Instant Political Analysis Makes Me Feel Blahg

Earlier this week, I was watching Hillary Clinton's speech in Denver at the Democratic National Convention. The speech was over and MSNBC's Keith Olbermann praised the speech, saying that Hillary hit the ball out of the stadium and across the street. I mean I liked the speech, but really Keith? Well, I decided to see what Fox News was saying. I was met with a chorus of bald white men and a pretty white woman -- the moderate -- saying "Lackluster!" These immediate reactions are nice emotional responses to the speech, but they don't offer much to an understanding of American politics. News on the web and 24-hour news networks have, together, failed on their mission to make more complete, probing coverage of politics. Instead, these 24-7 news entities have created an atmosphere where non-news dominates news.

Instant Political Analyses that are making me feel blahg:

INSTANT SPEECH/DEBATE REACTIONS -- C'mon Olbermann and company, speeches are speeches! Why do we need to have a reaction, a review, right after? Rather than commenting on the politics of the speech or as Fox News framed it, as "a piece of oratory," why not address the actual politics that are being examined in the speech. Let's be real. Most Americans don't really know the intricacies of the policies of Obama and McCain. For the most part, I certainly don't! When we have MILLIONS of eyes glued to the screen, all watching the great oratory of Hillary Clinton (doesn't that go without saying?) and her evasion of Obama-love, shouldn't we bypass the obvious and get to what she was talking about? Take this opportunity to explain to a HUGE audience the policies and opinions she spoke about.



INSTANT POLLS -- Every political move is followed by a quick phone poll that details the change in public opinion. As this article exemplifies, news stories centering on these polls EXPECT public opinion to change at every slight political move. The reality of this race is that the contenders are very close together, and the general public has a very good idea of the general sentiment of both Obama and McCain. The Democratic Convention was very much an exercise in fortifying the message being sent out so that it can stand tall in November, it was not full of surprises, bells, and whistles. Of course, then, the numbers aren't going to change. The Democratic Party is finally learning how to unify itself, something the Republicans were excellent at for the past few decades, and this was their first big display of this. The message was subtle, but its effects will be long lasting. This is nothing you can find in a morning-after poll.

MAKING STORIES -- We all need our fluff stories, but if you watched CNN over the past year, you've definitely seen your fair share of Obama girl and other fluff. I was going to make the case for this happening right now (I remember seeing a CNN story about a presidential race between Obama and McCain hamsters or something), but the news outlets have their hands full with real news, especially between the two conventions and the VP nominations.

I love blogs, I love 24 hour news networks. They just need to be smarter. I mean a glance at the Huffington Post, will convince you that there is a progressive future to political news, but everyone needs to catch up.

Finally, I leave you with a picture that I'm very unwilling to make instant commentary on. So I'll let it simmer. Do you have anything to say?

--bryce

Aamir Khan is Totes in Drag

I must be honest, I'm about to surpass any geekiness I may have claimed. In a recent Tata Sky ad in India touting the complementary relationship between the two companies in their merger, Aamir Khan (yes, the LAGAAN guy) appears as the bi-gender Ardhanarisvara character. No matter the silliness in the ad, this is a seriously fun venture into camp for Khan.



A bit from a paper I wrote on the normativity of transgender figures in Hindu religious literature (and life?) if you'd like to nerd out:

One of the most popular icons in Hindu art is the image of Ardhanarisvara, which is often mistranslated as “half-man, half-woman.” Instead, the name literally means “the lord who is half woman” (Goldberg 1). Thus, the common translation ignores the privileging of Siva in the representation, which creates Siva as the focus of the figure. He is the lord of Ardhanarisvara, of which his wife Parvati (sometimes interpreted instead as simply female power or shakti) is a part. This dualistic representation of the gods is seen often as a monistic view of not only the gender system but of life in general. It is something like the figure of the yin and yang in Daoism. Ardhanarisvara often appears in the religious literary tradition of bhakti poetry. Bhakti poems are “poems of personal devotion to a god, often a particular form of the god. The [bhakti poets] reject not only the ‘great’ traditions of Vedic religion, but the ‘little’ local traditions as well” (Ramanujan 25). So while Bhakti poems are often read in religious circles or settings, the bhakti poets are critical of organized religion.

