One, Of Many, Problems With Journalism

When in CEGEP (a Quebec version of college) I took a class that dealt with journalism.

It taught you about journalism integrity, and the goal of providing information to the public that was as true, and as free from bias as possible.

We then delved into random newspaper clippings and dissected them and immediately find out that journalism is far from unbiased and, unfortunately, very rarely provides you the truth.

There were a few things I learned from this class, along with other methodology courses in sociology and psychology, that makes it hard for me to read news articles.

I immediately find errors, slight word changes that biases the whole article, and unsubstantiated claims.

As a result i've sought out more credible news sources.  I've subscribed to news feeds on facebook of organizations that value reason and rational thought above all else.

Surely I can get some good articles from these sources right?

Apparently not.

One of my subscriptions posted this article:
http://bigthink.com/ideafeed/evolutionary-psychologist-staying-up-late-is-a-sign-of-superior-intelligence

It's actually a pretty harmless article but is just one of the more recent ones that lack any value whatsoever.

Briefly, it posits a theory, by evolutionary psychologist Satoshi Kanazawa, that those who stay up later and wake up later  (or night owls) are smarter then people on the traditional sleep schedule.  He then sites a study that states children with higher IQ's tend to go to bed later in their adolescence then their earlier bedtime peers.

Now that basic summary leaves me skeptical on a number of reasons that I don't even have to explore.

Because in the last paragraph of the very same article it states that the study was not peer reviewed (basically vetted out by other professional researchers), and the author of the study had a history of bad science!!!

THEN WHY POST THIS USELESS ARTICLE?

Again I chose this site for news because it was supposed to be based upon good science, reason, and good ol fashioned sense.

Instead it chooses to post these articles because of a fun headline.
Whats the big idea, or problem, with this?

People often simply read the headline of an article.  Get the basic musings of the article.  Move on.  And then spread this information to other people.  They often wont get to the end of this article that basically states the entire article is false.

Now again.  This is a harmless article.  It angers me because I wanted real news from somebody out there, and am once again let down by people whose mission statement is supposed to be in line with my own.

But it is also just one of many articles like this that are untrue.

There are tons of news sites out there that also release erroneous, or misleading, articles that actually have devastating consequences.

A couple of examples of that will be released in another blog that i've been planning on posting but was deleted by the kids :).  But I will be doing that blog eventually.

New Movie Review

So i'm going to do a movie review right now and let's just pretend that it's a late review and I actually watched it yesterday because of course I was busy watching my local sports team beat those pesky adversaries tonight and certainly not watching a movie.

Runoff sentences aside..

I watch a lot of movies.  Like way too many movies and, as a result, I'm usually pretty hard pressed to come up with a movie choice when my wife demands I select a movie to watch together.

Unfortunately neither of us are movie aficionados and so are unable to settle for, or appreciate, some new independent film or documentary that has been released.

Instead I'm reduced to scrounging in the far off reaches within the bowels of my phone where I occasionally write down a movie title that I'll probably have heard either from somebody mentioning in passing or on The Film Vault podcast.

These movies notes are often from at least 6 months ago and are only still on my phone because I haven't been desperate enough to resort to checking them out.

Well tonight last night was one of those nights with no other options.

I'm not selling this, so far unnamed, movie too hard am I?  Because despite what my current preamble suggests I'm actually really glad I watched this film.

And, without further ado, the movie in question is the 1996 film directed and written by Matthew Bright who you may have heard from such movies as....ok nothing.  His filmography on Wikipedia is so light they had to add this line for padding :

"He grew up with writer/director Richard Elfman and his brother, composer Danny Elfman."

So There's that.

Hmm I'm still not selling this movie very well, oh and gosh darn it I still haven't mentioned the title yet!

But if you read that gosh darn it line in a southern accent you would be right to do so because the always loveable southern beauty Reese Witherspoon stars in this film.

Now I have to be honest.  After seeing the trailer, I really wasn't very interested in seeing this film.  It's the reason its title was sitting on my phone in a note document for so long.  However because Reese was involved (and I'd like to think we'd be on a first name basis if we met) it was the tipping point for me to take the plunge and give this movie a chance.

For, as I'm sure we'd all agree, Reese's acting ability is really top notch grade A material. 

The way she portrayed her character Elle Woods in Legally blonde really made me believe that a blonde sorority girl could really earn a law degree in the hopes of winning back her ex boyfriend.

Her acting is second to none and it's no wonder that her performance spawned two sequels as well as a musical that opened on Broadway...wait really?  Let me check that again..Hmm well look at that.  Atta girl Reese.

What those pictures?  I have no idea how they got there and this is the first I'm seeing them and really don't understand how they pertain to this current movie review and in no way reflect my motives in watching this film.

