I Won My Case At The YMCA!

There are some musicians such as Prince, Toby Keith, Madonna, Jimmy Page and several others who are quite knowledgeable about the business side of the music business. They make it a point never to make the same mistake twice. They often have complete control over when, where, how and by whom their music is used. If someone is using their music then they are going to be paid in full, right down to the penny, according to the law governing that use. Although such musicians are not uncommon today, I don't know that they're the majority. It's a rare person who is expert in tax, copyright and contract laws of multiple jurisdictions, can successfully run international multimillion dollar concert promotion companies, can handle all their own merchandising, advertising and publishing, understands accounting backwards and forwards, and finds the time to continue to be the one in a million amazing songwriter, bandleader, musician or performer who originally grabbed the adulation of millions. There have always been performers who were more concerned with "sex, drugs, and rock-n-roll" than with ensuring that their business was tight. When their manager or lawyer told them to sign something they signed it. When their record company got cute with royalties they didn't demand an outside audit. And when a radio DJ's name showed up on a song they alone wrote they shrugged and told themselves that was the cost of doing business.

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me. One person who learned that the hard way and has fortunately lived long enough to finally see the law work in his favor rather than against him is Victor Willis, better known as The Policeman in the group The Village People.

In the lucrative world of music copyright, it may be something of a watershed moment: on Friday, after six years of legal wrangling and decades after he wrote the lyrics to the hit song “YMCA,” Victor Willis will gain control of his share of the copyright to that song and others he wrote when he was the lead singer of the 1970s disco group the Village People. Mr. Willis, who dressed as a policeman during the group’s heyday, was able to recapture those songs, thanks to a little-known provision of copyright legislation that went into effect in 1978. That law granted musicians and songwriters what are known as “termination rights,” allowing them to recover control of their creations after 35 years, even if they had originally signed away their rights.

“YMCA” is one of 33 songs whose copyright Mr. Willis was seeking to recover when he first went to court. Hits like “In the Navy” and “Go West” are part of that group, but another well-known song whose lyrics Mr. Willis wrote, “Macho Man,” was excluded because it was written just before the 1978 law went into effect. In a telephone interview from his home in Southern California, Mr. Willis said he has not yet decided how best to exploit the song catalog. “I’ve had lots of offers, from record and publishing companies, a lot of stuff, but I haven’t made up my mind how it’s going to be handled.”

He added, however, that he is thinking of prohibiting the Village People — the band still exists and is touring this month and next, though with largely different members — from singing any of his songs, at least in the United States. “I learned over the years that there are some awesome powers associated with copyright ownership,” Mr. Willis said. “You can stop somebody from performing your music if you want to, and I might object to some usages.” 

Mr. Willis had declined interview requests during earlier stages of the dispute, but said he decided to speak out now so as to alert other artists, both established and emerging, to protect their copyrights. He said it was only because his wife is a lawyer that he became aware of his termination rights. “I’m hoping that other artists will get a good lawyer and get back the works that a lot of us gave away when we were younger, before we knew what was going on,” he said. “When you’re young, you just want to get out there and aren’t really paying attention to what’s on paper. I never even read one contract they put in front of me, and that’s a big mistake.”

LINK

Good for him I say. Again, no matter what sort of business you enter into, whether it's creative or prosaic, whether you're a cubicle drone working for Penetrode Corporation or an innovative fly by the seat of your pants entrepreneur it's critical that you always maintain awareness of your rights and your options, especially if you're in a contractual relationship. Because as we've discussed before there is always someone willing to take horrible advantage of you and your ignorance or deference and smile at you while they do so. No one cares as much about you as you do. Believe that.

Book Reviews-The Third Bullet, Warrior Queen

The Third Bullet
by Stephen Hunter

I like Hunter's writing style generally speaking though I'm not sure I'd agree with him politically on much. I'm impressed with how his hero gets older and more damaged throughout his books. Bob Lee Swagger sounds like a bada$$ name and indeed the former Marine sniper and Vietnam Vet is one tough SOB. This is the case even though he's old, retired, and dealing with worsening physical infirmities. In the first Bob Lee Swagger novel, Point of Impact, there is a point in time when one of the bad guys has been killed by Swagger's buddy and sometime sidekick, FBI agent Nick Memphis, himself an excellent shooter though not in Swagger's class. People are rummaging through the bad guy's effects and come across what is described as "a curious collection of fired 162 grain .264 caliber bullets from some bizarre project or other in the early sixties, found in his safe deposit box." Now reading that line and knowing the deadly skill of the bad guy who had just been put down it was pretty obvious what Hunter was teasing. IIRC he didn't come back to that line until now, when he's written what could be the last Bob Lee Swagger novel, roughly 15-20 years after the events in Point of Impact.

