Anime, Fantasy, etc...

I took the liberty of copying most of the last two Anime comments here to start it off.

Comments

[Michael]

...I have at my Blockbuster "Spirited away", "Princess Mononoke", "Ghost in the shell" and "Akira" and this is by no means a special video store. You should be able to get "Spirited away" easily, because it is a new release.

Loved your work description, Gryka I wonder - are philosophers really qualified to talk serious physics? I'd say, unless you have a degree in physics you shouldn't be so eager to pass judgement. A philosopher talking about particle physics is no better than a theologist admonishing physicists trying to find out the truth about the beginning of the universe - unless of course s/he's a real pro in BOTH areas.

You think Smorodina won't be visiting us anymore, Yeti? I got a nice chuckle out of your "impression". ;)

Glimmung, Gryka - I'm not complaining about this site. Don't worry - it's just fine. I don't know jack about creating websites, so I'm happy someone else acted and did a good deed...

I watched animatrix over the weekend. I wasn't very impressed. I liked "Beyond" - the one about the cat lost in a haunted house. Other than that it was mostly fights and uninspired stories. In "Osiris" there was still something wrong with the facial animation. I guess they didn't use muscle based animation. And that stab at eroticism? Instead of being a turn-on it gave me the creeps. Maybe I'm just too aware that I'm looking at an animated mesh, covered with a texture not real, feeling human beings.

[mondrian5]

Michael,

I really love the work of Miyazaki. He is doing marvelous work.
Your post was spot on. You named all of the best anime I know. I have also seen a film called "Serial Experiments: lain" which is interesting.

Gryka,
Your Telka story was wonderful.

My son and I have been waiting for "Hero" for over a year. I recently bought the Hong Kong edition. It is such a beautiful film. Yimou Zhang is my favorite director. "Hero" is very "operatic" in feeling. A few years ago he staged "Turandot" in Beijing incorporating ancient artifacts and costuming. I was told the US release of "Hero", scheduled for February 2004, will have 20 minutes taken out. I can't imagine where they will find 20 minutes they can remove!

I will see if I can find a source for you. A quest to give this as a gift must be successful!!

[Yeti]

So, is Star Blazers considered to be something like the "Lavern and Shirley" of anime?

Maybe it doesn't deal with enough of the "tough topics" like shows nowadays. You know, like that one Charlie Brown special where Linus learns about STD's in "It hurts when I pee Charlie Brown", or when Franklin gives the kids a lesson in ebonics in "I'm gonna bust a cap in yo' ass, Charlie Brown". Or, finally, the one where Peppermint Pattie reveals her alternative lifestyle in "It's a different kind of love, Charlie Brown"

--okay, okay. I know you've all heard those groaners before, but I couldn't resist....

Seriously, though, what do serious anime fans think about Star Blazers?

They should come out with an anime version of my favorite episode of Gomer Pyle. You know, the one wher Gomer irritates Sgt. Carter? That one kills me every time!

[Glimmung]

Yeti, That reminds me...

Bushonics

[Gryka]

Originally posted by Michael: In "Osiris" there was still something wrong with the facial animation. I guess they didn't use muscle based animation. And that stab at eroticism? Instead of being a turn-on it gave me the creeps.

Ah, so it was creepy! I knew it, I knew it! :^D I was worried that I'm getting prudish in my ...hm... older years. ;^)

Did you see the documentary on making Beyond? The Wachowskis people were very upset with Morimoto for being slow, difficult, unable to work utilizing "creative approximation," and for being a drunk. One of them concluded Beyond was the weakest of all the stories. And I ended up with the impression that I would get continuously drunk too around people like that.

What did you think of Matriculated – the one about AI existing within human's mind? I know the story was kind of weak, but it had some neat ideas. Did you like the AI? Not the humanized version, but the one with 3 metal legs...

Yeti, I must say – you are a laugh a minute! :^D Very funny! Glimmung, I'm completely perplexed. Is the article a satire or reality? Is there a way to tell?

[Glimmung]

Gryka,

Satire! In a painful sort of way.

I'm picking up the Eolkien discussion from the general thread here...

Michael, it seems like Jackson's handling of Faramir is the most widely disliked thing about TTT. I'm inclined to agree. He seems overly concerned with giving some characters "developmental arcs" to the detriment of Tolkien's story. Faramir was intentionally "good", an echo of the nobility of the Numenorians of old, and a counterpoint to his fatally flawed brother. Guess Jackson thought that made him too dull. I expect he'll turn into the Faramir we recognize in ROTK.

He's guilty of this (and worse) in other instances. Merry and Pippin were never as callow as he portrays them in FOTR. Frodo's constant doe-eyed wimpiness is really annoying. I don't know what Galadriel was supposed to be - the character was barely recognizable with the overly affected manner of speech and the over-the-top transformation when Frodo tempts her with the Ring (though the extended version helped the Lorien segment considerably). Gimli is too often reduced to providing comic relief.

And I found the score to be overly intrusive and bombastic.

Still, the movies are so much more than I ever expected to see. Ian McKellen is wonderful. Sean Bean was superb - perhaps the best job of all. Sam, Bilbo, Legolas, Theoden, Eowyn are spot on. Liv Tyler's expanded Arwen, which was so controversial, to my surprise didn't bother me a bit. I wish Viggo Mortenson's voice projected a little better, and again, Jackson has overemphasized his self-doubt in the interest of character arc, but overall he's pretty good.

