In Review: Three Monkeys (2008)

Yesterday, was my ‘movie marathon’ day at the 2009 BigPond Adelaide Film Festival, where I caught three films. Here they are, reviewed in the order in which I saw them.

I can’t remember if I’ve ever seen a Turkish film before, which is a pity, because if Three Monkeys is anything to go by, I have missed some terrific movies.

This is a dark, stylish, noir thriller which sees a man agreeing to take the rap for his political master who is involved in a car accident. In return for doing time for a crime he did not commit, his boss will continue to pay his salary to his family, and also settle the ‘debt’ with a lump sum payment when the man is eventually released. While he is in prison, his wife is left to hold the family together and she and her son quickly get caught up in a web of passion and betrayal.

Director, Nuri Bilge Ceylan carried off the Best Director Award at Cannes for this, his fifth feature, and it’s not hard to see why.

Three Monkeys is is a dark, brooding film, where every shot has been thought through and framed with meticulous detail. Long, intense close ups of the principal characters produces sustained psychological tension as unspoken words seem to fly through the air like knives.

The principal cast of Three Monkeys; Yavuz Bingöl, Hatice Aslan, Ahmat Rifal Sungar, and Ercan Kesal, are univerally good, but top credits should go to Hatice Aslan, the femme fatale of the piece, who has the ability to convey many layers of meaning by saying little and feeling much.

Highly recommended.

“Every shot seems lifted right off the wall of an art gallery and just as powerfully, if quietly, satisfying.” (Hollywood Reporter)

Four stars
Image courtesy of BigPond Adelaide Film Festival

Back to Jim's Website...

In Review: Vacation (2008)

Another day, another Australian Premier screening at the 2009 BigPond Adelaide Film Festival, this time the film, Vacation, the latest work from Japanese director, Hajime Kadoi.

If you had to describe the way the Japanese live based on what is depicted in their films, one word would have to sum it up. Spartan.

Vacation is more spartan than most Japanese films. Much of the drama unfolds inside the confines of the tiny cell of a prison inmate. In deed, Kaneda, the prisoner, is on death row for a crime that is never mentioned or explained. We learn nothing about what the man is thinking beyond the fact that he spends every day drawing landscapes in a large sketch book.

As the drama unfolds, we are introduced to Hirai, a prison guard who is marrying a beautiful young woman with a six year old son. His only means of getting time off for a honeymoon is to act as a “supporter” at Kaneda’s execution. Again, we learn little about the woman and her child apart from the fact that her husband has apparently died.

Or has he?

Why does the little boy spend almost all of his time drawing in a large sketch book? And why does the Hirai, the guard say “Sorry” to the boy following the execution of Kaneda, the prisoner? Could it possibly be because the woman was Kaneda’s wife, and the boy his son?

We can only guess at the answers. Like Three Monkeys, this too is a darkly sombre film – understandable given the subject matter – filled with long silences, and beautifully framed shots.

According to the program notes, Vacation was a “break-out success” when it was released in Japan last year. This is director Kadoi’s second feature film and it bodes well for the future of his career, and for Japanese film.

Three and a half stars
Image courtesy of 2009 BigPond Adelaide Film Festival

Back to Jim's Website...

In Review: Road to Roubaix (2008)

It’s late and I’m tired, so I’m going to cheat and quote from the 2009 BigPond Adelaide Film Festival program notes for this one.

“If you know bikes, you need no explanation of Paris-Roubaix, the greatest and the toughest one-day classic in world cycling. The famed 260 kilometer race over a brutally difficult cobblestone surface … is a race known as the Hell of the North which requires, as one competitor puts it, “an immense appetite for the physical toll the race can take.”

And there is this: “Here’s your testosterone hit for the festival: the poor hopeful fools in the breakaway, the implacable peloton, the dreams and bikes broken on the cobblestones, the vanquished riders coated in blood, dust and sweat.”

Unfortunately, the program promised much – but Road to Roubaix delivered little.

OK, maybe I am being too harsh, but this is definitely one for the aficionado's. At 75 minutes, this documentary spent far too much time talking to the riders, officials, and other key players in international road racing, and far too little time on the real action taking place on the cobbled Paris to Roubaix route.

Maybe the co-directors, Dave Cooper and David Deal didn’t have permission to get close enough to the action to film the actual event, and had to make do with a mix of television footage, historical photographs, and other vision to fill out their story.

Not that the story isn’t compelling.

Stars of the past and present, including Lance Armstrong, Sean Kelly, George Hincapie, and Tom Boonen, all give insights into the gruelling ordeal. One star who was not interviewed, was Adelaide rider Stuart O’Grady, who threw everything at the 2007 Roubaix – the background to this film – and went on to win it.

After the dark subject matter of the first two films reviewed above (Three Monkeys and Vacation), Road to Roubaix was a pleasant enough way to wind down my marathon movie viewing session for the day.

Two Stars
Image courtesy of 2009 BigPond Adelaide Film Festival

Back to Jim's Website...

Hold Me Tight, Let Me Go (2007)

Yesterday I also attended the screening of Hold Me Tight, Let Me Go, another premier screening at the 2009 BigPond Adelaide Film Festival, produced and directed by Kim Longinotto. This is another documentary featuring children as its central focus, but what a complete contrast to Los Herederos this film is.

To quote, in part, from the Festival notes:

“For the forty children who call it home, Mulberry Bush is their last chance. Excluded from school for extreme behaviour, and often having suffered severe emotional trauma, they are given three years at the Oxford boarding school to try to turn their lives around. The fragile young boys at the heart of her [Longinotto’s] film lash out in shockingly extreme ways -- hitting, swearing and spitting their way through the misery of their blighted childhoods.”

Forty children; 108 staff members; and days filled with tears of rage, and physical and verbal abuse from children as young as eight and nine years of age.