As is obvious from the title and the book cover this is Hunter's take on the JFK assassination. Trouble finds Swagger though he's happily married, retired and living semi-incognito. If you like black humor Hunter serves it up here. He writes himself into the novel as a balding, overweight, bearded, pompous, alcoholic, blowhard thriller author. The author is killed in a hit and run "accident" that is no accident. This man was a conspiracy buff. His widow tracks down Swagger to ask him to investigate her husband's death. Swagger is gentlemanly but stubborn. He's retired. Despite his previous experiences with various conspiracies, he's not interested. Lots of people die in hit and runs. When the woman describes the apparent professional nature of her husband's killing Swagger is intrigued. But when she makes an offhand comment about a prosaic item discovered in Dallas after fifty years Swagger is suddenly chilled to his bones and decides to investigate. Although this was something which linked back very obviously to Point of Impact, I didn't pick up on it until later. Maybe I'm just dumb but in my defense it was a very innocuous statement.

This kicks off Swagger's journey through the looking glass and his attempt to understand the events of November 22, 1963. He travels to Russia and gets obsessed with Lee Harvey Oswald and his visits to Russia and Mexico. He pores over details about Oswald's life and the link back to the failed conspiracy that almost took his life in Point of Impact. He has run ins with Russian organized crime and Russian counter-intelligence. 
About halfway thru the book the POV switches to the Big Bad, who really was behind the JFK assassination, though perhaps not for the reasons that everyone thinks. He's aware that Swagger is on his tail. Having tangled with Swagger before, albeit at a distance, he takes steps to ensure that the truth never comes to light and that this time Swagger gets the permanent dirt nap. 

Perhaps in deference to Swagger's advanced age (he's in his late sixties by this point), the book is less of an action tale and much more of a detective story. Swagger knows he's not physically the man he used to be. The Third Bullet is also a hagiography of those skilled men who could shoot a quarter out of your hand at a thousand yards or throw a silver dollar in the air and hit it three times before it touches the ground. Hunter certainly loves them, good or bad and it shows. Swagger constantly complains of hip pain. He's been shot multiple times and walks with a noticeable limp. Once expansive muscle has withered away to stringy rawhide. But when the s*** gets real, old or not, Swagger still deals in lead. His "I'm just a dumb country boy" routine is getting a little long in the tooth but it still tricks some people into underestimating him. That's usually a fatal mistake. Just ask the bad guys in Point of Impact who told Swagger to drop his weapon or they'd kill his wife. Swagger agreed and said he'd put his gun down on the count of three. He started counting but shot everyone on the count of two. There are a couple of scenes like that here.

I don't think that Hunter believes in JFK conspiracy theories. The Third Bullet is dripping with Hunter's contempt for other conspiracy theories. As something of a conspiracy nut myself I thought Hunter was unfairly dismissive of some things. But YMMV. Hunter includes tons of detailed specialist information about guns, shooting and gun culture. Some questions about the events of November 22, 1963 will probably always be unanswered. But it's certain that you don't want to mess with Bob Lee Swagger.






Warrior Queen
by Alan Gold
And I will execute great vengeance upon them with furious rebukes; and they shall know that I am the LORD, when I shall lay my vengeance upon them. Ezekiel 25:17

When we study history we often talk about the glories of the Roman Empire and the benefits of civilization that the Romans brought to the places they conquered. What was overlooked until relatively recently historically speaking, is that advanced civilization or not, subjects of the Roman Empire did not necessarily appreciate being conquered, having their cultures altered, being forced to pay tribute or being enslaved. There is a pretty good book titled The Enemies of Rome that is worth reading if you can find it. Some of these people attained an almost legendary status over the centuries, even if they lost in the end, as most indeed did. There's something about standing up against all the odds, knowing you'll probably lose and putting up your dukes anyway, that resonates with people looking for heroes or heroines. Hannibal of Carthage, Arminus of Germany, Vercingtorix of Gaul and Spartacus of Thrace were some famous leaders who resisted Roman expansion or enslavement. Though Carthage lost the Punic Wars, Hannibal's tactics are still studied in military academies. Arminus was later murdered by his own people but his destruction of Roman forces at Teutoberg Forest ended Roman attempts to colonize Germany. Vercingtorix remains a national hero for France. And everyone knows the story of Spartacus, who became an inspiration for slave revolts down thru the ages.

But for pure style and tragedy none of these leaders could match up with Boudicca, Queen of the Iceni and leader of the most massive British revolt against Roman rule ever seen. Boudicca was married to King Prasutagus, leader of the Iceni, a Roman client state in the east of England. Upon his death, seeking to protect his wife and children, Prasutagus attempted to make the Emperor Nero co-ruler of his kingdom with his minor daughters. However the Romans had other ideas. They seized all of Boudicca's property and informed her that henceforth the Iceni would no longer have semi-independence but would be a conquered/enslaved people like any other. The Roman philosopher/banker Seneca called in his loans to the Iceni, further impoverishing them. When Boudicca went with her children to the local Roman governor to protest this treatment, the Romans made an example of her. Queen Boudicca was publicly stripped naked, beaten and whipped into unconsciousness while her minor daughters were gang raped by Roman soldiers. But the Romans made one mistake. They left her alive.