I'm curious to see how Denethor turns out - the right actor could steal ROTK with that role (script permitting).

I thought Jackson and Hugo Weaving fleshed out Elrond very nicely. And, as I mentioned before, Christoper Lee... wow.

Michael, I've always wondered, with your background, what you thought of the LOTR scriptwriting.

Oh, and Saruman: there was a famous photo of Saruman impaled on a wheel-like object. Speculation was that PJ killed him off during the confrontation with Gandalf at Orthanc (at the end ot TTT in the books, but pushed back to ROTK by PJ). Some think it could have been a piece of deliberate misdirection. I hope so, because I thought the ending in the Shire was excellent. I fear that may be another element gone from the movie. I have a theory that the impalement is real, but happens at Sandyman's mill. We'll see!

A good site, if you're enough of a geek (cough) is theonering.net.

Also great fun is this parody site: LOTR in the style of various authors or genres. You have to wade through a lot of dross, but there are some real gems. I loved one done like the Aussie Crocodile hunter guy (best read aloud in a broad accent), and the one inspired by Flowers For Algernon was brilliant.

Being my perverse self, I also liked the John Cage one (you'll have to go see for yourself). I tried to do a Hardy Boys version, but it just never came together in a way I liked.

Smeagol writhed in corruption, his lifelong attempts to collectivize the Hobbit economy had twisted his soul and body and brought ruin to the Shire. "Precious," he muttered. "Precious collective good giving according to need." He shuddered at the thought of the unbroken individual standing proudly over a conquered plain with the Ring, and felt jealous that the wholesome power could not be his.

-Lord of the Rings, by Ayn Rand.

[michael]

I didn't have time to read ALL the posts on the parody site but I loved the Dr. Seuss bit! People have a lot of imagination... Very cool site.

I really don't see why Jackson & Co. would try to impose on Faramir's character such an arc. They weren't so drastic with other characters. I think there's more to it than just beefing up his psychology. I agree that Gimli is too much of a typical comic relief but I have to admit I was laughing at the "dwarf tossing" bit at Helm's Deep. I've read Michael Moorcock's book about fantasy literature where he blasted Tolkien for being very two dimensional in his character descriptions and humorless. I agree that LOTR could have more humor. On the other hand the characters are meant to be mythical. No one expects a mythical character to have great depth. I have noticed one thing: symbolic characters in literature don't translate well to screen. When you see a flesh and blood person interacting with other characters on the screen you expect them to act like human beings, so giving the LOTR characters a bit more depth than in the books is actually a necessity. Otherwise the viewer wouldn't be able to empathize very much with them.

I've watched recently "The Quiet American" based on the Graham Greene novel. In the book the character of the young American is a symbol of the dangerous American innocence of the period (1950's, Vietnam). The screenwriters had a big trouble turning this character into a flesh and blood, dimensional character who could interact in believable ways inside the love traingle that is the basis of this story. Some things that work in the book look terrible on the screen.

Generally I think LOTR is as good an adaptation as you're probably going to get - at least judging by the first two parts. Successfully managing the huge amount of exposition and complexity of the story is a great logistical feat. I think people wrongly assume that "if the filmmaker just stuck to the book, everything would be much better". That is not how it works. On film, what you see is what you get. You have no narrator that can explain the character's thoughts and story background. In the book time is fluid. The narrator can jump in the same sentence between past and present and different places. Not so in a movie. Everything has to be presented in action, images and dialogue in a clear, concise, linear manner. In a movie dialogue serves only to push forward the storyline. You cannot digress because then the story sags. In a screenplay all the subplots and main plotline weave together and head straight toward a resolution. William Goldman (Butch Cassidy and Sundance Kid, All president's Men) said that screenplays are structure. He's right. A properly written screenplay has a very clear and strong dramatic structure. The best movies have lean and tight structure without a wasted line of dialogue or plodding scenes. In literature conflicts can be soft and hazy, because you get to know the characters thanks to the narrator's description. In a film you have no access to a character's thoughts. You get to know them by their actions and through clear conflict in which the goals of different characters collide, making the characters reveal "what they are made of". That's why films tend to be much more dramatic than most of good literature. Literature is much more forgiving than screenplay writing. All that means changes. Films try to capture the essence of the book but true, 100% fidelity to the story is impossible because film and literature are so different both in ways they presented and perceived.

Your jury adventure is very interesting, Glimmung. Somehow I immediately began to think about "12 angry men". Can you give us more details?

[Yeti]

I was wondering how did they do that stunt with Legolas jumping onto the horse. CG? Stuntman? It seems to defy the laws of physics.

--yeah. But isn't it cool? Legolas is awesome. I wondered about Faramir as well. It's been years since I read the books, but I distinctly remember that he didn't take them back to Gondor. Jackson has taken many liberties, but for me, it's o.k.

It's funny. I think I posted something on "Channel one" about the fact that Solaris was disappointing to me because all those years of overanalyzing it with all of you made me expect something which would be a parallel to the original story. So, when Soderburgh took liberties with his interpretation, and changed things, I was very upset. Hence, I disliked the movie.