Bhakti poems are concerned with individual forms of Siva, and they often include references to his Ardhanarisvara form. In one bhakti poem, Siva is described in the following:

He wears a woman’s earring on one ear;
riding on his bull,
crowned with the pure white crescent moon,
his body smeared with ash from the burning ground,
he is the thief who stole my heart. (Peterson in Goldberg 92)

Here, it is Siva that the poet is decidedly talking about, it is not an actual transgender character. There is no separate Ardhanarisvara according to the poet. Instead, the poet portrays Siva as a male god who happens to have half of his body consumed by womanhood. It is still notable, though, that the poet is invoking this figure of Siva at all, for there are innumerable ways to conceptualize or conjure images of Siva. That the author mentions him in this way means there is value in thinking of Siva as his Ardhanarisvara form.

--bryce

Metallica Drops New Single, Doesn't Suck

Since, apparently, Bryce and I promised you to be the arbiters of (good) musical taste, it only seems fitting that I too should blog today about another very important musical release: Metallica first single off their new album, Death Magnetic! The Day That Never Comes is streaming on their site now so go take a listen. According to Wikipedia (so you know it must be true), this single is the most downbeat track on the album. Which is good news because the song is definitely a mellow one, for Metallica anyway, and I was worried that the entire album might have that same tone. I'm relieved to hear that's not the case.

It's always difficult to anticipate a new album from such a significant band like Metallica, especially this late in their career. Do you expect more because they've always impressed you before or do you give them a pass because they've (mostly) hit the mark in the past? Oh, Metallica, you distress me so! Regardless, during my first listen the one thought that popped into my head was that James' voice is starting to sound old and tired - though I guess one would have to expect that from a 45 year old who's been tearing out his lungs screaming metal for the past 30 years. Still, it's definitely an improvement on any of the singles that came out of St. Anger and I'm still pumped to see them when they come through in January. Oh, and I can't wait to play it on Guitar Hero: World Tour when the album drops in September. (And again on Guitar Hero: Metallica next year)

-Arielle

Ra Ra Riot Proves Crafty if Reserved on LP Debut

I spent a few days toying with the idea of writing a blog post about Syracuse-formed Ra Ra Riot's US label LP debut The Rhumb Line (on Barsuk Records), nervous to publish something that could be seen by so many of their fans. But after a few days of listening and thinking, I have a few words to say. Plus, it's time Arielle and I made good on our promise to be your arbiter of (musical) taste.

Having seen Ra Ra a number of times, I can attest that they are a great live band. That being said, their recent performances, like at the Siren Festival (I was working and didn't go), are not gaining the best responses. This is probably due to the strength of the band in a small venue. But can't we all just agree that the band is fun.

The new album, while more polished than their EP and live performances (duh!) leaves me a bit torn. While the new recordings lead to a more complete feel to the songs, highlighting the beauty of Alexandra Lawn's cello and Rebecca Zeller's violin, lead singer Wes Miles's performance on the new album is often restrained. I'm suspicious of this reaction to Miles's voice, though. I think it has more to do with a comparison to earlier and live versions of "classics" like "Can You Tell?" (which includes new lyrics?!?). His vocal stylings on "Ghost Under Rocks" and Kate Bush cover "Suspended in Gaffa" are powerful and consistently so. The album does well in displaying the group's fun streak, with 80's synthlike "Too Too Too Fast" and "Can You Tell?".

The album is definitely worth a listen...and perhaps a purchase. Though I think it would have been more complete with their cover of Bush's "Hounds of Love." A well done debut LP, and a nice testament to the extensive work they have done up to this point.

P.S. The album is dedicated in memory of the band's former drummer John Pike, who died earlier this year. Many reviewers are trying to make this out to be songs about the band's reaction to his death, but many, like "Dying is Fine," were written with him.

Finally, a video for a former recording of "Dying is Fine" directed by brilliant Syracuse artists Albert Birney, Nicholas Gurewitch, and Jon Moses.

--bryce

Google Takes Another Step To Control the World

Do you hear that? I think it's the timid sound of Steve Jobs crying in a corner. Ok, that might be a bit of an exaggeration - it's probably just the sound of him playing in a giant pool filled with dollar bills. But still any new piece of tech hardware that can help feed my inexplicable need to see Apple fail makes me happy.

Witness the Android, Google's newest product that may look like a phone, but oh no it is so much more. According to Google, this isn't just about a phone it's about many phones. This is a phone as an operating system and it's set to be released sometime this quarter (just in time for someone's birthday!), possibly on T-Mobile. Perfect, another awesome phone that isn't available on my service. The Nokia E71 is starting to look better every day.