In short time Boudicca raised an army among not just the Iceni but various other British tribes. She became the most relentless executioner the Romans had seen. She exterminated an entire Roman legion, and sacked and completely burned down three Roman cities, including Londinium (London) and Camalondum (Colchester). Her stated intent was to drive all the Romans from Britain. She showed no Roman any mercy regardless of age, gender or combat status. Thousands of Romans were killed and many more fled overseas. Boudicca would have won if she hadn't made the critical mistake of attacking a Roman army on ground of its own choosing. Her largely irregular forces could not break the famed Roman cohesiveness nor withstand the deadlier Roman weaponry. And because they had foolishly brought their families along to watch their expected victory the Britons were hindered from fleeing the battlefield by the need to protect their loved ones. The Queen either died in battle or committed suicide to avoid capture. Before this last battle she gave a speech in which she listed all the various harms done to her, her daughters and Britain in general. She said she was only a woman but was willing to fight. She dared the men of Britain to stand with her. They did.

This book is historical fiction with emphasis on the fiction part. It shifts among the various points of view of major characters, including Boudicca, her husband, the Roman emperors Claudius and Nero and the Roman general Suetonius, who was destined to defeat Boudicca. Warrior Queen also gives a nod to the fact that truth is stranger than fiction by briefly detailing the sexual misadventures of Empresses Messalina and Aggrippina. Cersei Lannister had nothing on Aggrippina, who married her uncle Emperor Claudius and had regular sexual relations with both her brother, the Emperor Caligula and her son, the Emperor Nero. Warrior Queen attempts an overarching view of Celtic life. It starts in Boudicca's childhood and drags at the start. Still, it's a quick read, if not a great one. The dialogue is a little flat. Boudicca is thought to mean victory. The closest modern equivalent is Victoria. There are some timeless arguments about the difficulty of deciding when to go along to get along and when to get up and stand up for your rights. There is some contrast described between the extreme Roman patriarchy and the Celtic relatively relaxed gender roles. Before the final battle General Suetonius gave a speech mocking this difference. The book does not shrink from describing unpleasant cultural practices of both peoples, especially the habit of deliberate Roman atrocity. In this telling Boudicca is fully aware of her relative amateur military tactician status. She utilizes the Romans' arrogance and sexism against them.

Does Your Parachute Work?

Things are finally looking up for me financially. Nevertheless I still operate on a thinner margin than I would like. It's taken hard work to get where I am and will take more hard work to get where I want to be. Bad decisions made years ago have ripples down through the decades. There's nothing I can do about that except live and learn. I was reminded of all this recently while I was stopped at two different expressway exit ramps, watching two different young men hold up signs asking for help. They avoided eye contact and I'm sorry to say so did everyone else. They had what appeared to be their worldly belongings in either a milk carton or a backpack. Of course you see people like this all of the time and unfortunately you get used to it. Some people make bad decisions in life. There's plenty of work if you aren't lazy. It's not my problem. There's a decent safety net. Maybe those people all have substance abuse problems. And so on. Those are the things we privately tell ourselves in order remain convinced that WE would never fall so low as to be begging on the street.

But recent unfortunate events in my personal circle of family/friends and the news that the income gap between the richest 1% and everyone else has grown to the widest ever and that even the top 10% are also taking more than half of total income, also a record, have made me wonder (and will hopefully make you wonder), does your parachute really work? How easy is it to find another job that pays the same or more as the one you currently have? How far are you really, from begging strangers for money? 

Let's say you work for someone else. If that person died, transferred or retired, just how safe is your job? I've had the experience of a new boss arriving and wanting to hire and promote his or her own people. Depending on company culture, holdovers from the old regime might just be fired on the spot or not so subtly harassed until they transfer or quit. If your company decides that your services could be better and more cheaply performed by someone else, whether in this country or even overseas, there might not be any hint of change, just a terse email and a humiliating walk-out by company security. I've seen that happen too. It's also true that by the time you reach your forties and fifties and are at or near your maximum earning potential you are also a tempting target for a firm looking to save on salary and benefits or bring in younger and more malleable workers. If you work for yourself and make a mistake in business plan or your leverage you could also lose everything and watch your company go belly up. In any case no matter what happens to you the world will keep on turning. There are very very very few people on this planet who care quite as much about your well being as you do yourself. Because ultimately it's your life. You are the person who will reap the benefits or bear the costs of choices that you make.

If whatever you do today for money was no longer viable starting tomorrow, just how long would it be before you were on the street asking for money. My macho pride says that would never ever ever happen to me. I'm a (insert family name) and WE don't do that. But sometimes I'm not so sure. No one can see the future. Whether it's medical bills, lawsuits, divorce, bad personal habits, deaths, job loss there's always something that hits you when you least expect it. There are numerous calamities that could wipe out whatever financial stability you've attained. Winter is coming for us all. We don't know exactly when but it is coming. Count on it.

Now there are also tons of ways to deal with this risk and we've discussed some of them before. Spending less than you earn and saving the difference is the number one solution. Playing your cards right and regularly saving your money immediately after entering the workforce can give you a nice little nest egg by the time you hit your late thirties, forties and fifties and presumably start to slow down a little. Starting a side business is a great way to bring some extra income into your pockets. Keeping your skills up to date, staying in touch with close friends and family, avoiding or limiting consumer debt and getting married are also helpful. Divorce is obviously a big risk but having a second income and/or a second pair of hands to perform tasks you otherwise would have to spend time and money on is a huge advantage of marriage.