It is hard to believe what the teachers and staff at Mulberry Bush had to contend with. No-one could ever argue that the children attending this boarding school were over indulged or spoilt, but hasn't the school ever heard of 'time-out'. Don't they have a room where children can be left for ten minutes at a time to scream and rage on their own without putting other children and staff at risk? Wouldn't that be better than forcing staff to physically restrain errant children by virtually sitting on them?

And what staff! These people must have the patience of the biblical, Job. And just like Job, who took whatever his Lord was prepared to heap on him in an attempt to test his resolve - the staff of Mulberry Bush put up with whatever some of these children dish out to them.

Unfortunately, I couldn't help thinking that the boundaries weren't clear enough for the children, and that as long as they were (up to a point), able to get away with spitting on staff and kicking and punching them, their behaviour would take longer to control.

Of course, none of the above constitutes a review of the film, it is more a criticism of the how I felt the boarding school operated.

Again, like Los Herederos, Hold Me Tight... makes no use of voice overs or other on screen aids to try and explain what is unfolding before the viewers. Again, you are left to draw your own conclusions. Of the forty children one assumes are at the school at any one time, we are presented with just three or four - all males, although females students are clearly present.

Were the few children examined in the film the worst of forty students? The 'best' of the school? There are no clues, and no answers.

Maybe I was just emotionally wrung out from viewing Los Herederos but by the end of Hold Me Tight... my nerves were on edge, and I was happy to get outside into the sunshine and fresh air.

Three stars
Image courtesy of BigPond Adelaide Film Festival

Back to Jim's Website...

In Review: Los Herederos (2008)

Mexico has been on my wish list of go to places for some time, especially since I keep hearing so many good things about that country: its history and culture; its art, music and dance; and the remnants of ancient civilisations. On my next visit to North America I plan to travel through the southern states of the US, and since I will be in the area, I hope to include Mexico on my itinerary.

It’s safe to say, the Mexico most tourists and visitors experience is not the one depicted in Los Herederos (The Inheritors), a new documentary by Eugenio Polgovsky which screened yesterday as part of the 2009 BigPond Adelaide Film Festival. Ten years in the planning, Los Herederos follows children as they work alongside their parents and other adults in tasks as diverse as farming, brick making, weaving, the harvest of tomatoes, chili and maize, and numerous other labour intensive activities.

You will see no sun drenched beaches here; no Mariachi bands, and no luxurious hotels. Just everyday depictions of the hard daily grind of rural Mexican life.

Where the smiles are few and far between; where farming is often still done the old way – behind a wooden plough pulled behind a couple of oxen; where if you don’t work you don’t eat, and if you don’t eat you die; where this simple imperative forces even the most elderly and infirm to contribute something, no matter how little; where if you are ‘lucky’, you get to spend the day tending goats, instead of planting corn; where the ‘lucky’ girls get to spend their days weaving at the loom, instead of picking tomatoes or beans all day in open fields; where labour is always hard, back breaking and by hand; where any education or schooling is of the ‘hard knocks’ variety; and where finally, the concept of ‘doing your chores’ is meaningless, because in this world, you are born to work and contribute to the family table whether you want to or not.

How apt then, that in one scene we see a damaged alarm clock on which the thin hand ticking away the seconds is actually turning backwards!

“Rage and awe fuel my desire to pay homage to their abilities and their courage,” says writer, director, and producer, Eugenio Polgovsky.

There are few scenes of fun or rest and relaxation in this powerful documentary. Indeed, it was only the young boys herding goats who found the time to pause and look at a rainbows, or play by rolling down hills. Neither does the film show any sign of a formal education being directed towards the children in these communities.

There is very little dialogue in this film. It seemed to me that everyone was working so hard at their various tasks, they didn’t have the energy to waste on idle conversation. Neither is there any explanation in the form of a voice over or on screen text, to try and place the images we are viewing in some type of context. Polgovsky is content to let the images speak for themselves, and quite rightly so.

The scenes of children, some as young as five or six toiling for hours alongside their parents, picking beans, tomatoes and chillies, says more than mere words can ever hope to convey.

This is an eloquent portrait of the lives and daily struggle for survival of rural communities in today's Mexico. While the children may have inherited tools and techniques from their ancestors, they have also inherited their day to day hardship. Generations pass, but child workers remain captive in a seemingly endless cycle of inherited poverty.

Four stars
Image courtesy of BigPond Adelaide Film Festival

Back to Jim's Website...

In Review: Thriller In Manila (2008)

What’s the greatest boxing film ever made?

Rocky?

Raging Bull?

Million Dollar Baby?

None of the above. These after all, were actors movies. No-one got hurt in these boxing films, least of all the actors – not unless a training session went wrong and someone copped a wayward punch.

Up until now, I would have said When We Were Kings was the contender for best boxing film ever made, but now I’m not so sure because I’ve just come from a BigPond Adelaide Film Festival premier screening of John Dower’s 90 minute gut churner, Thriller in Manila.

When We Were Kings tells the story behind the George Foreman/Muhammad Ali title fight (billed as the Rumble in The Jungle), which took place in Zaire in 1974. On the other hand, the Thriller in Manila (as that fight was hyped), recounts the story leading up to the world heavyweight championship fight between Muhammad Ali and ‘Smokin’ Joe Frazier. Both films of course, use extensive footage of each title fight to drive home the power of their stories.

And what a fight the contest in Manila was. Fourteen brutal rounds beginning at 10am on a hot, humid Manila morning, just so the folks back home in America could watch it live in the comfort of their lounge rooms.

By 1975 when the fight took place, both men were at their peak as boxers. They had met on two previous occasions, each man coming away with one win. Now they were going head to head, for the third and final time. What unfolded in the searing heat of Manila is now considered one of the greatest boxing matches of all time.

