mean that clutch hitting is a myth. Some other ideas based on this statistical method (all of which should be familiar to any reader of Bill James Baseball Abstracts, Baseball Prospectus, Rob Neyer, or any of their countless web acolytes) include the following:


  • Pitchers can't control wins and losses. They can only prevent the other team from scoring runs.

  • Team performance in one-run games is largely luck.

  • Catchers don't affect their pitchers' ERAs

  • Pitchers can't control batting average of balls put in play (recent studies have qualified this to say that pitchers largely cannot control this).

  • Batters do not go on hot or cold streaks.


James does not argue that any of these are false, but he is concerned that the proofs are faulty.


"We ran astray because we have been assuming that random data is proof of nothingness, when in reality random data proves nothing...random data proves nothing--and it cannot be used as proof of nothingness.



Why? Because whenever you do a study, if your study completely fails, you will get random data. Therefore, when you get random data, all you may conclude is that your study has failed."


It's a fantastic article. Sabermetric thinking hasn't made any revolutionary leaps relative to itself in a long time. That it is taking hold in more baseball organizations now may make it seem fresh, but many of the ideas have been around for some time (of course, teams may have come upon some strategies that they have kept secret; I'm referring only to publicly available ideas). James's last Baseball Abstract came out in 2001. He doesn't seem to write for the public much anymore now that he works for the Red Sox (though recently he did conduct this interview with Sons of Sam Horn). I miss his contrarian voice--he's a bit of a curmudgeon, and whenever I catch the random episode of House I feel that Dr. Gregory House (Hugh Laurie) is a medical version of Bill James.


James still believes that hot streaks do not exist. This is one phenomenon I believe in without any data as proof. But in my own experience playing sports, I've gone through productive runs that I'd term hot streaks, during times when I've felt "in the zone." In baseball, it's the sense that all the pitches are slower and the ball larger than normal, easier to pick up with the eye. In basketball, it's the feeling that every jump shot will go in, that the basket is larger than normal. Personal experience and sensation is notoriously unreliable as a way to explain the world, so my belief in the existence of hot streaks is an article of faith. No one has ever been able to explain the phenomenon physiologically, but players refer to it again and again in different sports. If it is truly a transient (non-persistent) and random occurrence, these hot streaks, then they would indeed be very difficult to detect.


On the other hand, I can muster no amount of faith in the Cubs this season, and that was even before Nomar Garciaparra and Todd Walker went down with injuries. Not enough hitters, injury risks galore in the pitching staff, and a manager with questionable tactical ability. No underestimating that fog; it's hanging over Wrigley, and hanging over my head. 90% chance of showers.


That big red car? It's a Ferrari


The Wiggles are Australia's richest entertainers, having made $45 million last year, beating out the $40 million earned by Nicole Kidman. This will come as no surprise to anyone with a child or nephew or niece. My nephew Ryan has generated a massive volume of income for The Wiggles, along with having taught me the words to several Wiggles tunes.


Toot toot, chugga chugga, big red car...


Off his Rocker


Rich passed along this photo from an article in the NYTimes, a shot of ex-Atlanta Brave pitcher John Rocker, notorious for his prejudiced comments against the riders of the No. 7 subway train to Shea Stadium:




I think the editor is still peeved at Rocker's comments and chose this photo as a comment on the state of Rocker's mental health. Otherwise, why choose this photo for an article about his comeback? If you can pry your eyes from his crazed expression or enormous mullet, you'll notice he's about to throw a breaking ball.


Wine and swine me


Two Mondays ago I attended a food and wine tasting event. The theme? Pinot and pork; these are a few of my favorite things. A local wine importer sponsored the event, and proceeds went to Slow Food U.S.A, an "educational organization dedicated to promoting stewardship of the land and ecologically sound food production; reviving the kitchen and the table as the centers of pleasure, culture, and community; invigorating and proliferating regional, seasonal culinary traditions; creating a collaborative, ecologically-oriented, and virtuous globalization; and living a slower and more harmonious rhythm of life."


The pork dishes? Delicious. As soon as the event began, everyone was fighting for a spot in one of the food lines to grab a sampler from one of the participating restaurants. A bite of pork belly here, a bbq pork sandwich nibble there, and before you know it you're stuffed. Quaff the equivalent in pinot and you're loopy to boot. Rookie mistake. Next time I'm going to pace myself and wait for everyone to tire themselves out, and then I'll make my move. The space, which appeared to be a night club after hours, didn't have enough tables. People were standing around trying to hold a wine glass and a small plate of food and to eat and drink, all at once. Not an easy task with only two arms.


My old roommate Robert first turned me on to pinot noir. Ever since Sideways, the popularity of pinot has soared, and unfortunately, most of the pinots I've tried since just don't measure up. The pinot noir I love tastes like earth, and the pinots I tried at this event tasted fruity, like light burgundies. This seems especially true of pinots from California, though I haven't sampled enough to assert that with any confidence.


The Contender




Everytime I watch The Contender, I think, "The soundtrack sounds like imitation Hans Zimmer."


It turns out that the reason for that is that the music is composed by Hans Zimmer. The theme is bombastic and over the top, but it's appropriate for a Mark Burnett reality show. Download the theme song here. The MP3 is just an extract; if you want the whole intro theme song, take the movie into Quicktime Pro and then extract the sound to an AIFF or WAV file. Use your preferred MP3 player to convert it to MP3 if necessary. It will be playing on my iPod Shuffle the next time I'm working the heavy bag at the gym.