Still although it is ultimately on the individual to find his way through life I can't help but wonder if the changes we've made in our political economy over the past forty to fifty years have really helped more people than they've hurt. The economy is a man made entity. We can make changes in how we do things. There's not any good reason that we have to accept that the work participation rate in the US is at a 35 year low. Whatever bad decisions a particular homeless person might have made they did so against the backdrop of a US economy that is not producing enough jobs for everyone who wants one. But on my own I can't change that. I would need your help and that of millions more. But I can change my financial situation. To do that I need the help of much fewer people. So that's what I try to do.

Questions

If after you read this your current income was abruptly eliminated what would you do?

How long could you survive at current spending habits without income?

Do you have people who'd be willing to support you? How long? Indefinitely?

Do you have sympathy for the homeless? Do you give money? Volunteer at shelters?

Movie Reviews-The Iceman, Now You See Me

The Iceman
directed by Ariel Vroman

There are some actors who either through their looks or their skill at their chosen craft bring an unique intensity to all of their roles. Michael Shannon is such an actor. I first became aware of him as the self-loathing tightly wound Treasury Agent in Boardwalk Empire. His large almost Cookie Monsterish eyes allowed him to project a lot of emotions, mostly nervousness, hidden rage and desperation. He also had a funny turn reading the letter of an angry and EXTREMELY PROFANE sorority girl. So when I read that he was going to take the role of Richard Kuklinski, a serial killer who moonlighted as a mob hitman, or maybe he was a mob hitman who moonlighted as a serial killer, I thought that was a good role for him. Having watched The Iceman I can now say that not only was this a good role for him but was also was the role he was seemingly born to play. The film's makeup department did a great job at making Shannon look like Kuklinksi. Shannon is close to the same height as the gigantic Kuklinski was. The majority of the credit must go to Shannon himself, who via his body language, carefully swallowed vowels, ominous silences and sudden sarcastic asides, manages to become Kuklinski, or as he was known, The Iceman.

The Iceman, (his nickname referred to his cold blooded nature and his innovation of freezing the corpses of his victims to prevent coroners from determining time of death), was a murderer who worked for the East Coast Mafia as a contract killer from the 60's thru the 80's. He also killed people for his own reasons. Annoying him was dangerous. He occasionally killed someone just to see how a particular weapon or technique worked. He was both a serial killer and a profoundly professional and mercenary one.

As with any movie based on real life organized crime figures the truth is pretty hard to determine. Kuklinski claimed involvement in murders that he was almost definitely not part of, most outrageously that of Hoffa. The film wisely ignores some of the outlandish claims and builds a character drama about a coldblooded introvert who just happens to be an excellent killer. This film is primarily based on the Anthony Bruno book but it looks like it might also draw somewhat on the Phillip Carlo biography, if you are so inclined to look deeper into the story. Shannon plays Kuklinski as an evil man but one who has the evil within him carefully chained and caged. His lovely wife Deborah (Winona Ryder) has no clue what her husband does for a living other than he's some sort of currency trader. She doesn't ask too many questions as she's not exactly a feminist. Richard is not forthcoming. He provides well for his family. Generally that's all Deborah wants to know. And that is all Richard ever wants her to know.

Richard runs across Gambino soldier Roy DeMeo (Ray Liotta in a meaty role) and is introduced to the world of contract killing. Richard's only rules about killing are no women and no kids. Other than that he'll kill anyone for any reason or no reason at all. One person who doesn't share Richard's scruples but becomes his partner for a while is Robert Pronge (Chris Evans), an Irish-American contract killer who has a cover as a ice-cream truck driver. Pronge shares new ways of murder with Richard. They briefly bond as non-Italians in an organized crime milieu run by Italians. For a while things are okay with Richard's world. But when DeMeo and he have to temporarily part ways, Richard keeps on killing for money and finds himself out of his league. The film sketches the physical (sexual??) abuse Richard and his siblings suffered at the hands of their father, and asks the viewer if evil truly begets evil. As Richard's brother Joseph (Stephen Dorff) reminds Richie, his work for the Mafia was not the first time Richard killed, tortured or beat people. Joseph is in prison for the rape and murder of a 12 year old girl. Richard truly despises his brother. Joseph thinks that Richard is just like him and will wind up in the same prison. Grim yet enticing movie. I loved it. This is a movie which will make you think about how well you know your own family. The years have been very kind to Winona Ryder. James Franco, David Schwimmer, Robert Davi, John Ventimiglia, and Erin Cummings also star. The trailer is a good gauge of the violence in this film.
TRAILER






Now You See Me
directed by Louis Leterrier

Do you like heist/caper movies? Because that's what this movie is. I like these sort of films so I was positively inclined to this film even before I saw it. Again I want to be very careful about what I write here because the film deliberately is evasive about what's really going on at various points in the story. And that's important. There are plenty of plot twists that you might not see coming. Well you might, after all there aren't too many truly original stories but the fun in these kinds of movies is in getting there, not necessarily knowing ahead of time how it's done. I guess you could say the same thing about the dance of life between men and women, eh? And that's also a very minor plot point in this movie as well.
Although this film is star packed, along with a mini Zombieland reunion of sorts, the stars are not all that important. I mean they look good and are very convincing in their roles but this film's value is found in the director's set pieces, great dialog, stunts that feel realistic and a well written script that has plenty of surprises along the way, even for a jaded film goer. Maybe I'm gushing too much but suffice it to say I liked this movie. It was long but I never felt it dragged. I wanted to see what happened next.  Whether a story is short or long I think the best thing you can say about it is that it kept your interest.

