That's entertainment

Anyone who knows me, knows I watch a lot of movies. I don't review all of them because I'm lazy. That should be obvious to anyone who followed what was supposed to be a blog of reviews of books I read last year. I just can't commit to formally expressing an opinion on everything I read or watch. I read a lot. I watch even more movies. If I were to review everything, I wouldn't have time to play my 360. So, there's the explanation for the death of ZK's Reading List and why you'll never see ZK's Balcony.

Now, I'd like to figure out how to move the reading list posts into the main blog, but I'm not sure Blogger has the capability. It might...but see that whole "lazy" excuse above. If I can figure it out, I'll do it. Until then, I'll spotlight some of my more entertained moments here.

Anyway...here are some movies I've seen recently.

Pan's Labyrinth -Easily one of the best movies we'll see this year. Partly a tale of revolutionary Spain and partly a story of a child's imagination, this movie stayed with me for hours after I watched it. Some people have said that it's overly gorey, but I didn't think so (um...you should consider who you're reading when you evaluate the preceding statement). I enjoyed the stark contrast between the gritty war movie and the dreamlike colors and textures of the fairy tale. This movie shows the amazing ability of the human mind to cope with tragedy. Hard to believe this is the same director who gave us the craptacular Blade II.

The Queen - I had to get over two things very quickly once this movie started. First, it wasn't a biopic about Freddie Mercury. Second, it focused around the royal reaction to Princess Di's death. I never understood the whole "Diana" thing and why people are so obsessed with her, but this film used her death to effectively show the difference in how British people percieved the Royals and how the Royals perceived how the British people perceived them. This was a nice, fast film that explored the relevance of an historical Monarchy in a democratic country. While Helen Mirren is great in the film, my favorite role is Michael Sheen, as a young and optomistic Tony Blair. The scenes between he and Mirren are great as old world and new world (governmentally speaking) collide and interact.

Night at the Museum - Shut up, I like kids movies. This was a cute and fun movie in which Ben Stiller didn't annoy the hell out of me and Robin Williams didn't totally suck ass. If you want to entertain some children, this would be a good way.

The Departed - There's something really annoying about sitting in a movie and realizing half way through that you've seen it already. Had I read anything about this movie, I'd have learned that it was based on a trilogy of Hong Kong cop movies that I'd seen parts of. Important parts. Parts like the end. Oh well. It was a pleasant romp through the south end with Leo and Matt playing off Jack Nicholson. Marky Mark was okay in it, though his character conveniently disappears for part of the film where he could have cleared up a lot of confusion for one of the main characters.

That's all I can say without spoiling the film. You'll know what I mean when you see the movie.

The Pursuit of Happyness - As much as I hate seeing real life couples on film together (except for Brad and Angelina in Mr. and Mrs. Smith...Gods that was hot), I hate seeing parents and children together in a movie too. Will Smith and his kid pull this off though. I never once wanted to punch little Jaden in the throat. That aside, this movie is about the rags to about to make riches life of Chris Garner, who went from selling medical devices, to being homeless while trying to become a stock broker with a major Wall Street firm. While I really wanted to hate this movie, I found it pretty entertaining. It does get incredibly sappy at some points (for me anyway), but it's worth watching. That being said, the book is a hundred times better - and it doesn't feature Will Smith. Oh...and I wasn't crying - there was something in my eye.

Children of Men - See this movie. It's an awesome look at a bleak future where for some reason, women haven't been able to give birth for almost 20 years. The U.S. and the rest of the world are broken nations having been undone by terrorist attacks and only England is thriving due to the measures she's taken to protect her borders and instill order. Now, add a plot about an illegal immigrant who's mysteriously pregnant, and hijinx ensue. The movie is a bit heavy handed with its politics, but it's fairly believable with most of how it views the future. If you like
dystopia, this is the movie for you. Plus, Clive Owen is super cool and Michael Caine gives a performance that steals the show.

