What a day. Farrah Fawcett dies after a two-year bout with cancer. And then, five hours later Michael Jackson dies after a 10-year bout with karma. But if you're Farrah, you gotta be pissed, don't ya? She finally owns the headlines and doesn’t even get a full news cycle before she's back to "Who?" Ain't that the way it goes? No matter who you are, compared to somebody you're always a "Who?"
Friday, April 3, 2009
But really, the only thing you can do to recover from being a lawyer is STOP BEING A LAWYER. So, having a fool for a client, I took my own advice last year and decided to go on "inactive status" with the Washington State Bar Association, the local organization otherwise tasked with riding herd on people more interested in arguing about justice than actually preserving it.
Inactive status, as it turns out, does not come cheap, merely cheaper than active status. The insidious plan I had hatched was that for the paltry sum of $144 I would not have to register for nor suffer through another 4-day session of Trusts and Estates at the end of the year to satisfy my mandatory continuing legal education classes. What I know about trusts and estates can be encapsulated thusly: trust no one with an estate, especially if they are dead.
My assumption was that being "inactive" required little more than…well…. not being active. And if I don't put too fine a point on it I rather expected it to work in a relatively self-evident manner: I'd pay the fee, go – or at the very least, become – inactive and kick back every December instead of being jammed into a small conference room with a bunch of other idiots who've also waited until the last minute, spending four days reading USA Today and checking e-mail.
So, imagine my surprise when I received a CERTIFIED letter from the WSBA, admonishing me that I hadn't paid the annual fee to be inactive and was now in danger of being suspended.
Suspended from what? I mean, it's not like "recovering" is it?
I called the bar and was put through to "Arthur" in Member Benefits. Member Benefits? I'll grant you that my suspension would obviously be a benefit to the great unwashed public, but really – which mental giant put it under "Benefits" in the phone tree?
Anyhow, Arthur informs me that I'm on the pre-suspension list and there's a fine to get off the list.
"Arthur, I thought I was inactive, so I'm a little fuzzy on just what happens if I stay on the pre-suspension list.
"Well, your name could be forwarded to the Supreme Court and suspension proceedings could ensue."
"Arthur, maybe I wasn't clear – I'm supposed to be on the inactive list. I've already suspended myself."
"But that's not the same as the Supreme Court suspending you."
"Are you telling me they're going to suspend me from the inactive list?"
"If you don't pay the fine, yes, sir they could."
"And so if they suspend me from the inactive list, does that mean I have to practice law again?"
"I don't understand."
"Well, Arthur, I'm on the inactive list. If they suspend me, that would mean I'm not able to be inactive, so I must be active, right?"
A long awkward pause is followed by,
"Sir, I'm not a lawyer so I can't advise you what your status might be."
"Well, until I called I didn't think I was a lawyer anymore either, but increasingly it looks like I'm not only a lawyer, I'm very likely an active lawyer again. And I can tell you the idea of suspending an inactive lawyer is a little bit like taxing the unemployed."
"Sir, I can help you there – if you're unemployed, we have a deferment plan for your fees."
I gave him my VISA card before my head exploded and I was drafted into the judiciary.
Saturday, February 28, 2009
Leader and I were just about the same age – kind of a brother my parents didn't have to house train. He didn't have a name right away – the legend goes – because he hadn't named himself, which made sense to me as a kid because it obviously took him some time to learn how to properly use the crayons after he discovered they weren't edible. Plus which, as everyone knows, dogs have notoriously bad handwriting so I wasn't at all surprised it took some time for him to name himself. At the same time, however, I was suspicious of the whole Santa-Claus-down-the-chimney thing, but Leader not being able to write until he was older was bulls-eye stuff for me.
At any rate, he became "Leader" because he would invariably walk in front of you and seemed to know where you were going at all times. Of course, when you're a kid you don't have any place to go so from a probability and statistics standpoint the dog's topping the scale in the "WOW MOM – you won't believe what Leader did" department. At this point, I feel compelled to disclose I have never scored well in standardized testing, so the dog may not have been all that smart. But then again, if you were one of those Santa-Claus-down-the-chimney chumps, neither were you.
Leader would walk me to the bus, be sitting there waiting when the bus dropped me off, run around the woods with me, chase off other dogs and moose (this was Alaska, so chasing off moose isn't one of those special skills at the bottom of his resume), and slunk off to my room when we were in trouble (again, it wasn't normally Leader that got in trouble, but he'd occasionally take the fall).