Ok, just shortly then because I really think you ought to see this movie if you haven't done so already, let's quickly review some of the plot. There are four magicians/scoundrels who make their living doing tricks that have generally already been done by other magicians. They're good but they're not necessarily breaking new ground. These magicians are Daniel Atlas (Eisenberg), Henley Reeves (Isla Fisher), Jack Wilder (Dave Franco) and Merritt McKenny (Woody Harrelson). After they've all done a trick or in some cases while they're doing a trick they all get a tarot card and instructions that lead them to a New York apartment. A year later they are world famous magicians who perform as the Four Horsemen. Daniel and Henley have some history with each other. More to mess with Daniel than anything else Merritt offers his (ahem) "physical capabilities" to Henley but he's probably not serious. Probably not. Anyway as the Four Horsemen they perform in Las Vegas. They ask the audience how they would like to rob a bank and pick a man out of the audience. The group picks a man out of the crowd and seemingly teleport him to the vault of a French bank. There he activates an air duct that shoots money over the delighted crowd before the Horsemen bring him back.

When the authorities find out that money really is missing from the bank and the man is convinced he was teleported to France, obviously they have some questions for the Four Horsemen. That kicks off a game of cat and mouse and increasingly bigger stunts, robberies and events that appear to be impossible. As Daniel boasts, the secret to being a magician is to always be sure you're the smartest guy in the room. One person who thought he was the smartest guy in the room is the FBI agent assigned to the case, one Dylan Rhodes (Mark Ruffalo). He's assisted by French Interpol agent Alma Dray (Melanie Laurent) and congenitally bemused magician and debunker Thaddeus Bradley (Morgan Freeman). Common, Elias Koteas, Michael Caine, Michael Kelly and David Warshofsky also star. If you haven't seen this film, check it out but leave your cynicism at the door.
TRAILER

Movie Reviews-Pain & Gain, The Colony, Three Extremes

Pain & Gain
directed by Michael Bay

Back in the day there was a late night infomercial get rich quick scheme promulgated by Tom Vu. Like all good pimps salesmen Vu played on his audience's fears to convince them that they had what it took to make him money to make themselves rich. Vu stood apart because of his VERY strong Vietnamese accent and because he openly and unabashedly aimed at his apparently mostly male audience's base desires of women, cars and big houses. Especially women. In his commercials the diminutive Vu would be surrounded by numerous curvaceous women. To his audience this evidently proved his business model worked. Vu denigrated people who didn't believe in his process as "dummies" or "losahs". His thick accent and seeming earnest nature explained his appeal. It's probable that just as many people were laughing at him as with him but when your business model involves a "free" seminar followed by suckers buying your hugely overpriced semi-worthless materials, you only need to slaughter a few sheep to make big bucks. It's all about volume evidently. Vu is a high stakes poker player now.
Pain & Gain follows three bodybuilders who decide, after inspiration from the Vu stand-in, to grab the good life (women, cars and big houses) for themselves, legalities be dammed. 

The film attempts a broad comedic stance before flipping to black comedy. But because this story involves kidnapping, torture and murder there are few directors (Quentin Tarantino, Martin Scorsese and Guy Ritchie are among them) who could pull this off. I don't think Bay fully succeeded. The film is about 20 minutes too long. If you are sensitive to stereotypes there is a black man with a strong preference for fat white women, a Jewish man who would rather be tortured for days than surrender one thin dime and a dumb Eastern European woman who seeks work as a highly paid prostitute. YMMV. This was based on a real life story. There are some funny scenes but they a) mostly involve Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson (damn that is one HUGE man) b) are few and far between and c) make you feel guilty for laughing at them.

Danny Lugo (Mark Wahlberg) is a would be entrepreneurial ex-con and fitness fanatic. He works as a personal trainer in a body beautiful gym that he helped to make the hip and happening place to be. But he's unhappy with his life. He believe he's running out of time to make a mark. So he's fresh meat for Johnny Wu (Ken Jeong) who urges people to be "doers". That is Wu's mantra, that is when the sexist Wu is not telling his assistants to get the "b*****s on the boat" so they can go on to their next gig. Duly inspired, Danny starts paying closer attention to his latest client, the smug, crass and totally unlikable Victor Kershaw (Tony Shalhoub), a successful small businessman with his fingers in a lot of profitable pies, not all of which might pass IRS or other legal scrutiny. Kershaw just can't stop boasting about all the money he has, women he sleeps with, or taxes he doesn't pay. Danny decides that Kershaw doesn't actually need all of that wealth. In fact, as far as Danny is concerned, the congenitally irritating Kershaw doesn't need any of it. Danny is going to be a doer and TAKE his piece of the pie from Kershaw. Danny is ready for the big time right now!