It kind of looks like an iPhone, but what touch phone doesn't these days. It's got all the basic google apps (Fun note: when you use google maps street view the image moves with you. Meaning if I turn right the map automatically turns right. FUN!) but the bread and butter of this product as opposed to those made by other companies is that it's going to be completely open to third party developers. I can only imagine what ridiculous apps we'll see in the future. Here Google is offering an Android software development kit to get all you kids that consider yourselves to be software developers started. And get this, they're also offering $10 million for the best apps. I think Google just gave a whole mess of dudes living in their parents' basements another reason not to ever see the sun. Check out fan site Phandroid for all the nerdlicious details.

I think I'd be happy with an (eventual) Google government, at least they encourage independent thought and creativity. Page and Brin for President!

-Arielle

Moses is Lindsay's Homeboy?

Lindsay Lohan is coming out...as a Jew. (Moses 1, Jesus none. Face!) Yes, apparently Lindsay's "friendship" (not that there's anything wrong with that) with Samantha Ronson has made her interested in becoming one of the chosen people. JDate just got a new power couple for those horrible ads in Times Square. I wonder if this will show up on Living Lohan? Maybe Dina can wear a really inappropriate outfit to Rosh Hoshanah services, while she leaves those other two kids in a burning vehicle somewhere.

And why wouldn't Lindsay want to join the tribe? We all know that Hollywood is run by two groups - the gays and the Jews and one out of two ain't bad...It would be cool if she went through with it though. This might finally help us nab that tricky tween market.

Ok, but seriously - I have way too much time on my hands at work. Dirty lesbian gossip time. Somehow I went from reading about Lindsay's religious epiphany to her first "friendship" with Courtenay (yes, it's actually spelled like that) Semel daughter of ex-Yahoo! CEO Terry Semel, who was then dating Casey Johnson of the Johnson & Johnsons (who I only know because I watched this excellent E! THS on rich white kids and then this doc made by some rich white kid about other rich white kids) who at some point had a fiance and was adopting a baby from Kazakhstan (sexy time!) but who just got dumped by Courtenay (does anyone else say that with a thick Valley accent in their head every time?) for...wait for it...TILA TEQUILA! And this is all old news! How did I miss this? Needless to say this was like the greatest work day ever.

I know. I'm a sad, sad person. And I swear I'll get help soon.

-Arielle

Bollywood's Unforgettable Tour was...well, Mostly Forgettable

Friday night at the Nassau Coliseum, I crowded my way into a mass of Indian-American families and friends, one of the only a handful of goras (white people) in the audience, to see the Unforgettable Tour. While the Bachchan family members (Amitabh, Abhisek, and Aishwarya Rai all performed and Jaya was there with an environmental message) were gobbling up stage time throughout the show, the stole was stolen from them.

Om Shanti Om songwriters Vishal and Shekhar brought the house down with their live performances of many of their hits, especially this one:

But the unequivocal star of the evening was 80s/90s superstar Madhuri Dixit. Though 43 years old, the woman's hips are just as titillating as Shakira's. Her dancing was well worth the price of admission. Though her costumes did exemplify a glaring problem in the night's planning -- unflattering (and outdated) Indian and western clothing.

That being said, I was pumped to see the Bachchan's in action. Their family's treatment as unquestioned superstars provides great insight into the idiosyncrasies of the Hindi film star system. Aishwarya Rai Bachchan, frequently touted as the world's most beautiful woman, was sold to her fans as just that...oh right! She's also the husband of Abhishek. What was clear was that Aishwarya was to be thought of as a star by virtue of beauty first and a meteoric star married to Abhishek second. Nowhere is there room for talent in her star. Her husband, while pitching himself as one of the people by debuting in the audience and walking onto stage, is also clearly riding on the coattails of his father. In a venue and an industry where dancing and lip-syncing (or in the case of Amitabh, Dixit, and Vishal & Shekhar, singing) are central, the married couple cannot get by just on looks and/or acting chops. The family's patriarch, Mr. Amitabh, relied on his past virility to carry him through a career retrospective that he sang live to but danced only by stiffly raising a leg or arm here or there.