This unpainted Norman Rockwell went on until I was 12 when an Army Sgt moved into the area, saw Leader making his rounds one day and shot him, thinking he was wolf. Leader died in my arms a week later and with him died my belief in a lot of things. After we buried Leader, my Dad (to his great credit), wandered down to the G.I.'s house and suggested that if he couldn't tell the difference between a dog and a wolf, my Dad might not be able to keep his own WWII flashbacks under control and could mistake a US Army uniform for a Japanese Imperial Marine's uniform. The guy moved (I suspect my Dad was somewhat less obtuse, but I liked the story as he told it) but it didn't bring Leader back. Nothing did. And if anyone tells you that time heals all wounds, let me assure you it doesn't, it only dulls them.
So, when my wife and daughter announced recently that we should just drop by a pet shelter and look at some cats, warning lights went off. All I could think of was Robbie the Robot, "Danger, Will Robinson. Danger!" We're just looking, kinda interested in what they might have, but we're not going to get anything. OK, well, if that's all it is, I'm in if there's snacks involved. I was promised a hamburger and a Roy Rogers (I like maraschino cherries, so what?) so off we went.
We get to the pound or pet shelter or whatever they're calling pet jails and my first indication that things had changed was that we had to register – fill out paperwork – to see animals no one else wanted. Are you jiving me? I have to apply to look at a throw-away pet – a pet that someone else already didn't want, and I have to apply to see it? R U kidding me?
No, not so much. In fact, "they" take this throw-away pet thingy pretty seriously and don't have much sense of humor about it, either – thank you very much. OK, so now that I've been told I may or may not be qualified to look at a used cat, I'm truly just along for the Scooby snack I was promised.
After a background check with the FBI's NCIC and the TSA's No Fly List, we were granted full access to the pets, but of course, were accompanied by adult supervision. R U jackin' me around? We need a chaperone to LOOK at a fleet of previously owned cats? Which of these doors gets me back into the parking lot?
We're waltzed around some 2 dozen cats or so and none of them are doing anything for me except delaying lunch. Then Laurie The Chaperone says we have one more cat – but he's in quarantine from the other cats because he has FIV. And she says it like I know what that means.
Me: "What's FIV?"
Chaperone: "That's Feline Immunodeficiency Virus."
Me: "Right. What's Feline Immunodeficiency Virus?"
Chaperone: "Well, it's kinda like HIV for cats."
Me: "HIV for cats. You mean the cat tested positive for kitty AIDS?
Chapeone: "No, feline HIV."
Me: "Right. So… ah… Where's your back door?"
Chaperone: "We don't have one."
Me: "Where do you want one?"
OK, I do NOT need to see a cat with HIV or FIV or any other IV. And, incidentally, why would anyone with even below average standardized testing scores want to adopt an FIV cat? Before I can say any of this, I've followed the troop into the quarantine room where this ratty looking cat ("Goliath") about the size of a small Ocelot is curled up in a cage and listening to the dogs in the next room bark. He's a train wreck but without all the excitement.
The dogs are barking so loud you have to actually speak louder to be heard. And not only is the cat FIV, he must also be deaf because the barking isn't fazing him at all. He kinda rolls over, gives us a look and is completely non-plussed. But he and I get eye contact and I think, uh-ho… this ain't just a regular cat. He knows something… he knows the odds are stacked against him – he's kinda sick, they got him off by himself, not many people come in to see him. He knows he probably ain't going anyplace. This is as good as it's going to get for him so "Hello and welcome to my world." And then I made the BIG MISTAKE.
I picked him up. If I hadn't picked him up, he wouldn't have head-butted me in the face or wiped his face all over mine. And then he just kinda relaxed and I realized that for some unknown reason, we just "got" each other. He seemed to know he was going home with us before we did.
Me: "Does he answer to his name?"
Chaperone: "He answers to the can opener."
Me: "Me, too."
Turns out he was a stray and someone gave him the name because of his size. He's about two years old, strong and healthy, and probably picked up the FIV in a fight with another cat. I'd hate to see what the OTHER cat looks like.
Apparently adopting a "special needs" cat takes some soul searching so they made us leave to think things over. I was ready to take him right then and started lobbying for a special parking permit, but the rest of the family suggested we make a show of "thinking it over" during which time we could go to the store and buy all the stuff he'd need.
We picked him up and on the way home named him Mac – for McKinley, the BIG Alaska Mountain. Yeah, I know – it's fashionable to call it Denali these days, but I ain't calling a cat "Den" and besides, I still call Mumbai, Bombay and Myanmar, Burma. And since he won't answer to Mac anyway, why quibble about what they're calling a mountain?