This documentary tells its story through the battered eyes of Joe Frazier. It makes extensive use of archival footage, and numerous interviews with many of the surviving key personnel involved in both Ali and Frazier’s support teams, including Ali’s ringside doctor, and one of Frazier’s corner men.

It shows Ali at his best and his worst, as he stalks Joe Frazier with racial taunts of ‘Uncle Tom’, as “ignorant”, and through constant references to Frazier as a “gorilla”. For Ali, this was all part of the ‘mental game of boxing’, and he was a master of it. He knew how to psyche an opponent out, and he was using every weapon in his arsenal to try and put Frazier off his game.

But Frazier was having none of it.

Finally, when all the bluff and swagger, the arrogance and taunts, the hokey poems, and the hours of training are over, all you are left with is the ultimate physical contest between two men inside a boxing ring.

It was probably the first time that Ali had stood head to head with an opponent and slugged it out. No fancy dancing, no jokes or smart quips to the crowd – and no mercy or surrender. By the fourteenth round, both men were physically and mentally exhausted. Joe Frazier could barely see through his puffed and swollen eyes, and Ali’s body had taken such pounding to his kidneys, heart and liver that it was beginning to shut down (Frazier states in the documentary, that his constant pounding around the area of these vital organs was a deliberate attempt on his part to inhibit Ali’s ability to fight).

In the end, the fight finished not with a bang, but a whimper. Although Joe Frazier wanted to go out for the fifteenth and final round, his trainers would not let him. You can see him in the television footage refusing time and again, to throw in the towel, but his trainer, who had the final call, made the decision that gave the fight to Ali.

In Ali’s corner, a separate drama was taking place. Ali had gone back to his seat and demanded that his gloves be ‘cut off’, a clear sign that he had had enough. Ali was prepared to give the fight to Frazier, but his trainers refused.

One can only speculate now whether Ali would have refused to fight the last round with Frazier. History on the other hand records that Muhammad Ali won the ‘Thriller in Manila’.

One of the most poignant aspects of the film is watching Joe Frazier’s face as he in turn watches a film of the boxing match. You see him refighting every round with Ali, adding little comments here and there; taking the blows one more time.

While Muhammad Ali went on to make millions by selling his image to a host of advertisers, and through numerous lucrative product endorsements, Joe Frazier still lives humbly above the gym that bears his name in a poverty ridden suburb of Philadelphia.

At 63 years of age (when he was interviewed for this documentary), Joe Frazier does not make a good poster boy for the sport of boxing – and Muhammad Ali even less so. Both have been ravaged, physically and mentally by the constant pounding of sledgehammer-like blows to their heads, and yet I suspect that if either men were asked today, neither of them would probably have any regrets.

This film makes the perfect companion piece to When We Were Kings, which tells the story of arguably the greatest boxer in the history of the sport. Thriller in Manila, on the other hand, looks at this myth through the eyes of one of Ali’s greatest opponents, and casts an altogether different light on the man and the myth.

My only reservation about the film is that it is told almost entirely from Joe Frazier’s point of view. Of course, Ali himself, is no longer in any position mentally to present his side of the story. In many respects, his own words and actions speak for themselves, and viewers will have to be satisfied with these.

Over the intervening years since that great contest, Ali to his credit, has apologised on several occasions for his racial jibes against Joe Frazier, acknowledging that he had gone too far. Frazier for his part, seems to still harbour resentment for the way he was treated by Ali, and feels that Ali is now paying the price for his arrogance.

Four and a half stars
Image curtesy BigPond Adelaide Film Festival

Back to Jim's Website...

In Review: Lantana (2001)

~ The BigPond Adelaide Film Festival has begun, and I for one, am delighted. For the past several Film Festivals, I have been meaning to immerse myself in cinema for the 10 days of the event, but for various reason, mostly to do with work and money, I haven’t been able to. Now that I am ‘retired’, I have enough time and money to hopefully see between 10 and 15 films.

Unfortunately, I missed the opening on Thursday night, and didn’t see anything Friday either – so much for immersing myself in movies!

Yesterday however, I caught my first film, an encore screening of the stunning Australian movie, Lantana.

Directed by Ray Lawrence, working from a screenplay by Andrew Bovell, Lantana is a tour de force of Australian film making. Every major actor in the film gives a great performance, especially the female leads, Kerry Armstrong, Rachel Blake, Barbara Hershey and Daniella Farinacci.

The lead males are just as good. Anthony LaPaglia, Geoffrey Rush, and Vince Colosimo give top performances, and all the above are ably supported by Leah Purcell, Peter Phelps and Glenn Robbins. Even the child actors are good.

So what is it about this film that helped it scoop award after award?

The tag line for the film, ‘Sometimes love isn't enough’, gives a clue to the drama unfolding before the viewer. Relationships are put under a microscope so powerful, that nothing is able to escape its unwavering focus.

The film dissects in intimate detail the consequences of infidelity, lack of trust, and poor communication in human relationships – marriages in particular. Apart from the characters of Nick and Paula Daniels (Vince Colosimo and Daniella Farinacci), who are happy and secure in their partnership, all the other adult characters are either hiding something from their partners, or finding it difficult – if not down right impossible – to express their true feelings to each other.

Great dialogue shines throughout. Long pauses between short passages of conversation leave the viewer squirming as they watch these intensely human characters come apart before our eyes.

Dialogue: Leon Zat, (after admitting he’d had an affair): I f-cked up, all right? People f-ck up.
Sonja Zat: Really? Well, I don't. You know what's so easy, Leon? It's so easy to go out and find somebody. You know what's hard? What's hard is not to.

You might have noticed I haven’t even mentioned the plot yet. That’s because the plot, as interesting as it is, is merely the catalyst for the real drama taking place between all the couples and individuals in this complex interwoven masterpiece.