Throughout the night, what rang clear is that the tides are changing in Bollywood. Ms. Dixit's performance brought her well-deserved respect for possessing her great talent, but the Bachchan family and openers "priety awesome" Priety Zinta and funnyman Riteish Deshmukh felt a bit hollow comparatively. Beyond Ms. Dixit's talented performance, the duo of Vishal & Shekhar's success highlighted a new musical turn in Hindi cinema, one which incorporates unabashedly Western elements and masters the formula. All in all, the night was what all good Hindi film experiences should be -- showstoppingly fun and four hours long.

--bryce

Why We Should Be Excited About the New Fall TV Lineup

Two little words my friends: Sci-fi.

Ok. I'm a nerd and I was brought up in a home where sci-fi ruled all. Philip K. Dick was the family prophet and over the years we've built equal shrines to Joss Whedon and J.J. Abrams in the backyard (though Abrams' was, admittedly, reduced during the second season of Lost, but then slightly rebuilt after Cloverfield). Both have new shows coming this Fall and while I'm still holding my breath until I see a few episodes of each, I actually have something new to set on my DVR and this prospect excites me (how did they both land on Fox?). Also this season brings new episodes of Heroes, Lost and Pushing Daisies. Is it too early to have a complete geek out right now?

Never. So let's take a look at what we've got coming:

Fringe (Airing: September 9th, 2008 at 8/7c on Fox) - Is that...Joshua Jackson?! Oh man, I totally thought he was dead! So basically what we have here is what sounds to me like a modern update of Fox's last great sc-fi show, The X-Files (straight cop finds herself tangled in the world of the supernatural, but is hard pressed to believe what she sees. Has quirky partner), which is not a bad thing at all, as long as it's done right. And if anyone could do it right, and then probably overdo it into submission, it's definitely Abrams. He already has a prequel comic out and more are on the way. Insane fan sites are popping up (for a show that hasn't even premiered yet!) and here scifi.com counts down why Fringe will rule TV this season. I assume it will not only rule TV but books, movies, commercials, sky writing, milk cartons...Abrams insistence on making his creations completely multi-platform can get a little tiresome and irritating, if only because I don't have the time or patience to keep up which then makes me feel like I'm missing out. Taking into account the fact that this show is already over-hyped I'm giving it a 7 on the Excite-O-Meter.

Dollhouse (Airing: January 2009 at 8/7c also on Fox) - God Eliza Dushku is bad ass, no? Even in Bring It On she made me wonder who's head she was gonna knock off. Here Dushku plays Echo, a "Doll," or a person who has had their mind wiped clean so they can be used as, well, dolls. They can be laden with different personalities and sent on different missions i.e. Dushku gets to kick some ass. But oh, here's the twist - Echo is starting to become self aware. I don't even need to think twice about this one. Losing Buffy was probably the hardest part of my adolescence. And Firefly is possibly one of the most underrated shows of the century. I will follow Whedon into any dystopian reality he wants to create. And not to be out-done by J.J. "overdo it" Abrams, Whedon will be filming webisodes for each on air episode. Just another thing to keep me busy at work. Definitely scoring a 9 on the Excite-O-Meter.

Here's another exciting tidbit to get your panties all bunched: "Dollhouse, along with J.J. Abrams' Fringe, will air with half the commercials and promo spots, adding about 6 minutes to the shows' run times, as part of a new Fox initiative called "Remote-Free TV." With something like DVR I don't really have to worry about commercials (though where will Abrams hide his subliminal messages now?!), but as someone that works in the TV field this is totally fascinating and I'm curious to see how/if they can pull it off.

-Arielle

Everyone Is Stupid! Or How I Stopped Worrying and Learned to Love the Internet

Did you know that there is only one book store in all of Martha's Vineyard? And that it is nowhere near where my best friend and I are staying? Yeah, I didn't either. So when the book I brought along with me proved completely uninteresting I ventured out in search of better reading material. Being a beach town my only options are, apparently, cheesy romance novels, Tom Clancy type thrillers, or a handful of magazines. I practically tripped over myself grabbing for the newest issue of GQ (James Franco is on the cover. Nuff said). Wanting to save the ridiculously large mag for our trip home I began my search for a second option and that's when I realized my one failing as a geeky 14 yr old boy - I don't read any geeky magazines! (Does Atlantic Monthly count? Because then I've got at least one on my roster. But one geeky mag does not a true geek make.) I'm a big fan of the Wired blog so I figure why not try it in real life?