Jokes aside I actually do enjoy Reese Witherspoon every time she is on camera (even when yelling at cops) and many of her films I truly adore.  Actually i'll list a few of my favorites that everyone should have seen by now :

-Pleasantville
-Cruel Intentions
-Election
-Sweet Home Alabama
-Walk the Line

Now my darling Reese isn't the only noteworthy cast member in this film.  In fact this movie is chalk full of talent and includes Kiefer Sutherland (24), Dan Hedaya (too many films to mention but the dad in Clueless), Amanda Plummer (played crazy really well in So I Married an Axe Murderer and does so again in this film), Brooke Shields (Blue Lagoon), and Brittany Murphy (many critically acclaimed roles and also in Clueless).

This is an oddly sizable concentration of notable actors in a film that, halfway through, I believed to have achieved cult status purely because of how bad this movie is along the same vein as The Room,

Troll 2, and Howard the Duck.

The acting was awful, the plot unreasonable (let alone believable), at times contained unnecessary gore (not quite there but nearly reminiscent of Quinten Tarantinos staple overuse) and chalk full of technical errors that included awful sound and scene editing.  For just one example there was a scene with Kiefer Sutherland driving a car while engaging in conversation with Reese Witherspoon where his hands on the steering wheel where jerking back and forth so much he should have crashed multiple times into the super clearly green screened cars in the background.

So far still so bad.  How did I come around?

Well, at about halfway through, I realized that with a cast like this it really couldn't be bad as I thought it was and it must be being awful for irony sake.  A quick check of reviews later on confirmed these suspicions and luckily I realized this halfway through so I could at least appreciate the second half for the satire it was.

The same thing occurred to me in the film Drag Me To Hell.  However in that film I got all the way to the end thinking it was a terrible horror movie full of clichés, gore and general terribleness.  It wasn't until the actual final scene that I actually starting laughing (because the ending was so terrible) and realized that the film was entirely satire and poking fun at the horror genre and did so very skillfully.

This film should also be treated as such.

Now for the plot.

The movie begins with the opening credits accompanied by sexual graphic cartoons of little red riding hood being stalked by the wolf.  This is to set you up with the basic plot centering around a young girl trying to make it to her grandmother's house and being constantly hindered along the way by outside forces.  And as the provocative cartoons in the beginning suggest this will be a heavily twisted version of little red riding hood.

Now the trailer attempts to give you a better idea of what this movie is about which is along the lines of a redemption story but really trying to figure this movie out is not the point.

The reason this movie is so fun is because, in all its satire, it comes off as incredibly whimsical (like a fairy tale) and you are often left wondering where the story is going next.  Not because it's so superbly written but because if you have to suspend belief, as fairy tales require, then the writer is given free reign to take us wherever his imagination goes.

And unfortunately Matthew Bright's imagination takes us to a very dark place.

Which leads me to my conclusion.

In short: I liked this film, but you probably won't.
If you are over 40, you probably won't like this.
If you are under 15, you probably shouldn't watch this.
If you stick mainly to mainstream movies, you probably won't like this.
If you like to come out of a movie not feeling dirty, you probably won't like this.

Thing is this movie gives off a crazy vibe to it.  If you have seen the movies Requiem of a Dream, or Natural Born Killers, then you will have an idea of what I'm talking about it.

 This movie delves slightly into the more evil and dirty side of humanity and you can't help getting a dusting of this dirtiness on you that leaves you feeling a little gross.

However, if you are like me and have been desensitized over the years from an overindulgence of movies and want to see something kinda new, albeit an older film, then Freeway might be to your liking.

Ya that's right.  I didn't mention the title of the movie till the very end of my movie review.  Why?  Because I go against the curve.  Just like skipping out on watching the Canadians beat the Bruins in game 7 of the second round of the playoffs to instead watch a pretty god awful movie that I actually enjoyed.

So check it out.

And if you must see the trailer (please don't):

Take This Waltz

So it's that time of the year again.  It's January, the middle of winter, and we are all trying to convince ourselves that March is a pretty decent month (it's not), and so we will be out of these winter blues in just a couple more months.

In the meantime the December solstice has just passed, which means the days will be gradually getting longer but we are still dealing with some of the shortest days of the year.  Not that it matters since it is consistently overcast with a persistent grey hue throughout the day. 

It's also got to be one of the colder winters we've ever had.  How many days did we have below -20C?  It's cold.  So cold.

All we want to do is curl up into a ball, in front of a fire, cuddling our loved ones with some popcorn and a good movie.

But sorry folks you are out of luck!  Even though the Oscar's have been slated for March 2nd, for us moviegoers the movie watching season ended December 25th with the release of Wolf of Wall Street (Scorsese is Amazing!)

Unfortunately for us. All the movies of a higher caliber seem to be stacked at the end of the year and we are left with movies of a much inferior quality at the beginning of the new year.   I suspect this is due to the studios not having any faith in the memory of the members of the Academy who vote on the Oscars.  I can't blame them since it is purported that the average age of  judges of the Academy Awards is 62.