The Contender is entertaining, but the ratings haven't met expectations. The show has one massive problem in the ratings dept.: none of the contestants are women. Not much way around that. By itself, that doesn't have to be a death sentence with female viewers, but the show doesn't offer too much else for women viewers except for each episode's short montage that sketches each of the two fighter's family and roots. The fighters don't engage in the type of catty fighting you see on other reality shows. Instead, they engage in macho cockfighting centered around perceived slights and acts of disrespect. When rivalries converge in a five round match, the show is at its best. Sometimes they don't, and the editors have to manufacture a storyline, e.g. "boxer vs. fighter" or "youth vs. experience". Those episodes drag.


The amount of crying on reality shows astonishes me. It also provides limitless hilarity. Contestants on Survivor start blubbering when they received a postcard from home, as if they'll never see their loved ones again. They live on an island for, what, a month or two if they're lucky to survive that long? This is why I'd make a terrible reality show contestant. My postcard would be from my sister, and it would read: "Hey dorkbutt. I can't believe you're on a reality show. The entire family is embarrassed. Sorry, I have to go, someone just pinged me for a chat." In interviews, I'd bemoan my lack of access to the Internet, Cubs box scores, and movie theatres. Not much drama there.


Boxers on The Contender weep when interviewed about their wife and daughter. Their emotional breakdowns are a bit more understandable since most of them box for a living and will probably fade into obscurity, unable to make a living in the sport. Still, and I do feel bad about it, I can't help laughing everytime another tough boxer starts sniffling. And look at those goofy grins on Sugar Ray and Sly in the banner above! Okay, now I'm crying.


Scatterplot


The whole world's getting fat

The prime culprit cited is urbanization and the changes it causes in diet and lifestyle. People move to cities and drink more sugary soft drinks and food drenched in cheap vegetable oils, while automobiles and tv's facilitate more sedentary lifestyles. Also, the market value of processed foods is 3X that of the foods straight off the farm, so multinational food companies add cheap sugar, fats, and oils to agricultural products.


On a related note, the USDA released a new food pyramid...s

Only available online, the pyramid is customized according to age, sex, and physical activity, 12 different pyramids in all. Seems to confusing to be practical. I'm to eat 9 ounces of grains, 3.5 cups of veggies, 2 cups of fruits, 3 cups of milk, and 6.5 ounces of meat & beans daily. Probably not going to happen. Not that I expected a magic bullet, but if one of the criticisms about the old pyramid was that everyone ignored it, this new pyramid isn't going to do much better. That little stick figure needs to work on his calves, and he has no neck, hands, or feet, which is quite sad.




Divorce rates not as high as people think

The common saying is that one in two marriages end in divorce, but the actual rate has never exceeded 41 percent, and it is on the decline among college graduates.


A handy new mid-range zoom for Nikon's digital SLRs

I've been looking for a lightweight mid-range zoom like this, especially for shooting sporting events. The lens is slow at f4-5.6, but that doesn't matter as much with a digital SLR b/c of adjustable ISO as long as the focus is quick.


Highlights from last week's late-night talk show monologues

Letterman on Tiger Woods: "Congratulations to Tiger Woods. Won his fourth Masters golf tournament. What an amazing accomplishment, tremendous. I was not aware of this, but if Tiger Woods wins one more green jacket, he officially becomes a Christo project."


An animation using the recent and popular Craiglist/GoogleMaps integration to show that as you move up in price in New York rentals, you move in closer and closer on Manhattan


This latest entry at Postsecret (a site that displays postcards, mailed in by random people, containing secrets) is funny, and mean


A Boards of Canada remix of "Broken Drum" from Beck's very cool Guero


Back from long weekend in DC


Back from a weekend in DC where I played my first rounds of golf this year with Ken, who was kind enough to put me up. I took the Washington Deluxe bus down, on Eleanor's recommendation, in lieu of the Chinatown buses. $35 round trip, reasonably clean coach buses and on-time performance. Can't complain, though I was riding during off-peak days. Riding buses from town to town, I always feel like the Bill Bixby Bruce Banner, or John Rambo from First Blood.


Beautiful weather all weekend. Spring is here, though my golf game is not. My highlight was hitting a 310 yard drive, aided by a slight downhill slope and a really dry fairway. We played Tom Doak's Beachtree Golf Course and Worthington Manor, the 2004 U.S. Open Qualifying Course. Both are good deals. Beachtree is links style on the front nine, and through the woods on the back nine. The fairways were wide open, greens in perfect condition. The front nine is tough. Worthington Manor is a challenging course. Very few fairways are flat. The entire course undulates, including the greens, and the pin placements were nasty. I can see why they use that as a U.S. Open Qualifying Course.


I also had a free afternoon to stroll around the Mall and see the sights. It's been a long time since I toured the monuments, and apparently this is a prime time to do so with the cherry blossoms in bloom. I must have walked nearly six or seven miles that day, across bridges, through museums, around reservoirs and fountains, up and down escalators and hills. I'll try and post a few pics from my visit when I've finished unpacking.


Until then, a quick tour of the world, URL style...


Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger elected the 265th pope

He was, from what I'd read, the prohibitive favorite. The election process is steeped in tradition and ritual. The longest election (conclave, to use official terminology) lasted two years, nine months and two days and elected Gregory X.


Gregory, not surprisingly, wrote new rules to speed things up. If no one was elected within three days, he decreed, rations were to be cut to one meal a day. After five more days, the cardinals would be restricted to bread and water.


Good for Gregory for cutting through the red tape.


Apple announces Final Cut Studio, including Final Cut Pro 5, Soundtrack Pro, Motion 2, and DVD Studio Pro 4

Time for me to start eating ramen again for a month.


Prose Before Hos

Word.


Hallelujah, Maria Sharapova turns 18 today

Men everywhere no longer have to feel guilty about their thoughts. Oh, what am I saying, of course they should.