With LOTR, I remember the story hazily, and I deliberately didn't visit the websites and get too involved in discussions, and I enjoyed the movies immensely because I was looking for general interpretation of the characters and the overall "mood" of the books. I wasn't nit picking them the entire time, looking for Tom Bombadil, or following every word uttered by Arwin to see if it matched the dialogue in the books. For me, the movies were right on target for suspending my disbelief, and putting me back in Middle Earth. For Solaris, I just kept saying to myself, "That's not how Banoanais did it", or "That didn't happen in the book", and the movie was ruined for me as a result.

I thought the portrayal of Galadriel was a little strange too. In the movie, you are never certain if she is good or evil. Perhaps I need to get a DVD player and see the extended version.

Glimmung, I'm dying to hear some general details about your jury duty. Feel free to change the names to protect the innocent.

[michael]

The difference between Soderbergh's adaptation of "Solaris" and Jackson's of LOTR is that Soderbergh, very foolishly imo, cut out the core of the story, its brain, and therefore ruined it completely. He took out the most important and poignant thing in "Solaris", the reason why Lem wrote the story in the first place. Whatever liberties Jackson took, he stuck to the basic storyline and his changes aren't fundamental in any way. I just bow before him, because his LOTR is a great achievement.

[Gryka]

Hi Guys!

Sorry to be out for so long. Life interfered. The school year came and I'm suddenly busy at work and my friends from Europe are visiting and guess where they are staying... My husband says there is a sign just over our home visible from the plane saying: stay here, they will like you... But I must say having adults over is a nice thing. Especially, if the adults like food, like my friends do. So, I'm typing these words just before going to a Vietnamese restaurant. (Just made reservations, funny thing, the person taking reservations said: “we have tree parking” and I immediately imagined a tree and tried to place a car on it but it didn't work, so I asked again. “We have tree parking” the person reassured me. And then it downed on me: “Free parking” – OK, the tree is saved... ;^) )

Anyway, I have a lot to ask you and a lot to say but unfortunately I have no time to do it...

Quickly, Michael and Mondrian, we received Hero and saw it. My husband was very much impressed. It took us half an hour to figure out where in the Chinese menu were English subtitles but we finally found them. OMG! It is not an easy film. The message is hidden to fool the censor I think. That is why people think it is a glorification of fascism. No such thing. In contrary, the tyrant is clearly a fool and he can never be virtuous. I will go and see the movie again when it comes out on the big screen. The visuals are stunning and I want to see them bigger. There is a lot of Kurosawa in it and a lot of Ang Lee. I thought that artistically the film was repetitious but overall, beautiful.

Dimarec, I loved Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon and I didn't feel it was a Hollywood productions. But then the film is about empowerment of women (among other things) so, surely, I'd be attracted to it. I'd love to have a conversation about that film. The wuxia is something I'm very fascinated with. The film fulfills all requirements of that tradition: the main character (Mu Bai) resigns in the last moment from achieving his life's goal as he recognizes it, just before achieving it, to be diminishing.

Ever since I saw Samurai (Musashi Miyamoto - The Sword Saint) played by Mifune I thought the eastern knightship something much deeper than the one of Medieval Europe. Miyamoto is the samurai famous for constant postponing pending fight with his greatest opponent and finally when he run out of excuses, fighting him with a wooden sword. But wuxia, goes even deeper than samurai tradition. Hero speaks of it too.

Michael, I loved “The Quiet American” – the film that is. Perhaps because at the time I saw it I wanted America to turn back to the ideals for which I used to admire her and the film presented the old fashioned American, who seem blasé but when things got tough you could always count on him to stick to his principles and his humanity.

Not a word about Tolkien because I started reading him in college and I'm still somewhere in the middle of the second volume. Yeah, it's been years... Glimmung: love Cesil's rendition. :^D (My husband loved Merry Poppins version. BTW, do you guys know how to make a man stop signing? 8^) ) I'm still on the second page – this is slow reading but very rewarding. Guys go read! Especially, in lawyerese ;^)

[Gryka]

Oh, Glimmung, details about the jury duty! Please, please!

[mondrian5]

Hello all,
Mondrian here.
Pardon the absence. I have a note.
I've been away working. And learning to tango.

First, Michael,
I saw the first LOTR 7 times, ( !!!! that's 21 hrs of my life!) because I kept wanting different people I knew to see it. I read the books at a young age and never re-read them because I developed an unreasonable distaste for conventional fantasy. Seeing the film through my son's eyes has softened my aversions. For what it was, I loved the movie.
Second, I saw Soderbergh's Solaris again and listened to the commentary. Let's just say they have much in common with Salieri. I still have positive feelings about parts of their filmic accident.

Gryka,
Tree parking was a beautiful image.

How many surrealists does it take to change a lightbulb?

fish

I hope your husband had a good birthday. I am glad you found and saw Hero. I want to see it in a large cinema as well. Crouching Tiger is one of my favorite movies. Both films had music by my friend Tan Dun. I'm afraid Hero may have suffered by being second in this way.

I am a real admirer of Graham Greene. I didn't dislike The Quiet American, but felt The End Of The Affair was a much better film. (I kept expecting Brendon Fraiser to bump into things) Michael Caine was extraordinary.

