Monthly Archives: March 2006

I don't necessarily agree with all of this column by Paul Krugman about the problem of illegal immigration. But I think every point he makes is an issue that will have to be addressed if the matter is ever to be settled. Certainly a lot of people who want all the illegals rounded up and deported are in denial about the economic impact it would have on our society. Frankly, I'm so conflicted and confused on this issue that I sometimes find myself semi-agreeing with George W. Bush on it.

You all remember Die Hard? That was the slightly implausible 1988 movie that starred Bruce Willis as a cop who battles crooks who have taken over an office building near where my mother lives. Well, what you may not know is that the film was a remake of a 1924 silent picture, The Ballad of John McClane.

Okay, you got the premise? Die Hard as a silent movie set in 1924. Good. Here's a nine minute version of that film…

Tom Spurgeon interviews Buzz Dixon, the fellow behind the Serenity comic book/manga that we discussed here.

Okay, the polls are closed. We asked you to vote on whether you were okay with having video links embedded in this weblog and an amazing 909 of you wrote in to tell me how you felt. I'm not sure what I would have predicted but it sure wasn't this: 858 of you voted in favor of the embedded videos. 14 of you voted against them. A bit of a landslide, wouldn't you say?

I feel sorry for some of the fourteen…the ones who wrote that the links crash their computers or just plain don't appear…or they're on dial-up connections and the thing loads at the speed of a boulder eroding. To make their visits here a little easier, I've changed something about the main page here. It used to feature the current day's postings plus the previous four days. Now, it features the current day plus three. To read earlier posts than that, you click on the link at the bottom of the page. That should speed page loading up a bit.

The remaining 37 voters said things that didn't fit wholly into the YES or NO categories but were mostly more in favor of the embedding than against…so I think the embedded video links are here to stay. Thanks to all who voted.

Here's an update on the condition of Art Buchwald. He's still dying but boy, does he seem to be making it about as enjoyable an experience as it could be. [New York Times, so register already.]

You may have already seen this. It's been e-mailed more times than that photo of George W. Bush playing the guitar during Hurricane Katrina, plus I linked to it about two months ago. But every day, six or seven people write to me and suggest I put up a video link to Chris Bliss and his incredible juggling finale, so here it is.

An interesting controversy is brewing about this in some circles. I don't know Mr. Bliss but he's a very successful comedian who closes his stand-up act juggling three balls to a Beatles medley. He put a video of it up on his website so that potential clients could see what he did and perhaps hire him…but non-bookers found it, loved it and it's being forwarded and reposted all over the World Wide Web. This has upset a number of professional jugglers who feel that what Bliss does in it, at least from a technical standpoint, isn't all that impressive, especially because he only uses three balls. If you scan the many public forums on which this is being discussed, you'll find an amazing number of irate jugglers writing things like, "My own mother sent me this video and asked why I don't do something wonderful like that."

There's obviously some petty jealousy at work there but there's also some honest (if misguided, I think) upset that people who practice for decades to master more complicated routines are not getting this kind of grass-roots attention. And it's certainly true that the rewards for an accomplished juggler these days are not great. There aren't even all that many places you can do it and make a buck. Then again, it's not Chris Bliss's fault that folks love the clip and are forwarding it to each other. As far as I can tell, he's making no claims other than that audiences enjoy his finale. Which they obviously do.

Recently, a championship juggler named Jason Garfield did his own version of the Bliss routine. He calls it a "parody" while others are suggesting that Garfield, who has apparently been quite outspoken against jugglers who rip off others' routines, has committed that very crime. If I were doing my own parody of someone's act, I don't think I would use his soundtrack, nor would I take bows at the end in response to the standing ovation that he received. I'd also try to parody what he does instead of trying to prove that I can do it better.

The two performances are not really comparable. Bliss did his in one take in front of a live audience. Garfield did his sans audience in a gymnasium somewhere and the tape appears to be edited together from multiple takes. My own reaction, just going by these two videos, is that Garfield is the more skilled of the two but his performance is cold and impersonal, and his juggling doesn't connect with the music the way Bliss's does. But it's not fair to judge either man by what they did under different conditions. Perhaps in front of a packed crowd, Garfield would have given a warmer performance. Perhaps with the luxury of editing, Bliss would have attempted more elaborate feats.

I admire both but if forced to choose, I'd rather watch Bliss. What's impressive to me is not that he can keep three balls in the air for four and a half minutes without dropping one but that he moves them (and himself) with the rhythm and emotion of his accompaniment. I'd also rather watch Michael Goudeau or Charlie Frye or Anthony Gatto or the Flying Karamazov Brothers or the Passing Zone or any of a number of other great jugglers out there who do what they do with style and personality, even if they aren't always keeping five balls aloft.

Jason Garfield's performance is our non-embedded video link today. Our embedded video link is Chris Bliss…

I spent some time today, as I sometimes do, reading the websites of folks whose views on the world do not often coincide with mine.

On the subject of the Iraq War, I would feel a lot more optimistic if the supporters of George W. Bush would spend less time trying to prove he was right to invade and more time arguing that he knows what to do now.

