Hitchhiker's Guide

Last night, after a good meal with friends, I settled down in a theater to watch the much anticipated Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy. It was opening night, and the theater was filled with rowdy Douglas Adams fans, many dressed in bathrobes and carrying a towel (needless to say, if you have not read the book this will make no sense to you). The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is certainly one of the best and most insightful comedies ever written, and it's because of the large following the book has accumulated that the movie is so highly anticipated.

Based on the previews I was somewhat skeptical. It looked like they turned the book into a sci-fi action movie with lots of special effects......and that would kill the whole plotline, which depends not on action but on incisive commentary and ironic wit (in a dry, British, sarcastic sort of way) to keep the reader interested. Overall however, I thought the movie turned out pretty well. It left out a LOT from the book, but it kept the major events and in those it did not stray from the book much.

You know, I realized after seeing that movie that this is the kind of book that does not really lend itself to a movie format. Perhaps a tv series or something (the BBC gave it a noble try), but a movie ends up being disjointed. This is because a movie requires a solid plotline, a conflict and climax and resolution, etc. And this book does not have that......it's more like a rambling adventure of a Hitchhiker through the universe. Anyway, I thought that within that limitation a pretty good job was done. The acting was good, and Arthur Dent in particular was just as I imagined him. Good job there.

Well it's been a little longer than usual, but I've been away in the Big Apple for the past 4 days or so and unable to post.......my brother has a dial-up connection and I have a lack of patience. Seriously. Dial-up is so 20th century.

I have hitherto maintained a policy of not talking about my work on this blog, and I think I'm going to do the same about family. There's just way to much potential for stuff I say to get taken the wrong way. Thus, since my trip to NYC was fairly family-intensive, I will stick to general impressions and random thoughts that came to me as a result of my trip.

Chief among these is the notable lack of sky in NYC. Once you're in Manhattan, the sky diminishes to a lonely strip of blue that seems far less real than the strip of asphalt beneath your feet. I feel it contributes to a surreal science fiction atmosphere. Late one foggy night we were walking on a damp street bathed in the timeless glow of neon signs, with some Chinese guy inviting us to his all-night restaurant for noodles. It was like I had suddenly stepped into Bladerunner or something.

I like to look up at the sky for reference -- I find I do it quite often. To see if there are clouds nearby, to see where the sun is, to simply stare up and zone out. In Manhattan, zoning out is not permitted. It might even be against the law --- everyone there is so busy doing things. Places to go, people to meet, no time for philosphizing or musing on the origin and path of things.

Sin City

I don't know what I was expecting going into this movie. It's gotten a lot of hype in the past few weeks about being a new style of movie-making, and some great reviews. And yet, it's a movie based on a comic book, and I think that particular genre has been getting overdone recently. However, it turns out that I was pleasantly surprised with Sin City, which exceeded my expectations and is one that might go on the "To Buy" list of DVD's.

Sin City is a gritty, action based movie that is done in the comic book style. I think making Frank Miller (the author of the comic book series) a co-director on this was a great move by Robert Rodriguez - I think it was his ability to control things that kept the movie true to the original, and therefore much better than it might have been. Instead of taking a comic book and making it into a movie, he actually manages to take a movie and make it into a comic book. It was really fascinating to see.

The use of black and white was a good touch. It wasn't the normal movie "black and white" (which is really shades of gray), but actually really black and white. The stark contrast, with a few particular uses of color, made for a very interesting effect. It borrowed from Pulp Fiction in that it had multiple storylines that meshed together at the end, and in this case it worked well, as the plotlines in this movie could not have been sustained for 2 hours if it was linear. I also greatly enjoyed the acting. I'm impressed that RR got such a good performance out of Bruce Willis and other big names in such a short period of time, especially shooting against a green screen, which I know is not normal for them. RR continues to demonstrate his ability to find the right person for the right role -- this movie was cast extraordinarily well.

All in all, a great movie. I would enjoy seeing it again, if I did not have to pay the exorbitant $10 for a movie here. I'll just wait until it comes out on DVD.

This weekend I saw Not A Genuine Black Man, performed by Brian Copeland, at the Marsh Theater.

I really enjoyed his performance, funny and serious at the same time, about racism in San Leandro in the 1970's. It's odd because I think of that as a time, not too long after the "Summer of Love", when the Bay Area was really one of the most tolerant and integrated places in the country. I learned however, that San Leandro was anything but tolerant and integrated -- so I suppose I should add 'educational' to my list of compliments about this performance.

It must have been hard to get something like this right.....it's just him onstage for almost 2 hours, which I imagine can get boring really quickly if you don't mix it up pretty well and have a magnetic performance personality. He not only tells an interesting story, he actually acts out the characters and does "scenes" by himself, going from an 8-year old boy to a 60 year old grandmother in seconds. I really admire someone who has that sort of performance ability -- you can actually see him feeding off the energy in the audience. It was pretty cool.

I suppose to be honest, I also enjoyed the performance because it was a 'live show' and I really don't see enough of those any more (i know, it's my own fault). There's just something about being in a small theater with the actor 10 feet in front of you, where if he screws up he can't re-shoot the scene, where there are no special effects, or costumes, or a soundtrack, or any of that crap. Just one man alone up there, trying to make a point. And to entertain at the same time. Not only did I like the performance, but I love the whole concept of what he did.

That being said of course, I'm really looking forward to seeing "Sin City" in theaters soon.....everything in moderation.

This is so depressing

The fight over Kashmir has been going on so long, has claimed so many lives, and is destroying so much of the economy, land and goodwill that it is disheartening to see even the most neutral of attempts to heal the breach being subject to terrorism and violence. What on earth could anyone have against a bus service that allows families that have been separated for 50 years to once again visit with each other? It's absolutely silly. I think that some people claim that it is by default making the border a reality, but honestly if the past 50 years have not done that then a bus route isn't going to change anything.

These terrorists are fighting a pointless war, and it's sad that so many innocents have to die because of it.

Something amazing just happened. I have discovered that several people actually read this blog fairly regularly. That's great! Now I feel like I'm not actually wasting my time as I write......

This past weekend I went to a restaurant with a friend of mine who reviews restaurants as a part-time gig in SF. It's like the secret-shopper thing, except for restaurants -- very cool. It goes like this: you are assigned a restaurant to review on a given night, with a tab of X dollars (X being enough for a decent dinner for two people, depending on the $$ of the eatery in question). After eating dinner, you submit your receipt with a detailed review to the company (which apparently takes 1-2 hours), which will then reimburse you for the dinner. The beauty part of this: the guest gets a free dinner, no work involved! And, although I hate to admit it, I'm a sucker for free food.

The restaurant my friend and I went to on Saturday was large, but with a nice atmosphere. Think French-bistro-esque, except bigger. It had lots of those French ads from the mid-century which are so popular in upscale kitchens. You know what I'm talking about.

I learned a lot about the workings of a restaurant. My friend used to work for a catering service, and knew the inner workings of a good restaurant. He explained how everyone was evaluated, from the manager on down, as well as the food, etc. I never realized running a restaurant was such a complicated affair, but upon closer thought it makes sense. There are a lot of usually fairly demanding people to manage, and the clientele is always changing as the evening progresses.

In case you are wondering I had the Salmon Tartare to start, then the Lamb Stew, and a Lemon Tart for dessert. With a glass of wine, of course. It was very agreeable. All in all, it made me think of those cultures where food is appreciated to a higher degree than it is in the US. In France for example, people spend hours over a good meal. Now in my opinion they go overboard with it (a 2 hour lunchbreak every day?!? are you kidding?), but that does not mean that every now and then a good meal should not be savored and enjoyed.