Danny recruits Adrian Doorbal (Anthony Mackie), a fellow trainer with a taste for plus sized women and a set of steroid damaged twig and berries, and Paul Doyle (Dwayne Johnson), a gentle giant of a man who's devoutly religious. Doyle sees himself as a peacemaker but his idea of making peace is to stomp a mudhole in someone's a$$. And he will praise Jesus while doing so. He's an ex-con and is prone to sudden attacks of conscience. These three men, none of whom are cursed with devious or even particularly quick brains, decide to kidnap Kershaw, force him to sign over his wealth to them, and then kill him. It's a piece of cake and as easy as pie. Yes? No. Everything that can go wrong does go wrong and before long all of the men are being trailed by semi-retired private eye and former cop Ed Dubois (Ed Harris). Dubois is both amused and insulted by this group. He can't believe how stupid or greedy they are.

And not even the gargantuan feminine pleasures of Robin (Rebel Wilson) or the more typically hourglass sultry stylings of Sorina (Bar Paly) can make these men's lives better, as one crime begets another and murder leads to more murder. Evil leads to evil and more evil and more evil and so on.
As mentioned because the trio's actions are so unpleasant it's difficult if not impossible to root for them or even identify with them. So I had a little bit of distance watching this movie. Kershaw is depicted as a real slimeball in order to try to gin up sympathy for the people who kidnap him. The humor is often jarring. Because Danny and company are both cheap and stupid they try to return tools used in crimes and get refunds. They attempt to set up a neighborhood watch group while high on cocaine. I thought Wahlberg did a good job of playing a person who's dumb but is somehow convinced he is smart. The Rolling Stones' song Can't You Hear Me Knocking, which was used to such incredible effect in Casino and Blow, makes an appearance here but just like Adrian, it's limp. Michael Rispoli, Peter Stomare, Rob Corddry, Tony Plana, and Larry Hankin also have roles.
TRAILER






The Colony
directed by Jeff Renfroe

Do you have a child of your own or perhaps a young niece, nephew, cousin or grandchild who creates some art and displays it to you with anticipation and hope in their eyes? Or perhaps you're married or otherwise involved with an artistic person who requests your feedback on their latest creation. Well you'd have to be pretty cold to laugh at that person's creation and tell them that it was derivative, empty and not very well done. Most of us would mute our criticism or couch it in the mildest terms possible UNLESS the relationship is so strong and everyone is so mature that 100% brutal honesty is both demanded and given. I was reminded of these sorts of experiences watching this film. It's a paint by numbers sci-fi/horror film. I don't blame it for being that. I knew that going in. The question is how well is the story executed and whether or not the characters and special effects grab your interest. I think the film falls a little short. The film was shot in and around former NORAD facilities which gave it some nice verisimilitude. The special effects are very obviously CGI.

In the future, because of global climate change humans have created a worldwide network of weather modification stations. It's not explained very well and for purposes of the film (and this review) doesn't need to be. These stations either malfunctioned or worked too well and large portions of the planet were cut off from the Sun via some sort of greenhouse effect. Shortly afterwards a second ice age ensued. Billions of humans perished. Small groups of survivors eke out pitiful existences in underground colonies. Food and water are at a premium while paranoia runs high. One such colony is presided over by Briggs (Laurence Fishburne) who as a former soldier is tough but fair. Briggs' second in command and fellow veteran Mason (Bill Paxton) is more tough than fair. He has the responsibility of identifying and expelling/executing people who are sick and don't get better. He's supposed to give them a choice between expulsion and execution but of late just kills them. 

The colony receives a distress signal from another colony. Briggs intends to go help. Among other volunteers he takes Sam (Kevin Zegers) with him. Briggs is worried by Mason's attitude and after some harsh words he leaves Sam's girlfriend Kai (Charlotte Sullivan) in charge and departs, promising there will be more permanent changes upon his return. Obviously the colony should have ignored that distress signal. This was a classic B movie. It was recycled cheese with a side order of spam. It was okay to watch IF you do not have very high expectations. The Colony is a perfect movie for a lazy Saturday afternoon. Last stands abound. If I ever am in a last stand I want an automatic or at least a semi-automatic weapon, not a bolt-action. But I suppose bolt-actions work better for drama. Can you center the rifle sights on your target, aim, shoot, reacquire a target and rework the bolt in a smooth motion to keep up a steady rate of fire? Sure you can. Unless you happen to be an extra in a B movie when the script calls for a jammed bolt. That'll just ruin your day.
TRAILER






Three Extremes

This is an interesting collection of three short films by three different Asian directors. Obviously it is subtitled for the English speaking audience. The first short is directed by Chinese director Fruit Chan and is titled Dumplings. South Korean director Park Chan-Wook helms the second feature which is titled Cut. And the last is directed by Japanese director Takashi Miike and titled Box. These are horror films folks. So if you don't like explicit horror this is probably not the film for you. Squeamish folks would do well to pass this by. Although it's not always or necessarily supernatural horror, it is incredibly creepy stuff. I'm serious about this. These shorts take themselves seriously indeed. Each is definitely trying to shock you, gross you out or make you think, sometimes all at once. Each short film is extremely well shot with very colorful cinematography. For my money Dumplings was the standout here. It was extended to a full length film. After I saw the short I ordered the full length version of Dumplings. But I will need to order a different version. The version I had ordered wasn't compatible with US area blu-ray players. Go figure. All three shorts were similar to, if harsher than, some of the best stuff from Tales from the Crypt or the Friday the 13th TV series. So if you ARE a horror fan you should definitely have this in your collection.