So, Mac is all settled in. Head butts all around, Mr. Calm about everything, happy feet when he gets petted, lays around the house like a dog (hates the bed we bought), and has pretty much taken over the house (we're thinking of putting his name on the mortgage). His fur looks a lot better, he's getting chow he likes and generally has lost that drug-through-a-bird-cage-backwards look.
And as if all of this wasn't weird enough, here's the "bookend", as we like to say in screenwriting: Mac NEVER walks behind you – he ALWAYS walks in front. If I didn't know better, I'd say he wants to be a leader.
I'm leaving some crayons out for him just in case.
Saturday, January 31, 2009
But see, that's where you'd be wrong. Howard's laboring under the misapprehension that journalism is supposed to serve the public and protect its interests. That the Fourth Estate is a citizen's check against the other three branches of government, all of which need the open and transparent scrutiny of the press to ensure the survival of our nation's charter. Heady stuff, eh? Hell, Howard's so out of touch he thinks the responsibility of a free press is nothing short of a constitutional right – WOW, just how out of touch can one guy be?
The worst thing about having a friend like him is that you start to believe the same kinds of things he does. But only for 30 or 40 years, or so. Right up to this morning when I realized how out of touch I have become as a result of listening to Howard. Because this morning I read CNN.com, then Fox.com, then MSNBC.com – for content.
What the hell was I thinking?
There were three stories about Rush Limbaugh, two about Sarah Palin, one about Jessica Simpson and not one damn thing about Katrina victims (still waiting, still forgotten about), emergency aid to food banks (they're feeding more people now but with fewer resources), or reallocating resources from foreign to domestic aid (might want to take care of our own people for a change, just a thought).
Limbaugh is a gratuitous gasbag - why the national media gives him any space at all is a mystery to me given he is a RADIO ENTERTAINER. His job is to get more listeners not solve any of the deeply troubling issues facing our nation. He's not concerned about the gross domestic product, he's concerned about the Arbitron Radio Ratings.
The consolation prize to CNN.com running two "front page" stories about Limbaugh is that both were below a hard-hitting piece about the Jessica Simpson "weight controversy". Well, that's a relief. For a second I was concerned that electronic journalism had lost its rudder but I see the ship is well under way and heading full speed into Bligh's Banal Reef.
And speaking of gasbags and the banal, Sarah Palin doesn't have sufficient gravitas to even qualify as a gasbag. The problems facing our nation are not going to be solved by sound-bite leadership, especially from those whose obvious, if unstated intention, is to elevate themselves far beyond both their own competence or potential. When the media follows her every move they endorse the Palin Peter Principle of Politics.
Over 11 million people are unemployed and the major news sites are covering whether Sarah "I can see Russia from here" Palin is angling a new committee for support in a 2012 run at the Presidency? Really? Seriously, that's the highest and best use of your "news hole"?
My normal admonition is that the list of insufficiencies isn't endless but it is impressive. But the list is clearly long enough that it should at least push the Simpsons, Limbaughs and Palins off the home pages of "serious" new sites. I'm just saying that if you want people to take you seriously, you need to act seriously – or at the very least, responsibly.
So, I'm out. I'm stepping off. I'm buying a production grade camera for Indie and documentary work and I'm stepping the hell off. I'm going to make my little movies and let the next-gen step up. Call me back when the rest of the country gets as serious as Obama.
Meanwhile, my home page is going to rotate between the Hollywood Reporter, Variety and IMDB Pro. Yeah, Hollywood is a world of fantasy and banality. But at least the trades don't pretend it's something else.
Howard, you're on your own!
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Lucy is now visiting the Seattle Science Center and today, after kicking back for the past 35 years or so in Ethiopia, she's making her rock-star tour of the US. Some museums are boycotting her for what seem entirely reasonable and utterly incomprehensible reasons. Fortunately, Seattle decided to give her a look and I got in today when the door opened.
I expected to find Lucy just inside with a sign that said something roughly the equivalent of, "Joe, you been waiting 30 years, this way to Lucy." No go, no sign, they didn't even know I was Joe. What I got instead was a large exhibit on the history of Ethiopia, a place about which I knew little and cared less. Where's Lucy? was the only thing in my head. Ethiopia happened to be the map coordinates, but let's be clear – when Lucy lived there it wasn't called Ethiopia, so why do I care what it's called now. Where the hell's Lucy?
