This Is Not News

So today is the 30th anniversary of Star Wars, also known as the day George Lucas attached a vacuum to my wallet. My major commemoration of the anniversary has been to dive into the excellent new Making of Star Wars hardcover, which I’ll be reviewing in a few weeks over at theLogBook. I enjoy the book (and Ken Burns’s great documentary Empire of Dreams) for showing me more of how the movie was made – my interest in how-the-heck-did-they-do-that probably stems back to the Star Wars movies. But I also appreciate the occasional glimpse of a world where lightsabers and Wookiees were not ubiquitous pop culture references, but ideas that existed in the head of one stubborn director. I can’t remember a period when I didn’t know about Star Wars – I was one-and-a-half when the movie came out, three or four when I started playing with the toys, and six by the time I finally got to see the thing. So unlike Earl, I don’t necessarily remember how my life changed because of Star Wars – it’s just been a constant source of entertainment, inspiration, and occasional exasperation.

As for the title of this post – like a lot of people, I figured that the big Star Wars Celebration in California would be a source of big news about the future of the franchise. Some newspapers and fansites had even gotten worked up about the idea that new movies might be in the works, although Lucasfilm reps have said no. Still, plenty of time left in the weekend, so who knows what might be coming down the pike.

I was flipping through the cable guide some weeks back and found something on PBS called “John Cleese on The Human Face.” I figured it was a documentary special, so I had the DVR record it, and I finally had the time to watch it tonight. I was a little disappointed to discover that it was actually part of a series, and I probably missed the other parts. There wasn’t much humor, but Cleese did a very nice job of weaving some individual stories together to give a general picture of how the brain works with facial information. Cleese himself seemed very comfortable talking to scientists and people who had suffered unfortunate brain accidents – not the kind of personality you’d expect from many of his more famous roles. It was another striking reminder of one of the things that I associate with the British humorists I like – folks like Douglas Adams or the Monty Python troupe or Neil Gaiman. There’s an intellectual or academic flavor to what they do – not that it’s necessarily smarter than other people, but that it seems interested in using the kinds of things we study in school as fodder for material more than the everyday observational stuff that I associate with American humor. Dave Barry, for example, is a heck of a smart guy and a fine writer who graduated from Haverford College, an elite liberal arts school right outside Philly – but most of his stuff covers exploding whales, booger jokes, and terrible song lyrics. So I somehow find it easier to think of Cleese as a documentarian than Barry.

On the other hand, I wish my latest copy of Dave Barry’s Bad Habits hadn’t disintegrated so I could dig up what he had to say about philosophy. But now I digress.

WARNING – spoilers in the comments!

Saw Spider-Man 3 today. Overall, I liked it. I’m writing the review for the LogBook now. The plot summary for my Spider-Man 2 review was about 275 words long. This time around, it clocks in at 975.

Not that I’m necessarily agreeing with those that think the film was a bit on the overstuffed side. Nosir.

Update: Here’s the LogBook review. This movie is really bringing out the geek in me in that I could spend a lot of time dissecting it, but the one thing I keep coming back to in my head is that I think that this movie did such a bad job showing the Peter/MJ relationship that it calls my attention to the weaknesses of the first two movies in that regard. Very weird.

Someone asked J. Michael Straczynski if he was getting any financial benefit from the repurposing of Babylon 5 as DVDs, iTunes files, and so on. His answer:

Not a gripe, just an answer…as writer, creator and EP I have never
received anything from the DVD sales, Itunes, AOL, bittorrent,
soundtracks or any other form of video distribution on B5.

This is one of the reasons why there’s almost certainly going to be a
writer’s strike this year.

I’ve seen John Rogers at Kung Fu Monkey express similar sentiments. And I can’t say I blame any writer for thinking this way. The economics of entertainment has a lot of catching up to do.

With the news that ABC has announced a planned end date for Lost three years from now, I’ve imagined recurring guest star Mira Furlan holding seminars entitled “What to Do When My Executive Producer Cuts My Steady Gig Short Because His Story Has an Ending.”

Given Furlan’s presence on Lost, I have found it kind of amusing that there hasn’t been much mainstream mention of Babylon 5’s defined five-year structure. Then again, B5 barely scraped by year to year, and Lost is a Top 20 hit. So it’s clearly a much bigger deal for a network to say, “Yeah, we’re gonna end this thing, no matter how popular it is,” and to say it so far in advance.

