This sounds really fun.

Point Break Live!, is an original concept and adaptation by Jaime Keeling of the 1991 Keanu Reeves/Patrick Swayze extreme sports movie Point Break.[1] Sometimes credited as the first-ever “reality-play,”[citation needed] each features a new, unrehearsed actor in the protagonist role of “Keanu”, reading their lines from cue-cards delivered by a production assistant.[1] The play premiered in a sold-out 2 month run co-directed by Jaime Keeling and Jamie Hook at Seattle’s Northwest Film Forum[citation needed], and has since toured throughout the country, including extended runs at the Bryant-Lake Bowl in Minneapolis[2], and Galapagos Art Space in Brooklyn, New York.[3] The show played recently at the La Tea Theater in Manhattan, and is currently playing at Charlie O’s Lounge in the Alexandria Hotel in downtown Los Angeles, where much of the movie took place. Notable “Keanus” include: Justin Pierre from the band Motion City Soundtrack and Juli Crockett, lead singer of the Evangenitals.

This site lists movies that are in part about kind of philosophical topics. I might have to check some of them out.

Roger Simon makes an interesting point in comparing antiwar moves about Vietnam and Iraq.

Normally this would instill passion, or at least passionate ambition, but there is a subtler and more treacherous roadblock to authenticity in all this that is not frequently acknowledged. While the Vietnam and Iraq Wars are often equated by the liberal-left, the differences between the two are greater than the similarities, especially in the critical area of who is the adversary. For Vietnam: The evils of communism could be and were rationalized by the left as a plea for social equality in an economically unjust world. For Iraq: The evils of Islamofascism and just plain fascism are considerably harder, indeed almost impossible, to rationalize.

This problem is particularly true for Hollywood because the evils of Islamofascism – notably extreme misogyny and homophobia – are justifiably big no-nos to people in the Industry. In fact, they are close to the biggest no-nos of all for them in their daily lives. Who is worse than a sexist pig? Only a violent, murderous sexist pig who wants to take over the world. It then becomes a complex balancing act indeed to make a movie that ignores or downplays this in order to criticize the US as the larger villain. No one has been able to come close to pulling off this balancing act in a film. In fact, it may well be impossible because it is fundamentally dishonest.

Communism putatively was about the people. What is Islamic Fundamentalism about?

Michael sends me this link to a Zogby survey showing the viewing preferences of different political groups. Its an interesting read.

Advertisers may be surprised to discover that a great place to capture moderates is on Fox News, where over 27% of moderates tune in daily. Unlike conservatives, though, moderates watch all the broadcast networks, and, like the liberals, NBC is their favorite, with 37% watching daily.

One of the more satisfying, under-reported barometers of cultural trends is the dismal box office take of recent movies attacking U.S. foreign policy and the war in Iraq.

Read that article in its entirety, and observe that, in all the reasons offered for why these films have met with public indifference and scorn, the 800-pound gorilla in the room is ignored:

These films are all anti-U.S.

Post here.

You have no idea how happy I am that these films have all bombed at the box office. It was an unexpected bonus that they even the critics didn’t like them. Surprising given the slight liberal tilt of reviewers in the aggregate.

It makes me genuinely happy to see the Anti-America crowd in Hollywood have their shit shoved back in their face.

Apparently Kevin Smith director of Dogma was present at a protest of his film when it was first released.

I was on Rotten Tomatoes today and I saw this.

Could we be seeing a new golden age in cinema? Its remarkable how many movies have such high scores. Almost every week a movie goer could see at least one movie, if not more, that scores close to 90% on Rotten Tomatoes. I have no doubt part of the reason we are seeing such great movies is because technology has done a fine job of reducing the cost of movie making. All aspects of producing a film like shooting, editing, and distributing have seen drastic reductions in cost thanks chiefly to computers. This means more people can compete, and when their is competition their is excellence. Free markets playing a role in better cinema? You better believe it.

But it’s not a comedy. It’s the next best thing. Hollywood’s interpretation of the war on terror.

This film has the same fetid stench as Syriana and Crash. Just absolute trash.

Just watched Gangs of New York for the second time. If not for that mid part of the movie in which Leonardo DiCaprio and Cameron Diaz fall in love this would be one of the best movies I have ever seen. It would be a top fiver for sure.

Several things to note:

The opening sequence in which the leader of the Dead Rabbits , the Irish gang, marches through a labryinth rallying his gang for the impending melee with the nativist gang all the while an Irish half-jig-half-march plays in the background is probably the best opening to a movie I have ever seen. Offhand i can’t think of another movie that has a stronger opening. Can anyone think of other movies with strong openings for the purpose of comparison?

There is a scene when the movie is very rapidly movings towards the crescendo. In this segment of the scene we see the protagonist, antagonist, and some ancillary character all praying to their god. We get to hear them beseech their lords for assistance in the upcoming calamity. Whats interesting is how the words each character uses to speak to god vary as a function of their current position within the movie. Of particular interest is that both the protagonists and the antagonists beseech the same god in assistinance in killing the other. Its a subtle way of showing the realization that same god is invoked by sworn enemies.

In the opening scene we see the antagonist, Bill the Butcher, kill the father of the protagonist in a massive melee. These two are archenemies since they were the leaders of two opposing gangs. After the father is killed, Bill honors and shows reverence towards his fallen enemy. Bill considers the opposing leader a worthy enemy, which gives dimensionality to Bill by showing that he is capable of seeing value in others and respecting those values even when he must kill that person.