Dumplings

I'm not sure exactly when Bai Ling became a stereotypical joke of an actress, more famous for appearing half-nude in public than for her theatrical work but in Dumplings her acting was still on point. Obviously there is still some erotic display- the camera loves the down blouse shots of Bai Ling - but I had no problems with that. The story is pretty disturbing and disgusting once you realize what's really going on. Although cultures vary widely across the planet, one thing which seems to be pretty consistent is that youth and beauty are valued greatly, especially in and by women. Dumplings is an almost clinical look at what some women will do to keep their youth and beauty. It's not really a morality play. The people doing evil are not worried by their actions. This is the strongest and creepiest piece here. The subject matter, well let's just say not only does this film touch some basic worldwide human taboos it depicts the breaking of several. 

Mrs. Li (Miriam Yeung) is an middle aged woman who's losing her looks and intuitively knows that her husband (Tony Leung) is doing the do with someone else. Although hubby is polite and conscientious towards his wife, he never initiates intimacy or displays any passion beyond that which he might show to his grandmother. Dismayed and looking to get her groove back Mrs. Li meets with Aunt Mei (Bai Ling), a woman known for helping women regain and retain their feminine wiles. Mei is what you might call an organic foods enthusiast. She makes her special dumplings for Mrs Li. Despite Mei looking like well, Bai Ling, she gives off the impression of being older, MUCH older. You know how old people stereotypically just blurt out what's on their mind without regard to courtesy or propriety? That's Mei. 
Mrs. Li starts noticing some positive changes in her weight, skin elasticity and looks. Mei knows what she's doing. A big secret is revealed pretty early and although the audience will hopefully be shocked and horrified, Mrs. Li certainly isn't. How far would you go to regain your youth?  Beware the gross-out. 

Cut

This is basically Saw. I believe this came out at the same time as Saw. I don't know who influenced whom or if it was pure coincidence. Cut is indeed a morality play that asks you how good are you really and what would you do to save yourself or your spouse. A successful film director (Lee-Byung Hun) returns to his spacious mansion and is knocked out. Upon waking he finds that he, his wife (Kang Hye-Jung) and a small child have all been restrained by a madman with a grudge. This madman (Im Won-Hee) spends a lot of time trying to get the director to figure out who he is. Wrong guesses or refusals to play the game are punished by beatings, screaming fits or worst of all severing of the wife's fingers. She is a concert pianist.
The lunatic was a film extra. The director was kind to this man. But this nut was so twisted that he felt embarrassed by the director's good nature. Though he admired the director he hated that not only did the director have more money, fame, and a better looking wife than he did, but also that he was a nicer person. This sent him over the edge and now crazy boy wants to humiliate and destroy the director. He wants to bring the director down to his level. 

Box
I can hardly write anything about this short without giving away spoilers so I want to see if I can describe basic things about the story and cinematography in five to seven sentences and shut up. It's a very weird flick. It once again shows that Freud and the Oedipus myth might have had some insights not just limited to the people of their time and culture but human beings in general. This film is VERY reminiscent of David Lynch's weirder stuff. It concerns a woman Kyoko (Kyoko Hasegawa) who as a child performed in a circus with her twin sister with whom she had a romantic rivalry. Now she's having dreams of her dead sister and of being buried in a box.  And dreams and reality are starting to merge.
TRAILER

Health Benefits of Exercise

Have you been exercising as much as you should? There really is a use it or lose it calculus that applies to the human body, regardless of gender or age. It's unfortunate to look around as I often do in the great state of Michigan and see people that are not using what God or evolution gave them to the best of their ability. It's like seeing someone with a brand new car treat it like garbage. This is obviously particularly noticeable in the summertime. Clothing gets skimpier but fat rolls become more apparent.

It's easy unfortunately to get so caught up in other things and leave your body to the last. Of course there are a million and one reasons behind this. These reasons can be emotional, psychological, sexual, what have you. Not everyone is meant to be a certain size of course and no one should be shamed into thinking that they're automatically less than human because they are over a certain weight. That sort of thinking is short-sighted and ugly. That said I sometimes wonder if certain heavy people these days don't go too far in denying that they have a problem. Some even attempt to bully other people into saying that morbid obesity is somehow attractive. Morbid obesity isn't attractive. And it's associated with a higher risk for a number of dangerous conditions and diseases.

Exercise and diet are really important in not only extending your life but making sure that the life you have is worth living long into the future. We're still learning a lot about how diet and exercise work on the body. That's why I thought this recent NYT article was so interesting.

