The Pre-Read

Michael Jackson

I'm not sure what it is about the passing of Michael Jackson that has affected me so.

Maybe it was his talent. The way he could sing and dance and literally become one with the music. I would watch him dance and I could SEE the music in him. He seemed so completely intertwined with the music he performed that to watch him move, to watch him defy gravity with his dance was just ... well just so magical.

I will miss that.

But I've missed that for some time really. It's kind of like the Beatles in a way. When they broke up, when they stopped, that was it. All talk of reunion shows were eventually discredited, their legacy was sealed by the music they made for a certain period of time and that was it.

I think the same is true of Jackson. I longed to see him dance again,to float with music being his only tether to the stage.  But that will never happen. And maybe it's better that it won't.

Yes, his legacy will always be accompanied by the turmoil he endured after his years performing. But we'll always have Michael Jackson at his best. We will always see and hear him at the peak of his game.

I am sad today. But I will remember him at his best. And one of his best is featured in the clip below.

Michael Jackson, may he rest in peace.

Goodbye

I had started a post, earlier today about Farrah's passing. 

She was such an iconic figure in the 70's that it was impossible to go anywhere for a time and now be confronted by her famous poster featuring her brilliant smile and fantastic locks.

While I never had the crush on her I would later have on Cybil Shepherd, there was something about Farrah that transcended television.  She was the television equivalent of what a movie star was. 

She may not have been the best actress in the world, though she would wow audiences some years later in her performances on Broadway and television dramas, but there was something about her that proved she had star power.

I was a little sad this morning upon hearing the news. And now, I hear word that Michael Jackson has passed on. Really?  How is that possible?

It's a sad day today. I'm in a funk now, even though I didn't know these people, there is something terribly sad about anyone's passing and their being iconic figures somehow makes it seem personal.

May they both rest in peace and may their families receive comfort and strength.

Defense of Marriage

Okay, I've been mulling over the Governors situation in my last post.

If he wants to deny others the right to marry because he believes that their act of commitment would destroy the institute of marriage, well, I guess he has the right to believe what he wants.

But I have that right as well.

My thought is if he is so concerned about the stability, the very sanctity of marriage and yet is a personal warrior in its destruction, then perhaps it is he who should be denied marriage.

Maybe we should fight our opponents who say we are not deserving of marriage and turn around and destroy their own gift by pressing for their divorce.

Silly? yes, probably, but so is their hypocrisy.

Hypocrite(s)

It's one thing to espouse a certain point of view. It's another to espouse that point of view and not actually believe it.

South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford is a vocal opponent of Marriage Equality and an opponent of civil unions.  His belief is that the sanctity of marriage would be destroyed by acceptance of either of the above.

Today he explained why he was missing for a few days over the Father's Day weekend.  He left his family (kids included) to take a mini vacation with his mistress.

What someone does in their private life is their own business.

However, when you make it a cause to deny others the right to marry because you feel by allowing them that right jeopardizes the sanctity of that marriage, all the while committing the gravest of acts against the sanctity of that marriage ... well it's hypocritical at best, and downright mean at worst.

And speaking of hypocrites. Why is it that Fox "News" always seems to emblazon a large (D) for Democrat on the television screen for those Republicans who face any number of scandals, only later "correcting" their mistake when the breaking news has long passed?

For a "news" outlet to claim "fair and balanced" it is just more fuel to the fire that neither is true.

English Only

There is debate, much debate about making sure that only English is used in the United States.

I find it funny, ironic, and maybe it's a little bit of Karma, when those espousing English only seemed not to have mastered the very language for which they champion.

Change

"Change is rarely easy, even when it's right," California Assemblymember Marty Block said today.

The California Supreme Court's decision to uphold California's Proposition 8 and letting stand that marriage should be between opposite sex couples while, at the same time, upholding the marriages of roughly 18,000 same sex couples is an odd compromise at best. While I understand their belief that the wishes of the public must be respected, the truth is that the public isn't always on the right side of what is right. This is why we have a justice system that is supposed to be blind.