Star Wars: Episode III Revenge of the Sith tickets are already on sale, though if you're reading this you may already be out of luck for the midnight first screenings

Buy tix from Movietickets.com or Fandango. Watch the new TV ads, which contain lots of Jedi on Jedi action. Battle of the Heroes, the first track from the John Williams soundtrack, is available at iTunes.


Zabasearch is creepy

Punch in a first and last name and a state of residence and find address, phone number, and birth month/year for a whole lot of people. Of course, if you really wanted this type of info, you could obtain it (probably the same way private investigators and Zaba did, through public records), but the ease of type-and-click seems like a stalker's dream.


Dot dot dot


Not Pron - The hardest riddle on the Internet

Learn about your computer along the way. Good fun.


Directory of Open Access Journals

Over 1,500 journals, with nearly 400 searchable at the article level. Not all are in English, and you always have to wonder about people who write for free journals. What's the business model? Oh wait, thousands of people write for free on the web all the time, like yours truly.


Yo La Tengo's WFMU setlist is awesome

YLT just took requests for covers and played an entire concert of them. Where's the torrent?!


Annotated slideshow of photos by Sebastião Salgado


"The Parachute Artist" - How Lonely Planet changed travel

From this week's Journeys issue of The New Yorker. One article in the issue mentioned a class of traveler called the "budget travel snob," which brought a smile to my face.


I sold a used copy of Salò on DVD on Amazon.com for $200

Apparently it's out of print, and the authentic Criterion 29-chapter version with the frosted ring at the center of the DVD is very rare. Criterion DVDs are the Ferraris of the DVD market; they retain their value, and in some fortuitous cases they shoot up in value when they go out of print. Salò is described as "perhaps the most disturbing and disgusting film ever made," a "loose adaptation of the Marquis de Sade's The 120 Days of Sodom."


The Narutrix

Audio from the Matrix movies, mixed with video from the anime series Naruto.


The Episode III l33t trailer

Video mash-ups/remixes are becoming commonplace. Every week brings a new one.


Google Satellite Maps has spawned a host of miles high voyeurs: interesting Google Satellite maps, Google sightseeing, baseball stadiums

With the U.S. dollar so weak, this is the state of American travel. Sad.


URLwell is a handy piece of Mac software for stashing URLs

Useful while surfing if you'd rather not maintain dozens of open tabs in your browser


Review: Freakonomics


Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything is a tour of University of Chicago economist Steven D. Levitt's most famous works, most of which have been pay-per-view on the Internet up until now. His most public introduction came through a profile in the NYTimes Sunday Magazine in August of 2003. The journalist assigned to write that profile, Stephen Dubner, was fascinated by Levitt, and the article struck a chord with the readers. Soon Levitt was flooded by requests for assistance from all sides (including a former Tour de France champion who wanted help proving that the current Tour was rife with doping; wouldn't I give up my lunch money to find out who that might be).


He was also flooded by requests from publishers to write a book. After all, which publisher wouldn't want the next The Tipping Point? Levitt had no time or interest in writing a book...unless perhaps Dubner helped him write it. Out of that collaboration was born Freakonomics.


Freakonomics does not have as cohesive a theme as a book like The Tipping Point or The Wisdom of Crowds. The unifying theme is Levitt's brain, and that brain contains more ideas than can be tied together neatly. If one theme emerges more strongly than any other, it's that economics as a discipline can reveal the way the world works, even when the truth is obscure or counter intuitive (thus the subtitle The Hidden Side of Everything).


Levitt admits to Dubner at one point, "I just don't know much about the field of economics. I'm not good at math, I don't know a lot of econometrics, and I also don't know how to do theory. If you ask me about whether the stock market's going to go up or down, if you ask me whether the economy's going to grow or shrink, if you ask me whether deflation's good or bad, if you ask me about taxes--I mean, it would be total fakery if I said I knew anything about any of those things." Thank goodness. If he wrote a book on those esoteric topics, the ones the public traditionally associates with economics, I wouldn't have any interest in reading it.


Instead, what fascinates Levitt is corruption, lying, deception, and crime, and that leads him towards interesting subject matter . Levitt's studies cover cheating schoolteachers and sumo wrestlers, drug gang economics, shrinking crime rates, even racism on the game show The Weakest Link. Perhaps that explains the "Freakonomics" and "Rogue Economist" in the book's title because Levitt's research methodology is familiar and hardly controversial. He uses the standard economics toolkit, familiar to most anyone with a basic understanding of statistics. Even if you've never studied statistics, you can easily understand why correlation doesn't always equal causality, the importance of good and clean data, and other such principles, all of which are explained in the book. This book is targeted at the public at large, not at economists.


Another reason Levitt has such broad appeal is that within his areas of interest, he formulates interesting questions. Asking the right question can turn a mundane investigation into a fascinating one. Finally, Levitt has an uncanny intuition that allows him to devise hypotheses that guide his research. He puts himself in the shoes of people, imagines how incentives might influence them or how he might cheat if he were to cheat, and from that arises hypotheses that focus him on useful slices of an otherwise overwhelming sea of data.


Levitt's thought processes are remarkably unemotional and non-judgmental, and his data-driven assertions are an antidote to the shrill, dogmatic, and often uninformed rhetoric permeating media. It's refreshing to hear, especially after the din of political bluster from all sides in the 2004 election. During his interview with the Society of Fellows at Harvard, Levitt was asked what his unifying theme was. He couldn't name one, and one suspects that in part that is because Levitt refuses to let any loyalty to any one theme prejudice his thinking. He follows the data where it leads him, however unpleasant the conclusions. Moral judgments and political correctness he'll leave to others.