You in the Gold coat, where's Lucy?
I gotta go through the Ethiopian Chamber of Commerce exhibition first?
Far out, where is it?
First exhibit: Jews came to Ethiopia and blah blah with exhibits, artifacts, and photos.
Next exhibit: Christians came to Ehtiopia and blah blah with exhibits, artifacts and photos.
Yeah, so where's Lucy?
Next exhibit: Muslims came to Ethiopia and blah blah with exhibits, artifacts and photos.
Next exhibit: Halie Sallasie came to Ethiopia and blah blah with exhibits and photos.
Cool, so we're getting the band back together, where the hell's Lucy?
By this time I was at the head of the First Pack of Lucy Lookers and must have looked desperate because a Gold Coat caught my eye. I raised my hands palm up like, "Where". He points down a hall and says, "Up two ramps – you'll be the first today."
The sign at the ticket booth was clear, "No food, drinks, or photography." Not a word about running. Feet, do your thing.
I blew past Gold Coat ignoring his plea to slow down, up two long ramps where people would later be waiting to get in. Right up to the armed guard where I broke stride and walked into the Lucy exhibit. Up to where she lay – a mandible and six skull bones, along with 40% of her skeleton.
All alone. Me and her. By myself. For 10 minutes I was the only one there and it gave me chills.
I'd seen history. Hell, I've lived through history.
But I'd never seen mankind. Never seen THE antecedent. Never stood that close to both ends of the evolutionary process.
It doesn't matter if you believe in God or not, according to the exhibit the Ethiopians have you covered no matter what your persuasion might be. But whether God did it or evolution did it, standing next to Lucy will convince you that something extraordinary happened in the woodlands of Ethiopia and you and I are the benefactors. I'm pretty sure Lucy didn't have a cell phone but am equally certain that without her, neither would I. Or you. That's the funny thing about evolution - or God - there doesn't seem to be a destination. But it's a hell of a journey.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
I've lived through the Alaska earthquake, the first man on the moon, the first personal computer, first cell phone, and the inauguration of the first black President of the United States.
I'm going with "privileged".
Monday, January 19, 2009
I actually met a "producer" who told me she had never seen "The Sting". She was one of the "creatives" at a production company (now defunct for reasons which will be self evident) and had button-holded me at a film festival I'd won for screenwriting.
"Yeah, "The Sting" was made before I was born and I knew that since everyone already knows the plot, why waste my time with a movie that'll never be remade?"
I have a tendency to fall silent when I think I've dropped a verb, so she comes back with, "Know what I mean? It's not relevant. The actors aren't relevant anymore. The shooting technology isn't relevant anymore. The plot can't be redone again. It's just sooo not relevant to modern filmmaking."
I told her I was feeling a little light-headed because of all the excitement and thought I might throw up. On her. Any second. Maybe I should go to bathroom while you go text somebody. My best guess is that after her production company went down she would have graduated at the top of her barista class.
You try to put people like her out of your head because there are plenty of stereotypes in Hollywood and there's no reason to beat up on blondes anymore than you have to. But after seeing "The Curious Case of Benjamin Button" I'd kinda like to get her take on it.
So let me put the record straight before I get off on a rant: I think "Benjamin Button" is a spectacular movie, and I'll be astonished if it's not a multiple nominee: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Actor, Best Cinematography, Best Adapted Screenplay, spring quickly to mind.
And yet, I get the impression that my "Stingless" producer may been writing movie reviews between her Starbuck's shifts given some of the comments I've seen in the trades.
The one that got me onto this soapbox was a well respected critic who observed that the "Benjamin Button storyline just isn't the way life plays out." Or, "the plot was so contrived...." Really? Life doesn't play out in reverse? A movie about the metaphors of life is contrived? WOW – SNAP – dude, like... NFW.
Much easier to grasp that Dinosaurs can be reconstituted from an 80 million-year-old DEAD mosquito; that aliens would attack and kill off 85% of us before Will Smith flies an alien spacecraft to the mother ship to upload a computer virus to it; or how about this one: that a sitting US President would go on national TV to say he's prepared to go door-to-door to "get the guns" WHILE running for a second term. Yeah, that's gonna happen. Let's get down on this Skippy: ALL movies are contrived – there, I said it – go get the nails and cross. They have a name for movies that aren't contrived – they're called newspaper articles.