Let me say here that I am still a supporter of the president. I think he's making great strides in a variety of areas. But with the Don't Ask, Don't Tell issue put on the back burner, little comment on today's California decision. It doesn't' surprise me that images like the one below appear.

Compromise is important. Compromise is necessary. But compromise must never be used to elevate one group of people over another. 

The comment from the White House was not inspiring. Especially when it was asked nearly three hours after the ruling.

It's lost on no one that this is a divisive issue. But just because issues are divisive doesn't mean they should be ignored.

I don't expect everything to happen at once. I don't expect it all to happen within a week, or month or year even. But we need to move in the right direction or at least be given the hope that we are moving in the right direction.

I hope this administration doesn't bungle the gay issue the way the Clinton administration did. Yes, President Clinton brought gay issues to the forefront and we are all better for it. But that was over 15 years ago. It's time to move forward on this issue.

Comments like the one below don't offer me inspiration for change or hope. And I, for one, voted for this president becuase I want change, and I need hope!

"There's A Storm Coming"

I don't remember much about watching the first Terminator movie, except for the fact that I enjoyed it.

The other night it was on television. Wow, I hadn't realized how dated it looked. After a few moments I found myself doing something else and before long I was watching another show. That doesn't mean the movie wasn't good for what it was. It may even hold up (costumes and hair not withstanding) today. I just remember thinking back to the time when I first saw Terminator and thought was a fun movie it was.

Time travel is always an issue that, for me, rarely has a a satisfying outcome. And Terminator Salvation has the requisite time travel element to it.

Before I go any further, I guess I should say there will be spoilers here. It's impossible for me to talk about the movie without actually talking about the movie. So be forewarned.

Also it's probably a good thing to point out that I'm not a big McG fan. While I enjoyed Charlie's Angels, I really didn't enjoy Charlies Angels 2. And while I think the story behind We Are Marshall was an inspiring one. The direction was totally flawed and because of that, for me so too the movie.

I'm not a big fan of Christian Bale either. I don't deny he's a talented actor. But, I know I"m in the minority in this, I couldn't stand Steven Spielberg's Empire of the Sun, of which Bale starred. Granted he shouldn't be blamed for my not liking the film as much of that has to do with direction given him as an actor. But Bale has always seemed a bit one dimensional to me; serious, brooding, contemplative, did I say serious? I would love to see him in a comedy. Something where he truly stretches his talent.

I realize this summer I am in the minority. I didn't like Star Trek as a Star Trek movie (it was a fine action flick), and I really enjoyed Terminator Salvationwhile others around me seem to really dislike it. The funny thing is those who dislike the Terminator movie cite the same reasons I didn't enjoy the Trek movie. I imagine much of it must have to do with how invested you were in the lead up to this summers blockbusters.

What I liked. What I REALLY like about Terminator Salvation was that it offered no simple answers. It looks gritty and grey and bleak. Just as I would imagine the world would appear were something so menacing to take over and try to destroy humankind. And the direction was enjoyable.

So all that being said, I was able to overlook both McG and Bale and fall into the movie. I Love the new character of Marcus Wright, expertly played by Sam Worthington. Here was a character, from the get go, who was not a hero. In fact, he's facing the death penalty for murder. Yet the story is written in such a way that we are questioning his motives, intentions, and ultimately his humanity. And so is he.

Bale as John Connor is someone who seems hell bent on fulfilling prophecy. He listens to the tapes his mother made for him that help him to become who he is supposed to become. Yet, we can't help but wonder if his destiny was truly predetermined, or if it is she who is creating his destiny for him.

I love the fact that Connor acts not so much out of instinct, but out of obligation. He is "John Connor" savior. And the world of resistance fighters will do anything hey says. Ultimately even sealing their own potential doom.

But, again, it's the Marcus character who is so riveting for me. The time travel element rears it's head here and Marcus is first seen years before we seem him resurrected. Seemingly given new life, he embarks on a mission to find out what happened in the years since and why he is where he is.

