Parent criticizes book ‘Fahrenheit 451′

Tuesday, October 3rd, 2006

You’d think this was an Onion article. Parent criticizes book ‘Fahrenheit 451′:

Alton Verm, of Conroe, objects to the language and content in the book. His 15-year-old daughter Diana, a CCHS sophomore, came to him Sept. 21 with her reservations about reading the book because of its language.

“The book had a bunch of very bad language in it,” Diana Verm said. “It shouldn’t be in there because it’s offending people. … If they can’t find a book that uses clean words, they shouldn’t have a book at all.”

Alton Verm filed a “Request for Reconsideration of Instructional Materials” Thursday with the district regarding Fahrenheit 451, written by Ray Bradbury and published in 1953. He wants the district to remove the book from the curriculum.

“It’s just all kinds of filth,” said Alton Verm, adding that he had not read Fahrenheit 451. “The words don’t need to be brought out in class. I want to get the book taken out of the class.”

Frank Miller’s 300

Saturday, September 23rd, 2006

Frank Miller’s 300 is a graphic novel depicting the Spartans’ stand at Thermopylae. Now it is being turned into a movie, which, like Sin City before it, is to be highly stylized — “operatic” in the words of one of the designers.

You can view the trailer and production journals at YouTube. Naturally, I was drawn to Video Diary 3: Spartan Training and Video Diary 5: Fight Choreography. The actors have a personal trainer who has them clearly performing a CrossFit workout, and the fight choreographers are from the Inosanto Academy — so don’t be surprised if the Spartans fight in a vaguely Asian style.

French and German remakes of the BBC’s Office

Friday, September 22nd, 2006

Liesl Schillinger looks at the French and German remakes of the BBC’s Office — and the US version as well — and draws some conclusions about our varied national cultures:

Watching all four versions back-to-back is not only a strangely unmooring experience — like seeing the film Groundhog Day over and over — it’s a crash course in national identity. And if any conjecture could be made about the cultural differences that these subtly contrasting programs reveal, it might be this one: These days, Germans and Americans are doing much of their living in and around their offices, while the Brits and French continue to live outside of them. Here, in broad strokes, are the chief differences. In the British version, nobody is working, nobody has a happy relationship, everyone looks terrible, and everybody is depressed. In the French version, nobody is working but even the idiots look good, and everybody seems possessed of an intriguing private life. In the German version, actual work is visibly being done, most of the staff is coupled up, and the workers never stop eating and drinking—treating the office like a kitchen with desks. Stromberg continually calls his staff “Kinder,” or “children,” further blurring the line between Kinder, Computer, and Küche.

While Michael Scott also sometimes calls his American office a “family,” his staff knows he’s the kid brother, not the father, and that if there’s to be any Kinder in their lives, they’re going to have to get busy with one of their fellow prairie dogs, because really — who else are they likely to meet, given the stretching parameters of the U.S. working day? We may still talk of “working like a dog,” but the Russians lately have coined the expression, “to work like an American,” reflecting our 24/7 on-call mentality. These days, for Americans, “home office” is not just a place, it’s a state of mind. And it’s perfectly reflected by our version of this global sitcom — in which work is ostensibly cared about (though skimped on), romantic tension simmers on numerous fronts, and the whole enterprise is gently inflated by a mood of eventual, possible progress in work and love — like a bowl of dough that could have used a little more yeast but is doing its best to rise. Vive la différence.

(Hat tip to Dan Drezner.)

The Bombing of Japanese Cities as Omen

Thursday, September 21st, 2006

In The Bombing of Japanese Cities as Omen, Jonathan of Chicago Boyz describes the tail end of a public-TV documentary he caught:

I have no doubt that our bombing of German and Japanese cities was one of the most terrible things ever done. But what made the documentary tendentious was that it left out the political and military context; there was no more than superficial discussion of what led the USA to adopt such brutal tactics. The remarkable tenacity and cruelty of the Japanese fighters we encountered in our island-hopping campaign weren’t discussed, nor was the terrifying prospect of invading the Japanese home islands — a prospect which, until the atomic bombings, appeared certain and would have certainly killed millions. Instead the documentary framed our decision to burn the cities as having been based on Curtis LeMay’s desire to find a more-effective alternative to using inaccurate high-explosive bombs against Japanese factories. Of course, when you present the story in such a narrow way it makes it look like we went too far. The documentary might have been redeemed if someone had said: Yes, we did terrible things, but they only became conceivable late in the war after we learned what the enemy was capable of, and the alternatives were all much worse. But no one said that, at least not that I heard.

I don’t think this documentary could have been made in the 1960s or 1970s. It would have been widely seen as revisionist. Too many people were still aware, either from direct experience or from having learned about the war from family elders or in school or from the media, of the rationale for destroying the Japanese cities. But nowadays probably a lot of the people doing film production, and certainly a lot of the viewers, are too young and too scantily educated about World War II to recognize an incomplete historical treatment when they see one. This is a great pity in the context of the current war, because people in the democracies need to understand that insufficient seriousness in fighting radical Islam now could in the long run lead to a situation in which we kill millions in order to get the fight over with and protect our people. It could happen. The history of our war with Japan makes clear what we are capable of doing to an enemy who provokes us sufficiently. The Islamists, who are as cruel as the Japanese were, need to understand this too, but probably won’t until it’s too late.

Pyrats!

Thursday, September 21st, 2006

I’m a scurvy dog for missing Talk Like a Pirate Day yesterday, but I’ll try to make up for it by pointing you to Pyrats, “a super fun animated short from those talented scallywags at Gobelins animation school,” according to Drawn!

Literary Wealth

Sunday, September 17th, 2006

In Literary Wealth, Ward Just shares his five favorite novels about the pursuit of money:

  1. The Gilded Age by Mark Twain and Charles Dudley Warner (1873).
  2. The Financier by Theodore Dreiser (Harper, 1912).
  3. Something Happened by Joseph Heller (Knopf, 1974).
  4. Babbitt by Sinclair Lewis (Harcourt, Brace, 1922).
  5. American Pastoral by Philip Roth (Houghton Mifflin, 1997).

The Biology of B-Movie Monsters

Saturday, September 9th, 2006

Michael C. LaBarbera analyzes The Biology of B-Movie Monsters, starting with scaling:

  • The magnitude of surface tension forces is proportional to the wetted perimeter (a length); a water strider needs long feet, not big feet, to skate on the surface of a pond.
  • Adhesive forces are proportional to contact areas; geckos need broad, flat feet covered with millions of tiny setae to walk on the ceiling.
  • Gravitational or inertial forces are proportional to volume (assuming that density is constant); a bird that flies into a window may break its neck, but a fly that flies into a window will bounce without injury.

More:

The same dependence on different aspects of geometry holds for functional relationships. The forces that can be produced by a muscle or the strength of a bone are in each case proportional to their cross-sectional areas; the weight of an animal is proportional to its volume.

Physiological relationships are not exempt. The rate at which oxygen can be extracted from the air is proportional to the surface area of the lungs; the rate at which food is digested and absorbed to the surface area of the gut; the rate at which heat is lost to the surface area of the body: but the rate at which oxygen or food must be supplied or the rate at which heat is produced is proportional to the mass (i.e., volume) of the animal. If an animal performs well at any given size, size change alone implies that these related functions must change at different rates, since their underlying geometric bases change at different rates; if the animal is to be functional at the changed size, either functional relations must change or shape must change. Monster movies have extensively explored these scaling relationships, albeit usually incorrectly; knowing the true relationships often puts the entire movie into a new light.

It’s a lengthy piece. I’ll leave you with one passage on The Incredible Shrinking Man:

Because of these relatively larger surface areas, he’ll be losing water at a proportionally larger rate, so he’ll have to drink a lot, too. We see him drink once in the movie — he dips his hand into a puddle and sips from his cupped palm. The image is unremarkable and natural, but unfortunately wrong for his dimensions: at his size surface tension becomes a force comparable to gravity. More likely, he’d immerse his hand in the pool and withdraw it coated with a drop of water the size of his head. When he put his lips to the drop, the surface tension would force the drop down his throat whether or not he chooses to swallow.

Houdini’s Impossible Demonstration

Saturday, September 9th, 2006

Massimo Polidoro explains Houdini’s Impossible Demonstration, which he made to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, creator of the Sherlock Holmes stories — who, ironically, was a true believer in Spiritualism:

“Sir Arthur,” continued Houdini, “I want you to go out of the house, walk anywhere you like, as far as you like in any direction; then write a question or sentence on that piece of paper; put it back in your pocket and return to the house.”

Doyle obeyed, walking three blocks and turning a corner before he wrote upon the paper. When he returned Houdini invited him to take a spoon and remove the cork ball, which had been soaking in the white ink, then to touch the ball to the left side of the slate. The ball “stuck” there, seemingly of its own volition. Slowly, it began rolling across the surface of the slate, leaving a white track as it did so. As the ball rolled, it was seen to be spelling the words: “Mene, mene, tekel upharsin,” the very same words that Doyle had written. The guests were speechless.