This last bit reminds me of several discussion I have had recently. I have noticed in argument or conflict some have a tendency to explain their opponent’s dissent as a function of callowness or ignorance. When one dismiss an argument in this way they imply that their opponent’s dissent is not based on a well reasoned rationale but rather on immaturity or deception. Provided their opponents were mature enough or knowledgeable enough they would agree with their position. I dislike this kind of argumentation. I’m much more willing to grant that my opponent’s position is derived from a developed rationale and thus I treat their argument on equal grounds to mine. While I will treat their argument as a function of some rational faculty if I disagree with the position I will bring to bear the full force of my intellect in showing that position to be false.

This is how I see a parallel with Bill the Butcher. This character treats the other leader as as an equal. His enemy is an equal with a dissenting opinion and he must be killed for that reason. I treat my opponents arguments as equal to mine. Nevertheless when that position dissents with mine it must eventually be proven wrong.

But then again, I always do things the hard way.

Yesterday I had the chance to view a fantastically funny comedy. Maybe you have you seen it. Its called OutFoxed. It really is quite funny. Let me tell you about some of the funniest parts.

One of the filmmakers favorite tricks was to compile a collection of clips and use it to show that Fox News is bias in some regard. The problem with these collections was that all the clips always came from the talks shows and not the actual segments were news was being reported. Thus, to prove that Fox News is bias, they used the opinions of pundits and talk show hosts. I suppose the filmmakers are unable to separate fact from opinion and apparently this is the fault of Fox News. I know from my perspective I don’t watch Fox News because I can’t stand all the talks shows and pundits. Its a bunch of jackasses who think they know what they are talking about but actually don’t. But nevertheless i dont find the news segements to be overtly biased anymore then say CNN or MSNBC.

Fox News has the tag line ‘Fair and Balanced’. When you compile these clips together and overlook the fact that its just people’s opinion it creates the perception that Fox News is anything but fair and balanced. I imagine liberals all over the country becoming incensed over this blatant contradiction and scream ‘but how can you be in favor of Fair and Balanced when you seemingly support the conservative platform’. So what you have is some bold arrogant news organization intentionally biasing their news to the right side while the left side is screaming bloody murder over how they don’t play fair. Meanwhile Fox News continues their programing completely ignoring the whining of these liberals. With this understanding, when you bring in those collection of clips it really feels like Fox News is specifically try to get the liberal’s goat. And without hesitation the liberals all fall for it screaming bloody murder again and again in the movie. Its freaking hilarious. Oh by the way, someone should let the liberals know they can turn the channel.

Apparently Fox News has themes for each day that come from the corporate office. OutFox criticize these themes for being blatantly pro conservative. However, the DVD includes a making of OutFoxed. In the making of OutFoxed we come to find out that in order to manage the massive amount of footage they are recording, the director has the viewers looking out for 7 or 8 themes he is interested in. Some examples he gives are ‘Pro-Bush Anti-Kerry’ and ‘Happy Iraq’. It seems that the filmmaker is guilty of the same crime.

But on a more general level I’m sure all news organization have these kind of filters. They may not be as explicit as Fox News and OutFoxed but news organization must decide how to spend their publication resources. And it just so happens that most news organization consists primarily of left leaning folks and so inevitably they are going to favor left leaning stories. This may or may not be intentional but it brings about a subtle left leaning feel in main stream media. In this way, Fox News is simply more honest about their reporting then other news organizations. Wow, what a shocker, the conservative is more honest then the liberal.

At one point in the film goes statistical. Apparently some questions regarding the war Iraq were asked of viewers of Fox News and NPR-PBS. The questions were asked in October 2003.

1. Has the US found WMD in Iraq?

2. Does the World Opinion Favor the US Invasions of Iraq?

3. Has the US Found Links Between Iraq and al-Qaeda?

I shit you not when I say the expert characterized the question in these terms: “you are looking at questions of basic true false kind of factual nature” later he says this “These are simple questions with simple answers”. While question 1 (overlooking the whole WMD were moved to Syria) and 2 are may be argued as matters of fact, you sure as hell can’t make that argument for 3. If anything you would be forced to concede that Iraq had links with al-Qaeda if you are dealing in raw fact. Well the statistics show, unsurprisingly, that Fox News viewers are more likely to say yes to these questions then NPR-PBS viewer.

The explanation OutFoxed gives for this difference speak volumes about liberal attitudes towards those that do not share their opinion. OutFoxed argues that the viewers of Fox News are brainwashed. Apparently, Fox News has complete and total control over their viewers minds and can tell them anything they want. Underlying this explanation is the misunderstanding that correlation equals cause and effect. Correlation only shows a relationship between people who give a yes answer and people who watch Fox News. It does not show that Fox News has formed these opinions in the minds of their viewers. I would be more inclined to believe that these viewer already had these views and watch Fox News because their content is more consistent with their beliefs. Just like NPR-PBS viewers find their views to be shared by the programing on these networks. This statiscal analysis just a fancy way to say something obvious: Liberals enjoy NPR-PBS and conservatives watch Fox News.

The argument continues, as OutFoxed claims that Fox News is bad because it brain washes people. Apparently there is only one true perspective and anyone that believe otherwise is being controlled by some outside force. So much for multiculturalism. Their can be no possible way a normal person can have views other then liberal views. They must, in fact, be brain washed by some vast right wing conspiracy. Seriously, how do liberals expect to capture the vote of moderates with this kind of attitude. Given the 2004 election the answer is they don’t. MUAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHHAHAHAHHA.

I don’t want to spoil any more of the humor of this movie. I think it might become one of the Greatest American Comedies of all time and I highly recommend you check it out.