Ferguson Video: Michael Brown Shooting

The sobering thing about life today is that so much of what we do for good or for bad is captured by video, whether it be private, business or governmental.

Cell phone video taken by Ferguson resident Piaget Crenshaw and shown by CNN on Monday provides more footage of the aftermath of the Michael Brown shooting. Crenshaw described the scene to CNN, in which she said that police officer Darren Wilson shot Brown multiple times after Brown had ceased running and turned around.

“I knew this was not right, I knew police should not even have been chasing this young boy and firing at the same time,” Crenshaw told CNN. “That fact that he got shot in the face, it was something that clicked in me, I thought, somebody else needs to see this. This isn’t right.”

Crenshaw said there was a struggle at the police car in which it seemed Wilson was trying to draw Brown in. Brown took off running, and Crenshaw said Wilson began firing; when Brown turned around, he was shot multiple times. Crenshaw said that her accounting of the incident concurred with what she knew of the autopsy report, which found that Brown had been shot from the front. “When [Brown] turned toward the cop was when he let off the most shots,” Crenshaw said.

Movie Reviews: Get on Up, Clue

Get on Up
directed by Tate Taylor

Like Ray Charles but only more so James Brown was a larger than life musical figure who would likely be worshipped as a demigod if we lived back during pre-Christian times. There are very few people who had the influence that he did on popular music, not only in America but across the world. From Africa to Central America, the Caribbean to the Middle East, Europe to the Pacific there weren't very many people who didn't know who James Brown was. There weren't many popular or even more esoteric musicians who weren't influenced by him in ways great or small. People like Prince, Fela, Michael Jackson, vast numbers of soul and funk musicians, The Talking Heads, and many many more people or genres would not exist as they did then or do now without James Brown. James Brown had a pretty long run as someone making original music, maybe even as someone making high quality original music. I would argue that he was doing it to death for at least fifteen to twenty years, maybe even longer. That's unusual, in a music business that has always tended to reward the new, fresh and young. 

James Brown's impact went far beyond the musical of course. Along with such people as Miles Davis and Nat King Cole, Brown made it clear that a dark skinned black man could be not just a musical icon but a pop culture one, in a non-demeaning and even sexual manner. This was revolutionary stuff.

When Brown wrote and sang songs like How you gonna get respect? (when you haven't cut your process yet) or Say it Loud (I'm Black and I'm proud) he both channeled and inspired the nascent black self-love and black power movements of the sixties and seventies. Brown was a mess of contradictions. He gave women singers front lining status but could also be abusive publicly and privately. He talked of black power and endorsed Nixon. He spoke of mutual respect but ran his bands in a manner that let band members know he considered them all interchangeable and expendable. Brown constantly fined musicians for an array of mistakes or miscues, whether it be a note played a quarter second too long, arriving late to practice, a wrong dance step, a solo he didn't order or shoes that weren't properly shined. Practices were constant, grueling and extensive even by the demanding standards of the day. Brown knew exactly what he wanted and would figuratively and occasionally literally beat the band until he got it. As author Charles Shaar Murry wrote, Jimi Hendrix would not have lasted more than five minutes in Brown's band. Maximum.

So basically it would be very difficult for any single film to capture all of the facets of Brown's oft complicated personality, legacy and music. Get On Up makes a game try at doing this but in my view fell a little short. I've thought more about this and I don't blame the director/producers as much as I initially did. There's just so much to write or learn about Brown that it would be difficult to pick out one theme. The director decided to make the central theme of Brown's life his turbulent friendship with Bobby Byrd.

Get on Up jumps around chronologically, something I didn't like that much. Chadwick Boseman, despite being much taller and lankier than the relatively short Brown, did a masterful job at bringing across Brown's joys and depressions, his raspy voice and insistence on having non-intimates address him by his surname. We see him meet his lifelong friend and sounding board Bobby Byrd (Nelsan Ellis) while both are doing a stint in prison. Brown's charisma, audacity and financial savvy propel him to become the leader of what was Byrd's group. It becomes Brown's group, something that is made official in an ugly way when Brown's manager Ben Bart (Dan Akroyd) gets the group signed to King records as James Brown and his Famous Flames. Byrd is relegated to on stage valet, dancer, second singer and occasional pianist. Generally speaking though Byrd holds to the famous Dirty Harry dictum of "A man's gotta know his limitations". Byrd knew that whatever it took to be a star, Brown had it and he did not.

The films shows that this star power, this belief in self even when everything else was going against him is what helped Brown survive and escape from uncaring and occasionally abusive parents (Lenny Henry, Viola Davis) and work in a brothel run by an aunt (Octavia Spencer). The scenes with the younger Brown (played by twins Jamarion and Jordan Scott) are the film's most emotionally engaging. We see the ups and downs of Brown's life, including a tempestuous marriage with his wife Dee Dee (Jill Scott), tense relations with his primary soloist Maceo (Craig Robinson) and a surreal meeting with Little Richard (Brandon Smith). But as mentioned, the Byrd-Brown relationship is the key link between all the different time periods. I thought this was a decent enough film but it could have been better. It breaks the 4th wall quite a bit. A wrong note is played when Brown appears more distraught by the death of his manager than that of his oldest son Teddy. All in all I guess I'm glad I saw the film but it wasn't special to me. I'm rarely without Brown's music wherever I am but I did listen to it a bit more after seeing this film. Fun fact, most people don't know that most if not all of the children singing in Say It Loud.. were actually white or Asian not black, as the film depicts. The film is likely worth seeing if only for the music. Because the film breaks the 4th wall as often as it does, it takes you out of the suspension of disbelief. It reminds you that Boseman, talented as he is, is playing a role.
TRAILER