Some of Levitt's fundamental ideas dominate the book, and these ideas are cited in the introduction:


  • Incentives are the cornerstone of modern life

  • Experts--from real-estate agents to criminologists--use their information advantage to serve their own agenda

  • Conventional wisdom is often wrong

  • Dramatic effects often have distant, even subtle, causes

  • Knowing what to measure and how to measure it makes a complicated world much less so


Levitt's most well-known study, and the one that brought him to national prominence, was one that showed that the legalization of abortion played a far greater role in lowering the crime rate in the 1990's than gun control, a strong economy, and innovative police strategies combined. It embodies the Levitt intellectual sleuthing technique. First he shows how much conventional wisdom about crime deterrence is false, using a variety of data. An improved economy, increased use of capital punishment, and innovative policing strategies didn't drive down crime, though higher rates of imprisonment and additional police did. Gun control laws? Most that have been passed to date fail because a criminal has no incentive to fill out paperwork to wait for a gun when a burgeoning black market exists.


Next, Levitt followed his intuition to a factor no one else had considered. The legalization of abortion in the U.S. meant that in the early 1990's, just as the first generation of children born after Roe vs. Wade was in its late teens (the age at which young men enter their criminal prime), the rate of crime began to fall. This generation did not have as many of the type of children most likely to become criminals, the children born to unmarried, poor, and/or teenage mothers.


Were abortion and crime merely correlated and not causal? Levitt tests this several ways. First he examines the crime decreases in states where abortion was legalized before Roe vs. Wade. He finds that states that legalized abortion earlier saw their crime rates drop earlier than in the other states. Levitt also searched for a correlation between each state's abortion rates and crime rates. He found a correlation. States with higher abortion rates in the 1970's saw the greatest decrease in crime rates in the 1990's. Levitt finds other correlations that support the link between abortion and crime rates.


Needless to say, Levitt's conclusion was not received well by many people, especially those who were pro-life. Levitt does not argue for or against abortion, though. As Levitt has said, "morality represents the way people would like the world to work, whereas economics represents how it really works."


The book contains a summary of many other studies and cases. Among the most interesting:


  • A day care center had a policy requiring parents to pick up their children at by 4 p.m. But many parents were late, causing a teacher to stay late. A pair of economists proposed a fine for tardy parents and offered to test their solution. Once the fine was instituted, the number of late pickups increased, almost doubling. Why?

  • When President Bush signed the No Child Left Behind Act in 2002, "high-stakes" testing went into place, holding schools accountable for the results of their students' test scores. Whether you're for or against the law, one effect was undeniable: the incentives for teachers changed such that teachers had an incentive to cheat. How did teachers respond to these incentives, and how did Levitt search for cheating teachers?

  • Do sumo wrestlers cheat, and if so, how and why?

  • Which of the following five terms have a strong positive correlation to the ultimate sales price of a home, and which five have a strong negative correlation? Fantastic, Granite, Spacious, State-of-the-Art, !, Corian, Charming, Maple, Great Neighborhood, Gourmet

  • How might one test for discrimination on the game show The Weakest Link? What were the results of just such a study?

  • What are the economics of a drug gang like, and how is a drug gang like McDonald's?

  • What is more dangerous around the house to your children, a gun or a swimming pool?

  • What are eight factors that correlate strongly with a child having high test scores in school, and what are eight that do not? Some of these will be surprising to parents, especially those who obsess over their kids. It's not that parenting doesn't matter, but parents matter to their children in a way that most parents will not have thought of.

  • Does the name you give your child affect his/her life? Does a name matter? Levitt collaborated with Roland Fryer on a study of black vs. white names: do distinctively black names disadvantage people? One random but somewhat amusing tidbit in this chapter: Fryer recounts a story of a woman who called into a radio show angry that her niece had been given a name pronounced shuh-TEED but spelled Shithead. I'm no economist but I'm going to hypothesize that that name disadvantaged that girl.

  • What causes a names to gain in popularity anyhow? Does it come from celebrities? Does it start with popularity among high income, high education families and trickle down the socioeconomic ladder?


I devoured the book over two sleepless nights, the first time that's happened in a long time. Levitt is the type of guy I'd love to sit next to at a dinner party. I suspect there are few topics Levitt couldn't analyze in a unique and enlightening way. After this book is published, getting on Levitt's calendar at all, let alone chatting him up over a meal, will be considerably tougher. Getting inside Levitt's head, though, will be much easier starting tomorrow, April 12, when Freakonomics hits bookstores nationwide.


Economics is sexy again, Levitt is its pinup, and this book will turn him into household name.


TGIF


Wow, they are taking gamesmanship to a whole new level in tennis these days


I'm not sure I'm reading this correctly: did Roger Ebert give Eros zero stars or four stars?

Reading the review, it seems he at least liked the Wong Kar-Wai film of the trilogy, so zero stars is surprising. On the other hand, he called the Antonioni piece an embarrassment, so four stars doesn't make sense either.

ADDENDUM: Okay, the website has been updated to clear things up. Ebert gave a different rating to each of the three pieces of the trilogy. Wong Kar-Wai received four stars, Soderbergh three stars, and Antonioni just one. Their website just wasn't primed to handle movies receiving more than one rating, thus the confusion.