Glimmung, jury duty must have been quite an experience. I don't want to pry but it would be interesting to know how you felt about it all.

[Glimmung]

By popular request, here is a more detailed version of my Jury experience. Maybe this will spark a few debates...

As I said, this was my first time. Glimmette did her only turn several years ago, up in Oklahoma City where parking was lousy and expensive, the building was drafty, and things weren’t as well organized as they might have been. She wound up hearing a suit against Wal-Mart (boo! hiss!) having to do with eye injuries allegedly relating to a BB gun sold by WM. It became painfully obvious that the suit was without merit, and she was particularly disillusioned by how sleazy and clueless the lawyers (on both sides) were. All in all, a valuable but depressing experience for her.

My summons, at least, were not to Oklahoma county, but to our own county court, located in Norman. I could park for free a block away. There were about 150 people total in the jury pool. We sat for almost an hour while a bailiff “entertained” us with folksy BS and a few bad jokes. Finally, we got down to business. The judge came in and gave what amounted to a well-rehearsed 45-minute civics lesson. The importance of the jury system to our wonderful American justice system. The ins and outs of jury selection, the part of the process you don’t see on TV dramas. Great consternation over the two people who hadn’t shown up – they take this very seriously (the next week, a prospective juror who missed the callback received a cordial invitation to spend a couple days enjoying the county’s hospitality). So, I figured, there’ll be some little cases on the docket – nothing much. And lo and behold, one of the three cases for which they would be selecting jurors was a murder case! 60 members on that panel, they said. I was already unsure whether I wanted to be part of that panel, but the odds were 3-to-2 against it.

In the course of the remarks, it was mentioned that the death penalty was not being sought. Hmm, I thought. Odd for such an execution-happy state like Oklahoma (we execute more people per capita than any other state, even Texas). This removed one complicating factor. I’m sure it won’t surprise any of you to learn that I oppose Capital Punishment, since I believe it’s wrong to kill (except in self defense). In a capital case, that belief would soon come to light, and the prosecution would send me home. In this case, though, the choices (if found guilty) would be between life, and life-without-parole.

(In fact, Oklahoma enjoys executing people so much that they are busy spending millions and millions of dollars bringing state murder charges against Tim McVeigh's Murrah Bldg bombing accomplice Terry Nichols, not content to simply let him fade to obscurity and rot in prison for the rest of his life. You know, killing being wrong and all, we gotta kill him. The DA actually asked one of the prospective jurors (#6 below) what his opinion of this was, and he surprised me by saying he thought it was a waste of taxpayer's money.)

We’d almost reached lunchtime, and they began pulling the 60 names at random (literally, pulling out of a box) for the murder panel. Care to guess whose name was the very first out of the box?? Yep, that of your humble correspondent. Once the 60 names were pulled, we were seated together in one part of the courtroom while they pulled names for the remaining two cases. These folks went to other courtrooms, where their cases began that day. Our murder case wouldn’t start until Tuesday the next week (after Labor Day), but before we left we were given further civics lectures (especially about not reading or talking about the case at hand) and a LONG questionnaire to complete – took most of us well over an hour. We moved to the back of the courtroom while they resumed another trial dealing with some sort of contract dispute involving what sounded like oilfield work. Cleveland County now knows more than many of my acquaintances do about my work and educational background, my outside interests, my reading habits, my thoughts on gun ownership (a sadly necessary evil), the “drug problem” (as a libertarian-leaning progressive, I find our arbitrary and largely unenforceable laws to be the single biggest component of the “problem”), the breakdown of society’s morals (a mix of poverty-and-despair-in-the-capitalist-jungle – sorry Mr. Republican Christian DA – and the breakdown of stabilizing structures such as the family and a shortage of conspicuous ethical role models – sorry Ms. bleeding-heart lawyer), and numerous other topics. They even know that a recent movie I saw in a theater was some obscure thing called Solaris, about which I had mixed feelings! Had there been any longer waiting periods up to that point, they would have learned that I was currently reading Bulgakov’s Heart of a Dog, which I had purchased a couple weeks ago and brought along for just such an eventuality – wonder what they would have made of that (commie egghead!). Instead, it was Nick Hornby’s soccer-themed memoir Fever Pitch. They also knew that the last movie I’d seen on TV was Minority Report, which would not lack all relevance to the issues of murder, justice, and crime prevention.

So, I had eight days to think about things, and to avoid the local papers (which I largely do anyway). I didn’t have to feign ignorance of the case, I thought. I certainly didn’t recognize the defendant, or his name. He was quite young, and had been sitting with his two court-appointed attorneys across the courtroom from us, and there were a dozen or so people sitting in a cordoned-off visitors area who looked like they’d been sent over from central casting for a Deliverance remake. Defendant or victim, I wondered? Not both, or they wouldn’t have all been sitting together. The body was found at Draper Lake, but that’s been a pretty popular spot for bodies to turn up.

Tuesday finally arrived. Different judge. TV camera crews outside. More civics lectures from the judge that was running this trial. More visitors in the gallery. And they assigned the 60 of us our juror numbers, again at random. 1 thru 12 would go sit in the jury box, and the rest of us would sit in order in the benches. I was number 15, so that I would be the third juror to enter the box as current jurors were dismissed. I noticed that, as chance would have it, the women in the jury pool were towards the front, the men toward the back – only two men among the first 12.

