Be Kind Rewind

So we rented Be Kind Rewind last week and loved it.  The movie was a good concept, but even if I didn't like it I think I still would have a greater appreciation for the director, Michel Gondry.  Gondry also did Dave Chappelle's Block Party.  Be Kind Rewind takes on the same spirit of Block Party where the cast and crew of the movie embraced the neighborhood in which the movie took place.  Watching the DVD extra feature about the movie you see how the movie takes place in the real life small town in New Jersey, which due to economic difficulties is not what it once was.  It seems as though everyone that wanted to be a part of the movie was given that chance and what is more admirable is that the actors don't seem to have spent their time on the set locked away in trailers, but rather hanging out with the people.  I understand that not every movie can be made like this what with crazy stalkers and huge multimillion dollar stars like Brad Pitt or Tom Cruise.  However, it is nice to see movies that are able to allow real people to connect with the stars. 

Similarly with Gran Torino the casting for the Hmong people was exclusively for real life Hmong individuals.  The casting call was held specifically in cities with large Hmong populations.  The Hmong cast was largely made of first time actors and they were encouraged to improvise their dialogues when speaking in Hmong.  Clearly both movies found innovative ways to incorporate "real" people into the movies and I hope more movies follow this lead. 

Gran Torino

I'm well behind in my blogging.  At least 3 weeks ago we went to see Gran Torino with Clint Eastwood and well no one else famous.  The highlight of the movie was the relationship that Clint Eastwood had with the boy.  I particularly enjoy how Eastwood doesn't come across as putting on too much of a facade for this role.  I'm sure he's not a racist person, but I have a feeling that in real life he is not entirely that much different from his character.  His character was a person who was very straightforward and strong willed.  I think the other thing that really made this movie was the writing.  As intense as a movie as this was I found my self laughing very hard for at least a third of the movie.  One of the best scenes in the movie is when Eastwood is trying to teach the boy "how to talk like a man" and has him observe as he and a barber have an exchange.  Following the observation comes the practice as the boy has to have his own exchange upon walking into the shop and the result is priceless.  What ultimately stayed with me after I left the movie was how a man who was so vehemently racist against a particular group of people connects so easily (to his surprise) with those same people. 

Lets catch up soon...

It's almost as though the phrase, "lets catch up soon" is a mantra in California.  I feel this way so often that I'm convinced I have blogged about it before.  I don't want to complain and whine on my blog (then again it is my blog to complain and whine on), but it's something that bothers me.  I wonder how genuine the sentiment is when people say it.  I understand that people are busy (more so in California than in other states I feel), but I have heard this phrase so often it's almost to the point where it goes in one ear and out the other.  Do you really want to catch up with me soon?  If so tell me when...don't placate me with vague statements.  I know I am guilty of this also so in an effort to not be hypocritical I'm going to be more mindful.  I'm going to try not to say this without following up with, "what are you doing on..."

A failed protest

By definition a protest should express a strong objection to a situation or decision. In my mind the protest last night in Oakland against the BART police was a failed protest. I think it started out in a successful way with people peacefully blockading one station, but it was all downhill from there. It seems that the mob mentality took over and people had an "excuse" to release their anger and frustration. The reason I think it failed is because the protesters started destroying personal property. Personal property of people unconnected to the BART, BART police, or the incident. I'm not saying that if the property belonged to BART or BART police it would be ok, but it might be somewhat understandable. If anything I think by destroying other people's property the protesters further alienated their cause and worked against themselves. If I was a store owner and protesters destroyed my store front I can say that while I may sympathize with the plight of the victim's family I would have a hard time joining the fight against the police. It makes me so angry that people can be swept up so quickly through mob mentality into becoming this destructive force. Of course it is likely that the media blew it out of proportion and that not as many of the protesters were being destructive, but I clearly saw one private vehicle in the pictures that was on fire. I keep thinking about what if that was my vehicle or my store, which is why even if it was just a few people that's no excuse.

One of the key opinions that is floating out there is that why does this happen now? Of course it is a tragedy that someone had to die for fighting on a train, but what about the skyrocketing murder rate in this town. The murder rate is so high that there is a complacent attitude with each new murder. Where is the outrage over those murders? The difference is that there is a video here and the responsible party was in a position of authority. If there was evidence that each of the murders in Oakland were committed by officials in positions of authority there would be a lot more outrage. Unfortunately that's not the case and as a result no one thinks twice for the other deaths.

What would you do?

We caught a bit of a TV show on ABC called, "What Would You Do?" the other night.  The premise was pretty straight forward: put some actors and hidden cameras in a strange situation (racist coffee shop workers, obnoxious American tourists in Paris, etc.) and see what real people will do.  When someone says or does something interesting the camera people and host come running out of some hidden corner to find out why they did (or said) what the did.  The tv show is not really the point of this post though.

There was a shooting at a BART station (one station south of us) at 3-4am on New Years Eve.  A brief summary of what went down is that some partygoers returning from New Years celebration in the city were in a fight in one of cars.  As the car approached the next station BART HQ was notified and dispatched officers to the station to meet the train.  The train was held at the station while the situation was diffused.  The officers had most of the involved parties lined up on the ground on a wall.  For some reason they wanted one of the people to lay down and while he was on his stomach (and not in cuffs) they have said he looked like he was reaching for a weapon.  One of the officers shot him in the back.  The bullet ricocheted off the ground and reentered his chest (he died later).  As if the situation wasn't bad enough in today's digital age everyone on the train had a cell phone, digital camera, etc. and sure enough a few days later videos began to surface of the incident.  I want to address the digital camera in another post. 

After the tv show and this incident I'm left wondering what would I do?  If I was in the situation as the suspect or a bystander.  The obvious answer is do everything that the officer says and lay on the ground, but that looks like what he did.  It is harder as a bystander, because the police are who should be able to go when a situation is that volatile.  The police should be able to calm a situation down and gain control.  I wonder if officers would benefit from some sort of non violent conflict resolution classes or even indirect non violent theory/teachings. 

There is a lot more that I want to say about this, but I can't come up with it quite yet. 

July 25th vs. December 25th

During the Christmas Eve talk and discussion that we attended one of the points that was brought up was that there should be no difference between July 25th and December 25th (or any other day).  I like this idea and have already made attempts to live in this manner by not having an over the top birthday celebration.  The likely initial response to a suggestion like this is why should we "step down" recognition of a special day that comes once a year (birthdays, Christmas, Diwali, etc.).  I would argue that we don't need to "step down" their recognition, but "step up" the recognition of the other days.  Often on special days we bring out our best of everything: clothes, dishes, table linens, etc.  Why save those things for the big days?  We were recently gifted a box of very nice and special incense.  When the time came last night to do a prayer for difficult time in our family I was reluctant to use this incense.  My thought was that well this is good stuff and we shouldn't use it for sad moment.  I was wrong.  The HyWy pointed out to me this is the moment we have to use it, because one thing we have learned over the past year is the impermanence of life.  This lesson brings back so many memories (as I slightly drift off topic) from when I was a kid.  I would go trick or treating for Halloween and then sort out my candy.  After I had found exactly the candies that liked the most I would hide and save them.  I would save them and eat the smallest amount at a time.  The majority of the time the candy would end up being saved until the following Halloween at which point my mom probably found them and threw them away.  Perhaps that will be my New Years Resolution...to "step up" my celebration and embrace everyday as something special. 

It's times like these...

It's times like these you learn to live again.
It's times like these you give and give again.
It's times like these you learn to love again.
It's times like these time and time again.

-Foo Fighters 'Times Like These'-