So instead we are stuck with the 14th Paranormal Activity iteration and a movie called I Frankenstein that I haven't even bothered to check the description of. 

So we will have to find some other means to comfort us while we wait for the spring thaw and the heralding of better movies.

Or you can do what I do and look at movies that may have been missed in previous years.  Since I watch as many movies as I do that usually ends up being a bunch of independent films.

I just so happened to watch one recently that is actually quite good.
It is written, directed, and produced by Sarah Polley. 

She's a name I instantly recognized since I knew her from both Go and Existenz.  Or her much better known  role in the 2004 remake of Dawn ofThe Dead (of which the original was still better but the remake is still pretty darn great).



She apparently started out as a Disney actress, and experienced widespread recognition with her role on The Road to Avalon, but then had a falling out with Disney and also turned down major roles like the Penny Lane character in Almost Famous, and instead opted for more independent films.



As a result she has turned away from the fame and glamour of Hollywood and has been highly successful on the smaller stage winning numerous awards.

Take this waltz is her second full length film that she has directed and is pretty darn good.

Before I begin dissecting this film I do have to caution you.  This is not going to be a spoiler free blog entry whereby I simply mention what the movie is briefly about and whether or not I liked it. 

I will be going over certain scenes, sometimes at length, and exploring what I believe Sarah Polley was attempting to communicate or what I derived from the scene.

However I do not believe any spoilers will take away from the film.  In fact I think most people will simply overlook this movie after reading a brief synopsis and any spoiling I do will only increase the probability of it being viewed while taking away very little.


Furthermore this isn`t a whodunit film.  I detest any films relating to mystery or suspense (with the exception of Clue which is just great fun).  I do not go to a movie to try to figure out the ending.  I experience a film to be transported and  enveloped within the film so that I lose myself and for a brief time that is my reality.

...

Ok pomptatude aside (shut up spell check, add to dictionary, it is a word now), what i'm saying is that I won't be revealing any major plot points so don't worry about continuing to read my very amateurish analysis of this film.

So lets get to that brief synopsis.  This film is about a typical couple who have been married for a while, have   gotten into a rut, and how the wife deals with the monotony that is marriage.  The only true spoiler I could give, but wont,  is revealing whether or not the main character cheats on her husband,

Sounds pretty boring eh?  Well I'm pretty sure that is exactly what Sarah Polley was going for.  See when I say a typical married couple I mean a real life, we know each other, and spend so much time together, so we have nothing to say when we go out to dinner, kind of married couple. 

Not the highly fictionalized, and unrealistic, married couple who has Steve Carrel go from total geek to ladies man in order to win his wife back kind of married couple.


Instead we get to see ho w Michelle Williams, who plays the wife, deals with a husband, Seth Rogen, who is not only unexciting, but appears to show no interest in being anything but his boring self.  And while Seth Rogen is only playing the husband in the film, I picture Seth Rogen, as a real husband,  being very similar to his character.  That is extremely goofy and playful, which can be alot of fun, but to the detriment of intimacy.

If that sounds a little harsh to our Canadian boy Seth, it really isn't.  I feel the same way about myself only Seth is clearly much funnier then I'll ever be.

But that again is the point.  The realism of this film lends itself to its audience picturing their selves, in their relationships and relating to the characters on the screen.

And this isn't the first time Michelle Williams has played this role.  She reprised a similar role in Blue Valentine opposite Ryan Gosling.  Only this film was far more depressing as it delved deeply into a slowly, and painfully, deteriorating marriage.  Hard to watch but a great great film.

But back to Take This Waltz.

Now we contrast Seth Rogens character with that of Michelle Williams love interest and you get to see two very different men.

You have the goofy Seth Rogen character who is the nice guy.  And the love interest is unflinchingly, and unrelentingly, seductive.   He's confident, he's forward and to the point, and isn't afraid to put himself out there, but most of all he's exciting and new.

The kind of guy that us nice guys have no choice but to hate.

This dilemma is summed up quite nicely in a scene with two of Williams' characters friends, one of which is played by my unexpected crush and always adorable, Sarah Silverman.

Silverman:  At least I like my husband.  Is it worth trading that in for someone exciting who I may not even like in ten years?.

Other Friend:  Sometimes I just want something new.  New things are shiny. 

Wise 80 year old woman overhearing:  New things get old. 

Silverman:  That's right.  New things get old.  Just like the old things did.

And the rest of this movie is spent with Williams confronting this dilemma between the new and exciting or the old but comfortable.

Man I just hope us nice guys get a win for once.

Quebec

My father once told me that he didn't realize he felt like an immigrant living in his own country until he moved to Ottawa.  

I didn't understand what he meant until I too joined him in moving to Ottawa.  At that point I realized that I always had a weight upon my shoulders no matter where I went.  