There is so much to recommend repeated viewings of this film. The incredible understated performances of Kerry Armstrong and Rachel Blake in particular, should have propelled them both onto the international spotlight. Why it hasn’t is a continuing mystery to me. Maybe they are just too good for Hollywood! Or maybe they simply haven’t been presented with scripts that allow them to work with honesty and intelligence in an industry that often has no place for either.

If you have missed this film, rent, buy, beg or borrow Lantana now, and give yourself over to its power and mastery. I guarantee it will leave you contemplating the openness and honest of your own relationships in a way you may have never done before.

Definitely, five stars out of five from me.

Back to Jim's Website...

Farewell to The ‘Marj’

~ So the ‘Marj’, that stupid, disrespectful sobriquet coined by god knows who, has finally bitten the dust.

Well might the citizenry cry: “Halleluiah! The Marj is Dead!”

Don’t get me wrong, I had no problem what-so-ever with Adelaide's new hospital being called the Marjorie Jackson-Nelson Hospital, in honour of our former State Governor, and former Olympian, but I had plenty of objections to it being called the ‘Marj’.

There seems to be some part of the Australian psyche that loves to give well known public figures stupid nicknames, like the Australian cricketer Darren Lehmann’s, ‘Boof’.

If you go to the Adelaide Now site and search for “Boof” you will find plenty of headlines with that word in the title, but precious few with the name Lehmann in them. Here are just a few:

• Boof’s push to seize cricket control
• Boof rules out SACA challenge
• Boof wields willow on red carpet
• Boof bound for India
• Boof from Pads to Punts

Some of the articles even refer to him as ‘Boof’ Lehmann, not Darren Lehmann.

If I was Marjorie Jackson-Nelson, I wouldn’t want future generations of school children left baffled and bewildered, wondering why their state hospital was being confused with margarine!

After all, how many times have you sat around the kitchen table at breakfast or dinner and said, “Pass the marj”?

I can just see the future headlines now:

• Argy bargy at the Marj (in response to controversy)
• The Marj: Premier lays it on thick (say no more!)
• Budget cuts: pass the Marj (demanding hospital be spared from budget cuts), Or…
• Budget cuts trim fat off the Marj (this is getting out of hand!)
• Health minister trips over the Marj (!!!)

I could go on, but you get the picture. In fact, the rot has already set in. Search Adelaide Now again for ‘The Marj’, and you will find these headlines:

• Marj budget burden fears
• Factions dig in over Marj
• Doctors blast 'mad Marj' plan

You’ve got to love that last one. “Mad Marj”, indeed. Little wonder then, that Mrs Jackson-Nelson asked that her name no longer be associated with the hospital.

In a poll conducted by Adelaide Now, apparently more than 54 per cent of voters thought the name change was a good move, while only 5 per cent thought it was a "disgrace and insult" to Mrs Jackson-Nelson.

Actually, it is a disgrace and an insult that only 5% thought it wasn't!

It is a disgrace that highly respected public figures like the former Governor are not kept out of the petty politics used by both side of the political spectrum to score cheap points. It is a disgrace too, that normally highly regarded members of the medical profession also stoop so low as to join the grubby scrum.

And it is an insult to a life time of personal achievement and public service that their names and ongoing memories are reduced to ridiculous nicknames like, the ‘Marj’, or ‘Boof’ or some other stupid moniker.

Image curtesy of the Adelaide Advertiser:
Former Governor Marjorie Jackson-Nelson inspecting troops during the opening of State Parliament. Picture: JAMES ELSBY

Back to Jim's Website...

Dream Songs

~ It’s 6.20 am as I write this, having just got out of bed.

I’ve been watching a young male singer perform a song which, while it sounded familiar, and while it felt like I’d seen and heard the singer and the song before, I now realise is impossible.

It’s impossible because I watch very little television at the best of times, and even when I do watch TV, I watch virtually no Video Hits type of programs, no MTV, no Pay Per View music programs, nothing. Occasionally, I catch half an hour of Rage, the late night ABC TV program that screens Friday and Saturday nights, but that happens very rarely.

I don’t even get to live gigs as often as I would like to. The last live concert I attended was the great Leonard Cohen at his recent performance in Adelaide – and the singer I’ve just been watching definitely isn’t him.

So where did the singer and the song come from? And why did I just lie there enjoying what seemed to be a well written, well performed song? Why did I not jump out of bed and write the song down while I had the chance?

Even as I type this, I can still see the young singer, standing before a microphone. Still hear the beat and rhythm of the melody. Still feel the passion and honesty of the performer.

Look at him now, as he leans into the wall and pours out his heart to the object of his desires.

But it’s too late. All I am left with are echoes of the song in my head.

I can, and will try and catch those echoes before they fade completely away, but the moment has passed, and I know from experience that all I will be left with is a pale shadow of what I have seen and heard.

Because what I have been watching and enjoying is a ‘Dream Song’. One of those perfectly formed, ephemeral creations that come to me in my dreams. Generally in the early morning hours, somewhere between sleep and waking.

I thought I had trained myself to watch out for these dream songs. To recognise them, so that I would be ready to write them down, complete and unchanged, even while still half asleep.

But this one got away from me. I was enjoying the performance and the song too much. I allowed myself to get lost in the singer and the song.

That’s it. I’m going back to bed.

I want to see if I am able to ‘follow that dream’ back to its home, and grab it before it is lost forever. To steal it back to my bedroom where so many songs have been born and nurtured. So many melodies shaped and pressed; massaged and manipulated; caressed and yes, even discarded.

Then again, maybe I should just buy myself a Dream Catcher.

Image 'Visualising Another Place' courtesy of the artist Sarah-Jane Cook...

Back to Jim's Website...

Live Fast, Die Young…

~ How many times have you heard the above phrase used casually, and with complete disregard to the full implications of its real meaning?

