A good story. Well told & acted.
I like listening to this guy talk about the good old days & about the future! Great if you love movies.
First story on
What Makes A Blockbuster: George Lucas Weighs In
The video is interesting. As well as the site.
I had a good TV night last night as I used my Twitter list’s recommendations to watch YouTube & other videos. Today at lunch we were discussing how to consciously optimise that experience. How to create list of tweets with TV links that would make good watching.
Thoughts on that question follow.
It has been fun, but also frustrating to watch “In Treatment” and to see the therapist, Paul Weston (Gabriel Byrne), not following his patients. To see him have poor supervision, have poor insight into his own life & relationships and clueless about relationship therapy. (Its only TV, and I am intrigued by the programme, I wish somone could make a movie with good therapy in it).
It shows some good moments, but sadly it misses the mark of giving accurate insight into therapy. The acting is good, but all too frequently the dynamics become ingongruent, I cease to suspend dis-belief and see the writer, and director coming through. Unfortunately the poor practice and poor supervision may be all too accurate, though I think we do better in New Zealand where personal therapy & supervision are standard practice for psychotherapists.
Saw the video – snapped off the TV
A 19 year old (Heath Ledger) finds himself in debt to a local gangster (Bryan Brown) when some gang loot disappears and sets him on the run from thugs..
I loved this movie! Tight, funny, great acting, casting and writing & directing by Gregor Jordan is amazing! A n Australian “Smoking Barrels”, but better. Looking to see more from Jordan.
Watched this on DVD. It was ok. I did not really like any of the characters, that is a problem. This reviwer on IMDB makes a good point though.
I was not watching a movie, so much as seeing the writing process examined, explored, and enacted on the screen. The director doesn’t mind taking his time to allow events to develop and unfold, and he takes us along with him.
Great movie. (Spoilers coming up) Deeply disturbing. One reason is that it echoed my parents relationship. Really disturbing when John, the sane but mad truth sayer says: “I am glad I am not that child” pointing to April’s pregnant tummy.
I saw 1950’s lives described through the current consciousness. These people did not know about the 60’s countercultureal response to “empty lives”, 70’s wave of feminism, let alone the “me” generation of personal groth & self actualisation. They actually did well if you think about what was available to them. (My parents did too) They attacked each other and themselves, and oscillated between moments of false peace & dubious truth.
Disturbing too in that our lives now are lived with similar inadequate resources of consciousness & skill. We could see what they missed, but what are we missing? Kate Winslet as April sums up her own plight, but it fits the best of lives any time. This is existential despair that is hard to escape without deep love and acceptance of who we are now.
April Wheeler: I wanted IN. I just wanted us to live again. For years I thought we’ve shared this secret that we would be wonderful in the world. I don’t know exactly how, but just the possibility kept me hoping. How pathetic is that? So stupid. To put all your hopes in a promise that was never made. Frank knows what he wants, he found his place, he’s just fine. Married, two kids, it should be enough. It is for him. And he’s right; we were never special or destined for anything at all
Why “Revolutionary Road”? It is not hard to see this as a deeply cynical political analogy. All the way through there is comment about unrealistic plans. Mendes’ “American Beauty” another family saga, similarly invited to be seen as transcending the particular lives of particular people.
9.05am Interview: John Brockman Literary agent and founder of online salon The Edge Foundation (www.edge.org) to bring together people working at the edge of a broad range of scientific and technical fields. He is the editor of: ‘What We Believe But Cannot Prove: Today’s Leading Thinkers on Science in the Age of Certainty’ (ISBN 0060841818), ‘Curious Minds: How a Child Becomes a Scientist’ (ISBN 0-375-42291-9), and many other books.
I don’t know how long the podcast will be up there for. Forever I hope, but I listened to it later via mp3 player – which is agreat thing to be able to do! I found it interesting, always one to enjoy the reminiscences of a boomer in the 60’s. Disturbing too… such interesting people and stories and ideas but with is a strange scientism in the mix, he sides with Dawkins not Gould, there is a glowing link to Denis Dutton at the end, who maligns psychotherapy with his zealous cult like devotion to skepticism.
More on Brockman here by Bruce Stirling (Interesting that I just said he is interesting):
“You’re not interesting?” “Not not-interesting!” he snaps. “Post-interesting! Interesting doesn’t pay. Well, it pays once, but not twice. I used to be interesting. I was, like, the It Boy. Being so interesting – well, it’s not so interesting.”
Then and Now: