The medium of film has had certain limitations. I’ll never be able to smell a film (at least in my lifetime), and I’ll never feel the tactile sensation of the protagonist. People couldn’t see films in color for many years, and I’m sure lots of directors were like “color? Psssh, forget that, I have principles, and that’s for corny cheese ball films!” (Then they switched to color, or got fired). But now I have surround sound (thank you Dolby) and now I can see exactly what a filmmaker wants me to see. There was one glaring setback to film for a very long time, and that was the inability to display 3 dimensions. For many years film makers combated this with Z axis blocking, depth of fields, and many other technical things. But now there is a whole other dimension for a filmmaker to work with. In my opinion (which is right) modern 3-D is the biggest advancement for film since the invention of the “talkie” or color film. For artistic reasons there are instances when you want an audience to be aware of the “film”, but the goal of the majority of films is to create complete immersion and reality, which 3-D finally makes possible. It makes me sad that respected film makers are decrying the use of 3-D, they should know better. But good for them, it leaves room for me to come in and surpass them in an industry that is constantly evolving.

This is 2-D film

This is 3-D film

I can see a future, and it is good. It is a future where the Cohen Brothers and Paul Thomas Anderson make 3-D films. It is a future where the majority of films at Sundance are 3-D. And when that happens, maybe we can move onto smell-o-vision and jetpacks.

To be against a new technology in an industry entirely reliant and based upon new technology is both hypocritical and idiotic. The End.

- Kyle

Also of interest to me are these ridiculous new anti-sexting ads. These ads are the old guard making some kind of last attempt at controlling the sexuality of young Americans, while simultaneously embracing a culture that teaches that sex is one of the few things that really matter (along with money, and power); and I find that pretty laughable. It’s hilarious that in America, somebody can be charged with production of child pornography for taking photos of themselves (don’t believe me? look it up); and yet we have shows like Toddlers and Tiaras, which are actually produced with a straight face and a sick sense of hilarity through exploitation. I was reading something, I forget where from, but it was speaking of how nudity is not inherently sexual, but is instead deemed so by the culture it is placed in. Following that line of logic, these PSAs are a direct reflection of what is deemed “mainstream culture”. And apparently our sense of sexuality is just as fucked as it was in the 1950s, or the 1750s. So let’s examine one of these ads.

First off, this was made by MTV, so lets just assume its hypocritical. Ok, first who is the protagonist, ok, a relatively hot…You know what, this will probably be easier in sarcastic list form.

1. Its sent to her boyfriend. Heaven forbid a teenage girl be sexually intimate with someone who isn’t her boyfriend, if at all.
2. You know what’s a good idea guys? Let’s put a sexually charged commercial (featuring a nude girl) on TV to keep kids from sending sexually charged photos! Brilliant!
3. I haven’t seen one with a guy yet, so apparently its cool for guys to send pictures of their junk to girls. Good old double standard sexism.
4. Let’s follow this PSA with an episode of the Real World, where a chick gets drunk, strips naked and has a threesome. “What was that? …Mixed messages? Fuck off, You’re fired!”
5. Girls should be afraid of their nude body (so afraid they don’t let their dogs see them naked!?). This is very important, because why would a person who’s comfortable with themselves spend tons of money on jewelry, make-up, and fashion to improve their self image.
6. I wouldn’t call this ad racist, but they would’ve had a hard time finding a more anglicized person of color.

Being straightforward here, these people are using a recent advancement in technology, and a logical effect of that technology, to help push an outdated view (in my opinion) of sexuality, one that I wouldn’t halt myself in calling puritanical. American culture is sexualized and glamorized, and yet some people still wonder why teenage girls sext photos of themselves. Some spend a life being so much less than these fictionalized and idealized women that you’d do anything to get some of the attention they garner. Even if that means sending nude photos to a guy who says you’re hot, for some twisted kind of praise. To me this ad and others are the definition of hypocrisy, and to continue to air them on MTV and expect no one to make the connections I made (which are not hard to make) is insulting.

Really my view on this is contradictory; I’m both for and against sexting. I’m all for the sexual realization and empowerment of the youth of today. But I also don’t want somebody so fucked up by popular teen culture (cough, MTV) sending nudes to gain some self esteem, just to lose it when that same culture vilifies them for doing so.