Of course, ‘Live fast, die young, and have a good looking corpse’ is the entire phrase.

It is often used flippantly and without thought to the real implications of what death at a young age really means to those who have lost their lives, and to those left behind dealing with the loss.

I have even used the saying myself. Hopefully, I will have the foresight to never speak those words again.

I’m writing about this because a few days ago, the 17 year old daughter of a friend died needlessly in an horrific automobile accident.

The car was driven by her 17 year old boy friend – who also died.

They were driving on a notorious stretch of country road at high speed. This particular section of road – commonly referred to as ‘The Big Dipper’ – is popular with young, teenage drivers because it is long, straight and has several large ‘dips’ in it giving you the sensation of speeding up and down a roller coaster.

The young man had recently bought the car he was driving via the online auction site, eBay. I don’t know what make and model it was, but according to police reports it was a V8; a powerful eight cylinder car that no 17 year old on ‘P’ plates* should be allowed to drive.

Last Saturday, Valentine’s Day, this young couple went for a drive in the Adelaide hills. Did they go out with the deliberate intention of driving along this stretch of road, or did they just happen to find themselves in its vicinity?

We’ll never know.

What we do know is that as they raced up and down the deep troughs of the ‘big dipper’, the young man’s V8 became airborne as it shot over a rise, travelled some 40-50 metres through the air, and smashed head on into a tree by the side of the road.

It might be comforting to think this moment of madness; this moment of youthful ‘fun’, ended in instant death – or death on impact.

It didn’t.

As neighbours rushed to the scene, drawn by the sound of the impact, the car burst into flames, and screams could be heard coming from those caught inside.

Now two families have been left to deal with the tragic loss of a son, daughter, brother, sister. Police and emergency services workers are left to deal with the psychological stress of having to remove charred remains from the scene of yet another horrific accident. Local residents are left with the sound of screaming, and who knows how many friends and acquaintances have been left behind to mourn the senseless loss of these two young people. May we all at least, learn something from this tragedy.

And may Joe and Julia rest in peace.


*P-Plates: In South Australia all new drivers, no matter what their age, are restricted to a Provisional Drivers Licence – commonly called a ‘P’ plate – for the first two years of their driving life. This Provisional Licence comes with numerous conditions and strict penalties apply to those caught breaking them.

- Photo courtesy of the Adelaide Advertiser.

Back to Jim's Website...

Aussie Ladettes To Lady

Last night to my shame, I watched the first episode of Channel Nine’s, Aussie Ladettes to Lady show.

It only confirms my belief that free to air television will do whatever it takes to keep bums on seats in front of the idiot box, just so their advertisers will have someone in the room to look at their idiotic advertisements.

There is so much wrong with this show, that it’s hard to know where to begin.

For a start, the program rewards binge drinking, and lewd and sluttish behaviour from its ‘contestants’. It does this by selecting only those young women whose behaviour is considered the worst of the worst. If you can’t top what these eight young women do with your own binge drinking and lack of self control, you don’t have a chance of being selected.

One wonders just how many women were filmed for this show by the producers before the final eight were chosen. How many young women pushed themselves to the limit (when the camera was around), to behave even worse than they might normally act, just so they could ‘win’ a spot on this trashy program?

Picture this: after taking hundreds of hours of footage and filming dozens of young women binge drinking, exposing themselves, and no doubt vomiting and urinating in the street, the producers of this trash would have sat around with profiles of each of the women in front of them, and discussed which out of all the dozens filmed, they would choose.

One can only guess at the list of criteria the producers had before them, when making their decisions.

• Borderline alcoholic – check
• Great boobs – check
• Lack of self control – check
• Will behave outrageously – check
• Will pee in the middle of the road – check
• Will expose herself for the camera – check

One of the many problems with the show is that those women who get sent home first, are the one’s who are least able to control themselves and their behaviour, and least able to examine their motives for binge drinking and behaving the way they do.

And yet often those women are the one’s who need help the most!

If the producers were at all seriously concerned about the eight young women on the show – and they are not – they would at least have counsellors on hand to help the women gain some insight into why they behave the way they do. From what I’ve seen so far, no-one; not the producers, the ‘teachers’, or the women themselves have made any attempt to do this.

It is already clear these women are not happy with the people they have become. However, putting them in a contest and trying to turn them into ‘Ladies’ will not solve the problem. If they return to the same surroundings from which they came – the same circle of friends, the same pubs and clubs, the same jobs even – who is going to arm them with the skills and insight to stop them from repeating past mistakes?

To make matters worse, the behaviour of the eight young women involved in the show is now exposed for all the world to see. And this in an age when young people are constantly being warned to be careful about what they put online. Now these women face the prospect of having their antics on display for years to come.

I wonder if the producers warned them about the implications of that?

It would appear that some of the women were unemployed, or ‘between jobs’ when they were selected for the show. Can you imagine what a great addition to any resume an appearance on the program would make?

“Yes, that was me vomiting into the bucket in episode one.”

“No, I wasn’t mooning up against the bus window – I was peeing in the middle of the road!”

Potential employers are bound to be impressed!

As if all this isn’t enough, immediately following the program, Channel Nine began advertising for participants for the next series of the show!

So off you go, girls…

Let’s see who can do the biggest projectile vomit; the loudest burp and/or fart; skull the most drinks in the shortest possible time; swear the worst; expose the most; and generally behave in the least lady-like manner imaginable.

Your “15 minutes” are about to begin.

Back to Jim's website...

At The Movies in 2009

Paste Magazine has a list of what they call the 29 Most Anticipated Movies of 2009 and it makes interesting reading.

No, make that exciting reading.

Included on the list are films by some of my favourite directors (Martin Scorsese, Terry Gilliam, the Cohen Brothers, Quentin Tarantino, and Terence Malick),with some of my favourite actors (Leonardo DiCaprio, Johnny Depp, Christian Bale, and Sean Penn).