Of course to any fan of the movies, what Marcus is, is fairly obvious given his "rebirth". But his direction, his feelings, the conflict he ultimately experiences is best illustrated when Connor must trust Marcus, but ultimately asks him "Who are you?" to which Marcus can only reply "I don't know."

In the end, which as a friend pointed out is fairly predictable, we find the answer. Though part machine, Marcus is governed by his own history, his own guilt, and ultimately, his own selflessness. It is this which makes him, perhaps, more human than any of the resistance fighters, including Connor. 

Cameos by Helena Bonham Carter and Jane Alexander are, sadly, mostly wasted, but it's always good to see both in any film.

Ultimately this is Worthington's movie. I am told that Bale was originally offered the Marcus role and chose Connor instead. I don't know if that was such a wise decision becasue Worthington just ignites the screen whenever he's on it and Bale reallly isn't as exciting to watch in comparison.

I wondered if I would see this movie again. It's not a happy, uplifting movie and the end while somewhat predictable, is refreshing for an American action movie that almost always has to have a strong, upbeat finale. But I know I will see it again. It's well written, well acted, especially with the standout perf of Sam Worthington.

If Star Trek has relaunched the Trek franchise, I hope at least, Terminator Salvation will do the same for the Terminator franchise. Only this time it will be a little more adult and a lot less tongue-in-cheek.

Not Left, Just Right

Long, but funny. Watch till the end if you can.

I used to listen to Rachel Maddow on XM radio. Since I've gotten a new car, it comes equipped with Sirius/XM which has one channel for broadcasters who lean to the left. But the line-up is such that I don't enjoy most of them, or the one's I do enjoy seem to be at hours when I'm not in the car. So I try to catch Maddow's show on the rebroadcast on MSNBC. Not always successful, but when I am, I'm rarely disappointed.

I might point out, that there are at least three radio stations dedicated to the far right on Sirius/XM compared to the one for those leaning left. I wonder why that is?

Anyway, enjoy:

Gay Marriage

Call it internalized homophobia, but I had doubts about gay marriage some years back.

My thoughts were simple on the issue and pretty much centered around the thought of 'why rock the boat." Back then I thought that was a good answer. I would have also thought that the answer Miss California gave in the beauty pageant was her own beliefs and she shouldn't be chastised for them.

Granted everyone has the right to think or believe what they want, but as a friend commented, had she declared support for segregation, she would have, and should have expected the same amount of criticism.

Of course not rocking the boat is rarely a good excuse for preventing liberty. But way back when it may have been that my thoughts on gay marriage were formed pretty much the same way my thoughts on gays were. From public portrayal.

Gays were portrayed as fragile, or criminal or any number of other negatives. But when heterosexuals were portrayed in the same manner in movies or television I never defined the entire heterosexual community based upon those perceptions.

Sure there were straight murderers, but to think all straights were murderers was ridiculous. The same is true for any other negative portrayal.

As I ventured "out" I discovered as many diverse members of the gay community as in the non gay world. I was happy to make friends with couples who had been involved in their relationship for as many years as my parents. I made friends with a man who was the first gay man to run for local political office. I made friends with a woman who worked as a lawyer and one who worked for the city.

Basically, they were gay, and lived just as normal a life as anyone else on television or the movies who wasn't gay. I was young, but it was an eye opening experience for me. And to think that my prevailing thought, before this revelation, was that I was somehow the gay aberration. . That I somehow may be the only gay person who wasn't fragile or a criminal.

The reason I bring all this up is because the old saying of "we are everywhere" really is true. We are everywhere and we have been for a very, very long time. Being gay isn't a new thing. And we should be allowed the same rights and liberties granted others in our nation.

I came across an interesting website recently. It features a whole lot of different things. But one of the areas that really intrigued me was the photos of male couples from... well from about as long ago as there have been photos.

Whether every person in these pictures are gay is anyone's guess but it is safe to assume that at least some are.

We, in the United States, are guaranteed the right to pursue happiness. Until such time as I am treated as my fellow citizens and allowed to marry the person I love, I will not be able to attain my unalienable right granted to me by the Creator as set forth by our Declaration of Independence.