Clue
directed by Jonathan Lynn

On one, admittedly low level, some people men may enjoy this older film simply for the implausibly and impossibly low cut or clingy outfits worn by the French maid Yvette and the sultry Miss Scarlett. And there's absolutely nothing wrong with that I might add. But even putting that aside I thought this to be a fun enjoyable movie. It did not do very well at the box office because of a mishmash of contradictory endings but later gained some fame as a comic cult film. Clue was primarily held together by the sly drollness and manic energy of Tim Curry. But Clue had an ensemble cast with many actors known for their comic timing. Everyone got a chance to shine. It's based on the old whodunnit board game which I doubt that very many people play any more. Do people even still purchase board games? I don't know. But there was a time back in the day when people did. The film's basic theme is an Agatha Christie type murder mystery at an isolated mansion in the early 50s. Six very shady strangers have all received an invitation to a dinner party, one which they dare not refuse. The guests, who have been assigned aliases, include:

• Mrs. White (Madeleine Kahn) a self assured multiple widow who calmly insists that she had nothing to do with her husbands' mysterious disappearances and/or deaths. Accused of luring men to their deaths like a spider with flies she responds that flies are where men are most vulnerable.
• Miss Scarlett (Lesley Ann Warren) an extroverted lady of the night and D.C. madam who caters to politicians, members of the military industrial complex and rich businessmen.
• Colonel Mustard (Martin Mull) a pompous, smug, officious military man who became well off during the war.
• Professor Plum (Christopher Lloyd) (my favorite character) a sex obsessed UN psychiatrist who always manages to be next to Miss Scarlett, Mrs. White or Yvette. When he sees that Miss Scarlett's car has broken down he offers her a ride to the mansion. That's not the only ride he would like to give.
• Mrs. Peacock (Eileen Brennan) a senator's wife who may not be the ditzy dame she seems to be. Some people talk a lot because they're nervous. Some have other reasons.
• Mr. Green (Michael McKean) a nerdy State Department employee who is homosexual, feckless, and stereotypically frightened of everything.

These people are met at the house by the fastidious butler Wadsworth (Tim Curry), the va-va voom maid Yvette (Colleen Camp) and the silent cook (Kellye Nakahara). Wadsworth, and Curry really has fun with this character, explains to the guests after dinner that they are each being blackmailed by his employer, Mr. Boddy (Lee Ving). Mr. Boddy discovered all of their deepest secrets and rather than turn them in to the authorities, like any good American he decided to make some money from it. Wadsworth explains this to the guests in the presence of Mr. Boddy who is obviously not too pleased with this turn of events. But Boddy is one cool customer. Giving each of the guests weapons he tells them that if he is arrested, he'll expose them all. But if one of them will kill Wadsworth right now then they can all go on as if none of this ever happened. After all Wadsworth hangs around with communists (that's what Boddy was blackmailing him and his wife about) so whoever kills him will be doing his or her patriotic duty. Boddy turns out the lights. There's a thump, a scream and a shot. Someone turns the lights back on but it's not Wadsworth who's dead. It's Boddy.

This kicks off a mystery as the group of people try to figure out who killed Boddy and how it was done. As other people start to drop like flies, the mystery thickens. For me anyway this was a tremendously funny film. It's full of visual puns and gags, tons of one liners and double entendres and a fair amount of Three Stooges style slapstick. The dialogue is something else. It moves very quickly. Some of it, such as a famous monologue by Mrs. White, was improvised by the actors. I still fall out laughing whenever I watch Wadsworth flawlessly imitate Green in a key moment. There are plenty of lines from this film which I still find myself using today in certain work situations such as when the mulish Colonel Mustard states "There's still one thing I don't understand." and the other guests sneer "One thing?" or someone will say "..so to make a long story short.." and everyone else interrupts "Too late!" There are three different endings to the story. The theater versions all had just one different ending. On the DVD all three endings are included. The first two endings are set up with "This is how it could have happened" while the third and most satisfying ending is introduced with "But here's how it really happened". As mentioned not all the conclusions line up 100% with what actually happened in the film but if you're the kind of person to nitpick over things like that and miss out on the fun and silliness this may not be the film for you. Otherwise if you're perceptive and notice things you may indeed watch closely to see just who had access to the lead pipe, how many shots were fired from the revolver and who wasn't there when everyone ran to the kitchen. 
TRAILER

President Obama and Foreign Policy: Et tu, Hillary?

I could never ever ever be a politician. There are just too many times that you must smile and eat a big bowl of crap while pretending that it tastes good. And if you're good at pulling off that trick you can expect that many more such bowls will be delivered to you. h/t The Wire. You must occasionally pretend to be all things to all people, be on all sides of any issue at once and come up smelling like roses even as you're wading knee deep in the sewage of backroom deals and donor stroking. One of the most important skills you must have as a politician could be to never take anything personally. It's just business, after all. Everyone is self-interested. Hillary Clinton and President Barack Obama are consummate politicians. And Mrs. Clinton is basically running an as yet so far formally undeclared campaign for the 2016 Presidential election. I think that with two years and change left in the Obama Administration it's a little early for her to be getting her name out there but she apparently operates on the principle of don't put off until tomorrow what you could be doing today. 

As a key member of the Obama Administration, former Senator, and Secretary of State, Mrs. Clinton, should she run, would be wise depending on the President's popularity around 2016, to keep her options open on whether her Administration would represent a break from the Obama Administration or a continuation of Obama policies. Recently, Mrs. Clinton sent a very deliberate message that at least as far as foreign policy is concerned, she would do things differently than President Obama.