I’m really looking forward to seeing Terminator: Salvation with Christian Bale in the lead role of John Conner. Even without Arnie as the Terminator this already looks great. According to the article, Terminator: Salvation is the first in a trilogy of films which takes the Terminator franchise even further than I had hoped. Click here to watch the trailer on YouTube.

The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus, directed by Terry Gilliam, and starring the late Heath Ledger, Johnny Depp, Jude Law, Colin Farrell is a time travel fantasy. Imaginarium was Heath Ledger's final screen appearance. Unfortunately he died before filming was completed, and his role had to be shared between Johnny Depp, Jude Law and Colin Farrell! I guess Terry Gilliam was forced to take a leaf out the Doctor Who series which often sees the time travelling Lord change from one character to another.

Then there is Shutter Island by one of my all time favourite directors, Martin Scorsese again stars Leonardo DiCaprio in his fourth collaboration with Scorsese. DiCaprio has taken the place of Robert DeNiro as Scorsese leading man, and almost every film DiCaprio makes seems to push the actor just a bit further. His great performance in Revolutionary Road with Kate Winslett is a case in point.

This film is an adaptation of Dennis Lehane's novel about a U.S. Marshal (DiCaprio) investigating a disappearance on a remote island. Also starring are Mark Ruffalo and Ben Kingsley, and a slew of Oscar nominees Michelle Williams, Patricia Clarkson and Jackie Earle Haley. Shutter Island looks like one of the 'must see' films of 2009.

The Tree of Life, directed by Terrence Malick stars Sean Penn, and Brad Pitt. Sean Penn has always been a great actor, and I can't imagine he will disappoint here. Brad Pitt has shown that he too has the potential to be a great actor, but hasn't always had an opportunity to shine given his choice of films over the past 10 years. Thankfully, his more recent performances (Babel, Burn After Reading, Benjamin Button), seem to be a return to form after the formulaic Oceans... series of films.

Speaking of 'At The Movies', the Australian ABC television program of that name has posted the results of its 2008 viewers poll, of the best films of 2008, and that makes interesting reading as well.

The top 10 films (as chosen by viewers of At The Movies) are...

[Drum roll]

1. THE DARK KNIGHT
2. BURN AFTER READING
3. JUNO
4. THERE WILL BE BLOOD
5. LARS AND THE REAL GIRL
6. IN BRUGES
7. WALL-E
8. THE BLACK BALLOON
9. IRON MAN
10 GONE BABY GONE

You can see the full list of 150 films here…

Back to Jim's Website...

Drive New Cars For Free!

~Take a look at the picture illustrating this entry. You’ve almost certainly seen vehicles like this driving around your city streets, and probably thought they were cars owned by the company whose product was being advertised. They may well have been – but increasingly, advertisers are using vehicles supplied by other companies to promote their products without the extra cost of having to invest in their own fleet of new vehicles.

Yesterday, I wrote about a scheme to help you subsidise your fuel costs. Today I’ve got a similar scheme that potentially gives you a new car to drive. For free! The people at Lease Guide dot Com seem to have looked into this and have vouched for it on their website.

Are there companies who will actually provide a free car or pay you to drive your own car?

The answer is, Yes! Companies DO exist, that pay you to drive company supplied vehicles, and they DO provide free cars. Of course, the car remains the property of the company supplying it, but you get to keep it for the length of the contract you have with them.

Here’s How it Works
Basically, you agree to drive a car that displays advertising for a company's product or service. Since you do the advertising and driving, you get a free car to drive or – and I wrote about this yesterday – you get paid to drive your own car. In some cases, you may get a free car AND get paid to drive too.

What’s The Catch?

• You have to be at least 18 years old; have a drivers license (doh!); and have an excellent driving record
• You will almost certainly have to pay for insurance and maintenance, especially if you drive your own car
• You will have to have a clean criminal record, or at the very least one with only minor offences
• You will need to be highly visible, because

How much you get paid, and whether you get a free car, depends on three main factors:

• The number of miles you drive each month;
• Where you drive; and
• Where you park

In other words, if you have any chance of being chosen, it will be on the basis of how many people potentially get to see your vehicle in an average day. Ultimately, you have a better chance at receiving a free vehicle if you drive lots of miles, and drive in heavily populated and high traffic areas. It's not hard to work out whether or not you might qualify for one of these cars-for-free programs. Look at the scheme from the advertisers point of view – after all, they want their ads to be seen by as many people as possible in a specific area.

Therefore:

• If you are a stay at home mother, who keeps her car locked away in a garage for 23 out of every 24 hours, don’t expect to get a job or a free car!
• If you live in an isolated rural area and use your SUV to drive quiet country roads, you shouldn’t expect the gig either

On the other hand, if you live in a major city and your car is visible 24 hours a day, you should have a better chance than most.

Where Do I Get the Information I Need?
The best way to find the companies that work best for you is to "subscribe" to an information directory that lists all such advertisers. These directories are compiled and provided by companies who specialize in this kind of service. There are a relatively small number of these companies, who can be found on the Internet, in newspaper ads, and in auto-related magazines.

There is typically a one-off charge for the directory subscription, and usually with a 90-day money-back guarantee. Since the directory is always changing and being updated, make sure you get a lifetime "membership" if possible, so that all future updates to the directory are free.

Make sure you are honest and provide accurate information in your application. These companies will almost certainly check your credentials, and get police checks on your bonafides, so don’t waste your time or theirs by applying for something you know you won’t get. Needless to say – but I’ll say it anyway – there is no guarantee that you will be accepted or that you will find a deal that you like, but if you don’t sign up, you will have no chance anyway.

Sign Me Up!
The two companies listed below provide free-car and drive-for-pay program directories. The directories include programs in the U.S. and other countries all over the world. Subscribing with more than one company could be beneficial but, generally, it should be expected that one company's directory will be much like another's.