My French was, and still is, very basic.  So every time I went into a public place I was always worried that I wouldn't be able to communicate.  I felt obligated to attempt to speak French and if, after engaging in conversation, I realized there was a word that I didn't know in French coming up I would feel quite a bit of anxiety.

That anxiety was compounded exponentially when dealing with things other than just a fast food place but instead something like renewing a health card or getting a drivers license.

And that was when I was speaking with friendly people.  There were many instances of times when I would get dirty looks or get curt responses of Francais or simply be ignored.

Luckily the rude people were the minority and it didn't shake my faith in humanity.  


I did however feel like I was the one who needed to make the effort to please those I was interacting with even though, for the most part, I was the customer who was attempting to hand over my money.

It's a strange thing to feel as though you don't feel included in a society that you were born in.  

Now for the most part it wasn't that big a deal but I can definitely say that I felt a huge burden lifted off of my shoulders upon moving to Ottawa.

Now why do I write this now?  I have no qualms over my childhood or young adulthood living in Quebec.  In fact I loved my childhood.  I left because my lack of French was becoming an issue when it came to me finding a job.  (Please let's not get into why I didn't learn the language.  I tried.  I could have tried harder for sure.  But even when I put in the effort I had extreme difficulty.  So rather than struggle with it my whole life I decided to move on).

So again why am I writing this now?

Well up to this point I thought Quebecers, like the rest of Canadians, were friendly inclusive tolerant people.

That view is starting to change with the media portrayal of all the discrimination that is going on right now in light of Pauline Marious recent legislation proposal.  And that comes on the tail end of all the language police issues that were being reported.

At first I believed that the media was simply reporting the few rare instances of discrimination that ,added up, seemed widespread but in actuality did not represent the view of Quebecers.  

Even when polls initially came out that stated a strong majority of Quebecers support her proposed legislation I thought it was faulty polling.

However the news reports keep coming in and the polls are consistently showing a majority of support.  (A most recent poll showed a dramatic decline in support but still brings a small majority).

Here's where I become woefully ignorant and start talking on issues that I have no heavily researched, if I haven't been already.  

What I believe Pauline's current legislation is attempting to do is ban public workers, including teachers, doctors, day care workers, from displaying any religious symbols.  It appears as though a few modest pieces of Christian attire will be permitted however.

The belief is that Quebec values are based upon inclusion and that religion has no place in the public sphere.  Therefore keep your religious beliefs at home.  

Now I've already hinted at the obvious hypocrisy in this.  They are permitting small crosses on necklaces so apparently it's not so much the Christian faith they are concerned with.  But that is really besides the point.

The point is this:

...

I'm having a hard time right now figuring out how to write this because it's just so obvious...

I suppose it could go something like this:

Life is very simple.  Do whatever you want as long as whatever you are doing isn't also infringing on another's right to do whatever they want.

I'm an atheist.  I have no way of knowing for sure that God doesn't exist but I've decided that I do not believe that he does.  The reasons for that are numerous and could fill up many many blog entries.  But that's not what this one is about.

I have the right to not believe in God.   Somebody wearing their religious attire does in no way infringe on my right to believe that.  They are simply exorcising their right to religious freedom.  We can work side by side in harmony.

And yet I've heard people say that those people should leave their religion at home and stop throwing their religion onto all of us.  Keep it private.

Now again I believed those people to be in the minority and quite frankly purely and simply dumb.  So I didn't even bother trying to figure out their rational.  

However with the high level of support I'm deeply troubled about what is currently going on in Quebec.  And quite honestly it's not just in Quebec.  The initial polls had something like 45% of the rest of Canadians also in favor of this legislation.  

I hate that as I get older I think less and less of humanity.  

I loved the fact that, what I believed to be, the Canadian identity was actually a lack of a strong Canadian identity.  What I mean by that is that to be Canadian is to be unique and different.  There are all kinds of Canadians and we don't all represent one belief system.  What holds us together is our sense of individual rights and respect for others.  

What I fear going on in Quebec right now is a backlash against multiculturalism.  What Pauline Marious is attempting to do is create a single identity and that is strictly anti Canadian as well as anti human rights.

My bigger fear is that it is only going to get worse.  

And I believe it will get worse as Quebec's economy gets worse.  Quebec has a huge debt issue.  And I believe, with the earlier language laws, businesses and talented professionals have already begun leaving Quebec.  

Now Quebec, with its current discriminatory laws, is going to further encourage talented professionals to take their law or doctor degree where somebody doesn't care that they wear a hat on their head.  

This will further damage the economy.  

As the economy gets worse the people of Quebec are going to look for somebody to blame and it's really hard to blame oneself.  So instead they will look at further tightening immigration laws, since they are the reason for this downward spiral.  All the while failing to realize that Quebecers aren't having enough babies and the immigrants are actually keeping the population afloat.  

