Archive for July 2010

Palin and Suffering

Sarah Palin is more dangerous than Dick Cheney with a loaded AK-47. Last week, while speaking (or “tweeting”) out against plans for a new mosque near NYC’s Ground Zero, the former Alaskan governor and 2008 Republican vice presidential nominee proved what many have  suspected all along-that she is both ignorant and intolerant.

Palin’s comment, “Ground Zero Mosque supporters: doesn’t it stab you in the heart, as it does ours throughout the heartland? Peaceful Muslims, pls refudiate,” is equally as offensive to Muslim-Americans as it is to Noah Webster’s memory. Sure, Palin may be a self-proclaimed “maverick,” but using imaginary words isn’t nearly as brave or rebellious as it is stupid (either “refute” or “repudiate” would’ve been appropriate in this context).

Instead of simply revising the tweet, Palin suggested she was embodying the linguistic spirit of history’s most esteemed writer. She added, “ ‘Refudiate,’ ‘misunderestimate,’ ‘wee-wee’d up.’ English is a living language. Shakespeare liked to coin new words too. Got to celebrate it!”

Huh?

While Mrs. Palin may have been trying to make light of her mistake, her messages were written in bullshit, not Iambic pentameter. Yes, her overt prejudice is more of an issue than her foolishness, but a public figure with her track record needs to be more conscious of what she’s saying, and how she’s saying it.

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg responded to Russia’s favorite next-door neighbor by asserting, “Sarah Palin has a right to her opinions but I could not disagree more. Everything the United States stands for, and New York stands for, is tolerance and openness.” He added that constructing a mosque would be “a great message for the world.” He’s right. A symbol of diversity, peace, and understanding would undoubtedly help America progress towards a future more rich in these very things.

Insensitivity to 9/11 victims and their families understandably concerns some, but Sarah Palin’s social and political relevance frightens me much more. While she may have our “hearts” in mind, this doesn’t mean we can stop using our brains. Oh, Sarah…”pls refudiate.” Maybe then we’ll have something worth celebrating.


To Mel With It!

Mel Gibson may be a raging fool, but he also happens to be a genius. While the American Australian actor, director, and producer is feeling the heat this week for his starring role in the most career-damaging tape recordings since  Nixon’s Watergate scandal, one can abhor the man without abstaining from enjoying his work.

Heaven and Mel

Sure, Gibson’s phone recordings are alarming, but they certainly shouldn’t be surprising. For years, we’ve known this man is batshit, and while he may now appear crazier than his character in Lethal Weapon, there’s nothing wrong with still being a fan of this artist’s art.

While Gibson’s vulgar ranting makes Alec Baldwin’s infamous 2007 voicemail sound like a Joel Osteen sermon, this wouldn’t stop me from watching a film with Mad Max’s name in the credits. I don’t believe there’s anything shameful about exploring the work of a shameful individual. Of course, most filmgoers don’t share my position, as Gibson’s career and reputation are now dead (or at best, on life support).

The Joely One

Sure, I’m angered by this former icon’s arrogance, ignorance, alleged violent tendencies, and overt racism/sexism/anti-semitism, but I’m also disappointed that Gibson has blown his opportunity for future professional triumphs. Some troubled celebrities have continued to succeed after overcoming seemingly insurmountable personal woes (including the resilient, public-relations nightmare Charlie Sheen), but I can’t foresee another Braveheart or Apocalypto (two of the most ambitious and awe-inspiring films ever produced) hitting theaters anytime soon. Heck, the only thing less likely than another studio-financed Gibson epic would be a sequel to What Women Want.

Where Have You Gone, Helen Hunt?

I’ve frequently written about the “power of celebrity” and how America should hold its stars to higher standards. Still, I think the line between entertainers’ public and private lives needs to be stretched. We often confuse actors with the larger-than-life characters they portray, distorting our cultural values. TMZ may be entertaining, but it certainly isn’t interesting, and our obsession with stars’ “everyday” lives only sets us up for disappointment when we realize they are as flawed and fragile as the rest of us.

I often wonder if celebrities themselves lose track of their surroundings and remain in character when they’re away from their set. After all, wasn’t 24′s Kiefer Sutherland recently arrested for headbutting/”Jack Bauering” a fashion designer? Didn’t Christian Bale verbally “terminate” a crew member during a 2008 T:4 shoot?

Even Kiefer Sutherland wears Jack Bauer pajamas

If you listen closely to the Mel Gibson tapes, you’ll hear that he sounds a lot like a cross between his roles in Hamlet, Conspiracy Theory, and The Patriot (with a little Darth Vader added in). Essentially, Mel was just being who we knew him to be- the intense renegade we always loved to watch fight back on-screen. Only this time, unbenownonst to Gibson, it was real.

To be perfectly clear, I’m not defending Mel Gibson’s actions. I’m only trying to understand how an individual with so much to lose can throw it all away. For someone who once brought people so much joy, the fallen star has truly earned the masses’ animosity  (while NBA icon Lebron James has taken fair criticism for his egotistical “Decision,” Gibson’s actions were significantly more offensive and help put things in perspective).