So, as # 15, I had a front row seat as the DA began his opening remarks to the prospective jurors. And Michael, he asked how many of the jurors had seen 12 Angry Men! Several questions related to the ability of a juror to 1) arrive at and defend their own conclusions 2) handle disagreements during deliberations – the questionnaire asked whether we considered ourselves to be more of a leader or follower. He read (as required) a long list of official witnesses (mostly law enforcement personnel), so that any jurors who knew any of them could say so. No one did. Finally, he had his stack of questionnaires, and began asking specific questions of jurors 1-12. He focused especially on anyone who had friends or relatives currently in prison, anyone who had been victims of a crime, anyone who had friends or relatives with substance abuse problems, anyone who had been on juries previously. Many variations on “such-and-such might happen during the trial – would it affect you ability to be impartial?” (e.g, witnesses listed but not called; remarks objected to and sustained, documents shown to witnesses but not entered into evidence). Repeated emphasis that our decisions would be solely based, to the best of our ability, on the evidence presented and the judge’s instructions. Numerous hints that we would hear witnesses who might be slightly unsavory (including some currently in prison), references to the methamphetamine subculture.

I thought I had identified that at least eight of the 12 jurors would be challenged or otherwise excused – 1) a very pregnant lady, 2) a man who had worked in a Federal Prison and had once violently intervened to break up a robbery attempt, 3) a Vietnamese lady whose English was not good, 4) a lady who had worked in the DA’s office for years, 5) a 50-ish woman who’d grown up in Berkeley CA and attended Cal-Berkeley during the free-speech movement, 6) a good ‘ol boy who owned lots of guns, 7) a young girl whose husband was in prison and said she didn’t think it was right to put a young person in prison for life, 8) a lady who had been on several juries in Colorado (including a murder trial) who said she loved being on juries. I was eventually right about everyone except the Berkeley and Colorado ladies. The Colorado one really surprised me, if I’d been the defense attorney I’d have booted her out first thing, since she had indicated that she just loved sitting in judgement of others.

After the DA was done, the defense attorney had her turn. She pointed out that in spite of what we might have gathered from the DA, there were three possible outcomes, not two – we could find him Not Guilty. Juror #7 above actually said she hadn’t realized that! She emphasized that the burden of proof was on the prosecution, that if she chose, she didn’t have to call a single witness or ask a single question, and would we be able to not draw any prejudicial conclusions if that was the case?

Eventually she was done, and everyone huddled up with the judge. First round: # 6, #7, and one other juror were excused. I was now in the box. The DA asked us three newbies if we had anything particular to say in response to any of the questions we’d already heard – no one did. When he started with me individually, he said, in reference to my questionnaire “Oh, you’re the KGOU listener! I guess someone has to keep them on the air.” (KGOU is the Norman NPR station affiliated with the Univ of Oklahoma.) He asked what I liked about the station, and I replied “everything but the jazz programming”. He asked what I liked about living out in the country, and I replied that we loved the peace and quiet, the absence of concrete, and the ability to take in stray animals as necessary. He asked how often I played tennis, and I said whenever I could, about once a week.

Then, the defense lawyer focused on my unusual philosophy/math background, saying that seemed incongruous, philosophy being so abstract and all. I said that they overlapped in the study of formal logic, but that my main interest had been ethics. How might that relate to my ability to function as a juror, she asked? I said that I understood the need to focus on the evidence and instructions, that as fallible humans we could only promise to do our best to ignore other factors, that the social contract implicit in our web of laws made this important. I could sense fellow jurors wondering what the hell this overeducated dork was going on about. But I understood, more than I ever had before, that this process depended on jurors exposing who they were – some of the jurors had been asked questions far more personal than I had been asked.

(I resisted saying that I would be disappointed to the extent either side tried to use emotional manipulation, that we all knew about prosecutorial misconduct, and sleazy loophole-exploiting lawyers, and that the conduct of both sides would necessarily play a part in how we eventually decided the case, and that I was familiar with the concept of jury nullification – the two sides would race to be the first to excuse me!)

Two more jurors were excused, then two more, and the first day was done. We came back Wednesday, and two more were excused. I figured I’d “made the cut” at this point. I thought it more likely that the DA would excuse me, since he plainly was not a fan of that liberal public radio, knew I read a lot, that I held no specific religious beliefs, and that Glimmette and I had lived together for 20-plus years without the benefit of marriage. Bad juror. But, he also knew that we had once been victims of an unsolved robbery, that we have a gun in the house, that I had a very stable work history, that I sang in community choirs (my secrets are out!). Good juror.

But, then the axe fell, and I was excused. I wish I knew which side wanted me out, and why. In spite of my misgivings about being entrusted with a person’s life, on the whole I was more disappointed than relieved. All told, I thought I had a varied but balanced background that should cause both sides to feel I would be impartial – as I genuinely think I would have been. I’m sure that there is some ego involved with my disappointment, to be honest. Don’t you lawyers see? I’m the Glimmung! Powerful yet humble! All-knowing yet innocent! And excruciatingly fair, as befits my status as a Libra (not that I believe in astrology – Libras never do). How fair am I? I refused reimbursement for my mileage since the round trip to the courthouse was considerably less than my normal round trip to work - they seemed quite surprised by that!