You’ll notice I didn’t mention any anti-drug PSA, more specifically any anti-pot ads. Really, at this point I hope everyone can realize how many lies and misdirection they force feed you on this specific topic. I’ll just say that every hippie, most every musical artist, most people of intellect are right… and the government is wrong; 27.5 billion wasted dollars wrong.

Because that was depressing, here’s what should be a PSA, it has a semi-popular celebrity warning about the dangers of taking too many drugs…

-Kyle

For anyone not on the up and up on the pigfuckers from Arizona, a collective of artists and musicians under the leadership of Rage Against the Machine’s Zach de la Rocha are protesting the state’s semi-recent passing of pigfucker immigration laws. Dubbed ‘Sound Strike’, all artists involved have refused to play in the state or cancelled shows planned in the state because that’s what you do when you’re punk rock. The group has been growing in size and looks to become a highly successful boycott. New members include Nine Inch Nails, Maroon 5 (why?), Pit Bull, and bitch-aholic Bright Eyes frontman Conor Oberst. Oberst even wrote a letter explaining his actions, calling the pigfucker state’s actions “class-warfare” and loosely and incoherently incorporating American corporatism into the equation.

I don’t mean to hate on the group. Anything Juanes is involved in is probably awesome (since he’s Colombian), and I love RATM. But in some ways it seems counter-productive for these bands to boycott the state. I understand the moral dilemma they face when choosing to play there, but wouldn’t they be more effective and subversive by playing there and spreading their message? Couldn’t RATM hold a massive concert in Arizona that spills over into a crazy riot? These artists are missing out on an opportunity to subvert these laws from within. If the most visible people on the Left leave, who will be left to fight these laws?

Anyway, one of my first real “dislikes” was patriotism/nationalism. I moved to Weston when I was about 10, so I managed to develop a healthy distaste for the loud, ignorant, drenched-in-my-country’s-colors-even-though-last-year-I-couldn’t-draw-the-flag Colombians and Venezuelans. Venezuelans are especially guilty of this thanks to the whole Chavez fiasco. I hated the idea of having this fixed identity, especially one that I associated with these people who I thought were stupid. As I’ve gotten older I’ve loosened and refined this feeling a lot more, but I still dislike patriotism very strongly, for my own reasons.

This day I will go through my first 4^th of July as a legal citizen of the United States. My family’s not going out, because it’s never been much of a holiday for us. I’ve been reflecting on what this now means for me and for how I feel about this country. To be perfectly honest It’s incredibly fun to hate on the United States. It’s a country associated with ignorance (especially amongst the Left) and not “cool” like those European countries. It also has a brutal history of racism and imperialism that not many can defend. But now I’m a citizen of this country. Some of you might think it my duty to love and defend this country. I think my citizenship is a completely irrelevant question for various reasons, but it does make me think about the fact that I will likely have children and die in this country. I can’t quite muster patriotism, but I have grown to appreciate what Americans can be and what a unique culture we live in. It was in this culture that rock music was born, Dylan, and a slew of great thinkers that I admire and appreciate.

This isn’t simply reflection, but an idea of how I want to be American and behave in a manner that reflects it. I will not be apathetic about American politics, as so many of you American-borns are, but I will engage myself and be a critical, active citizen. I have my own ideal of what being an American can be, and those are the standards I will live by.

1. Akira Kosemura’s Grassland

This guy is pretty damn good. What he’s really known for is ambient piano playing, and there is  a lot of that on this album, but he expands his sound into more classic electronic and pop areas on Grassland.  If Four Tet and the Books had a lovechild, and that child made really chill music, you might get something resembling what Grassland sounds like. These are comforting songs, songs that feel like I’ve listened to them hundreds of times without them losing any of their poignancy or originality.

2. Das Racist’s Shut Up, Dude Mixtape

You know that commercial for Bing where people spew out random connections between words? Like “Florida, Florida oranges, orange juice, juicer…”? This album is like that, except put to the beat of mainstream rap. It’s sort of like art house rap, a random association of images in rapid succession, put together to create some kind of commentary on our society…Our it could just be really shitty. I can’t tell, and that’s why I like rap, because I never can. Nevertheless, I’m listening to it, and enjoying it; but it is most definitely an acquired taste.