Houdini then explained that it was all done with trickery, not psychic powers — but Doyle never believed him.

How it was done:

Berol had been performing for years, both in Europe and America, an act in which a ball dipped in ink would spell on an isolated board the words called out by members of the audience:

“Berol did this by switching a solid cork ball for one with an iron core. A magnet at the end of a rod, manipulated by an assistant concealed behind the board, caused the ball to adhere and move — apparently under its own power. After Berol retired, Houdini purchased the equipment. An assistant in the room adjacent to Houdini’s library had opened a small panel in the wall and extended the rod with a magnet through it. The ball on the slate had an iron center, of course.

“Ernst had not remembered that when Doyle returned to the room, after writing the words outdoors, Houdini had checked to make sure the slip of paper on which Doyle wrote was folded, then immediately returned it to his friend. Before doing so, the magician had switched slips. While Doyle was busy retrieving the ball from the inkwell and taking it to the board, Houdini read the words. His conversation cued his hidden assistant. Once the message had been written on the slate, Houdini asked Doyle for the folded slip to verify his words. He opened the blank paper, pretended to read from it, then switched it for the original as he returned the paper to his friend. Later, Houdini explained this switching process during his public lectures on fraudulent mediums.”

If Stan Lee wrote Watchmen

Tuesday, September 5th, 2006


Cory Doctorow points to Stan Lee’s Watchmen, which “remixes the classic Dave Gibbons/Alan Moore comic in the hyperbolic, alliterative style of Stan Lee.” Quite amusing — if your geek-fu is strong.

Sci Fi Uses a Web Series to Entice Viewers to ‘Battlestar Galactica’

Tuesday, September 5th, 2006

Sci Fi Uses a Web Series to Entice Viewers to ‘Battlestar Galactica’:

Beginning tonight the television series “Battlestar Galactica” will travel from outer space into cyberspace. The Sci Fi Channel, which broadcasts the series, has created online mini-episodes, the first of which is scheduled to be posted at midnight.
[...]
The mini-episodes will go online, one at a time, on Tuesday and Thursday nights until “Galactica’s” season premiere on Oct. 6. They focus on two soldiers in a new city built by humans fleeing Cylons, a race of machines that has wiped out human civilization elsewhere.

A Big Star May Not a Profitable Movie Make

Tuesday, August 29th, 2006

A Big Star May Not a Profitable Movie Make:

“Movies with stars are successful not because of the star, but because the star chooses projects that people tend to like,” said Arthur S. De Vany, a professor emeritus of economics at the University of California, Irvine, who has written extensively about the economics of moviemaking. “It’s a movie that makes a star.”
[...]
Mr. De Vany and other economists point out that many factors contribute to the success of a movie — like a big budget, having a G or PG rating, opening on a large number of screens and whether it is a sequel, among others.

In one study, Mr. De Vany and W. David Walls, an economist at the University of Calgary, took those factors into account. Looking across a sample of more than 2,000 movies exhibited between 1985 and 1996, they found that only seven actors and actresses — Tom Hanks, Michelle Pfeiffer, Sandra Bullock, Jodie Foster, Jim Carrey, Barbra Streisand and Robin Williams — had a positive impact on the box office, mostly in the first few weeks of a film’s release.

In the same study, two directors, Steven Spielberg and Oliver Stone also pushed up a movie’s revenue. But Winona Ryder, Sharon Stone and Val Kilmer were associated with a smaller box-office revenue. No other star had any statistically significant impact at all. So what are stars for? By helping a movie open — attracting lots of people in to see a movie in the first few days before the buzz about whether it’s good or bad is widely known — stars can set a floor for revenues, said Mr. De Vany.

“Stars help to launch a film. They are meant as signals to create a big opening,” he said. “But they can’t make a film have legs.”

(Shouldn’t a professor emeritus be referred to as Dr. or Professor de Vany?)

A new, old "Lassie" comes home to U.S. theaters

Tuesday, August 29th, 2006

A new, old “Lassie” comes home to U.S. theaters &mdash one that resembles the original story:

“Lassie” comes home to another generation of U.S. children this week in a new film that hews closely to the original, dark tale of the loyal collie and her boy in wartime England, instead of the sunny California of the long-running television series.

The sable-and-white collie, Lassie, and her young owner, Joe, first appeared in a 1938 short story in the Saturday Evening Post by Eric Knight, a British-American journalist and writer who spun the story into a 1940 book, “Lassie Come-Home.”
[...]
Like many fans, Sturridge had never read Knight’s book or seen the 1943 film it spawned, and initially assumed from watching the TV show that Knight had created Lassie as an American dog living on a ranch in California with her owner, Timmy.