So, I wandered out into the noontime sun, just another ordinary citizen. Went to catch lunch at an Indian buffet (a perk of being in town at lunch without the Glimmette). And now, I thought, I can buy a paper and read up on this case. Turned out I did remember it.

Supposedly, the defendant had killed the guy who he believed had killed his parents two days previously. The bodies were in their burned house, but they had been shot. Allegations of meth labs. A number of things fell into place. No wonder they hadn’t sought the death penalty even though the charges specified premeditation – talk about extenuating circumstances in the minds of a jury, and the chance for a skilled attorney to create a sense of sympathy for a young, grief-stricken defendant. This will be very interesting to follow, I thought, and was forecast to take about a week. Thursday’s paper then indicated that the trial had started Wednesday afternoon, so I must have been nearly the last juror excused.

Then, in Friday’s paper, I read that things had come to a screeching halt on Thursday. The lawyers had a high-decibel fight, and the jury had been removed while the judge tried to sort things out. The defense had withdrawn subpoenas on several prospective witnesses because the DA had successfully moved to bar any mention of the parents’ murders during the trial. The DA said that the defense had led him to believe that she would defend on the basis of “heat of the moment”. If she could create reasonable doubt about premeditation, a crucial element of the first-degree murder charge, he would walk. But once the trial started, her opening statement indicated she had switched to “he’s innocent”. The DA wanted to rescind the motion to exclude mention of the other murders, since it would relate to motive. The defense said “no way, the DA is stuck with his motion”, and said if the judge allowed the change, she needed several days to reassemble her other witnesses. The judge said he was inclined to allow the DA to withdraw his motion, but if he did he would grant a mistrial if the defense asked. They adjourned for the day.

On Friday, a mistrial was declared. And the judge said that he had probably been in error to offer the mistrial, but he felt bound by the offer once made. They'll try again in October.

So, Glimmung would have had no chance to emulate Atropos and help weave the threads of fate. Sure would have been fun to watch the shouting, though! All in all, the experience was fascinating and educational. Hope I haven’t bored you. Your fault, you asked! Oh, I almost forgot – the DA was obnoxious, and the defense lawyer had a really nice pair of legs… so if all else failed, I could have sided with the defense on that basis… :^)

[Glimmung]

mondrian5,

Good to see you!

Good joke. :^) You'll appreciate the John Cage version of LOTR if you go look. Speaking of Cage, NPR had a piece last week about an ongoing performance of a Cage work that is scheduled to last about 600 years. They built and housed an organ specifically for this purpose, since an organ can sustain a note indefinitely.

To my surprise, our local Borders had all three of these DVDs on the shelf: Tarkovsky's Nostalgia, Grave of the Fireflies, and The Saragossa Manuscript. I bought Saragossa, but it was a hard decision. It was the cheapest, and looked like it had been there quite a while. Reactions, anyone?

[michael]

Hi to All!

Glimmung,

Thanks for the great and detailed description of your jury adventure! That was really a very interesting experience. Imo it's exactly people like you that should be on that jury. Maybe lawyers got afraid you would be too conscientious in weighing the evidence and too difficult to manipulate by both sides... BTW I'm a Libra too and no, I don't believe in astrology, although like a true Libra I love beauty, justice and good food.

Which brings me to Gryka: have you been in a restaurant in downtown Chicago called Cyrano's? It is a small, very nice French place. Excellent duck in orange sauce and chocolate bread pudding. For starters they always bring you fresh bread and delicious butter with capers and sweet peppers in it. It tastes like the best fromage (Gulp). I would eat out the entire cup of that butter every time I went there!

I'm glad you and your hubby enjoyed "Hero". My mother saw it in Poland and also liked it a lot. I thought "Crouching Tiger..." was a really good movie. It was a beautiful fairy tale, very well crafted.

I never liked Michael Caine. I always thought he had eyes like a lizard and he played too often sleazeballs for me to warm up to him but I turned my opinion 180 degrees after watching "The Quiet American". Caine was unbelievable! He just inhabited this role! I like Brendan Fraser (he was wonderful in "Blast From The Past") but he seemed to be too much of a straight arrow for me to believe that in fact he had a more shady side. Somehow I didn't buy it. If you haven't seen this movie on dvd I really recommend it, because the director/cast commentary is very revealing.

Mondrian: I guess we had similar feelings about the "Solaris" commentary. It looked like Cameron was sucking up to the "great auteur" Soderbergh. It was funny when Cameron would say "Oh, this is a briliant shot, Steven, you are a genius - well I would do it totally differently but what do I know..." I guess Cameron himself has very mixed feeling about the film but was just trying to sell it to the public as a real piece of art. Anyway the commentary seemed insincere.

I don't know if you had the same impression, mondrian, but at the end of the commentary Cameron began talking about love, how people hook up together for all the wrong reasons and so on. What he said beared some striking resemblances to the discussion we once had on "Channel One"... Was Cameron paying attention then or was it just another case of parallel thinking, which is of course very possible?

I think that had Cameron made "Solaris", we would get "Titanic" on a space station with a good measure of explosions thrown in but at least we would see a symmetriad or two. Cameron never shied away from a good spectacle and I don't see that necessarily as a bad thing.