Besides I’ve already heard this album reference both Anthony Bourdain, and Harold and Kumar 2, and you gotta love pop culture references.

UPDATE: here’s a link to free downloads of the album offered by the band http://dasracist.net/?p=87

-Kyle

So what’s left for Coleman’s legacy? Well, really, nothing. Coleman’s life was clearly hell, and not Hollywood hell, where having a shitty childhood and life is redeemed in the end by making you attractive in an edgy way or having some awesome talent (Good Will Hunting, that shitty movie with Will Smith and the Rubiks Cube, etc.), but more like a cesspool of a life that leads to nothing. He was a child-actor, but not in the traditional sense. He was close to his teens when the show ended, though on-screen he remained at relatively the same age throughout. He was able to do this due to a condition that stunted his growth and development. Coleman’s situation calls up the symbol/image of the clown for me: to the ignorant and the innocent he signifies joy, but the clown also tends to evoke degradation and deviancy (think of the clown commonly portrayed as sinister/deviant). Coleman was all smiles on the show, but in reality he was a sick kid, forced to exploit his illness for money. In reality, he would continue to exploit his illness as he grew older, though now it didn’t have the cuteness of the show but a sick sadness about it. The sheer number of commercials he made where the only importance of him to the advertisement was his stature or his being the butt of some joke belies a sadistic streak to the American public. His death of a brain hemorrhage was followed by rumors that his wife tried to murder him to steal his inheritance before he could change his will.

When NPR eulogized him they were trying to keep the narrative that began with the happy child on Different Strokes alive. This narrative is as fictitituos as the show’s plot of “racial harmony”, and in my opinion does a greater dishonor to Coleman’s life than a truthful portrayal of his life. Coleman should instead be remembered as a victim of show business, where we as consumers and spectators share part of the role of perpetrator. Coleman’s death should raise questions about why we consume what we consume, why is it that we desire celebrities, and why we sometimes seek to destroy them.

A young Coleman

Last weekend both the A-team and Karate Kid came out, both originally from the wonderful decade of the 1980s (a decade Juan proclaims nothing good ever came out of). Having seen neither of the films, I can’t really comment on whether they are good or not or whether they are worth your hard earned 10 dollars. But what I can talk about is the concept of the Hollywood remake. It’s easy to see why Hollywood would fall back to these films, they are guaranteed moneymakers, and provide very little financial risk in making. What I don’t understand is why they try to replicate movies that have become canonical in America. When I watch the Longest Yard I think its a shitty movie, but not because it doesn’t live up to the Burt Reynolds original (which few people born after the cold war have ever seen). When you pick a movie like the A-team, based on a TV show that is only remembered by the current youth of America for the fact that they drove an awesome van and Mr. T  had a mohawk and chains(who now does World of Warcraft commercials?), you are picking a movie that will really please no one. For those old enough to watch the original series, there is no way a modern movie seen in adulthood can live up to a part of their childhood. And for those who never saw it, the fact they drive a van and the black guy has a mohawk can only be as entertaining as a sight gag. So what happens is the movie falls back on its genre, and you get a forgettable movie.

How can you top this?

I’d like to think this current trend in remakes is a new occurance in Hollywood, but in fact its typical hollywood. These are just the genre movies of earlier hollywood, where the specifics didn’t matter, you just knew who was in it, and that it was an action movie, and that was reason enough to see it. So if Hollywood will insist on making remakes, I will insist that they pick better source material. If you are going to remake the cheesiest film canon, you might as well remake the upper tier of American film. I’d love to see a remake of Casablanca, sure it may be so horrible I want to cry, but at least its an attempt at something more artistic and deep (and it would have a much greater draw to the public, seeing as everyone at least knows about Casablanca). Go watch the two Bad Lieutenant’s, the original with Harvey Keitel, and the remake with Nicolas Cage. I wouldn’t mind seeing more remakes where Nicolas Cage has sex with crack heads and hallucinates iguanas.

- Kyle