Free Car Index
- A comprehensive database of ad companies that pay people to drive cars with graphic ads on them — with immediate online directory access. The companies in the directory, collectively, have over 100,000 new vehicles decorated with advertisements that are ready to be driven. The directory applies to residents of the United States, Canada, United Kingdom, France, and Australia. This company has a 100% money-back satisfaction guarantee.

Click on the image below to go to their site...



The Free Car
- This site offers a great "Car Finder" that allows you to see if there are advertisers in your area before you buy the service. There is an online application process to shorten the procedure. They also have a money-back guarantee and a nice free bonus product. This service is well worth your consideration if you are looking for a free car program.

Click here to take advantage of the Free Car Offer!

Don’t forget, both these companies offer a 100% money back guarantee, so if you have no luck within 90 days, you can ask for your money back!

Once again, if you are part of one of these schemes, or if you join one, let other readers know how useful or otherwise they are via the comments below.

Back to Jim's Website...

Sponsored Fuel Costs in the USA

This is an interesting program which lets you turn your own car into a mobile advertising display. In return for carrying the advertising message or logo of a local or national business, they pay you up to $200 worth of petrol per month.

From my reading of the website, this scheme only applies in the United States, but it seems like a great way to get your fuel costs subsidised by someone else. You can even combine more than one advertising scheme to earn more fuel points.

For example, by combining a Rear Window Decal Advertisement with two Side Rear Window Decal Advertisements you can earn $100 worth of fuel per month.

The catch?

The main catch appears to be that you must drive at least 1000 miles per month. However, if you are a courier driver, or pizza delivery person, or one of a hundred other professions that are constantly on the road, covering a 1000 miles a month may not be a big issue.

Since you are going to be on the road anyway, why not get someone else to help with your fuel costs?

Here is the full schedule of advertising types and the dollar amount of fuel per month each ad is worth.

ADVERTISING TYPE & $ AMOUNT IN FUEL PER MONTH
Full Car Wrap [1 Year Contract Required] [$200 per month]
(2) Door Magnets 12” x 24” [$30.00]
Truck Rear Tail Gate Magnet 12" x 36" [$25.00]
Rear Window Decal Advertisement [$50.00]
(2) Side Rear Window Decal Advertisements [$50.00]
Window BOX Sign Advertisement [$80.00]
License Plate Frames Advertisement [$ 5.00]
Hub Cap Advertisements [$30.00]
Front Hood Magnet Advertisement [$30.00]
Rear Window Web Address Decal [$17.00]
Truck Rear Tail Gate Web Address Decal [$17.00]

You can get more details at Free Gas Help.

If you are able to take advantage of this scheme I'd love to get some feedback about it from you.

Back to Jim's Website...

The Most Annoying Song Ever

An online poll conducted in the '90s set Vitaly Komar, Alex Melamid and David Soldier on a quest to create the most annoying song ever. After gathering data about people's least favorite music and lyrical subjects, they did the unthinkable: they combined them into a single monstrosity, specifically engineered to sound unpleasant to the maximum percentage of listeners. Amazingly, this "most unwanted music" contains little dissonance -- that would have been too easy. For the most part, they seem to have tried to assemble these elements in a listenable way.

Komar & Melamid and David Soldier's list of undesirable elements included holiday music, bagpipes, pipe organ, a children's chorus and the concept of children in general (really?), Wal-Mart, cowboys, political jingoism, George Stephanopoulos, Coca Cola, bossanova synths, banjo ferocity, harp glissandos, oompah-ing tubas and much, much more. It's actually a fascinating listen, worthwhile for the opera rapping alone.

You can listen to the song and download it to your computer at this link: The Most Annoying Song Ever...

Using the same survey data, Vitaly Komar, Alex Melamid and David Soldier also put together "Most Wanted Music." This "most wanted" version combines the elements the 500 people surveyed said they wanted most -- love, soprano sax, humble ambition, tenor sax, a marriage proposal, cheesy electronic drum fills, working the night shift, string swells, power chords, and saccharine male/female harmonies.

You can listen to the song and download it to your computer at this link: The Most Wanted Song Ever...

Ironically, if you read the comments posted to the Most Annoying Song Ever, most people love the 'song'. In fact, I haven't laughed and smiled so much in ages. I've downloaded a copy to my computer so I can listed again - and again - and again. Go figure.

Back to Jim's Website...

Downloading TV From the Internet

Ok, let's be straight up about this. If I said I’ve never illegally downloaded anything from the internet, I’d be lying. I’m not proud of this fact, but there it is.

I’m writing about this today, because “I’m mad as hell, and I’m not going to take it anymore!”

Last night, after weeks of pre-publicity, the American version of Life On Mars premiered on Australian television.

Now, normally I watch very little television, and even less if a program is on a commercial station. Why? For the same reason many others don’t watch commercial TV. The commercials. I can’t stand the damned things. I can’t stand how they constantly interrupt the action and destroy the flow of a story, often at the most interesting or exciting part of the film.

But I was willing to make an exception for Life On Mars. Partly because it looked interesting, but mainly because one of my favourite actors, Harvey Keitel was appearing in it. I figured that if Harvey Keitel was in anything, it would have to be worth watching.

I lasted 30 minutes, and then gave up. Not because Life On Mars was boring. Not because the acting was second rate, and locations uninteresting. No, I gave up because of the commercial breaks. They came literally every five minutes or so throughout the first half of the program, and after I had abused Channel 10, loudly and effusively for the second or third time, my housemate said to me, “Why don’t you download it from the Internet?”

Bingo!

“Why not indeed,” I said, and rushed off to the computer.