And boy am I happy I did. Only a few pages in and I stumble upon a brief article on a topic Bryce and I were just discussing – the next step in the evolution of thinking brought to us by our friendly neighborhood interweb. Actually this takes us back to my love for Atlantic Monthly. Any readers of the mag will recognize the July/August cover story Is Google Making Us Stupid? (spoiler alert: it isn’t), a geniously written article by author Nicholas Carr. In short the article discusses the latest theory that the popularity of the internet is ruining our pliable little brains by making us slow, shallow, basically my nemesis - 14 yr old girls. The Wired article digs into this theory as well, bashing a long list of books that take the opposing side of the argument and that are now on my reading list. Well, if I’m going to make fun of the authors and their texts I should probably read them first, no?

Where all the pundits and non-believers have gone wrong is that they fail to take into account the evolution of learning up until now. I’m pretty sure that at some point in history everyone agreed that the printing press was going to kill the beauty of the written word. And well, you just have to take a look at this magnificent blog to see that that just isn’t true. These days my Grad Schools professors shiver at the mere utterance of the word “Wikipedia.” And yes, I can understand why. Many people do take everything that is written there as 100% truth without bothering to double check their facts. But Wired’s David Wolman makes an excellent argument for these kinds of sites, “Imperfect as they may be, the collective brainpower contained within these kinds of sites – the hunger for learning and accurate information they represent – is something human history has never know before.” (Actually, anyone who’s read Simon Winchester’s The Professor and the Madman knows that this is exactly how the Oxford English Dictionary was created.)

Sure I’ve noticed that my reading style has changed a little, but unlike the friends Carr quotes in his article, I still have no problem sitting down and reading a 500 page book. As long as it’s well written, be it blog or novel, I’m willing to ingest. In fact, I’m eager and excited to read it. Just as excited as I am by the fact that I can get the answer to nearly any question I have throughout the day with a few clicks of my mouse. (Anyone in my office will tell you that a resounding “let’s look it up” is my most commonly used phrase.) I was instilled with the love of information, and I think that anything that makes learning more easily accessible is a good thing. Yes, there can be some issues. No process is perfect right off the bat (that’s the point of evolution, kids) so that’s why I love these types of articles. These issues should be debated and then debated some more. It’s what will keep us all on our virtual toes.

And, yes, I now have a subscription to Wired.

-Arielle

Tropic Thunder isn't Offensive...Just Unfocused

So after receiving a load of e-mails asking me to participate in protests of the film Tropic Thunder and reading editorials (anti-film and pro-film) about its questionable content, I decided I needed to see this film. If you don't know, the controversy surrounds the film's use of the word "retard" and its depiction of an actor played by Ben Stiller playing a cognitively disabled person in a film-with-the-film. And so my journey to the theater was made all the more uncomfortable when two cognitively disabled people took my tickets...knowing I paid $11.75 to support a film which potentially exploits people like them was how I started off this screening.

Tropic Thunder, directed, co-written, and starring Ben Stiller, is a movie about making a movie called Tropic Thunder. The actors in this film-within-a-film (Stiller, Jack Black as a schticky comedic actor, Robert Downey Jr. as one taking his role too seriously whilst in blackface, macho(-gay?) black actor played by Brandon T. Jackson and Jay Baruchel's optimistic artist-actor) are set up to satirize the film industry by poking fun at the seriousness with which actors take the ludicrous situations Hollywood puts them in.

But none of it really comes close enough to Hollywood's actual practices of late. For instance, it's been a long time since Hollywood has asked a white actor to put on brown paint and play a black character. That didn't stop Stiller and company from making Downey's character do that...and have him get reaaaaaallly into his character. But as my friend Linde reminded me, what's really going on in Hollywood is not blackface...it's re-writing non-white characters in these based-on-a-true story narratives to be played as white by white characters. Making this a point of the film would have made a more poignant film. Instead, Downey's performance, while impressive, came off as why!?