This signal was sent loud and clear in a recent interview with centrist-right author and correspondent for The Atlantic, Jeffrey Goldberg. You can read it here in its entirety. I urge you to do so. It's long but gives you a great idea of how much Mrs. Clinton had to bite her tongue during her stint in the Obama Administration or perhaps more accurately how much she might want possible voters to believe she had to bite her tongue. Although she talks about how smart the President is, she unhesitatingly called out his foreign affairs principle by name saying:

• Great nations need organizing principles, and “Don’t do stupid stuff” is not an organizing principle. It may be a necessary brake on the actions you might take in order to promote a vision.  
• "You know, when you’re down on yourself, and when you are hunkering down and pulling back, you’re not going to make any better decisions than when you were aggressively, belligerently putting yourself forward.” 

Clinton openly identified with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu's refusal to countenance an independent Palestinian state saying that:

• If I were the prime minister of Israel, you’re damn right I would expect to have control over security, because even if I’m dealing with [Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud] Abbas, who is 79 years old, and other members of Fatah, who are enjoying a better lifestyle and making money on all kinds of things, that does not protect Israel from the influx of Hamas or cross-border attacks from anywhere else. With Syria and Iraq, it is all one big threat. So Netanyahu could not do this in good conscience. 

She also hinted that ISIS might not have become the problem that it is now had the US armed Syrian rebels. In short Clinton as President would tack a bit more to the right than President Obama has. It's not fair to uncritically proclaim, as some have stated, that she sees him as a wimp, but it is fair to infer that she would have a more aggressive foreign policy and would not be as cautious about the use of military power. It's amusing to read what Mrs. Clinton had to say about President Obama considering he has stretched executive authority on drone use far beyond what the second President Bush thought prudent, attacked Libya, and is currently at the time limit for the War Powers Act regarding intervention in Iraq, but life is strange. Obama loyalist David Axelrod not so subtly tweaked Mrs. Clinton for her "stupid" vote for the Iraq war, a signal that President Obama and his inner circle might be more than a bit peeved about Mrs. Clinton's interview.

Now it's not unusual for politicians to work with or even include on their team people they don't like. JFK wasn't very fond of LBJ. Eisenhower was coolly contemptuous of Nixon. Nobody liked Hoover. So it goes. And it only makes sense that Clinton would hint that she would chart her own path should she become President.way. Still, given the nastiness shown between Obama and Clinton in the 2008 Democratic primary, I was a little surprised that the President welcomed her into his Administration in the first place, let alone gave her such a high profile position as Secretary of State. If I were the President I wouldn't have hired her. And if advisers claimed I had to do so I would have given her a relatively low profile unattractive position and then micromanaged the hell out of her, all the while leaking to the press how disappointed "high ranking officials" were with her work so far. But that's just me. I would not have wished to help her burnish her resume.

It is a delicate balance to seek to succeed someone for whom you worked. Show that you're your own (wo)man but at the same time show that you're going to provide continuity for successful policies. The issue with Clinton's criticism is not that she made it. The issue is that it hearkens back to charges she made before and which Republicans make today, that the President is in over his head and substitutes sloganeering for action. It's not necessarily a fair critique but I wonder if the President, who has been accused of being rabbit eared about criticism, is at at least in part reacting to such feedback by intervening in Iraq without Congressional authority when just a few months earlier he claimed that he needed such authority to intervene in Syria. If Obama's approval ratings were higher I doubt Clinton would be running her mouth. But as they say about politics, if you want a friend, get a dog. 

So what do you think?

Are Clinton's criticisms just par for the course and no big deal?

Is Clinton disloyal?

Is she putting her name out there too early?

Music Reviews: The Coasters, Valerie June

The Coasters

The Coasters were a 50s era black rock-n-roll/doo-wop singing group who had a wonderful mix of tenor, baritone and bass voices. Musicians who were associated with The Coasters included people like later saxophone R&B god, King Curtis and guitarist Adolph Jacobs. Although they were not strictly speaking band members, it is impossible to discuss or appreciate The Coasters without giving tremendous credit to their primary songwriters and producers, Jerry Leiber and Mike Stoller. Similar to Greek-American R&B/blues musician Johnny Otis, who assimilated into black culture and black music so thoroughly that he married a black woman, described himself as black and lived on the black side of the segregation line, Leiber and Stoller had a keen appreciation of the popular black music and culture of their time. Some people, even members of The Coasters themselves, were surprised that the duo had such a pulse on black humor and musical stylings. Perhaps this is because to a lesser extent Jewish Americans were also cultural outsiders and had their own rich tradition of using sardonic humor to mask social commentary. In any event The Coasters' voices and instrumentation were a perfect fit for Leiber's and Stoller's lyrics and music. Stoller often composed at the piano. He played piano on some recordings. The band name came from the fact that the members were all from the Los Angeles area but did not achieve success until they signed with New York based Atlantic records. Some of the early Coasters' music was actually recorded by the group The Robins, two of whose members became founding members of the Coasters. Leiber and Stoller wrote for the Robins as well. They also wrote Hound Dog and quite a few other pop, rock, and soul songs.