I watched again the bonus materials to the first LOTR (I'm prepairing myself for "Two Towers" dvd) and again, it was a great experience. I would just love to be part of that prodution team. I'm not the least surprised, mondrian, that you've watched the movie so many times. I completely understand that!

[Gryka]

Glimmung, your story was very well written and funny – I really felt for you when you were dismissed! I have a very limited experience with American jury system, but I'll say, your experiences confirm all my fears about it.

I wouldn't be too sure that it was the DA who kicked you out from the panel. I agree with Michael, that it's to the advantage of both sides to have on the panel people who can be manipulated. Hence, the woman who loved to be a juror would never be dismissed, she's a perfect candidate. And ditto, the defense counsel grilled you about your math/philosophy background, "[it] seemed incongruous, philosophy being so abstract and all" - what nonsense! And she knew it but in that courtroom she would be the only one dictating logic to the panel and you were in direct competition with her. The process isn't about impartiality, it's about winning the case.

I don't like the law systems around the world in general (I mean the democratic world, of course). They seem always unfair to everyone involved. Yet, I dislike the American system the most because it embraces cynicism at every step. The judges and the advocates are - by nature - political creatures and the jurors are - by design - cretins. Or the nonsense of precedents – if there is no law on the books against the alleged criminal, why not sentence him for something similar that is on the books? How is that about justice? Not to mention pleading "guilty" to get a lesser sentence. What sort of justice is that? And let me not start on the prosecutor and the defense counsel roles (think: OJ)!

BTW, I watched once a trial in Germany and I came out quite impressed. It was a criminal case (a family member got in trouble with the law) and after we finally left the courtroom I thought the judges (3 professional and 2 lay judges) discussed and addressed every single issue in the case. Their judgment was a little harsh (or appeared to me), but it wasn't unreasonable. The case was automatically appealed and the appeal was – unsurprisingly – dismissed. This was a speedy trail, I was on vacation in Germany when the crime occurred and I managed to "catch" the trial as well. Overall, the entire experience was boring. No cross-examination, when the prosecutor asked questions about the character of one witness the judge allowed just little leeway, any testimony that was not related to the case was immediately cut short, the judge not the adversaries called the experts, who were boring and testified to no end. At the end, it appeared the defendant did what he was accused of. I don't intend to praise German legal system here but, it seems reasonable to think, even based on one experience, it works better than American legal system.

Glimmung, "libertarian-leaning"? Come on, you're better than that ;^)! Oh, and you definitely made a wrong choice in Borders – that translation is horrible, you would have been better off with "Nostalgia".

Mondrian, I love the joke! I've been telling it to everyone I met today and I quite enjoy the look on their faces once I tell them the punch line. Complete confusion! :^D Very, very funny!

Michael, I've been to Cyrano's of course. They are the only restaurant I know that has Staropramen draft (it is a beer from Prague that is the best lager in the world right now – you can get the bottled version in Whole Foods around the States, I highly recommend it). I don't particularly like French food (or most European cuisines, they are simply too heavy for me) but this is indeed a good spot. My tastes run nowadays along the coast of Northern Africa and Thai and, as I found out last Sunday, Viet-Nam. I also love some Indian food. But, Thai chefs in particular are poets, imo.

I finally saw Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within – I watched it with a woman of my age, for whom it was a first contact with 3-d animation. It was fun to see her get really wrapped up in the story. At one point we had to take a break because she was so jumpy she had to go for a smoke (we don't smoke in the house) and she smokes 2 cigarettes a day. Now I see what CGI can do. Animatrix, with all the money spent on it, wasn't done that well, was it?

I agree, Michael Caine was really good in The Quiet American. I didn't really want to compare the film with the book. For some reason, Greene renders himself to creation of films that are independent from his novels, unlike Tolkien or Lem. Above all, this film showed up in the right time for me. I really wanted to believe in America again and the events around me didn't yield themselves to be interpreted in such a way.

I think Fraser a very good actor (that bumping into things was done too well!). I thought only he could pull off such a one-dimensional role and be memorable in it. I am going to rent the dvd. I wanted to do that before but so many people were on the commentary track I thought it would be a mess.

Let me get it straight: Cameron does commentary of Soderbergh's Solaris on the dvd?

P.S.: I think the Academy should start to give out another Oscar: for the extras on dvds. Especially for the commentaries. Some are terrific. Like Polanski's commentary of The Ninth Gate

[Glimmung]

Gryka,

I thought I recalled you recommending the Saragossa movie, that it was more faithful to Potocki than any of the currently available translations of the novel.

Btw, we're in Google. A search for (solaris k26) put us on the first page of results! :^) Without k26 in the search, though, we're way, way down the list of results.

[mondrian5]

Glimmung, Beautifully written description of your jury experience. It's amazing isn't it, how many things other than the truth come into consideration in a trial. I was the sole witness to a burglary once and called before the grand jury. The experience was very disheartening.
Gryka is right, we do have a court system which embraces cynicism, but sometimes we make good courtroom movies. Allow me to bridge an implied gap: what did you think of the movie "The Verdict"? I remember liking it. What's the best courtroom movie you can think of?