While I could care less about Gibson’s image, I do want to protect his artistic legacy. Like the auteur himself, Gibson’s projects have often been controversial, unconventional, and uncompromising. Society may deserve better public influences, but cinema certainly needs more like Mel Gibson.




A Trip Through The Wire

The great David Frost once said “Television is an invention that permits you to be entertained in your living room by people you wouldn’t have in your home.” After recently completing all five seasons of HBO’s The Wire, the same goes for places you wouldn’t want to call home.

Throughout all of my television watching endeavors, I’ve never seen a more ambitious, realistic, patiently-written, and better collectively acted series.  From beginning to end, creator David Simon challenged the standard conventions of the medium by consciously producing a work that cared more about being sociologically important than culturally relevant.

Despite never winning any Emmy Awards during its 2002-2008 run (the show only received two writing nominations during this period), The Wire is regarded by many critics as one of the greatest TV dramas of all time. Contrary to most scripted programs, David Simon’s series avoids a glamorous central setting (New York, Los Angeles, Miami, etc.) and instead focuses on the struggling port city of Baltimore.

To most outsiders, Baltimore is best known for its beautiful harbor, Cal Ripken Jr, and as Bradley Cooper so eloquently put it in Wedding Crashers, “CRABCAKES AND FOOTBALL!” With other neighboring cities and districts receiving more tourist and media attention (like our nation’s capital), it’s easy to misunderstand and overlook Baltimore’s true, tormented identity. The Wire represents a bold effort to illuminate the greed, chaos, and corruption that have consumed this forgotten city for years.

In addition to its unconventional location, The Wire’s relatively unknown cast also helps distance the series from more traditional dramas. The city itself, is essentially the star of the show, as Baltimore is never overshadowed by the actors portraying its inhabitants (the same cannot be said of the CSI locales).  Still, the diverse and talented ensemble makes its mark.

Characters like Detective Jimmy McNulty (Dominic West), Robin Hood-like gangster Omar Little (Michael K. Williams) and junkie Reginald “Bubbles” Cousins (Andre Royo) resonate because they are raw and believable, not because they are likeable. McNulty, surely one of the most interesting (and flawed) TV cops in history, makes Dennis Franz’s NYPD Blue protagonist seem like a mormon.

While McNulty is usually the smartest guy in the room, he has no problem acknowledging this with an authority-challenging addiction only matched by another to Jameson Whiskey. While he’s not as dirty as Michael Chiklis’s Vic Mackey on The Shield, McNulty shares his ability to circumvent rules and manipulate others into following his lead (often unknowingly). Still, his superiors concede that he is perhaps the city’s most intuitive lawman.

During my Wire experience, I couldn’t help but see parallels between McNulty and the series as a whole. Both are in-your-face renegades that are surrounded (for the most part) by inferior company. Neither The Wire or its lead character were highly decorated, but both ironically stand out for the very reasons they couldn’t be publically honored. Just as McNulty watches conservative, less competent officers rise up the departmental ranks, The Wire got spurned by supporters of  more universally-appealing (and commercially viable) programs that played by the rules.

While many of the show’s core themes and main characters remain, each of The Wire’s seasons highlight different underlying forces contributing to many of the city’s problems (urban drug trafficking, labor shortages on the docks, policymaking conflicts, educational shortcomings, and vanishing journalistic integrity are some of the primary subjects explored). This helps paint a comprehensive and frightening picture of a population killing itself  from within.

I believe each Wire season is better than the preceding one. As our exploration of Baltimore widens, our understanding of the characters (both good and bad) also grows deeper. By examining the flaws within the city’s public school system (Season 4), we begin to understand how neglected students enter “The Game” and begin to follow the paths of violent criminal leaders like drug kingpin Avon Barksdale (Wood Harris). Our close observation of a hostile mayoral campaign (Seasons 3 & 4) helps explain why certain issues are buried behind others that can help generate more votes.

Individual greed inhibits collective growth, and this fact is painfully articulated by countless Wire characters. David Simon & Co. do an excellent job of asserting that they’re very few differences between drug addicts,ambitious politicians, weasel criminal defense attorneys, business savvy gangsters, and crime statistic-altering police leaders. Nobody is truly innocent.

As an aspiring writer, I appreciated Season 5 most because of its concentration on the influence of The Baltimore Sun. Much of the season dealt with a clash between an old school news editor named Gus Haynes (Clark Johnson) and journalist Scott Templeton. (Thomas McCarthy). Haynes believes Templeton is fabricating stories to better his career, and alienates himself while pursuing the truth. In an age where important facts are constantly being obscured, we need more series like The Wire to shed light on what others are too busy or ignorant to understand.


Perhaps the most famous quote from this groundbreaking series is “A man’s gotta have a code.” Whether cop, con, supplier, buyer, reporter, or bystander, one must have a fundamental grasp of morality to get by. No series in television history has provided us with a more stark and eye-opening reminder of this than The Wire.