As mentioned, much of The Coasters' music could be understood as fun uptempo dance music. Much of it had hidden meanings. If you happen to be fond of deep male voices this could be the best group you haven't heard of as The Coasters had very prominent bass and baritone parts sung by such band members as Dub Jones, Billy Guy and Bobby Nunn. I'm talking DEEP. Even the group's primary lead/tenor singer Carl Gardner, had a very resonant voice the likes of which is a little bit harder to find today. The song Riot in Cell Block #9 has bass vocalist Bobby Nunn singing lead. It lifted the sound effects from the radio show "Gangbusters". It also swiped the then popular blues stop time riff from Willie Dixon's Hoochie Coochie Man to paint a picture of a prison riot. Although the song is somewhat humorous and does not explicitly mention race, most people in 1950s segregated America probably didn't miss the overtones of a racial uprising or slave revolt. This could be why when white singer Wanda Jackson did a cover of it, she changed the POV so that the song was glorifying the brave (and presumably white) prison guards instead of the (obviously black) prisoners who were telling their friends to "pass the dynamite cause the fuse is lit". Go figure.
Hearing Down in Mexico now always makes me visualize Jessica Alba or Salma Hayek in some low rent dangerous desperado domicile doing a down and dirty dance. I first heard the song as a kid and only recently as an adult realized that the song's subject matter was really about a trip to a south of the border house of ill repute, a subject matter that later bands like ZZ Top would return to frequently. Leiber and Stoller were inspired to give a musical "latin" tinge to the story, in part by living around the Los Angeles Latino population. 

The songs Run Red Run and What about Us are semi-explicit social commentary about class and racial inequities. Leiber and Stoller had been reading about Nat Turner, among other things. I like the harmony on Run Red Run. Along Came Jones reimagines a black hero for television shows. Framed, which strictly speaking was a Robins song, is another piece about an unfair justice system. Smokey Joe's Cafe details the problems involved in trying to flirt with someone else's lady. It's similar to what Lynyrd Skynryd would do a few decades later with Gimme Three Steps. Little Egypt finds the hero making an honest woman out of a stripper. Searchin, Yakety Yak and Charlie Brown are fun slice of life songs aimed squarely at the teen market. The narrator may be a leering lech in Youngblood but it's all in good fun, mostly. Poison Ivy is I suppose what you might call a safe sex warning song. The rap group The Jungle Brothers later used the bass riff from Shopping for Clothes. I LOVE this song. Everyone should occasionally take the time to "stand in the mirror and dig yourself". Shopping for Clothes is just the song you need if you're cruising down the main strip in your lead sled. I really like The Coasters sound and production. It amazes me that music recorded back in the 50s and 60s sounds so good today. It's not too loud. It has more bass response in the vocals than is currently popular. Of course I don't listen to much modern music so if there is anyone out there like that today chances are I wouldn't know of them. My take on much of modern R&B is that the women all sing like they're in a competition to see who can put the most vowels in any given word while the men generally sound as if someone has grabbed or crushed two of their most critical body parts. Anyway, my sonic prejudices aside I always liked The Coasters and hope you do as well.






Valerie June

It's funny how things work out. I meant to mention this singer and musician quite some time ago. Her debut major label release "Pushin' Against a Stone" came out in 2013. I purchased the CD back then but just like with books sometimes it takes me a while to get around to things. So it goes. I was reminded of her from reading about her experiences and receptions at some tour or another. So I dug out the cd and gave it a listen. 

I am fascinated by accents, especially those of women (heh-heh) and with the first note she sings it is very obvious that June is from the South. I like that she is not trying to sound as if she's from anywhere else. Actually I don't think she could. Her very strong accent reminds me of relatives I haven't seen in decades and of some I'll never see again. Accent aside she has a reedy, quirky, somewhat nasally voice that may not be to everyone's taste. It took me a while to get used to it but now I think it's something really special. Her intonation and vocal choices are miles apart from most modern R&B singers, though like the best of them she also comes out of the church tradition. I don't say she's better, just different. She's not overusing melisma. I can't really compare June to many other people. I will have to go back and listen some more. The only musicians who immediately come to mind are women like Dionne Farris, Rhiannon Giddens, Dolly Parton, Macy Gray, or Lauryn Hill. June describes her sound as "organic roots moonshine music". I guess that says it all. Labels don't really apply. She seamlessly mixes and crosses such genres as soul, R&B, gospel, country, blues, black string band music, folk, bluegrass and more. She's also a guitarist and multi-instrumentalist. You can hear her instrumental skills a bit more easily on the solo or acoustic cuts.

The cd is recorded well. There's clarity without too much volume or treble. Such heavy hitters as keyboardist Booker T. of Stax fame and guitarist Dan Auerbach of the Black Keys guest on this release. There might be a tad too much Auerbach as he also gets songwriting and production credits and apparently takes a few solos but again overall this is a solid piece of musical work. I will have to go back and find June's self-produced cd's but the way it usually goes is either they won't be in stock or will only be available for insane amounts of money. Although the cd may put you in mind of everything from 60s beehive bedecked girl soul revues to Appalachian front porch singing groups and more I found that the different styles all fit together: primarily because of June's truly distinctive voice. If you're open to music that's a bit off the beaten path you could do worse than to give this a listen. It's nice to see someone make a successful debut singing in their own voice and not letting their image become overly sexualized. For my money Somebody to Love and You Can't Be Told are the cd standouts! Somebody to Love could be an answer song to King Floyd's Handle with Care. I am looking forward to hearing what June does next.

Somebody to Love   Wanna Be On Your Mind Pushin Against A Stone 
You Can't Be Told  On My Way  Tennessee Time (Live)  
Working Woman Blues (Live)  The Hour

Cane Corso Dogs Kill Livonia Jogger

I have a dog. She's a German Shepherd. She's about average size for a female German Shepherd, weighing in at around 72lbs or so, but she is still extremely aggressive, protective and selfish of what she thinks of as her territory and pack. She's big enough to make unwanted solicitors go away which is fine by me. It's highly unlikely she is anywhere near as dangerous as she thinks she is. But she still has a high prey drive and loves to chase smaller creatures. She becomes agitated when someone she does not know approaches me or other humans she's accepted as part of her pack. And though my dog is smart for a dog, the smartest dog is still downright dumb compared to a human. So, with all that said I never ever ever let my dog run free off leash outside of my fenced backyard. And since she's figured out how to open the gate, I still have to keep an eye on her if she's in the back yard. The world is full of dangers, whether it be other dogs, trigger happy police or other armed people "standing their ground", cars, kids, etc. For both my dog's safety and my own it's best if she's on the leash and I do all the thinking for both of us. Because otherwise if she's off leash and trying to figure out the world on her own, each of us could get into a lot of trouble. A dog, even a midsize animal like a Shepherd, can under certain circumstances be quite dangerous. Responsible dog owners know this and take steps to ensure everyone's safety. But irresponsible dog owners don't take the proper steps to do that, whether it be training, control of the animal, or even better making sure that they have the correct animal for their needs. This is what happened in Michigan recently.

You don't have to be licensed to purchase any sort of dog. You can be a responsible management consultant who keeps his dog on leash and obeys the relevant laws and codes. Or you can be an illegal immigrant couple who let their dogs run free off leash throughout the neighborhood scaring people, biting them and finally killing a person. Mr. Qualgiata and Mrs. Lucaj are now facing second degree murder charges because their two Cane Corso dogs killed a Livonia jogger while he was jogging past their home.

The Metamora couple whose dogs killed a jogger last week are in the U.S. illegally and were facing imminent deportation at the time of the attack. Valbona Lucaj, 44, got into the country from Albania in January 1997 after bribing an immigration officer into granting her asylum, according to federal court filings. Her Italian husband, Sebastiano Quagliata, 45, arrived a month earlier as a tourist and never left. The two are potentially facing involuntary manslaughter charges after their Cane Corso dogs attacked and killed Craig Sytsma, 46, of Livonia on July 23 as he jogged past their home on a rural Metamora Township road. Lapeer County prosecutors are expected to announce a decision on criminal charges this week. It is unclear what, if any impact, their citizenship status will have on possible prosecution. The couple have been fighting deportation for years since immigration officials discovered that Lucaj had paid $3,000 to an immigration officer in New York to grant her asylum. That asylum was then granted to Quagliata because he was her spouse. LINK

Now there is plenty of blame to go around. If the federal government had been doing its job in a prompt and efficient manner these two lowlifes would have been kicked out of my country a long time ago. But also if the local and state agencies, ie. the prosecutors, had been doing their job the dogs would have been seized and destroyed and/or the couple would have been arrested before this final tragedy took place. I am actually less concerned with their immigration status than with a pattern of behavior that shows the couple simply didn't care what their dogs did. This fatal mauling was not the first time that the dogs had attacked humans. And in the neighborhood the couple was apparently well known for letting their dogs run free. If you don't give a dog something to do and a sense that you are the one in charge, the dog will make up its own job. And it may even start to think that it is in charge. This is a horrible thing to have happen. And with an animal which possesses the size and aggression of a Cane Corso it's akin to leaving a loaded gun out around a child.  LINK

I don't jog as much as I used to because of knee issues. But I still go for pretty long walks with my dog in the subdivision or the woods/farmland which are behind it. Dogs being dogs there is plenty of barking and raised hackles when we encounter other dogs. But there's only been two occasions in the decade or so that I've had my dog that we've been attacked by other dogs. In one of those cases the other dog stopped short and ran when my dog went into full beast mode. In the other incident I applied my boot to a place on the other dog's anatomy where I thought it would do the most good. I had words with the owner in the second situation and did indeed file a complaint with the authorities. But neither of those two dogs which attacked us were Cane Corsos. If you are unarmed and are attacked by such animals there's not going to be too much that you can do. You are going to get bit. You may not survive. 

So although I have a gooey soft heart for animals in general and canids in particular it's critical that the Cane Corsos involved in this attack be destroyed. It's not their fault but all the same they have demonstrated that they are too dangerous to be allowed to live. The behavior patterns they've shown prove that they will continue to harass and attack passers-by. And as far as the owners, I think that second-degree murder charges are exactly the appropriate charges. If found guilty they could get up to life in prison. I am not at all bothered by that. I just wish that everyone, local, state and federal, had paid more attention to the situation before it reached this point. Having a dog is a responsibility. You must be in control of the animal at all times. If you can't do that and/or are deep down scared of the dog then don't get it.

Thoughts?

Is 2nd degree murder the correct charge here?

Is there a problem with off leash dogs in your community?

Movie Reviews: Hercules, Sabotage, Transcendence

Hercules
directed by Brett Rattner

While this graphic novel adapted film starring Dwayne Johnson was better than the other Hercules movie that recently appeared (you shouldn’t see that film unless you are trying to kill your brain cells) it wasn't quite a must see film for a few reasons. This film is still under the spell of Zack Snyder’s 300. I am too but does that mean I want to see it made over and over again by every single director? Probably not. Also 300 had a well deserved “R” rating. Because it’s aiming for the family crowd, Hercules has a “PG-13” rating. It has a few iffy scenes but despite war and death this is not a supremely graphic film. Second, maybe we just live in a cynical age but the mythical Hercules was a great tragic hero of supernatural origins. As the half-human son of Zeus, king of gods and men, Hercules attracted special hatred from Zeus’ sister-wife, the goddess Hera. It didn't help matters that Hercules' mother gave him the name "Glory of Hera" to try to mollify the goddess. Hera was not mollified. Hera tried to murder Hercules in his cradle. She later drove him to a fit of madness during which he murdered his wife and children. In repentance Hercules performed the 12 labors. Hercules once impregnated 50 women in a single night. Hercules was the ancestor of the Spartans. Eventually Hercules was killed by his jealous wife who was either wrongly convinced Hercules was having an affair, trying to prevent Hercules from having an affair, or manipulated into doing so accidentally by an enemy, depending on which myth you prefer. The human Hercules died. The demigod Hercules ascended to Olympus. 