With professional and talented immigrants going elsewhere we are both losing their brain power as well as their younger numbers to help pay for an increasingly aging Quebec population further damaging the economy.

What I really fear is what happens at this point.  The blame will only intensify and then what?  Well I've said it before.  We as a species seem to love a scapegoat.  We've seen in throughout history and while I hate to play the Hitler card it is how Hitler came to power.

I just made several leaps.  But honestly even if you don't believe in my doomsday prophecy for Quebec I'm sure you can at least agree with my belief in basic human rights.  

Let others practice whatever religious belief, in whatever way they please, as long as it doesn't pose a threat to society.  And your not agreeing with a popular faith is not a threat to society.

And as a white, male atheist i'm not standing up for the rights of religious people.  I'm standing up for my own.  The right to live in a free society.  Free from hate, free from fear, and free from all those who attempt to impose THEIR beliefs onto my own.  

Fuck those people.

The Purge

I'm just a little bit difficult.

What do I mean by that?  

Well I often find myself in situations where somebody is telling me about how awesome this or that is and when they ask how I feel about it my feelings are usually lackluster.

Some may call this boring, a Debbie downer, a pain in the ass, or as previously mentioned difficult.

But it's not my fault!

I do not enjoy dancing no matter how much fun you may say that it is.
I will not enjoy a music concert even if its one of my favorite bands.
The thought of going up and doing some karaoke frightens me, and not in an exciting tower of terror (that's my obligatory Disney reference for this blog) kind of way.

By all means dance, see a concert, do those silly all of you jumping in the sky in unison, or taking pictures of your feet type photos but don't expect me to get excited about it.  

I could lie and say that i'm just as into it as you are but lying just aint me either.  You may say that i'm missing out but i'm not.  I'm perfectly content to just sit back in my little corner, sipping my wine while listening to you belt out your best William Hung impression to She Bangs.

Now what does this all have to do with the title of my blog?  Not much really.  I just like to go off onto some crazy long tangents to get to my point...if I ever get there.

But what i'm getting at is all of this also goes towards my taste in movies.  I've been trying to go see Star Trek for a few weeks now at many peoples urgings.  It's apparently a great movie that I will love.  But I know it won't be and it'll just lead to my trashing it the same way that I did the latest Iron Man.  

I'm constantly getting into conversations with people about movies that get them excited and I know I leave them unsatisfied with my total lack of enthusiasm.  I don't think I know of anybody out there that isn't excited about the new Superman coming out...except me.  

People eventually get frustrated and ask me what kind of movies I do like.  And the answer to that is of course good ones you simpletons!

Ya ok I don't actually think i'm as pretentious as that but it is really hard to nail down what exactly I do like.  But there is one type of movie that I will always see no matter how bad or good it looks.  And that's What IF? movies.

I like movies to take me out the realm of reality and transport me to what if scenarios that do not exist currently but have a semblance of possibility.  That's why i'm a sucker for horror movies.  90% of the time the horror movies end up being horrible but because so many of them lend itself to my made up What if? genre I will watch them.  And sometimes i'm rewarded with a gem like The Stand.

Well while trying to psych myself up to watching Star Trek I came across the brief synopsis to The Purge.  Basically it goes as follows:

It's the year 2022 and for one 12 hour period a year crimes are legal and all emergency services will be suspended.  

A great what if? scenario.  It seems highly unlikely that anything like this would ever happen but as the movie goes on you begin to wonder if that's really the case.  You see characters behaving in ways that remind you of people in real life and that really gets you thinking.

The reason in the film, for this purge, is that after a crippling quadruple dip recession America was dealing with pent up frustrations, hate and rage and needed a way to vent this out.  

This is basically the cathartic method.  A bullshit theory that Freud postulated would allow somebody to let out all their negative emotions and then become calm again.  Freud thought that by punching a pillow when you are angry you would get rid of that anger.  Actual research shows that it does the opposite and actually makes you want to keep punching that damn pillow to the point that your brain has to justify why it's hitting a harmless pillow so that you then begin believing that the pillow had it coming.

So does it seem far fetched that we may take this a bit further and even allow murder?  Well we've done it before.  Basically its scapegoating whereby a

"scapegoat is an individual, group, or country singled out for unmerited negative treatment or blame"

You would see alot of this in ancient times when a natural disaster occurs, or a serious of unfortunate circumstances would arise, and one person or group would be deemed the cause of the event and would then be sacrificed.  

Another example of this would be Jesus and his death somehow absolving us of our sins.  I still don't understand why Jesus dying absolves all of us of our crimes but I won't get any deeper into that here.

In modern times the Jewish population being blamed for the problems in Germany and subsequently targeted for eradication in would be an example. 

 And even simpler is the person who is chastised by a whole blackjack table for hitting on 17 because he has ruined the whole deck by not playing by the book.  For you people I say this.  Let me play my damn black jack how I want in peace!  If your planning on getting rich in a casino and really think my game play actually affects your outcome then your the one who should be chastised!  