Can I say again, I’m not proud of what I’m doing. I’m old fashioned in this sense. It’s illegal, it’s unlawful, and if nothing else, the quality of the downloads leaves much to be desired. It is for this reason I don’t download movies or other television programs. I prefer to buy the official release because I get a lot of satisfaction out of owning the full package. My personal collection of DVDs runs to almost 300 titles – all bought legally and in many cases, expensively.

I could of course, buy Life On Mars when it is available here in Australia, but I rarely buy complete television series’, and probably won’t buy Life On Mars when it is released either. So I’ve resorted to downloading the program.

I know, I know, ‘free to air’ commercial stations can only survive if they are able to screen advertising to pay the expensive costs of providing their schedule of programs for free. But there has to be a balance. A balance between their commercial money making imperatives, and the enjoyment of the viewers.

The program guide would lead you to believe that each episode of Life On Mars runs for an hour.

Wrong.

The first episode of Life On Mars – as downloaded – runs for 42 minutes and 11 seconds (42:11). This means that almost a third of that hour – 18 minutes – is available for advertising, station promos, and trailers for upcoming shows. Eighteen minutes! No wonder Channel 10 constantly interrupt Life On Mars, and other programs every five or six minutes with their infernal breaks. In my opinion eighteen minutes is not a balance, and either I don’t watch it at all; watch it and spend every commercial break shouting at the television; buy the series when it is released; or download it from the internet like thousands of others.

Any comments from readers would be greatly appreciated.

Back to Jim's Website...

Save Money on Travel Costs

~ Last year I spent seven months travelling the world.

Well, Ok, I didn't spend the whole seven months constantly travelling, I spent nine weeks in the USA, eight of which were in New York City. Another four months were spent on the Greek island of Ikaria. And the remaining few weeks were spent either in Athens or London.

While I started out trying to keep a daily log of my expenses, I eventually gave up and instead concentrated on having a good time! After all, wasn't that the whole point of going on an extended vacation?

However... some $25,000 dollars later, I am beginning to wish I had invested a few of those thousands in an eBook I have just ordered online.

The eBook is written by Tony Morrison, who says he was a former travel agent. Tony has published his eBook, Save On Airfare Secrets to help other travellers save hundreds - if not thousands - of dollars on their travel costs.

Some of the information Save On Airfare Secrets covers includes:

• How to knock $100 right off of your next ticket!
• Earn free vouchers for airfare tickets by knowing what to say to the agent
• Twelve dirty little tricks to knock off hundreds on your airfare ticket
• How to get FREE upgrades on car and hotel rentals
• The two rules of thumb that will always guarantee you the lowest airfare costs
• A legal bait-and-switch method travel companies use to fool customers into overpaying for tickets!
• The BEST time to start planning your trip
• How to bargain for dirt-cheap prices on tickets
• How to make one phone call to an agent and receive discounts on your ticket
• How most buyers waste time searching for cheap tickets at the wrong places
• When to book flights on specific days of the week to receive discounted tickets
• How to obtain special access to the cheapest bargain tickets before anyone else
• When to fly during specific days of the year to get insanely discounted tickets
• The truth about travel agents vs airline agents that neither will ever tell you
• How to trick the airline into selling you 25 vacation packages for the price of one!
• How to save a crazy amount of money when traveling with a child

It all sounds too good to be true, but for the few dollars it is going to cost, I am willing to take a chance on Tony's eBook to see what I can learn about the travel industry.

Right now, Tony is offering a bunch of other eBooks with his Save On Airfare Secrets publication.

I've decided to order it now, even though I am not going to be travelling a lot this year. However, I do plan to go overseas again in 2010, and I want to be well informed before I do so. Of course, I will also use the publication to help family and friends save money on their travel expenses as well. Any success we have will be reported back here, so keep coming back to this blog for the latest updates.

If you want to check out or order Save On Airfare Secrets for yourself just click on the highlighted Save On Airfare Secrets links.

By the way, some of my previous blog entries were posted while on my vacation, so if you have the time, feel free to check out the entries and videos of that trip.

Back to Jim's Website...

This Land Is Your Land (Reprise)

In my last entry, I talked about Pete Seeger and Bruce Springsteen's performance of This Land Is Your Land at the 2009 Inauguration concert for President Barack Obama.

Here is a YouTube clip of the same song, this time as recorded by Woody Guthrie himself. The vision seen here shows Woody Guthrie caught on two vary rare film clips.

The first carries the date, 1945, and appears to be at an outdoor location. This captures Woody as many might expect him to be seen -- singing at a hobo camp or to a group of itinerant workers somewhere. Of course, we have no way of knowing what the real circumstances behind this recording is. It may have been filmed for a very early television program or documentary film. It's not even clear if he is in fact singing This Land... during this clip.

The second piece of footage dated 1946 shows Woody Guthrie performing with Sonny Terry and Brownie McGee, again probably for a very early television program, or film. They are almost certainly not performing This Land... but it doesn't matter.

Just to see an iconic figure like Woody Guthrie caught on film is enough.



Why do people like Woody Guthrie become such iconic figures. After all, it is not as if he found a cure for cancer, or made some other great scientific discovery. And yet Woody seems to have found a place in popular history -- the people's history, if you will -- that has cemented his place in the pantheon of great individuals who have touched other peoples lives in ways they would never have thought possible while they were living their own.

Maybe it is because people like Woody, and Pete Seeger, and Leadbelly walked the walk, and talked the talk. They lived in an age when what you did with your life and art, was always more important than who you slept with, or how you dressed, or whether you had added a few pounds to your butt over the summer.

They also lived in an age when they could carve out a niche for themselves in music, or theatre or the arts. Today, people like Woody and his contemporaries might still carve out a small niche for themselves in the modern music business, but only as curiosities -- as some sort of throwback to an age or era long past and almost forgotten.

Thank goodness these small remnants of film and audio exist to remind us of their greatness and their existence in the world.

Back to Jim's Website...