Interesting AP report on the Web today about Keith Olbermann’s anchoring coverage of the recent Republican presidential candidate debate, shortly after making a Special Comment that criticized Rudy Giuliani. There’s a parallel drawn between the way Republicans view Olbermann and Democrats view Fox News, and a discussion of whether someone who quite openly editorializes on television can also have the neutrality that we tend to associate with “objective” news reporters/anchors.

It’s an interesting question, but I think the article comes close to setting up false dichotomies. It says that “the danger for MSNBC is provoking the same anger among Republicans that Democrats feel toward Fox News Channel.” I find it hard to believe that one person could generate the kind of hostility that Democrats feel toward Fox as an institution. Olbermann is followed by former Republican congressman Joe Scarborough on the air, and preceded by Chris Matthews – who didn’t do much to hide his antipathy toward Bill Clinton – and conservative pundit Tucker Carlson. Liberal bloggers like Atrios have even wondered why MSNBC hasn’t taken note of Olbermann’s ratings performance and tried to develop more shows/personalities to appeal to Olbermann’s audience. The closest I can think of to an analogous Democratic presence on Fox is retired General Wesley Clark’s time there as a military analyst, and from what I understand Sean Hannity’s co-host is supposed to provide some liberal balance. (And I’m deliberately leaving aside here the issue of how the two networks’ anchors cover news, since I’m sure different sides of the partisan divide have very different views.)

As for whether or not Olbermann can be neutral enough, I guess that gets us back to the old question of whether it’s really possible to do what the AP article claims is the historic standard: “maintain strict objectivity.” Is this possible? What does it mean? Does it mean removing all efforts at intelligent analysis? If it does, what’s the use of having a trained journalist ask questions?

It’s also worth noting that many of the reporters who are supposed to have the “objectivity” in their day jobs wind up assuming the roles of pundits on TV news programming, at which point they have to start having a point of view. So why not make that point of view clear? Now, if that point of view starts leading to falsehoods or selective editing of information, then we should start to be concerned. But then again, striving for “objectivity” and “neutrality” has led some journalists to hold information back from the public for fear of seeming to interfere with the political process. So, again, what use is there in pretending to be objective when one isn’t? You can have an opinion and still be even-handed in considering both sides of a question. I wonder if that’s just a skill we’ve lost.

All that said, if Giuliani or any other candidate was concerned that he would not be able to accurately get his message out with Olbermann as an anchor, I wouldn’t blame them from stepping back from the debate. We’re all kind of feeling our way through this right now, and it will be interesting to see how the media comes to define its role and its code of behavior in the years ahead.

So Pete Yorn, having previously opened for R.E.M. and collaborated with the Dixie Chicks, will be doing some shows opening for the reformed Crowded House in August, including a show in Philly. One of these days I really ought to go see Yorn headline a show, but if he keeps opening for groups I’m going to see anyway, he’s going to make it hard.

Reaction on Yorn’s message board is sparse and mixed. Some people like the idea, but at least one person is wondering at the wisdom of opening for a band that, truthfully, many people outside the adult album alternative market will write off as an exercise in 80s nostalgia. (Never mind that for me, Crowded House is a 90s nostalgia band, given how much I love Together Alone.) I can see the point. On the other hand, the AAA market seems like it’s the one place that’s still really supporting Yorn. So it probably doesn’t hurt to get a little additional exposure in that market while he’s between tours.

And hey, it’d be great if more acts would pay attention to what I want to see anyway. 🙂

Video may have killed the radio star but the iPod has helped me re-discover NPR.

I know, it seems strange that a device that to some is nothing short of Doom for both terrestrial and satellite radio could actually turn someone on to the often dry, yet reliable and competent smarminess that is National Public Radio, but that’s exactly what has happened to me over the past several months.

After years of saying that I’d never have any need for one of them new-fangled mp3 players (as Dave will no doubt confirm), I broke down and bought one. An iPod Nano to be exact. Now don’t get me wrong, having at least a portion of my music collection available at the push of a click wheel is cool but what really got me attached to my Nano were the podcasts. I mean, seriously, where have these things been all my life?