Thanks to GayTwoGether for posting some great photos. And reminding us all, love is eternal; regardless of who it is you love.

Not So Boldly

I haven't written about movies in a while. Actually I haven't written about much lately I guess.

When I heard they were making a new Star Trek movie and it would be a retelling of the origins I was both excited and apprehensive. As a kid I used to consider myself a Trekker, but there are people who know so much about the Trek universe that I am, at best, a Trekkie, bordering on just being a fan of the series.  The Original Series (TOS) to be more specific.

I have always enjoyed science fiction. I have always enjoyed reading or watching stories that take place in the future when life was made easier by cool gadgets, or time travel, or space travel or ... well just anything that was cool to imagine or fun to watch. So when I discovered Star Trek(on reruns, but new to me) I was hooked. Flying ships to distant galaxies, guns that didn't shoot bullets but lasers that could either stun people or eliminate them. Travel without having to board a plane, just a step on a platform and "beam" to wherever you wanted to go and, of course, flipping your communication device and being able to talk to whomever you wanted, pretty much wherever they were.

The interesting thing about Star Trek though, for me, was while there were all these major advances in communication, travel, and science, there was still one element that hadn't change. And that was the human condition.

I loved that Kirk was willing to sacrifice rules for what was right. I loved that Dr. McCoy would get so angry that the veins in the neck would nearly burst. I loved that while all this advanced technology had made life easier, the universe was still irrational. We still had to deal with prejudices, war, intolerance and everything else that made this particular future seem so .... real. It was Kirk and crew who, each week, pretty much battled a social issue. Not always, of course, but that  what I took from the series. And often times, Kirk had to make heroic decisions. Yeah, sometimes they were just plot devices, but sometimes they were truly emblematic of someone who took risks that could have hugely detrimental effects for all involved, and those risks weren't taken lightly. It's what made Kirk the hero character.

In fact, the first 5 minutes of the movie are pretty great. Without giving any spoilers it begins with Kirk's father and this character is most like the Capt. Kirk I've come to know and love that I thought for sure this would be an awesome movie. In fact, the first segment, with Kirk's dad, is handled in such a way that it pulls you into the movie in an emotional way that I certainly hadn't expected. And done is such a manner that was missed in a similar scene in Revenge of the Sith (the last Star Wars movie).

Star Trek, the 'new' movie, takes a lot from the original series too. But it also misses the point on so many areas. I know that I am in the minority on my thoughts of the new movie. I have read the reviews, accept the way the filmmakers have made things "work" in this version, though I can't help but think they took an lazy way out. It really does seem like instead of doing some research into the history of Star Trek, they just decided to revive the things that are most common.

This new movie isn't a bad movie. It's an action movie, and as action movies go, it really is good. I don't care so much for the close-up shots during fight scenes or space battles, but that's more a comment on the director than the story and experience.

While the new movie makes reference to things die hard Trek fans will recognize. It also reinvents things for, it seems, the sake of reinventing. That is something I don't understand.

When Mission Impossible was 're-imagined' I was excited. I loved the old series that had people battle major issues with their wits. But what I saw in that theatrical movie was an action film. Why it was labeled Mission Impossible is beyond me. The filmmakers took an otherwise great premise and simply used it for establishing a new franchise having little to do with the original things that made Mission Impossible so great. I feel the same way about this new Star Trek.

While the series had its fair share of fights and battles, this movie is all about fights and battles. It uses the premise of time travel as a way to rewrite Trek history and, in the end, makes me wonder why they didn't just make a movie about space travel where battles take place and there is a time travel element and call it something other than Star Trek? The answer is obvious of course. Trek has name recognition. Here is a way for filmmakers to begin a new franchise, using the husk of an old franchise and in so doing, create new fans while, hopefully, not alienating old ones.

I didn't dislike the film. I just didn't like it as a Star Trek film. If you want to see cool effects, cool battles and lots of action. This movie is for you. You don't have to be a Star Trek fan. In fact, it might be better for you if you weren't.