Mr. T says treat your mother right (Windows Media, via Stereogum)


Coincidence: I was grocery shopping in Chinatown just two days ago, and stopped for noodles at Marco Polo. Two days later? That same shop shows up in Aliens Loves Predator (a funny one, by the way)


BET developing their own Apprentice knockoff hosted by Damon Dash. Humiliating elimination ritual? Dash removes a special gold chain from the contestant's neck

I'm not making this up, though maybe someone else is. I hope it's true, though


Some really late Sundance reviews, including Kung Fu Hustle, The Ballad of Jack and Rose, and The Jacket


It's been almost two and a half months since my trip to Sundance, but some of the movies I saw there have yet to reach theaters so perhaps these impressions from memory will still be of use. Filmmakers continue to go to Sundance to spread the word about their movies, despite all the media attention focused on stars partying and receiving swag from the various sponsors. Many directors and actors journey out for their ten or fifteen minutes of Q&A after each screening, and many will fade back into obscurity. I've seen a lot of movies in the past year but have been terrible about recording my impressions here. When I see the movies at Sundance and other film festivals, I feel like I owe it to the filmmakers to spread the word. Fortunately, many of the movies I saw this year did get picked up for distribution and will reach a broad audience.


These are my thoughts on movies I saw my first two days at Sundance, listed in the order I saw them. By chance, the list includes one movie that came and went, one that is out in theaters now, one that opens in LA/NY tomorrow, and one that may not see big screen distribution.


_______________________________________


Saturday morning, our entire gang went out for our first movie of Sundance at Eccles Auditorium. Ellie Parker stars Naomi Watts as a struggling actress in Los Angeles, attending audition after audition, fighting to maintain her identity and her integrity while navigating the de-humanizing profession of acting in Los Angeles. Like the new HBO series Unscripted, Ellie Parker de-glamorizes the lives of actors, reminding us that for every Hollywood star are hundreds of dreamers whose souls wither from year after over year of being treated like human cattle.


Scott Coffey, an old acting classmate of Watts, wrote and directed. They began shooting five years ago, when Watts actually was struggling to make it as an actress in Los Angeles. Of course, in the ensuing five years, she became one of Hollywood's A-list actresses. That's fortunate for Watts, but a development that blunts the impact of the movie's message.


The movie opens strong. Naomi Watts rushes from one audition to the next, and the shots of her in the car, preparing for the audition, changing outfits while driving, shouting at other L.A. drivers, and bopping to techno music are genuinely funny. Her lines for one audition in a Brooklyn-based drug movie are too profane to print here, but none of us could stop reciting those lines the rest of the weekend (get me on the phone sometime after a few drinks and I'll do my impression of Aussie Watts doing Brooklyn mob floozy). From there we get a glimpse into Watts' chaotic personal and emotional lives. Keanu Reeves and his band Dogstar make a cameo, with Watts as a blathering groupie, jacked up on drugs. I wondered if they shot that scene before or after Watts did Mulholland Drive.


Ellie Parker was originally a short, but after a solid reception at Sundance, Coffey decided to stretch it into a full-length feature. Unfortunately, the narrative suffers for it. Parts of the movie feel like padding, like a sequence when Watts goes to a zoo and stares wistfully at gorillas running about. It's meant to reveal her inner turmoil. Everyone knows, however, that Watts is starring in Peter Jackson's version of King Kong this summer. From staring at gorillas at a zoo to co-starring next to the biggest gorilla of them all; it's an unfortunate coincidence that just reminds the audience that Watts is no longer the unknown she plays in this movie. With some more aggressive editing, Ellie Parker would work as well as a one hour special for television. I don't believe Ellie Parker was picked up, but hopefully it will make it to the Sundance Channel or DVD.


The movie was shot on a 1-chip Sony consumer camcorder, so blown up to movie theater screen size, it looks awful. The shoddy cinematography contributes to the documentary/verite feel, though, and that's part of the movie's charm. And Watts is excellent. Perhaps because of all her years fighting to make it as an actress, she has little to no vanity. She's willing to turn herself inside-out on camera, to be emotionally naked on screen. The adjective brave is overused in describing actors, but it comes to mind when she's on screen.


One of the funniest moments at the screening occurred during Q&A. No one was asking any questions of Chevy Chase, and so at one point he grabbed the mike and said, "I'm not going to answer any questions." Finally someone bit and asked how Chase got involved.


"My agent sent me the script, said I should do it. So here I am in Sundance. I don't know anyone. I have no friends. It's very lonely."


We had no other movies on Saturday, so we spent the afternoon on the slopes of Park City. Sundance Film Fest inflates prices of lodging in Park City, but the benefit for those who attend is one empty ski run after another. Utah had a fantastic winter for skiing, and we treated Park City as our personal playground. In the evening, we cooked a huge feast back at our lodge, grilling steak on our deck and soaking in the hot tub. Even Karen's old friend Cortney drove out from her home in Utah to spend the evening with us. Good times.


After dinner, we fought off food coma and went to the Amazon/UTA Party. It was fun to catch up with old work colleagues, discuss movies with Jeff when he wasn't besieged by movie stars, and to take in the scene. Half of Sundance is like a high school dance, everyone checking everyone else out to see who is worth talking to. Everyone wants to talk up the food chain. You can be disgusted by it all and reminisce about the good old days of Sundance, or you can laugh at it all while enjoying a few free drinks.


_______________________________________




Joseph Gordon-Levitt (left) and Lukas Haas in Brick


Sunday we had a four movies with only a break for lunch. It's the type of day I have no problem with but feel guilty subjecting others to. Mike, Joannie, Karen, and Arya were good sports and put up with my film nerd itinerary.


Rian Johnson's Brick is a modern high school drama cast as a film noir. Brendan Fry (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) is the cool-on-the-outside, wounded-on-the-inside bleeding heart hero, investigating the murder of his ex-girlfriend, willing to risk life and limb to unravel the dark and mysterious entanglements that she couldn't escape. Old film noir characters all appear, albeit played by familiar high school social archetypes. The cruel sex vixen is the high school drama queen, the hero's well-informed sidekick is a computer nerd, the femme fatale is the head cheerleader, and a mob boss is played by Lukas Haas as a drug dealer living in his mom's basement (until I read Freakonomics, written by another Levitt, not related to Joseph Gordon-Levitt, I didn't realize why it was that so many gang members live with their mothers).