I know, most of them have been on the radio but other than in my car, I never actually listened to the radio! And even then, I only listened to WXPN for tunes and to our local all-news outlet to confirm the traffic jams that I was already trapped in. How was I supposed to know when all these great public radio shows were even on let alone carve out time to sit and listen to them?

But, thanks to the fact that the fine people at NPR put most of their programming out in the form of podcasts, it doesn’t matter when Wait, Wait…Don’t Tell Me is on, all I know is that it downloads into my iTunes every Sunday evening, with a the same smarmy reliability each and every week. I can listen to it on the treadmill, in my car, at my desk at work, on my way to lunch, or when Dave is trying to talk to me about something and doesn’t realize that my ear buds are in.

So what’s on my iPod that can also be heard on NPR? Here are three of my faves:

Wait, Wait..Don’t Tell Me – the quiz show for NPR geeks that basically rewards us for listening all week. The show presents questions from the week’s news to a trio of “celebâ€? panelists and call-in listeners. Very funny, very topical, but a very poor choice to listen to while exercising because your fits of laughter really throw off the aerobic process. I’m just saying.

KRCW’s The Business – originating from Santa Monica’s brilliant public radio outlet, KCRW, but distributed by NPR, The Business is entertainment news and information that you can actually use. All the blather about who’s dating who, who’s in rehab, and who’s converted to Scientology is left to Us Weekly. This leaves host Claude Brodesser-Akner plenty of time to focus on such topics as the differences between scripts written on spec and those sold as pitches, the effect of CGI on movie budgets, the latest distribution technology, how piracy impacts the studios’ and the consumers’ bottom lines, etc. It’s good listening, so good that I’m bummed it only comes out once per week, but Brodesser-Akner often updates his blog in between and that helps ease the withdrawal. A side note: this show also has one of the few really cool theme songs in all of public radio. Imagine that.

This I Believe – A simple premise: someone – a different person each week, in fact – reads an essay which he or she has written summing up a core personal belief. You literally never know what you’re going to get. One week a jovial man extols his belief in good, slow-cooked barbecue. The next week, an Army wife describes why she believes that her husband will phone her each month from Iraq, as he has promised. The following week, the founder of Craig’slist talks about why he believes that the percentage of people who want to lie, cheat, and steal from their fellow man is relatively small. NPR claims that this is one of their most popular segments ever. I believe that.

Take a listen to any or all of these. On your iPod or even the old-fashioned way.

So Wired magazine lets you subscribe dirt cheap – a dollar an issue – and Pattie and I both agree that it’s a great deal. There are many thought-provoking stories that I’m sure will provide much blog fodder in days to come. But there’s a trend in the reporting that makes me wonder if I’m hopelessly behind or the folks at Wired aren’t quite living in the world we are. There’s a lot of talk about the death of the PC and the upcoming future where all of our applications live on the network and we just access them from our web/net terminals. I’m sure I’m oversimplifying, and I apologize for that. But the paradigm example that was discussed in one article was e-mail and webmail, and the rise of Yahoo Mail and Google’s G-mail. And let me tell ya, I can not stand webmail. Several of the schools where I teach have web-based e-mail setups such that I can not use Mozilla Thunderbird to pull the messages down to my home desktop. This aggravates me to no end. I do not want to have to have several web browsers open at one time to be able to get my e-mail. I do not want to have to keep logging into a particular website to get my mail. I want to open my frackin’ e-mail program and tell it, “OK, fella, every couple of minutes, you go check all of my e-mail accounts and bring home the stuff that isn’t spam.” It ticks me off because when I can’t get to the net, or if I get absorbed in other projects, I miss e-mail from people that I would like to be able to respond to more promptly, and then I wind up feeling like an idiot. And I am not in favor of any technological advancement that makes me feel like an idiot.

Pattie and I watched Jon Stewart’s appearance on Bill Moyers’ Journal today. It was a very impressive half hour conversation, and if you missed it you should go over to the PBS site and watch the clip or read the transcript. (Heck, you can also see a Moyers/Stewart conversation from 2003.) I admit I was disappointed that I could not find a transcript of the unedited interview on the web – I feel like there must have been more good stuff there, and the web would be a perfect place to share it.