But this film has few supernatural elements. Almost every myth is revealed as people exaggerating, lying or simply being mistaken about key events. Unlike the movie King Arthur, which also showed a grittier deglamorized version of a central Western myth, Hercules suffers from this approach. There’s a resulting loss of majesty which limits the film. Dwayne Johnson is literally larger than life. Why not give him a film that measures up?  

Still, Johnson impresses as the film doesn’t require him to do much more than strut around, drop some boasts, glower at his enemies and of course engage in the physical stunts which he made famous as “The Rock”. He takes his role very seriously. I suppose this is an example of color blind casting as the Black/Samoan Johnson plays the European Greek hero Hercules but it really wasn’t that jarring given Johnson's appearance. Russian model Irina Shayk, who could probably pass for Brazilian or Black/Biracial , has a brief role as Hercules’ doomed wife. She can smell what the Hercules is cooking!

The film opens some time after Hercules has completed his 12 labors. He’s a mercenary who leads a small band of brothers (and one sister). He claims to fight for money but we all know that anyone who says that doubtless has a hidden core of decency. Some say that the orphaned Hercules must be the son of Zeus to have done all that he’s accomplished. This is what his hype man, charioteer and nephew Iolaus (Reece Ritchie) is always telling people. Amphiaraus (Ian McShane) is the older world weary adviser who claims to be a seer. Atalanta (Ingrid Berdal) is the woman archer in the form fitting leather bustier. Heh-heh. Autolycus (Rufus Sewell) is the savvy #2. And Tydeus (Aksel Hennie) is the wild man who thinks he’s a wolf. He doesn't speak but is thoroughly devoted to Hercules. Princess Ergenia (Rebecca Ferguson in clothing that is a little less form fitting but more diaphanous) seeks out Hercules and his group. The Princess wants to hire the mercenaries to lead and train the armies of her father King Cotys (John Hurt) to protect Thrace against the depredations of the evil warlord Rhesus (Tobias Santelmann). People say Rhesus has centaurs and magic.

Hercules agrees to work for King Cotys. Hercules comes to take a paternal liking to Ergenia’s son and heir to the throne while Ergenia may have an earthier interest in Hercules (her husband is dead). And the King is as pleased as punch to have the grand hero Hercules helping to lead his men to (hopeful) victory. There are plenty of twists and turns, most of which are predictable. Hercules might be the strongest of men but no one ever said he was the smartest. Joseph Fiennes has a small role as someone from Hercules' past. I liked the idea that it takes more than weapons and equipment to make an army and more than beating up people to make a hero. The film features a pretty exciting setpiece attack on a shieldwall. This film was a worthwhile entry in the whole swords and sandals genre which I enjoy ever so much but it wasn’t an A+ submission. I would give it a solid B. Not everything needs to be Braveheart, 300, or LOTR. Johnson’s charisma and extreme dedication to diet and exercise shine through but there's not much more to this film. It's fun though and maybe sometimes that's all you need from a summer film. So enjoy if battles, derring do and feats of strength are your thing. TRAILER

Sabotage
directed by David Ayer

If you send your dog to hunt a wolf what happens if the dog decides on second thought it would rather be a wolf? You've got a serious problem if that happens. After all, unlike the wolf, the dog knows all your bad habits and weak spots. You actually trust the dog which is something a bad dog might be able to use to its advantage. Sabotage raises that question but the film doesn't really give us a classic cat and mouse game between the good guy gone bad and the real good guy who has noticed some anomalies and is closing in fast. It tries to do that for a short period of time but inexplicably drops that approach. As a result it's difficult to identify with any of the protagonists, even if you think you know who the "good" guy is. Or at least it was difficult for me to cheer anyone on. YMMV. Everything is ambiguous. David Ayer also wrote Training Day and directed End of Watch. You can see some of the same themes that Ayer used in those films used in this one but for some reason they seem muddled here.

John Breacher (Schwarzenegger) is a legendary DEA commander who commands a DEA strike force team. They are described as undercover agents but only one of them is ever seen in a true undercover role. And with one exception they don't seem to be in the business of arresting people either. No, they're really paramilitary Special Forces type operators. They kill people. And they're good at it. Generally speaking the characters all run together and you don't get a chance to make too many individual distinctions among them. So their names aren't really that important. There's big white guy, even bigger white guy, serious white guy, crazy white guy, intelligent white guy, smooth black guy, crazy white girl, etc. Each of them have nicknames like Sugar, Grinder, Monster, Tripod, etc. They all seem to have an excess of testosterone, including the sole woman. For example Lizzy (Mirielle Enos), tells a team member who is not her husband that she can outfight and outf*** him. This is banter. Maybe. The team, including Lizzy, also spends a lot of its down time in bars and strip joints where boasting, excessive drinking and fights -with other people- are normal behavior. These are bada$$es who might have adapted a bit too well to their violent milieu. Although they squabble and harass each other they all have trust and something approaching love for Breacher. It's a family and he's their Daddy.