But back to the controversy... Ben Stiller's actor-character's last role was a cognitively challenged character in a film called Simple Jack. The problem for me here wasn't the film's use of this as a plot point or its use of the word "retard." The problem was using scenes of Stiller playing Jack for comedy. And they were definitely the points of the movie that got the most laughs. The audience clearly found the idea of a cognitively disabled person on screen inherently funny. And thank god it was within the bounds of a film classified as comedy so they could actually laugh. While Stiller does contextualize this film-within-a-film within the Hollywood structure in a smart conversation between Downey Jr.'s and Stiller's characters about the politics of "playing retard" in an effort to find critical acclaim, the film would been much more effective as a piece of satire would the film have excised the pieces of Simple Jack. (Note: It is this scene that for some reason seems to be getting the most focus from the protesters. Most likely, because it explicitly uses the word "retard." And the studio did take down a website devoted to the film-within-the-film cuz it's just not funny on its own.)

That being said, this is just the beginning of the film's lack of focus. Also to be included on that list is a point where the film breaks its own rule by casting someone in prosthetic makeup unnecessarily just for laughs when it makes Tom Cruise the not-very-funny-looking but kind of funny movie exec. Why the prosthetic makeup? Especially when Black's character makes fun of that device? Why Stiller why? It seems people were to afraid to hurt the artiste's feelings here by telling him his film lacked a central point. (Oh, and by the way, wtf Lisa Schwarzbaum!? A!!?!?! No one was laughing at half of the jokes at my screening...)

--bryce

Why "Real" Journalists Can't Win

The answer is because they suck at their job. Let me explain...

Regular CNN Contributor Roland S. Martin published an editorial article, (Media's job is to focus on facts, not rumors) today explaining why real journalists (like those at CNN) hold such an important, no distinguished role in a media landscape plagued by the rumor mills of the Internet and tabloid mags.

Let's start with his examples that support this view of the world:

1.) Example: People were blogging, texting, and emailing about Bernie Mac's death a week before he actually died. Conclusion: Bloggers, texters, emailers are unreliable and only press releases can officially declare deaths. Duh!

2.) Example: The National Enquirer was reporting on John Edwards affair weeks before Edwards told Bob Woodruff on ABC News. Conclusion: Okay, maybe the rumor mills were right on this one...but like, what if they weren't? And btw...they totally paid for their lead.

3.) Example: Some company lost a lot of money because some people were spreading rumors that they didn't have money but they really did. And then those rumors became news. And then the company lost a lot of investment and then they really did become poor. Conclusion: Whoops! I guess we shouldn't report on rumors.

Ok, Mr. Martin I get that rumor mills shouldn't be reported on because, well, they can be damaging for journalists and subjects alike. But doesn't this all really have to do with the fact that journalists reporting on rumors aren't actually doing anything journalistic unless they investigate the validity of these rumors. I mean, let's be real...saying that rumors exist is all fine and dandy...but the problem with "real journalists" is that they all too often don't take that extra step to investigate these rumors and either ignore them for fear of a libel suit and the loss of their job or they report on the fact that rumors exist.

The fact is that people who aren't journalists know things that journalists wished they knew. In order to survive in this here newfangled world taken over by the Interwebs, more journalists are going to need to be investigative journalists. Lucky for them...the blogging world has done much of their preliminary research. Now they just need to finish it. The "real" journalist does have a role in this new media environment: check facts, unleash story beyond the blogosphere.

--bryce

Pineapple Express - Review

As I sit down to review this movie, I'll admit I'm a little worried - I'm a die-hard fan of anything remotely related to Judd Apatow or Seth Rogen. (Though I was a little disappointed with Superbad and the pace at which they release movies is beginning to become worrisome, but that's a whole different post) And I can pretty much just watch James Franco peel an orange and I'd be happy. So while I know that Pineapple Express wasn't the most perfect movie out there, it's still one of the best I've seen in a while (and no, Bryce, this is not including Dark Knight. Please, it's too early for that kind of sacrilege). Though, when you're going to a movie that has been consistently reviewed as one that should only be seen when stoned - well, I think that we all know what to expect.

One thing that annoyed me about the early reviews of the film was this grand looming question constantly being posed -A stoner/action/comedy? Is it possible? Hello! Has no one here seen The Big Lebowski? Have we forgotten the Dude? For the sake of your future viewing happiness I sincerely hope not. Alright, I'll admit that Lebowski and co. weren't nearly as stoned as the characters in Pineapple Express and that this film's plot actually revolved primarily around pot without too many diverging story lines. Rogen and Franco get into trouble because they are stoners while Lebowski just happened to be a stoner who got into trouble. Still Lebowski definitely opened the door for a film like this. (Geeky side note: If you're in NY in August make sure to get to the MOMA. They're screening the entire Coen catalogue all month!)