Michael, I do remember our discussion. The thought that Cameron may have noticed K26 hadn't occurred to me. I suppose it's possible but I thought we sounded more convincing :-)
I wonder when they make those commentaries.

The John Cage LOTR was hilarious. Perfect!

Has anyone here read Salman Rushdie's "Fury"?

[michael]

Yes, both Soderbergh and Cameron are on the commentary track to Solaris. Another thing I remembered was that they talked a bit about Lem and wondered whether he would like the movie or not. Then Cameron, if I remember correctly, said that Lem's people saw the movie and liked it. I wonder, if anyone from Lem's circle saw the movie and thought the way Lem does, how could they like the movie? I think that's impossible. Lem doesn't care for love stories but for the ideas in his book... This just sounded like propaganda to me.

They also mentioned Tarkovsky. I cannot recall exactly what was said but I know it made me feel uncomfortable. Mondrian, could you tell us what exactly was said about Tarkovsky's Solaris?

"Final Fantasy" is really a pretty decent movie. It's a pity it bombed at the box office. I liked the way Aki Ross looked. Thank goodness they didn't turn her into a big-boobed sex kitten with puffed up lips and tons of make-up. If you've checked out the extras, they showed Aki's first incarnation, which was closer to your typical "male fantasy girl". The end result Aki had a nice etheral and no-nonsense quality at the same time which worked much better.

Yesterday I've checked out at Borders a book titled "Femme Digital" - a collection of computer female portraits. God awful! Boris Vallejo's illustrations would seem like the epithomy of good taste and imagination compared to that trash. Except for one portrait of a GI Jane in a beret there wasn't one picture worth the paper they were printed on. Why do they print such shlock?! Are people really so devoid of taste and ideas?

[Yeti]

Michael,

Perhaps Claudia Schiffer would have made a better Aki Ross? Heh. Heh.

What I'd like to know is, when is the whole "girl power" phase going to end? I mean, come on. Have you ever watched Alias? Jennifer Garner gets on there and slaps around these big, bad dudes. Or, you see these computer games with the "fullsome" heroine kicking the Samoan guy in the groin or something. I mean where does all of this happen?

I know I'm going to offend Gryka, but how often does a 110 pound athletic woman kick a 300 pound goon's butt? It's just a little too unbelieveable. Perhaps they should come up with something more original, like having a handsome man arrive just in the nick of time before the beautiful woman is about to be killed or hurt or something.

[michael]

Yeti,

I think the problem is that in this world "manliness" is the yardstick which we use to measure others worth. This is still a patriachal society and women, trying to be an active part of the society, evaluate themselves using male criteria. I think it would be much better if this world became more feminine and didn't force women in a subconscious sort of way to act like tough men. Although weight and built isn't an entirely good measure of ones ability to kick someone's @$$ (take Bruce Lee for exammple) I agree that those tough gals beating up huge guys is rather silly. Plus it still objectifies women, because men just love watching well built, leather clad beauties, don't they? It's a very sexy image. I've never watched "Alias", apart from some ads, but I get the idea. I guess a lot of guys, whether they are aware of it or not, think "Wow! That girl is so strong and agile, she must be a real tigress in bed!" So in the end this is less about female empowerment and more about male fantasies. On the other hand, women can watch quite a lot of sweaty male torsos and chiseled chins covered with a handsome stubble on tv, so there's a lot of male objectification going on as well. Probably both sides are getting their required daily dose of "jollies" on tv. It's good that female sexual needs are being now openly recognized. You know what? I actually don't mind watching BOTH sides - men and women strutting their stuff on tv, as long as it isn't demeaning. I hate watching young male models at fashion shows though. They just look stupid. All those pouty little boys, pretending to be adult and suave... Ridiculous.

[Gryka]

I completely agree with you Yeti, ;^), it is far more believable when Jet Li (145 lbs and 5’6”) beats up the same dudes (although by dozens not individually) Jennifer Garner beats up. The difference is his Wushu championship in the beginning of the 80s and that 35 lbs he’s got over her. ;^D

BTW, do you know this woman? Agata Wrobel or stroll down to the bottom of the page to see the weights being lifted

P.S.: Glimmung, Michael is right, the new color of the font is a little difficult to read. But nice...

[michael]

Gryka,

Is Agata Wrobel still a woman? She looks more like a macho butcher to me. I can imagine her guzzling beer and beating up her husband (or boyfriend - whatever applies).

On the other hand, I didn't have a problem believing that Linda Hamilton in T2 was a lean mean killing machine. Yet she still was a woman. I love the sequence in T2 when she escapes from the psychiatric ward...

[Yeti]

Linda Hamilton is a hottie.

I love the idea of Terminator. One of my favorite scenes in T2 is when Arnold gets impaled by the T-1000, and you see the lightning bolts and the red eyes go out. Then, very dramatically, the positronic brain finds an alternate power source, and he comes back to life, removes the spud bar, throws it down and looks at it momentarily, and then picks himself up and continues his mission.

Sort of like "Jaws" in the older James Bond films. He was one of my favorite characters as well. I especially liked when he would get slammed into a brick wall, destroying the wall, and then get up, brush himself off, and continue on as if nothing very severe had happened.

Jaws....now there is a real man's man!

[michael]

Terminator vs. Jaws... now that's an interesting idea.