But I digress...

Now where was I?  Oh right the movie!  As you see I've gone all philosophical and there's a reason for that.  This movie, while appearing simple, actually makes you ask yourself alot of the deeper questions.  Such as what is human nature and more importantly what am I capable of?

Well during the purge this movie follows one family, headed by Ethan Hawk (whom I love), while they try to shield themselves from the dangers outside, all the while trying to come to grips with their own views of what is right and wrong in the face of dire circumstances.

I'll say this.  I'm pretty sure i'm capable of doing nearly anything when it comes to protecting my family and ultimately I probably would have done the same thing as Ethan Hawks character.  Although I can also see myself doing so far more heinous things just to feed my family let alone keep them alive.

Now the writing in this film wasn't the greatest.  It wasn't bad it just wasn't great.  But that really didn't matter because it was so intense.  And the reason it was intense was because of the crazy build up of the film.  It hasn't been since the movie The Mist that I've felt myself at the edge of my seat, incredibly tense, with my heart rate elevated for far too long all because we knew it was only a matter of time before the impending doom would arrive.  And I mean literally at the edge of my seat.  When your that tense its tough to remain slouched and relaxed.  And I wasn't the only one.  A fellow moviegoer sitting a couple seats away from me was in the exact same position.  

Speaking of my heart rate.  I don't know if it was intentional but the young boy in the film had his own heart rate monitor to check on himself and that, coupled with the fantastic foreboding score, only made me more aware of the fact that my blood pressure was far too high.

Eventually that tension did build to a release and luckily that release was dealt with quickly because I hate overly drawn out fight scenes and the writing was a little weak so that you really kind of did see what was coming next.  Luckily the action scenes that they did have were actually kind of cool so you could overlook the simple writing.

Overall this movie had me thinking throughout the entire film.  I was transported to a scenario that I could put myself into and I left that movie wondering what is human nature, what is what and wrong, what am I capable of and most importantly what if?

Iron Man 3

Iron Man 3 is the first Marvel movie to be released after the immensely popular Avengers film.

I loved the Avengers movie.  I thought it was the perfect superhero movie and can be summed up by a young boy moviegoer who was watching the movie next to me with wide eyes and exclaiming "wow".

It's pretty hard to reach perfection so I did not in any way believe that Iron Man 3 would have provided the same satisfaction as The Avengers did.

This is all to say that I went into this film with my expectations managed so when I say that I did not enjoy this film it has nothing to do with prior experience.

And enjoy this film I did not and boy oh boy do I wish Josh Whedon could have had a hand in the script in this one.

THE PLOT

Now I plan to make this a spoiler free report on my movie experience so I won't give any of the major plot points away and will even shy away from the minor plot points.  So you will be able to read this review without having to worry about me spoiling the movie.

Actually you won't have to worry about me spoiling the plot because the plot made no sense!  This is largely due to the bastardization of the 3 act structure.

A film typically has three acts.  The first sets up the film, the 2nd deals with some sort of conflict, and the 3rd resolves this conflict.  This film seems to have very nearly skipped the first act and jumped right into the 2nd, dragged that out to the point that the third act ended up lacking as well.

You need that first act to make sense of the movie.  But i'll go more into those details later.  For now the story is basically Tony Stark is suffering from Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, as a result of the events in The Avengers film, and has to stop a terrorist who is conducting numerous terrorist acts.


That's the basic plot but really I think this film is about making Tony Stark more real to the audience.  If you go into this film with that belief then you will have a better time.  Because nothing else about this movie makes any sense.

So like I said after the Avengers Tony Stark is now suffering from PTSD.  Hes hit with recurrent anxiety attacks as well as bouts of crying.  He kind of has to rediscover who he is by shedding his Iron man suit.  He does this by remembering that it is not the suit that made him who he was.  But instead it was who he was that made his Iron Man suit.  It is that genius mechanical mind that makes up who he is.

Now this is only my interpretation of the movie but if it's incorrect then there is nothing in this movie that makes sense.  Even as is they could definitely have accomplished this discovery with a much more coherent story line.  Instead they try to add a bunch of other characters into the story that either have no background, little screen time, or serve no purpose.

The Characters


Speaking of characters with no background.  We have in the opening scene a sub character (Rebecca Hall) that is introduced, offered very little screen time, serves no purpose to the convoluted story and is killed anyway.  Ok I spoiled that one but fuck it she serves absolutely no purpose to the movie so you might as well ignore her character from the beginning as if she were dead anyway.

Might as well go into the other characters now.  I promise not to give anything else away.

Don Cheadle plays Tony Starks' sidekick.  I actually kind of liked his character.  I'm a sucker for pure moral people fighting for good, which is probably why I am one of the few who enjoyed the Captain America film. However because this film is trapped in the 2nd act we don't see too much of him.