In fact, the story grew out of a trip Knight took during the Great Depression to England, where he saw people selling belongings to survive, according to “Lassie” historian Ace Collins.

“The prized possession of these people were their collie dogs,” Collins said. “A lot of people were having to sell those dogs to put food on the table.”

“Lassie Come-Home” became the story of a Yorkshire boy whose coal miner father sells the family’s unusually beautiful collie to a nobleman when he loses his job. The duke takes the dog to Scotland, where she escapes and returns to the boy.

Dave Sim’s fighting aardvark

Friday, August 25th, 2006

Dave Sim discusses his fighting aardvark comic, Cerebus, with the CBC in this interview from their archives:

It began as a satire of Conan the Barbarian mixed with Howard the Duck. But over the years Cerebus the Aardvark turned into something much more, an intricate socio-political allegory, an epic labour of love for its creator and eventually, the longest running English-language comic book story ever. In this 1983 radio clip, cartoonist Dave Sim along with his wife and publisher Deni Loubert, discuss his then young comic and its unlikely hero.

The Power of Personality

Monday, August 7th, 2006

In The Power of Personality, Bryan Caplan explains “What Happens When You Give a Homeless Man $100k”:

The homeless are different from you and me, and it’s not because they have less money. It’s because they are extraordinarily low in what personality psychologists call conscientiousness. That’s my theory, anyway. A quite watchable documentary on Showtime (and that’s high praise from me, I strongly prefer fiction) puts my theory to the test. It’s called Reversal of Fortune, and it’s got a simple set-up: The film-makers picked Ted, a homeless man in Pasadena, gave him $100,000, and filmed the results.

We initially see Ted’s life on the streets. He sleeps under a bridge and does enough recycling to pay for beer, cigarettes, and a little food. He is surprisingly articulate — low IQ is not his problem. It would be easy for someone to argue that Ted has simply been unlucky, and that his drinking is “just a response to the hopelessness of his situation.”

Then he gets $100k. He starts off with some reasonable purchases: He gets a new bike with a trailer for transportation, checks into a motel, and gets cleaned up. But that’s as far as it goes. Once he’s got his basic needs taken care of, Ted starts blowing through his fortune at high speed: A brand new truck, extravagant gifts, and daily carousing at the bar with fair-weather girlfriends. So much for drinking being a response to hopelessness!

Ted keeps muttering about how he should get his (horrifying) teeth fixed, but doesn’t even schedule a dental appointment. Family members nag him to be more prudent, but he stubbornly declares that he lives day by day. After six months, he apparently stops cooperating with the film crew — they can only guess that he’s just about broke.

The Wilhelm Scream Compilation

Friday, August 4th, 2006

The Wilhelm Scream Compilation is a wonderful piece of movie geekdom. It all starts with a character named Wilhelm in The Charge at Feather River (1953) — sort of:

A scream used for the character Pvt. Wilhelm (recorded originally for Distant Drums (1951)) has since been reused in many films, including the Star Wars and Indiana Jones films.

More on the origin, from Distant Drums (1951):

This film contains the first known instance of “The Wilhelm Scream” (a sound effect of a man screaming, since used in over 70 other movies). During a scene in which the soldiers are wading through a swamp in the everglades, one of them is bitten and dragged underwater by an alligator. The scream for that character was recorded later. Six short pained screams were recorded in a single take, which was slated “man getting bit by an alligator, and he screams.” The fifth scream was used for the soldier — but the 4th, 5th, and 6th screams recorded in the session were also used earlier in the film when three Indians are shot, one after another, during a raid on a fort. Although the “signature” or “classic” screams, takes 4 through 6 on the original recording, are the most recognizable, all of the screams are referred to as “Wilhelm” by those in the sound community. Ben Burtt, sound effects designer on Star Wars (1977), named it “Wilhelm” after the character that let out the scream in Charge at Feather River (1953). He discovered a file at Warner Bros. for this movie, which contained paperwork that was left over from the picture editor when the film was completed. One of the papers was a short list of names of actors who were scheduled to come in to perform various lines of dialogue for miscellaneous roles in the movie. After reviewing the names and even listening to their voices, one person seemed to be the most likely suspect: Sheb Wooley. Sheb played the uncredited role of Private Jessup in “Distant Drums”, and was one of the few actors assembled for the recording of additional vocal elements for the film. It is very likely he was asked on the spot to perform other things for the film, including the screams for a man being bitten by an alligator.