The dialogue is straight film-noir, delivered at an ear-blistering pace. Director Rian Johnson is clearly a film noir buff, and his rendition of film noir dialogue and cinematography is exacting and faithful. Old film noir movie dialogue, though stylized, has a certain snap and sting that is lacking in modern movies. And there's a certain pleasure in seeing how seriously each of the actors takes his or her film noir archetype. However, the conceit at the heart of this movie, high school drama cast as film noir, doesn't transcend stylish experiement. It's an intriguing choice but doesn't provide any deep insight into either film noir or high school dramas. We've all been guilty of exaggerating the import of our high school social and emotional dramas, but everyone in the movie takes themselves so seriously that by movie's end it comes off as vanity. The movie feels a bit like a creative exercise, albeit one with high production values and a consistently nervous and sinister atmosphere.


The mystery itself is complex, and it took a van ride home of conversation for all of us to lay out the story clearly in our own heads. I seem to recall Sony Pictures Classics picking up Brick for $1 million, so most of America should have an opportunity to see the movie on the big screen. Rian Johnson seemed like an extremely affable and appreciative young guy during Q&A. Hopefully he'll find more work in Hollywood; he has talent.


_______________________________________




Everybody was kung-fu fighting...hee-ya


There's usually one movie every year that just leaves me grinning ear to ear, a movie that's pure fun. I didn't expect to find that movie for 2005 as early as January, but as soon as the end credit for Kung Fu Hustle appeared on screen, I knew I'd be unlikely to have as much fun at any other movie this year. Stephen Chow's follow-up to Shaolin Soccer is a gem in its genre; I'm just not sure what genre that is.


As with many Hong Kong movies, Kung Fu Hustle defies easy categorization because it embodies more genres than you'd expect to see mixed in one movie. The joy of Kung Fu Hustle is that it spans them so effortlessly. One minute the movie is an action flick, the next it's a dance scene from a musical. One scene will have the pathos of a tragedy, and the next scene will be a slapstick comedy with the physical genius of a Keaton or Jackie Chan. Stephen Chow, who wrote, produced, and directed, loves Hollywood movies, and he pays tribute to at least a dozen Hollywood movies and directors, from West Side Story to The Matrix to The Untouchables to The Shining to Batman to the Road Runner.


Sing (Stephen Chow), a bumbling thief, tries to shake down some of the residents of Pig Sty Alley for some money. As has been the case most of his life, he fails miserably, but in the process, he attracts the murderous Axe Gang. The residents of Pig Sty Alley look like a motley bunch, but they have a few surprises up their sleeves, and when the two groups clash, a delirious mayhem ensues.


The landlord (Wah Yuen) and landlady (Yuen Qiu) of Pig Sty Alley steal this movie. They reminded me of a couple of next door neighbors from my childhood, and they'll be familiar to old school martial arts fans. Bruce Lee cleaned Wah Yuen's clock in The Chinese Connection, and Yuen Qiu is a former martial arts actress who hasn't been on screen in years. Their appearance, and their identities in this movie, pay homage to their past in Chinese cinema. They aren't the only screen legends on display; Leung Siu Lung plays the Beast. Quentin Tarantino, for one, casts many of his favorite actors growing up in his movie as his way of paying tribute to their influence on him. Many people find this type of inside circle back-slapping annoying, but it happens in every field, and it doesn't feel forced here. Most people won't even notice.


Stephen Chow has a certain understated manner about him that distinguishes him from other slapstick martial arts comedians (there are many) that have come before him. He doesn't overact, instead surrounding himself with more exaggerated physical comedians, in contrast to someone like Jackie Chan whose dorky Uncle personality and cartoonish facial expressions center his movies around him. The low-key approach works for Chow, also serving as a counterbalance to some of the gaudy special effects. Think Cartoon Laws of Physics depicted in live action and you'll be in the right ballpark.


Though I still can't pin it to one genre, Kung Fu Hustle is most certainly a genre movie. If you had to weight it, it's 50% martial arts, 35% comedy, 10% drama, 5% romance. Seen att a film festival, and among film geeks, especially devotees of martial arts, it's joyride. I know I would never take some people to see it; they'd find it silly and a waste of celluloid, but then I wouldn't take other people to see a French New Wave retrospective either. Some people don't like chocolate, some don't even like watching movies. That's fine, but they're missing out.


Stephen Chow came out after the movie to a standing ovation, the only one I saw at Sundance this year. Kung Fu Hustle had distribution even before Sundance, and joy of joys, it hits theaters in NY/LA April 8 (tomorrow) and nationwide April 22. Catch it with a group; it's one of those movies best enjoyed in the company of others.


_______________________________________


Rebecca Miller, daughter of Arthur Miller, is married to Daniel Day-Lewis. I don't think she had to fly to Italy where he was cobbling shoes to convince him to act in her movie The Ballad of Jack and Rose. Day-Lewis plays Jack, the last of a hippie commune who lives with his teenage daughter Rose (Camilla Belle) on an island away from civilization. They live in harmony with the environment, or at least according to Jack's ideals, and they wage a war with developers building properties near their house. Jack and Rose live alone, both literally, in this outpost away from civilization, and figuratively, in their idealism. When Jack brings his girlfriend (Catherine Keener) and her sons back from the mainland to stay with him and Rose, expected and unexpected clashes and connections follow.


The movie examines and questions the healthiness and sustainability of strict idealism in any form. To adhere to such standards not only sets up painful and inevitable losses of innocence but may not be sustainable. Miller employs a snake in one sequence, its escape coinciding with one such loss of innocence, and it's not nearly as heavy-handed or forced a symbolic moment as it sounds. When Day-Lewis confronts his nemesis, a land developer played by Beau Bridges, Day-Lewis, Keener, Belle, and Ryan McDonald as Keener's son Rodney are excellent. This was the best-acted movie I saw at Sundance.