The team gets an assignment to raid a drug house which has tremendous amount of money hidden within. Lizzy is undercover and lets the team in. After wasting the bad guys and losing one of their own the team steals some of the money (about $10 million) and destroys the rest of the cash (significantly more than $10 million). It's initially unclear as to whether they are doing this for themselves or for higher ups. What is clear is that when they go to retrieve the stolen liberated cash it's gone. More disturbingly the DEA bosses somehow know that money was taken from the larger stash. They even roughly know the amount. Apparently this theft was unauthorized. Breacher and his team are separated and grilled. No one admits to anything, Breacher is placed on restricted desk duty while his team is suspended. Eventually the suspension is lifted. The team's internal trust and competence is badly damaged. Before Breacher can get it fully restored one of the team members dies in what appears to be a grisly accident. This accident attracts the attention of hardnosed homicide investigators Brentwood (Olivia Williams) and Jackson (Harold Perrineau). Other team members start to die in spectacularly gruesome violent ways. Obviously someone is hunting them. Is it the DEA? Is it the Mexican Cartels who want their money back? Who can they trust? This is basically an updated version of Agatha Christie's And Then There Were None but without the Old World panache.

I thought that Williams and Enos should have switched roles. Williams has the tough lady look and sound down much more than the slight Enos. Enos took an over the top approach that I didn't find all that convincing, though it was somewhat entertaining. This is a very graphically violent movie. There are a lot of shootouts. Whoever is killing the team members not only knows what they were doing but intended to inflict the maximum amount of pain and humiliation. The camera lingers over a few killings. Generally speaking I like the film's look. There's a good mix of colors and settings. As mentioned it's difficult to tell who if anyone you should be rooting for. Even after one of the big reveals you might wonder if that's really the bad guy. Schwarzenegger is the name to draw viewers but this is really an ensemble movie. Other cast members include Joe Manganiello, Sam Worthington, Kevin Vance, Josh Holloway, Max Martini, and Terrence Howard. I recently read an online question asking why does Howard often sound like he's on the verge of crying when he talks in many movies. Evidently in real life Howard might indeed have a reason to shed a few tears. Heh-heh. All in all this was a mediocre/decent action movie. The ending was semi-satisfactory. It's just that getting there didn't make a lot of sense to me.  TRAILER





Transcendence
directed by Wally Pfister

This movie was thoroughly bad. Disappointing. Frustrating. Irritating. Just all around bad. It was so bad that it actually amazes me that when the director, producers, writers and studio execs reviewed the finished product that they actually thought releasing this film unchanged was a good idea. It seems as if someone would have raised his hand and said "Guys, we might need to reshoot this and rewrite that." Then again, jobs are hard to come by these days. At work I've kept my mouth shut sometimes when I shouldn't have done so. But I like to think I'd speak up if my department was about to produce something that was equally as bad as Transcendence. I don't mean that the acting was particularly horrible or that the movie looked bad. Well then again to be kind there were some performances that were better than others. But most of the cast gave it the old college try. And the film's look and associated special effects were ok. No what I didn't care for in this film was the story and the pacing. If you read the Stephen King book or saw the film Pet Sematary, you will remember the quote and tagline "Sometimes dead is better". Well that quote succinctly summed up the message in Pet Sematary and should have been obvious to everyone in Transcendence but especially the remarkably solipsistic scientist Evelyn Caster (Rebecca Hall).This woman got on my nerves so much that I wanted to yell at the screen. She was a walking example of the stereotype "I don't care what my man does as long as he's nice to me". Long after everyone involved can see the danger and is literally heading for the hills, Evelyn is still marching along with blinders on. Love will do that I guess. 

I couldn't care less about the romance between Evelyn and her husband, scientist Dr. Will Caster (Johnny Depp). Obviously I am not among the target audience who goes gaga over Johnny Depp but that aside I thought the film placed far too much emphasis on the relationship. It was almost like a Beauty and the Beast opera. I was waiting for the singing to break out.

Dr. Will Caster is a genius cutting edge artificial intelligence researcher. He thinks that quite soon humans (that is to say him) will be able to create a sentient computer that has more brainpower than all of humanity ever has had or ever will have. Such intelligence will radically change the world and humanity, much for the better as far as the good doctor is concerned. He thinks that his AI will help slow the rise of the oceans and heal the planet. To those who think that Caster or his would be creation are playing God, Caster responds that humans have always tried to create God. Well some people who are either religious and/or wary of creating artificial intelligence are not thrilled with Caster or his ideas. One of them decides to let Caster know of this generalized displeasure by shooting him with an irradiated bullet. The gunman works for an anti-tech organization headed by Bree (Kate Mara). Will's not long for the world. But desperate to continue their work and lives together, the Casters convince friend and fellow scientist Max Waters (Paul Bettany) to upload Caster's consciousness to a quantum computer. Later, against Max's strident advice, Evelyn gives her husband's virtual identity access to the internet. Well you know what they say about absolute power and all that. Government scientist Joseph Tagger (Morgan Freeman), a mentor of both Casters, finds that he must make common cause with Bree despite the fact that she sent hit teams after him. 

The film misses some important things because it's too busy trying to be important and philosophical. Other than Evelyn and a few other characters no one shows any excitement or wonder at the fact that Will's consciousness has survived or rather transcended the death of his body and is still existing in THIS world. Sorry but that's something that would have been a big f*****g deal as our vice-President would say. That news would have gone around the world at light speed. Evelyn and virtual Will would have immediately been inundated non-stop with worldwide media coverage, government interest, terminally ill people, etc. Religions would have been rocked to their core. And so on. But the film doesn't bring any of this across. Depp basically mails in his performance. FLAT doesn't do justice to the lack of emotion shown. And as mentioned Evelyn is so freaking stupid and self-righteous that it hurt my head to watch her. If you skip this movie you won't miss much.  TRAILER

Stephen Smith, Michelle Beadle and the Ray Rice Situation: Was Stephen Smith Defending Domestic Violence?