Gwyneth Paltrow returns as Tony Starks' wife.  Never really enjoyed the character (I mean why would a playboy choose to be married? :) )  but she did get more of a role this time around.

Ty Simpkins plays a young boy who helps Tony Stark rediscover who he is, which again is the only part of the plot that makes any sense.

And Robert Downy Jr. as Tony Stark.  His acting was great as always.  His on screen charisma has made him Tony Stark and there is no doubt that future Iron Man films will have to have him reprise his role.  In fact he's up for contract negotiations and i'm sure hes going to make a killing.

His character away from the self discovery however seems to have had some other changes.  And not for the better.  Tony seems to go from charming and witty to using incredibly cheap humor and actually becomes downright mean.  He is constantly being mean to his new young helper to the point that he even tells the kid to stop being a pussy just because his dad ran out on him 6 years ago.

Oh of course I almost forgot Ben Kingsley.  In my opinion hes a legendary actor who is at the upper most echelon when it comes to acting.  No matter what role he does I have no doubt that he will come out of it a shining star.  And this movie is no exception.  Unfortunately for us movie-goers he is offered very little screen time.

Plot Twists and Plot Holes

This movie is riddled with obvious plot twists and plot holes.  The twists I won't go into because I want to keep this spoiler free.  However I will go into the plot holes in minor detail.

To begin with the villain in this film has no background whatsoever.  For some reason the villain became evil out of nowhere, is committing purely horrible acts for no reason and his current motive for his actions, while explained in the movie, still makes no sense.

Both the villain and Rebecca Halls character could have been served much better by actually having a first act.  Instead the film dwells in the second act which allows for tons of plot holes and obvious plot twists.  And again I wont go into the plots twists because I don't want to spoil the movie but i'm sure you will be expecting most of them a good 20-30 minutes before they even happen.

But back to the plot holes.

One of the earlier scenes involves Tony challenging the terrorist to come to his house and face him like a man.  Remember Tony lives with his wife and yet he welcomes terrorists into their home.  She actually says that it's time to go and he attempts to convince her to stay.  We are led to believe that he loves his wife and yet he's willingly putting her in harms way.

What is particularly ridiculous about this is that the terrorist does take him up on his offer and Tony has absolutely no home self defense systems.  Not only that but he only uses one of his Iron Man suits, in a house of dozens, and the suit used is only a prototype and is barely operational.

No.  I'm convinced he hates his wife.  Its the only explanation.

Now speaking of his suit.  In the Avengers it was basically epic and could stop buses no problem.  Heck it took on a hoard of raging aliens.  But in this film its downright cheap and operates like a disposable camera.  When your down with one you just discard and move onto another.

Another plot hole i'm sure has to do more with my tendency to notice and complain about everything then anything else.  There was some weird Christmas theme in this movie that only manifested itself in short bursts.

You first experience this when Tony is trying out his new suit for the first time and is dancing sexy to a Christmas song.  I was immediately confused because there was no mention of Christmas prior to this.  A little ways later we see tony getting a Christmas gift for his wife and the terrorist vowing that he will end things by Christmas day, so I get the idea that it must be set during Christmastime.

However this film was shot mostly in North Carolina and Florida and so other then that there were no other Christmas elements.  Why even mention or have anything Christmas related then?  Seems incredibly odd as if they planned a movie during Christmastime but a quick wiki search seems that that isn't he case so it leaves me very confused.  I'm sure this is a question that will lead scholars debating for decades to come...

Final Thougts

Alright so thats basicaly the movie but i'll add just a couple more things.

-The action was incredibly boring.  It could have been tons more exciting considering what was introduced in the final fight.  In fact the movie was boring overall.  There was one scene that had an important character die (not the one I spoiled) and the other character involved showed very little emotion considering.

-Don't bother on paying extra for 3d.  It adds absolutely nothing and actually takes away from the film at times.  Which seems odd to say considering how little I enjoyed this film.  But at the very least it was shot well and looked good.  The 3D took away from that because in one scene where Iron Man jumps out to save other passengers we see tons of blurring.  The 3D was added in post production and not shot that way so it makes sense.

Now I should also finally add that my movie going experience was severely hurt by the movie crowd.  I honestly think that theaters biggest problem of the future will be that the younger generations are unable to sit still and just enjoy a movie.  The ammount of people checking their phones was astounding.  I used to actually tell people to give it a break but with the vast ammount of peolple doing it I was severely outnumbered.  Combine that with the constant talking throughout the film, and a curious lack of hygiene (bad bad BO), and I can see people like myself opting to just watch movies on demand at home with our ever increasing home theater systems.

That no doubt contributed to my movie going experience but I honestly think that this film had a dumb plot that should have respected its audience much more.

All I can say is that:

-God I hope this travesty isn't Disney's fault.