The subject matter is touching and intelligent but also serious about its ideas. It won't win a huge mainstream audience but should appeal to moviegoers who seek something original and thought-provoking amidst the more predictable fare at the cineplex.


Miller spent years and years working on the script, and the characters of Jack and Rose are based in part on two female characters from a short she screened several years back at Sundance. Day-Lewis came on stage for Q&A looking like he'd just come off the slopes, dressed head-to-toe in ski gear and sporting a mountain-man beard. There's no art about him; he answers questions in such a direct manner it's disarming, almost intimidating. He's also a brilliant, serious actor, and I can imagine no other actor today who would be as appropriate to play the part of a man so committed to his ideals.


_______________________________________


Our fourth and final movie screening on Sunday was John Maybury's The Jacket, out in theaters just a short while ago. The theater was all abuzz before the screening began as celebs strolled in and fought through adoring crowds armed with digital cameras. Chevy Chase. Kevin Bacon. Keira Knightley and her boyfriend. Jennifer Jason Leigh. Adrien Brody and a woman I assumed was his girlfriend. Even Tobey Maguire and Steven Soderbergh (representing Section Eight, I think) dropped in.


The Jacket reminded me of The Machinist. I saw both at Sundance, and both were mysteries, visual puzzles. The movie begins with U.S. Marine Jack Starks (Adrien Brody) apparently getting killed as a soldier in the Gulf War in Iraq. The movie then cuts to Vermont, where Starks, apparently having survived, but with no memory of the incident, hitchhiking along a Vermont road in the middle of winter. He helps a woman and her daughter whose car has broken down, and then a stranger gives him a lift. A policeman flags the car down, and one more blackout later, and Starks finds himself on trial for the policeman's murder.


Found insane, Starks ends up in a mental institution. There, Kris Kristofferson subjects Starks to a brutal experimental treatment in which Starks is drugged, tied down with straps, and slid into one of those metal drawers where they store corpses in the morgue. I think I saw something similar on an episode of Fear Factor once. Surprisingly, Kristofferson is not a patient at this mental institution but a doctor. If Kristofferson were my psychological doctor, that alone would give me nightmares, without the drugs and solitary confinement.


In the drawer, Starks begins experiencing visions. Or are they visions? In one such "dream," he encounters a young waitress named Jackie (Keira Knightley doing a Marlene Dietrich smoky voice) at a rest stop. It's Christmas Eve, and taking pity on Starks, Jackie offers him her sofa for the night. I've had the same dream numerous times, and I know it's a vision, but if being drugged, shackled, and locked in the morgue for the evening is the price to pay to shack up with Keira Knightley, consider me patient zero. Starks doesn't think it's a fantasy, though, and begins to believe that these visions are the key to his salvation.


I'm willing to hang in there with a convoluted plot if there's a piece of cheese at the end of the maze (especially if it's from Murray's Cheese Shop, mmm), but some movies need clarity (e.g., did Sharon Stone kill those guys in Basic Instinct? It matters, and c'mon, she and Michael Douglas are obviously not doing the sequel anymore, so someone needs to come clean). I'm willing to tolerate abstraction if it serves a purpose or is intended to simulate the subconscious (David Lynch, for example, or perhaps Bunuel). But the open-ended and complex mystery in The Jacket just left my eyes rolling because it feels like lazy plotting.


I thought I saw a clue in The Jacket, a little string of beads that two different characters were twirling around their fingers. It was subtle, and I thought it might mean the two were the same person. In Q&A, Maybury revealed that he had both actors holding that trinket solely to mess with the audience's mind, that it was meaningless. At that point I gave up on the movie. Jack Starks sees his tombstone, and on it we see that he is born on Christmas Day. Does that mean he's Christ? After Maybury's admission that the string of beads was merely random and unimportant, I didn't care anymore.


When people asked what the movie meant, Maybury replied, "What does it mean to you?" It's a common response at Sundance; directors hate to explain what their movies mean. If a magician explains how a trick works, the magic is gone, right? Well, sometimes the spectator doesn't care how the trick was done because it wasn't all that magical in the first place.




What, you wanted a picture of Kris Kristofferson?


Is nothing sacred?


From Eric, who will find this more offensive than almost anyone I know: Cookie Monster has gone from "C is for cookie, that's good enough for me" to "A Cookie Is Sometimes Food" as part of an Sesame Street effort to teach moderation. Furthermore:


"Sesame Street" also will introduce new characters, such as talking eggplants and carrots...


Why not just go all the way and show Cookie Monster getting angioplasty?


Levitt vs. Beane


Steven Levitt is finally posting to his Freakonomics blog, and it didn't take him long to stir up a hornet's nest. Levitt is skeptical of Billy Beane's genius, as described in Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game (read here, here, and here). Levitt lays out a simple test to answer this debate:


In the spirit of data, the skeptics amongst you should tell me how many games the A's need to win this year or over the next five years so that they would feel that Moneyball is validated. My own view is that if the A's win 81 games a year for the next five years, it is more likely that Beane was lucky than good. If they win 97 a year, I'll happily concede that Beane is the best. Even an average of 90 games

a year and I will acknowledge he is brilliant.


Beane has a worshipful following among the sabermetric crowd, so they've responded in force with comments to Levitt's posts. I'm not entirely clear what is being debated, and so it's not clear to me that the above test is the right test.