Exercise promotes health, reducing most people’s risks of developing diabetes and growing obese. But just how, at a cellular level, exercise performs this beneficial magic — what physiological steps are involved and in what order — remains mysterious to a surprising degree.

Several striking new studies, however, provide some clarity by showing that exercise seems able to drastically alter how genes operate. Genes are, of course, not static. They turn on or off, depending on what biochemical signals they receive from elsewhere in the body. When they are turned on, genes express various proteins that, in turn, prompt a range of physiological actions in the body.

One powerful means of affecting gene activity involves a process called methylation, in which methyl groups, a cluster of carbon and hydrogen atoms, attach to the outside of a gene and make it easier or harder for that gene to receive and respond to messages from the body. In this way, the behavior of the gene is changed, but not the fundamental structure of the gene itself. Remarkably, these methylation patterns can be passed on to offspring – a phenomenon known as epigenetics.

What is particularly fascinating about the methylation process is that it seems to be driven largely by how you live your life. Many recent studies have found that diet, for instance, notably affects the methylation of genes, and scientists working in this area suspect that differing genetic methylation patterns resulting from differing diets may partly determine whether someone develops diabetes and other metabolic diseases.

But the role of physical activity in gene methylation has been poorly understood, even though exercise, like diet, greatly changes the body. So several groups of scientists recently set out to determine what working out does to the exterior of our genes. The answer, their recently published results show, is plenty. ..“Our data suggest that exercise may affect the risk for Type 2 diabetes and obesity by changing DNA methylation of those genes,” says Charlotte Ling, an associate professor at Lund University and senior author of the study.

So there you have it. It's important to exercise. I already knew that. But the idea that you can make genetic changes in yourself and possibly pass these changes along to the next generation was something I did not know. I'm not a scientist but I was fascinated by how some common sense admonitions (get off your a$$ and jam!!!) are backed up by science. I intend to refocus and expand my exercise program over the next few weeks. We don't have a choice in the particular genetic gifts or curses our parents granted us. But to the extent that some of what your parents gave you is negative you can overcome that inheritance by eating well and exercising. So just because say diabetes or hypertension runs in your family doesn't mean that you are doomed to acquire those conditions or that if you do you must have a shortened and less pleasant life. You, all by yourself, have the power to change your body and more importantly, change your health. That's pretty awesome. With changes in the health care system making it more explicit that to an extent, we are all our brothers' and sisters' keepers, I expect that insurance "incentives" to exercise will become a bit more shall we say noticeable.

How often do you exercise?

Have there been times when you've stopped exercising? 

If you don't exercise do you intend to start?

Detroit Woman Loses Temper Over Cell Phone

This is madness. No decent woman behaves this way in public!!
MADNESS?
THIS IS DETROIT!!!!!!

I had actually slowed down writing these sorts of posts because they're too obvious. However I am currently super busy with paid work. So this quick and short post was something I couldn't resist. I'm from Detroit. Most of Detroit's convenience stores aka "party stores", independent grocery stores, gas stations and phone reseller shops are owned and operated by citizens or immigrants of Middle Eastern descent who stereotypically, fairly or not, often have a reputation for treating their clientele with disinterest, avarice and contempt. The clientele is mostly African American and it, stereotypically, fairly or not, often has a reputation for disrespect for other people's property and flying off the handle at the slightest hint of unfairness. I've seen both groups do shady stuff. 

No one should shop where they're disrespected or cheated. I was taught that from day one. If I were in charge I would bring down the full force of criminal/civil law on people who think because they operate in Detroit they can sell postdated milk or overpriced used junk repackaged and branded as new. I would unleash city, county and state regulators on city businesses until there was no quantifiable difference in cleanliness and quality between city stores and suburban ones. But I would also remind people that if they don't like another group owning many businesses in what they consider "their" neighborhood, there's no law preventing them from getting off their rusty dusty and opening their own business. 

The African-American woman (I can't call her a lady) in the video was foul. Was the store clerk was cheating her? He may have been. Rules around refunds and returns are often quite flexible. Perhaps the shop owner or manager had noticed some irregularities with returns/refunds and insisted on a strict limited refund policy. Who knows?

I don't know the state or federal laws on refunds. I am going to look them up. But if the woman felt that she was being given the runaround, disrespected or cheated there are methods to resolve that situation which don't involve damaging other people's property or God forbid showing the world something that it really didn't ask to see. I certainly don't think there were people clamoring to see that. No. At least I know I wasn't. But as always YMMV.

                


It makes it more difficult to demand that others treat you with respect when you yourself won't act in a respectful manner. That was something a deviant three year old would do. I understand anger. There is even a body of research that suggests that it's good to vent anger rather than hold it in as many people feel compelled to do. But even venting anger has to be done within certain limits. And this woman crossed those. Even if her complaint was valid, her reaction destroyed any sympathy I would have had. 

Thoughts?

If the clerk had physically tried to prevent the woman from damaging the shop would he have been in the right?

Why didn't the woman just take the store to small claims court?

What's the worst argument/debate/fight you ever had on your job?