Man got his woman to take his seed /He got the power oh she got the need/ She spends her life through pleasing up her man/She feeds him dinner or anything she can/
She cries alone at night too often/ He smokes and drinks and don't come home at all/
Only women bleed only women bleed only women bleed/
Black eyes all of the time don't spend a dime clean up this grime/And you there down on your knees begging me please come watch me bleed Only Women Bleed - Alice Cooper 
As you may have heard Baltimore Ravens running back Ray Rice and his then fiancee and now wife Janay Palmer got into some sort of physical altercation in an Atlantic City hotel. Unlike the one way slap and kickfest between Solange Knowles and Jay-Z the public lacks video evidence of what exactly took place but apparently whatever fight took place the new Mrs. Rice lost decisively because we do see the video of Mr. Rice dragging the unconscious Mrs. Rice by her hair and lifting her up after he apparently knocked her out. The police arrested both Rice and Palmer. Each had assault charges filed against them. Janay Palmer's charges were later dropped while Mr. Rice's charges were increased. However as a first time offender, Mr. Rice was eligible to enter into a diversion program, which will allow him to avoid jail or prison. FWIW his wife indicated that she didn't want to pursue charges. In fact at the press conference in which Rice apologized to everyone except her, she said that she regretted the role she played in the incident. Ok. I can't imagine ever becoming violent with a woman. The very idea disgusts me. It's a virtual impossibility. Work it out or walk away. I was raised in a very traditional household. However I am also disgusted by the idea of a woman spitting on me or hitting me as Mrs. Rice is reported to have done to Mr. Rice. I think that everyone should abide by a no-hands rule in interpersonal conflict. When you start a violent confrontation you don't know what the other person might consider an appropriate response to your physical aggression. I have never understood people who hit or beat a spouse or intimate and then go to sleep in the same house as the person they just assaulted. I think that's dumb. You might get some hot grits thrown on you. You might not wake up with everything still attached. You might not wake up at all. So again, no violence against either party should ever be tolerated. This is for both moral reasons and those of pure self-interest. 

So with no jail time upcoming, the only question was what would NFL commissioner Roger Goodell do. Goodell has a media image, one aided by his own pronouncements, as a tough take no prisoners type of guy, who was going to lay down the law to bad guys. Beating your wife certainly is something a bad guy would do. So many people both in and outside of the NFL were a bit taken aback when Goodell announced that Ray Rice would be suspended for two games and have pay withheld for a third game. Some people wanted a tougher sanction. Oft irritating ESPN personality Stephen Smith is paid to be opinionated and loud. So he gave his opinion about the Rice situation. However he walked into a buzzsaw of controversy when he seemingly suggested that women can be taught or advised not to inflame situations. Likely the word that caused the media storm of controversy and set off a wordy twitter battle with fellow ESPN employee Michelle Beadle was "provoke". As expected Smith had to apologize for his statements which he duly did here. It was a pretty good apology as apologies go I guess. I would guess that his bosses at ESPN made it clear that it was not helpful to the network or his continued employment at the network for anyone to think that Smith or the network condoned beating up women. If I go tell the police that I was assaulted I would be taken aback if rather than ask who did it, their first question was "Well what were you doing to cause that? We need to investigate that first sir before we go bother other decent people on your say so." So I understand that discussion of "provoking" violence likely won't be well received by anyone who was the target of said violence.

Nevertheless I feel that Smith and his detractors are talking past one another, purposely or not. If I walked up to a man larger, stronger and entirely more dangerous than myself and said insulting things about his mother, punched him or spit in his face there's a good chance that after I got out of the hospital people might ask me why I thought my actions were appropriate. And those would be fair questions. There are many people who see the NFL as the last remaining he-man woman hater's club. But I don't think that's the case. There are plenty of other situations where businesses or organizations have looked the other way when a man who brings in money behaves poorly or even arguably criminally with women. Former American Apparel CEO Dov Charney, who among other things, pleasured himself in front of a female journalist, and fashion photographer Terry Richardson, who has been accused of everything from generalized sleaziness to sexual harassment and assault, are just two examples of men not working with, in or for the NFL who somehow have managed to until recently avoid mainstream media attention, even after having done or allegedly done acts that are just as bad as what Ray Rice did. The ugly truth of the matter is that just like every other business, the NFL is looking to make money. That's the primary concern. If Charney were still making money for his company American Apparel he would still be in the big seat. And Richardson is skilled enough at what he does to still have legions of admirers and fans. And if Ray Rice rushes for 1300 yards this year, most Ravens fans won't care too much about whatever happened in that elevator. That may be sad and even immoral but it's just the way it is. So I don't think we should pretend that the NFL alone has a problem. 

Domestic violence is all over the place. It's a societal problem, not just a NFL or sports problem. Everyone should be aware of it and seek to stop it, regardless of the victim's gender. I think that is what Smith was trying to say. I think that as soon as Smith used the word "provoke" people thought about the classic stereotype of a woman cutting a man verbally and a man lashing out at her physically or for no reason at all because he's a cowardly POS. Those events still take place. I've seen a few, unfortunately. But times change. There are some quite dangerous women walking around out there. If you were the man unlucky enough to be intimate with Sadie Bell, you had better be ready to defend yourself at all times, up to and including fisticuffs or more. That's reality. 
Update********

ESPN on Tuesday announced a one-week suspension for one of its most controversial commentators, Stephen A. Smith, in the wake of his widely-criticized remarks about domestic abuse that referred to possible "provocation" by victims.

What do you think?
Is a two game suspension enough for Ray Rice?
Was Stephen Smith defending domestic violence?
Should Stephen Smith have been suspended?