I've received over 700 votes so far in my survey as to whether you folks would prefer that video links on this site be embedded or non-embedded. Voting has been lopsided but I won't tell you which way. I'd like to get as many "ballots" as I can, just to see how this will play out…so if you care at all, read this message and send me a quick e-mail, even if it's only to say YES or NO. The polls are open 'til Noon tomorrow, Pacific Time at which time the bars can reopen and I'll announce the result. And please, no electioneering within 50 yards of your computer.

The other day in this post, I noted that I would soon be watching the 1966 movie Penelope for the first time since 1966. I said that I remembered it not being very good and that my father and I felt cheated because Jonathan Winters, though billed among its stars, was only on the screen for — and I quote myself: "…what seemed like about two minutes. It was probably more than that but I'll bet it wasn't a lot more than that. Four minutes, tops."

I have now seen Penelope for the first time in forty years. By an odd coincidence, I won't be watching this movie again for another forty years. What a non-entertaining piece of celluloid. The single interesting thing about it is Peter Falk, playing a cop and apparently warming up to play Lt. Columbo many years later.

As it turns out, I was wrong about the length of the appearance of Jonathan Winters in the film. Leonard Maltin says in his indispensable Leonard Maltin's 2006 Movie Guide that Winters is on screen "less than three minutes." That's correct but Leonard, you may want to change that line in your next edition. In fact, I insist upon it. The actual, measured-by-a-stopwatch length of time from when we first see Jonathan Winters to when we last see Jonathan Winters is one minute and thirty-one seconds. Exactly.

A couple years ago, back before I learned how to do a frame grab so I could post a TV photo, I posted this item here…

I'm watching a rerun of The Flip Wilson Show that TiVo (we love TiVo) snagged for me this morn from TV Land. In the sketch, Dennis Weaver is playing a Justice of the Peace and Flip is in wedding dress drag as Geraldine, who's waiting for her never-seen boy friend, "Killer," to show up and marry her. Okay, you got the picture?

There's a knock at the door and Flip/Geraldine says, "Come in, Killer." And in comes another guest star on the show, O.J. Simpson, looking very groom-like in a tuxedo. I am not making this up.

"You're not Killer," Geraldine says. (Right the first time, lady!) Actually, Simpson's the Best Man, and he's there to stand in for Killer, who's too busy shooting pool to show up for his wedding. Weaver proceeds to try to conduct a proxy marriage of Geraldine and Killer…until Simpson tries to call it off because "he won't treat you right." Geraldine goes ahead and marries her absent beau anyway.

Geraldine Jones has not been seen in many years. Which proves it's dangerous to stand next to O.J. Simpson at your wedding…even if he's only the Best Man.

TV Land ran the episode again this morning so I TiVo'ed it intentionally and extracted the above photo. And suddenly, I'm suspicious all over again. Because not only has Geraldine Jones not been seen in a long time but that Justice of the Peace recently met an untimely demise, as well.

Here's a short but interesting article in the New York Times about what Bob Newhart is doing these days.

The Max Fleischer cartoon studio was making Popeye shorts and embarking on their first feature when their releasing company, Paramount Pictures, asked about doing something with a new comic book hit called Superman. The Fleischer Brothers weren't all that interested and they also knew that the more realistic style that Superman would require would be very expensive. So, largely to blow the deal, they asked for a price they were sure Paramount would never meet. When Paramount did, they had no choice but to go out and make what may still be the best adventure-oriented cartoons ever made.

Here's one of 'em: "The Mechanical Monsters," an extra-long (10 minutes) Superman cartoon that was made in 1941. You can watch it below or if you want to save it on your computer, go to this page where you can download it in several different formats. Here we go…

Our non-embedded video link for today is on pretty much the same theme. It's this commercial for the new Citroën.

And for God's sake, don't click on this link. Do you understand? I don't know why I even posted it but please, for your well-being and mine, DO NOT CLICK ON IT. Avoid the temptation. Don't think, "Oh, I have to click on it just to see what it is. Believe me: You don't. Show a little strength of character and do not click on it. Please.

My TiVos were upgraded early this morn with the latest software. The big new feature is a "recently deleted" folder which enables you to reclaim a show you deleted by accident. We like this a lot. Matter of fact, a show I deleted two weeks ago was still in there and I thought, "Hey, I'd like another look at that" and — ZAP! — it's back. I don't know why they didn't do this years ago.

I am informed that the TiVo website no longer sells the lifetime service option but that it is still available by phone — meaning, you call the TiVo company — until April 15. A friend of mine speculates that TiVo is getting rid of it because they plan on slowly raising the cost of monthly service in the future. If so, it will make lifetime service an even bigger bargain than it already is.

Here's the latest out of the White House…

When President Bush signed the reauthorization of the USA Patriot Act this month, he included an addendum saying that he did not feel obliged to obey requirements that he inform Congress about how the FBI was using the act's expanded police powers.

And it goes on to say that as with other laws Congress has passed, he feels he can disregard the portions he doesn't like, especially those that say what he can and cannot do.

I've read an awful lot of articles about this interpretation Bush has of presidential powers. I have yet to read one that made what I thought was a reasonable case on his behalf. In fact, I have yet to read a defense written by anyone I thought wouldn't demand the impeachment of any Democratic president who even toyed with this concept.

Molly Ivins on what's happening to the press in this country. I especially like her opening sentence…

I don't so much mind that newspapers are dying — it's watching them commit suicide that pisses me off.