Is the question whether Beane has succeeded because of the skills attributed to him in Moneyball? That would require some clarification of what those were (I loaned my copy of Moneyball out to someone and can't remember who that was). Even then, I'm not sure that all of Billy Beane's tactics were revealed in the book (Beane wouldn't be that smart if he gave away his recipe to a reporter to publish in a book), and now that several other teams are operating with similar tactics (the Red Sox and the teams run by his former assistants, the Dodgers and Blue Jays), it's likely that he's had to adjust his strategy.


If the question is simply whether Beane can maintain a 90 win a season team with a small to mid-market budget, then the test is better, but not perfect. Just a bit of bad luck, a severe injury to one of the team's offensive or pitching stars, can derail a 90 win season. And it's possible the A's will elevate their payroll in the future, introducing a new variable to the test. Incidentally, the A's have won 90 games a season for the last five seasons, and it's not the first time in their history they've done that. To add another five 90 win seasons to that would be a string that I believe has only been done by only one team in history, the 1947-1958 Yankees (someone please correct me if I'm wrong). If Beane can do that, then Levitt is right, Beane is on to something.


Now that the A's have traded away Mulder and Hudson, people can no longer claim that the A's success is purely a result of the Big Three. I'm curious to see what happens, and personally I do think Beane is a very good general manager.


Meanwhile, Levitt lives up to his reputation as an original. I was going to say contrarian, but I'm not sure Beane's philosophy is widespread enough to qualify as conventional wisdom. Economist bloggers, when they aren't discussing interest rates, are among the most interesting voices on the web.


Saul Bellow passes away


Saul Bellow, R.I.P.


Star Wars fans line up outside Grauman's Chinese Theater for the premiere of Episode III. One problem: that theater isn't premiering the movie (via Slashdot)


The Year of the Yao

A movie about Yao Ming. Who picked that goofy title?


MemoryMaps

Annotated photos using satellite pics from the new GoogleMaps/Keyhole integration


Yahoo's Toolbar now works with Firefox on the Mac


How does sleep compare with death?

I never thought of these tradeoffs. Fascinating.


Flat World


Not a new topic, by any means, but one that continues to interest me. Thomas Friedman writes in the NYTimes Sunday Magazine about the flattening of the world, or the convergence of events and technology that allow work to be moved anywhere in the world, in pieces or in totality. A few quotes:


This has been building for a long time. Globalization 1.0 (1492 to 1800) shrank the world from a size large to a size medium, and the dynamic force in that era was countries globalizing for resources and imperial conquest. Globalization 2.0 (1800 to 2000) shrank the world from a size medium to a size small, and it was spearheaded by companies globalizing for markets and labor. Globalization 3.0 (which started around 2000) is shrinking the world from a size small to a size tiny and flattening the playing field at the same time. And while the dynamic force in Globalization 1.0 was countries globalizing and the dynamic force in Globalization 2.0 was companies globalizing, the dynamic force in Globalization 3.0 -- the thing that gives it its unique character -- is individuals and small groups globalizing. Individuals must, and can, now ask: where do I fit into the global competition and opportunities of the day, and how can I, on my own, collaborate with others globally? But Globalization 3.0 not only differs from the previous eras in how it is shrinking and flattening the world and in how it is empowering individuals. It is also different in that Globalization 1.0 and 2.0 were driven primarily by European and American companies and countries. But going forward, this will be less and less true. Globalization 3.0 is not only going to be driven more by individuals but also by a much more diverse -- non-Western, nonwhite -- group of individuals. In Globalization 3.0, you are going to see every color of the human rainbow take part.

This quiet crisis is a product of three gaps now plaguing American society. The first is an ''ambition gap.'' Compared with the young, energetic Indians and Chinese, too many Americans have gotten too lazy. As David Rothkopf, a former official in the Clinton Commerce Department, puts it, ''The real entitlement we need to get rid of is our sense of entitlement.'' Second, we have a serious numbers gap building. We are not producing enough engineers and scientists. We used to make up for that by importing them from India and China, but in a flat world, where people can now stay home and compete with us, and in a post-9/11 world, where we are insanely keeping out many of the first-round intellectual draft choices in the world for exaggerated security reasons, we can no longer cover the gap. That's a key reason companies are looking abroad. The numbers are not here. And finally we are developing an education gap. Here is the dirty little secret that no C.E.O. wants to tell you: they are not just outsourcing to save on salary. They are doing it because they can often get better-skilled and more productive people than their American workers.



They have a saying at Microsoft about their Asia center, which captures the intensity of competition it takes to win a job there and explains why it is already the most productive research team at Microsoft: ''Remember, in China, when you are one in a million, there are 1,300 other people just like you.''

These are some of the reasons that Bill Gates, the Microsoft chairman, warned the governors' conference in a Feb. 26 speech that American high-school education is ''obsolete.'' As Gates put it: ''When I compare our high schools to what I see when I'm traveling abroad, I am terrified for our work force of tomorrow. In math and science, our fourth graders are among the top students in the world. By eighth grade, they're in the middle of the pack. By 12th grade, U.S. students are scoring near the bottom of all industrialized nations. . . . The percentage of a population with a college degree is important, but so are sheer numbers. In 2001, India graduated almost a million more students from college than the United States did. China graduates twice as many students with bachelor's degrees as the U.S., and they have six times as many graduates majoring in engineering. In the international competition to have the biggest and best supply of knowledge workers, America is falling behind.''

So parents, throw away the Game Boy, turn off the television and get your kids to work. There is no sugar-coating this: in a flat world, every individual is going to have to run a little faster if he or she wants to advance his or her standard of living. When I was growing up, my parents used to say to me, ''Tom, finish your dinner -- people in China are starving.'' But after sailing to the edges of the flat world for a year, I am now telling my own daughters, ''Girls, finish your homework -- people in China and India are starving for your jobs.''