The God Who Wasn't There - Brian Flemming is an atheist who resents his Christian upbringing. In order to put his fundamentalist roots behind him, he made this documentary. It starts off as a pretty interesting look at a fundamental flaw in Christianity - the lack of proof that Jesus Christ actually existed. Flemming speaks with a number of people who've investigated the historical Jesus and points out that most of the miracles attributed to Christ have also been attributed to other characters at the time. Flemming spends a brief moment talking about the gospels and how the books of the New Testament were chosen, and he shows how much of Christianity can be attributed not to Jesus, but to the Apostle Paul. It's a fascinating look at Christianity and along the way, I found myself scrambling for a pen and paper to write down a list of books to add to my reading list.

The end of this documentary peters out though (pun completely intended) as Flemming confronts the principal of the fundamentalist school he attended as a child. While I'm all for eviscerating people who have the nerve to tell children that their hellbound little sinners, I don't know what it added to the film, other than the satisfaction flemming must have gotten from the act. Instead, I'd have rather he put in some of the extended interviews that can be found in the DVD's special features. This is definitely a DVD you need to watch the special features on. The actual documentary is only an hour or so long, but there's twice that amount of extended interviews. Also, there's a commentary track by Richard Dawkins - the enemy of all things religious.

Talladega Nights - Ugh. I will take some of the blame for Will Ferrell making so much money in his career. I honestly used to find him funny. In Old School, I loved him. I liked the Legend of Ron Burgundy thing he did. Everyone told me this movie was hilarious, yet I was bored throughout the entire thing. I even watched the unrated version which you'd think would have some nudity or something to keep me interested. But there wasn't. Nothing. Nada. It is probably one of the unfunniest comedies ever made. There are six jokes in it that I remember being hilarious, but I could have seen them all on youtube. Fuck you Will Ferrell.

Oh...and apologies to PBRStreetgang, to whom I gave the false information that the dad from Silver Spoons was in the movie. It was actually the Sherriff from American Gothic and the boss from Office Space. I think they look alike.

Texas Chainsaw Massacre: The Beginning - Doesn't even deserve a review. How about we leave bad old horror movies back in the decades that made them entertaining to watch.

The Fountain - I think I should have been high in order to truly appreciate Darren Aronofsky's latest movie. I'm not sure what I expected going in, but it wasn't what I got. This trippy film that bounces from surreal futuristic visions of nirvana to a tale of a conquistador to the story of a New York doctor was sad and intriguing, if hard to decipher. I really liked the movie, I just can't explain why.

I could go on forever, I watch a lot of movies. But I think that's enough rehashing for now. Next up...books.

Jesus Camp: The Review

At some point during the holidays, I watched the movie Jesus Camp and it was pretty much exactly what I expected. It was a smartly edited movie that was pieced together and framed in such a way to make a point that Christians are crazy, and Christian children are being brainwashed. The directors claim that they didn't editorialize during the filmaking process at all and wanted to be fair. I don't know the directors, but I believe them. I believe that any religious ritual, when shown to the general public, will seem a bit crazy to people who don't subscribe to the religion the ritual belongs to. It's not the directors' fault (not totally, but I'll discuss that later) that we get this impression of craziness, it's our own perception instead.

If you haven't seen this movie, I recommend it. The film focuses on a group of children who attend a charismatic Christian themed camp in the midwest. It shows young children talking about how they came to Christ because they knew that there was something more to life than what they were getting at the age of eight or nine. The kids go on to talk about how they're going to be the generation that takes back America for Christ and bring back morality to our society. These children pray, and preach, and pray, and cry, and expound on theological concepts that should be years beyond them. The movie does a good job of showing us how these kids come to their conclusions and how they're indoctrinated and trained for a spiritual war for our country.

Some reviewers have said that the film is biased and I agree somewhat. It is biased, but it's also fair. I know that sounds contradictory, but bear with me for a second.

The film is fair because it doesn't do a Moorian edit of reality where the director lies with facts. The directors turned the cameras on and both kids and adults were allowed to state their views. There's no hatchet job being done. The people are portrayed as they presented themselves and their views are honestly presented.

The bias is in some of the directorial decisions made. There are moments in the film where over a hundred kids are praying in tounges and crying for salvation. It's obviously an emotionally intense moment for the kids, and if you're on the outside of this world, it can be disturbing. The directors obviously thought so because the soundtrack for these moments is a dark ochestral number that seems ripped from the score of The Omen. The effect is one that fills you with dread over the future of these poor children. However, if the directors had chosen some type of light and joyful spiritual as background for the same scene, the effect would have been completely different for some viewers. So the correct choice may have been to not have background music at all. The film is filled with these moments where the music or the framing give a scene a much more sinister feel than is called for.