While the Coen brothers are probably the only filmmakers that could unseat Apatow and Rogen as my celluloid gods - this movie still impressed the hell out of me. Rogen and Goldberg's writing has really improved since Superbad and honestly, I wasn't expecting the amount of action that was delivered. I don't know much about director David Gordan Green, except that I had wanted to see his last film Snow Angels, but never actually got around to it. I had also read about his unsuccessful attempts to adapt Confederacy of Dunces into a film starring Will Ferrell. (has no one else realized the irony in Will Ferrell's last name? I love it) Anyway, the guy had no background in action and he pulled it off. I'm impressed.

Sure there were some excessive moments in the film - the entire subplot with Rogen's girlfriend could have easily been chopped. I guess they needed some way to stick a pair of breasts in amongst the mostly all male cast (not to say that Rosie Perez's twins aren't fine enough). The pace was consistently inconsistent, quick jump from a car chase to a smoking montage to Rogen crying on the phone to the aforementioned breasts. While the guy I saw it with wasn't happy with this odd pacing, I, and trust me I know how this is going to sound, felt that the pace totally lent itself to the mood of the story. As in these dudes are stoned the entire time this is happening, I liked feeling a little bewildered/unprepared for what came next.

Final verdict - the movie isn't perfect but it's exactly what it advertises itself as. I laughed a lot, I giggled at some explosions, and I drooled at James Franco's adorable smirk the entire time through. So yes, I'm still a Apatow/Rogen believer and I'll probably keep seeing anything they throw at me.

-Arielle

Xanadu Rocks (Whoopi Rolls with the Punches)

So I've been meaning to see Xanadu for a year or so now and after the "new to Broadway" cool factor faded, the only thing that could get me to the theater was a big name like, hmm, Whoopi Goldberg in the production. And so Goldberg, who started last week in the show, got me into a partial view student rush seat at the Helen Hayes Theater yesterday. (Rest assured, I moved over when the two seats next to me were unattended.)

Before I begin, seeing Whoopi is an experience in itself. No surprise, she exudes a delightful presence, well worth the price of admission. But, as is often the problem with bringing stars onto already established productions, her shaky dance moves and sometimes awkward blocking do not jive with the other actors' full-time yearlong commitment to the musical. And her presence has given a mega-boost to the under-the-radar musical that is so deserved for a really rather smart production.

So some things you should know...

-- be prepared to see a lot of Cheyenne Jackson's (sigh) thigh and not a lot of bulge in his short short cut-off jean shorts.

-- watch the film before seeing the musical. 90 minutes of "Why was this movie made?" will turn into 100 minutes of that question being asked in song and on roller skates and with disco balls.

-- you will be wondering why Kerry Butler is so amazing for all 100 minutes.

-- jukebox musicals (rightfully) get a bad name. But Electric Light Orchestra is (finally?) put to good use.

--bryce

No One Can Dance in JAANE TU YA JAANE NA...Not Even Pappu

A change of pace today... After seeing that Jaane Tu Ya Jaane Na was a hugely popular film in India with great word of mouth and noticing it had been in the AMC East Village Cinemas for more than 4 weeks, I decided to go buy a ticket. (When I went up to the ticket booth, pasty skin and all, and asked for a ticket to "Jaane Tu Ya Jaane Na," the woman made sure to check I didn't make a mistake. "That's an Indian movie, you know?")

But what I was struck by this film was that it was a standard Bollywood film (sans stars) with just fine music and a dance number. The only thing is the dance song from this film ("Pappu Can't Dance"), while being a nice song, lacks in the dance department. Jai (Imran Khan) is adorable, but cannot carry the song with good looks. The success of this film despite a run-of-the-mill script with a ridiculous premise and gratuitous silly scenes (including a scene where Jai convinces two thugs to get away from a pretty lady by telling them she has AIDS), is surprising. It attests to a cheapening of the already just-for-fun romantic melodrama of Hindi film. This film doesn't take itself as seriously as the star-studded melodramas do, but perhaps it should. It seems this film is abandoning what Hindi films do best...just being plain fun...but doing it professionally. The question is then: Why did people flock to the theaters for this one? I'm not so sure about that one...(Although I'd accept the charm of the couple (Khan and Genelia as Aditi) as an answer.)

--bryce