The Doctor

*Warning*
The current blog post you are about to read contains some pretty depressing material.  If you are not a fan of death and dying, or aging in general, then you may want to skip this one.

-You have been warned.


I have a couple of jobs.  One at Canada Post which is quite uneventful, and the other is working in a Long Term Care facility which is anything but.

I work in Long Term Care as a Personal Support Worker.  I basically take care of the elderly who are on their last legs of life and are no longer able to take care of themselves.  They pretty well all have Alzheimer's, most have additional dementia  and its the lucky resident who is actually able to walk, let alone form a solid bowl movement, not need a diaper, speak, hear, or eat solid food that hasn't gone through the blender for 5 minutes longer then any food should ever need to.  Everything we are able to do for ourselves they can't, and I do it for them.  Until they pass on...

It is often, quite obviously, a pretty depressing environment.

But this blog isn't about my job.  It's about a large painting that hangs in the common room within this not so sunny environment.

This is the picture.  Blow it up to really appreciate the details.

Now the super depressing intro to this blog served a purpose.  It provided the setting for which this painting is situated.  Namely a really depressing environment.  I'm now going to argue that I find it absurd that somebody deemed this painting appropriate for a Long Term Care environment.

I should start by saying that the actual painting within our facility is actually black and white, further adding to its dreariness.  The color within the original art piece actually kind of changes its meaning but i'll get to that later.

So!

I'm now going to give you what is my interpretation of this painting.  This is the same interpretation that I've given to many of my fellow employees who had not noticed this painting but, upon really examining it, were dumbfounded.

We have 4 characters in this painting.  A doctor, a young child who is his patient and the mother and father of the child.  We can see there is various tools the doctor used.

I saw that there was alcohol on the table by the doctor.  I assumed he used this to numb the daughers pain while he conducted surgery on her for some sort of illness.  I thought he had done surgery because there was a table next to the daughter that what I believed to contain a bowl of water that housed his scalpel and bloody rags.

I also saw the mother in the background crying inconsolably, while her husband attempted to comfort her nonetheless, while looking on to his daughter.

The mothers crying is understandable considering her daughter has just died.  This can be seen by looking at her body sprawled out across two chairs, eyes closed, and most importantly her recently unclenched hands that has released, upon her death, what I thought to be rose petals that you can then see lying on the floor underneath her.

Incredibly depressing no?

Now you might look at that picture and see some discrepancies.

Again this picture was black and white so I actually didn't see the objects properly.  Now viewing the color version I see that I had made a few errors.  And actually I was completely wrong about what I was seeing in the painting.

Here is the black and white version:

However after pointing out the correct interpretation i'll again argue that it still should not be within the facility.

So onto the correct interpretation.

In my view the painting was about the death of a daughter.  The painting in actuality is about the Doctor and not the daughter.  The artist was inspired by a personal experience where he was helpless with his ailing one year that a doctor saved.

This painting is actually about the doctor being the consummate professional.

The father and mother are helpless to aid their ailing daughter.  The mother turns to prayer and is seen praying for her daughter to get better.  The father is looking to the doctor for strength and the doctors confidence and authoritarian demeanor provide him with hope.

Based on the mismatched furniture, small living space, and the clothing of the family you can determine that they are of the lower classes.  They work hard but there is much in the world that don't understand and therefore must rely on higher authorities for their expertise.

In the case of a ill child they require a doctor.  And the doctor in this painting has turned to his expertise.  He has recently used his instruments to help their daughter.  There is washbasin with cold water and a towel that was used to help break the daughters fever.  And what I had thought was alcohol was actually medicine   This can be evidenced by the prescription papers lying on the ground, that I had thought were rose petals.

And most importantly the daughter has not died.  The doctor looks on with his furrowed brow, dressed in the suit of his profession, and is evaluating his patient, having used all his tools of his trade.

Luckily it looks as though all his hard work has paid off.  We can see the light of dawn creeping into the room and casting a light onto the daughter.  It looks as if she is beginning to recover thanks to the doctor.

...or maybe it was the prayer.

Ok so two very different interpretations.  One happy ending.  One incredibly sad.  Even though I interpreted the painting wrong I still believe this painting should not hang.  My interpretation was wrong largely due to the fact that the actual painting is black and white.  Furthermore everybody I pointed this painting out to also agreed with my interpretation.

So happy ending or not this painting should not be in my facility.

It reminds me of my history of psychology courses where psych wards used to be incredibly dreary, bland and depressing environments until somebody  had the novel idea of actually letting their patients experience sunshine, green grass, and exercise to outstanding results.

My facility is depressing enough.  Is it too much to ask for some more uplifting imagery?

On my part I've continued to show any new staff the painting, and have petitioned the nurses to look into replacing it.  Apparently the committee that used to take care of this sort of thing no longer exists on my unit...

In the meantime I guess i'll start letting the staff know that this is actually a happy painting with a happy ending.