But let's get to the rave part: "Benjamin Button" is really not best described at all – it's a movie that has to be seen to be appreciated, on any level. Civilians may or may not enjoy it – it can be a downer if you don't get past the top level of the story – but filmmakers have to see this in the same way they had to see "Jurassic Park". It's a game changer. It may not change the way you look at films, but it will change what you think you can do as a filmmaker.
The game changer here is the cinematography in concert with the lighting. It's just breathtaking. Most filmmakers sit in the audience, smug in their own arrogance, "I could do that if I had their money." I sat there completely blown away wondering, out loud: "How the hell'd they do THAT?" Rule: your wife will move away from you in a crowded theater, and take her popcorn with her.
Yeah there was some minor vignetting and the CGI really pulled the premise together, but so what? The camera work and lighting support were like paint brushes in the hands of a modern impressionist. In fact, I'm not at all certain that isn't what I saw, a modern impressionist at work. The framing – especially in the Russian sequences – is a study in how to do it. You can go to film school or buy the books and read about dissecting the image into thirds, then sixths. OR you could go through the house looking for loose change, put $8.50 down at the box office and get a cheap seminar in how it's supposed to be done.
And poor Brad Pitt. First he's sleeping with Jennifer Aniston and hanging out with Clooney et al, and now he's sleeping with Angelina Jolie and has become the modern Steve McQueen. The guy can't buy a break.
No matter what you thought of Pitt's chops before this movie (and I thought he was fine in action-comedy and comedies), he now owns the title as the new dramatic minimalist. Jason Bourne is fine when he's masquerading as Matt Damon (not a typo), but Pitt's depth is simply astounding. What directors worship about McQueen, they have in spades with Pitt: he speaks with his body – he gives you another level of performance beyond what you get with dialogue. Suddenly you've got character definition that's both horizontal in scope and vertical in depth.
With a lot actors – movie stars especially – what you often get is someone pretending to be the character – and let's not talk method vs. technique here, just the net effect of what winds up on the screen. What Pitt gives in "Benjamin Button" is a full-on portrayal of a character that isn't Pitt-like in carriage, manner or legacy. As Pitt regresses in age, it is astonishing to see his mannerisms regress to an earlier age as well; like it or not, a guy carries himself differently at 50 than at 30 than at 15. And Pitt nails those differences as though he WERE those ages, not merely pretending to be them.
The new McQueen is subtle, nuanced, and powerful – just like the old one. Pitt is one of those rare Hollywood leading men that have made a seamless transition from movie star to actor – and I can't wait for hell to freeze over so I can work with him.
"Benjamin Button" is a movie about life and it's expectations and how they slam up against the reality of your own situations. And whether you are at a point in your life where this film has resonance, if you are a filmmaker you need to see it. I'm not asking you to like it because most filmmakers don't like any film – we often get lost in the minutia and lose the journey of the film.
But if filmmaking is anything, it's subjective and self-centered: you don't make films so other people will like them or you, you make them because you have something to say and don't much give a damn what others think.
Which is why "Button" is a must-see for filmmakers: the movie stands for the proposition that life is subjective, live it as you will, live it as you can. And the film itself is such a study of the art of filmmaking it is difficult to imagine we all can't steal --- errr – learn from it.
Sunday, January 11, 2009
I mention this inasmuch as I can't help but notice that this looks alarmingly like a blog; I already have a web site, I'm well past a box of business cards, and my popularity on IMDB is waaaay below Pia Zidora, largely considered the drum majorette of Hollywood's walking dead. In fact, my popularity is even below actors who have actually been dead longer than I've been alive (for instance: Leslie Howard, "Gone with the Wind", killed in WWII; bummer – maybe if he'd lived longer his numbers wouldn't be so good). So I guess the good news is that as a writer-director -- not actor -- I'm only compared with other filmmakers nobody's heard of either. I think this comes under the heading of "small consolation".
Anyhow, my wife announced she's tired of waiting for the bling and that I needed to kick this puppy up a notch, "Start a blog, it'll help you write your screenplays." This strikes me as roughly the equivalent of Jeff Gordon riding a bicycle to the track, but I get her point.
My daughter was more direct, "I'm the one who's going to decide which nursing home you wind up in, so be nice."
All of which is by way of preface to say that this is intended as mental gymnasium: a place to try things out, bat stuff around, somewhere to go at 2AM when I'm supposed to be writing. It won't all be about film – but film is about life and experiences, so don't be surprised if what you see in here, winds up in a screenplay. And if I steal something of yours -- we'll it's because I respect you too much to insult you by trying to quantify your artistry with money. -- Oh, yeah, baby... with that kind of B.S., the bling can't be too far away.