If you can get past that minor criticism, it's not a bad look at how children are raised in one particular version of Christianity and regardless of what some Christian leaders will tell you, it's spot on. I've been to a Jesus camp and I've been one of these kids who barely knows how the world works, but will tell you with absolute surety that you're going to Hell if you don't recognize Jesus as lord. Watching this film caused some serious flashbacks for me, so I dismiss anyone who says it's an inaccurate or manufactured portrayal of Charismatics.

Anyway, that's my review of Jesus camp. I'll talk more about religion later.

I'm a Y. Are you?

Well, I haven't posted in awhile. To the few people who care, I apologize. Life's been wierd - weird enough to warrant the rare and elusive PERSONAL LIFE BLOG(tm).

Back in September, my employer and I reached the mutual conclusion that I was growing unhappy with my job. I was reluctant to admit this since I really loved the company, but it was time to move on. After that realization, I figured I'd start the six month process of looking for another job. My employer had a shorter time frame in mind - one and a half months. So, after a lot of running around trying to tie up loose ends, I became unemployed on November 16, 2006.

I'd been given a bonus and had enough savings so that money wouldn't really be an issue. This made the first two or three weeks really seem like more of a vacation than unemployment. I woke up late, started some home improvement projects, wrote some, and casually went on interview after interview, not finding a job that really spoke to me. It was nice to have the luxury to say "No thank you, that's really not what I'm looking for."

Somewhere around the one month mark, I began to get restless. I really wanted to work. I'd narrowed the potential employers down to two jobs that each made offers. Both offers were good, offered great opportunities, and for companies I wouldn't mind working for. Neither was offering the money I wanted, but after some negotiating both raised their salaries. In the end, I chose a consulting gig (which is a really fancy way of saying that I'm temping professionally) on the basis that I probably won't get bored, I'll get exposure to a lot of different focuses in the accounting profession, and after three years of bouncing around, I'll have enough experience with a variety of areas to work practically anywhere. The downside is that now that I've accepted the job, I still have to wait for the first assignment. Granted, it's only been a week, but now I'm in this wierd limbo of unemployment where I have a job, but I'm still not working.

The whole experience has made me think about the old Theory X versus Theory Y argument though. In case you don't know, these theories of human behavior towards work were developed by the Sloan School of Management at MIT in the 1960's. Managers and human resource departments have used these two theories to try and determine the best way to motivate their work forces since the theories were developed.

Theory X, simply put, says that workers are inherently lazy and avoid working at all costs. You can tell when a company subscribes to this theory by the controls they put on their employees. They block any fun website. They install timers on the toilets. They employ midgits to follow employees around and make sure that diversion from work is kept to a minimum. It's a cynical and pessimistic view of the world, but not entirely without merit. In fact, before this stretch of unemployment, I'd have agreed with it.

Really, I'd have said, who wants to work. If I had enough money to just sit around and read all day, wouldn't I do it? Wouldn't I become a fixture at a coffee house that discourages the bringing of children into the establishment? Wouldn't I watch the news, sunsets, people, strippers, internet porn, or any number of other things there are to watch? Wouldn't I finally finish that damn novel I'm wearing around my neck like a concrete albatross that's holding a lead balloon filled with cement?

The answer was apparently "no".

That brings us to Theory Y. Theory Y states that workers want to work. They enjoy a challenge. They are naturally ambitious and will do the best job they can - when they enjoy the work they're doing. On the surface it appears to be some seriously Pollyanna style of management, but now that I'm sitting here chomping at the bit to get back into a cube farm as quickly as possible, I think I'm a convert.

Maybe workers aren't inherently lazy. Maybe there's just too many of them who are in the wrong job. I know that my major periods of work malaise were at points when I a) took a job just to have a paycheck, b) the workplace became such an example of a perfect physical hell that I threw up a little in my mouth each time I walked through the door or c) everything was fine, but my skills simply developed beyond the point where the job was challenging. As I sit here hoping for a phone call telling me to report for work Monday morning, and considering the above, I'm a perfect example of Theory Y.

So, let me work.