Just another blogs.elsweb.org weblog

Hey Jim, I did what you said.  I picked a new theme.  When I sent a comment to Stephanie at “Gone but not Forgotten” it showed up as anonymous.  What’s the deal?  I have now switched back to “Waterlily.”  Thanks.  Carmen

April 7th, 2007 at 3:40 pm | Comments Off on Jim Groom again please | Permalink

I’ve read almost three chapters so far and am really enjoying it.  Already it is presenting itself with the notion of time.  That is, Eben seems preoccupied with the idea of controlling time.  This is always interesting because it seems to be at the heart of everyone’s decisions in life.  We’re always trying to “save time,” we’re running out of time, or we just want to go back in time. 

There’s also a strong connection between art and life.  Mr. Mathews tells Eben not to paint landscapes because they don’t reflect time.  But the sketch of Jenny does.  He can’t just be referring to her clothes because that is just a superficial triviality.  I’m waiting to see what all this means.  I wonder if Jenny grows up faster, as the novel hints at, to be with Eben.

April 7th, 2007 at 2:04 pm | Comments Off on Portrait of Jenny | Permalink

Hey Jim,  I picked a new theme.  It’s Ocadia.  Hopefully this will work.  I’m going to try responding to someone’s blog.

April 7th, 2007 at 1:41 pm | Comments Off on Jim, I picked a new theme | Permalink

Jim, I having trouble with my comments again.  They’re showing up as comments to my own posts.  This happens when I haven’t even logged in yet.  What’s the deal?

 Carmen

P.S. I have tried deleting the comments and sending them to where they were intended to go but they’re still showing up 24 hours later.

April 6th, 2007 at 3:56 pm | Comments Off on This is for Jim Groom | Permalink

What came across to me in Fast, Cheap and Out of Control was the four men trying to control their environments, and by doing so they could exert control over their lives.  They did not appear God-like to me, but rather they strove to counter-balance the influence of God or nature or whatever you want to call it (I call it God, but nowadays that’s not PC) in their lives. 

The Topiary Gardner

The topiary gardner literally created the animals from the shrubbery he tended to.  He seemed to love those animals the way a mother loves her child.  He nurtured their growth by preening out the unwanted branches while encouraging the new leaves to grow.  He waited for the rain that would feed them and turn them into what he was hoping they would become.   I noticed in several shots that right after he pruned them into their perfect shape, it would rain and you could see the new growth that threatened to ruin the smoothness and perfect shape that he had created.

The Naked Mole Rat Man

This man bothered me because he took the mole rats out of their environment in Africa and transplanted them into the zoo.  They could have very easily died in their new, alien environment.  Then what would he have to study?  Most likely he would have found some other poor, unsuspecting creature to “observe” in the name of science.  For me, he represents the ultimate in man’s selfishness and disregard for other life forms.  He became detached from the mole rats as creatures and saw them as merely objects of interest.  People do this to each other all the time in the name of science or ethnic cleansing (think Hitler or slavery in the US).  This  was very scary and I think Morris intended to show this potential in man.

The Wild Animal Tamer

I’m an animal lover and hate to see animals subjected and lowered to being beaten and forced to perform for mankinds’ benefit.  Like the naked mole rat man, the wild animal trainer was hard to watch.  I kept hoping that one of the lions would eat him or at least maim him to the point that he would have to retire.  Perhaps this guy was the most eager to manipulate his environment or at the very least, try to mitigate the effects it had on him.  He had to employ animal psychology in order to dominate the animals.  However, we all know that those animals could have turned on him at any time.  I don’t know if taming the animals made him feel like more of a man, or if it was just an adrenaline rush and he was a thrill junkie.  I think Morris included him because he was the “ultimate manipulator” of his environment.  It’s interesting to me that he was not hurt more seriously than he was the time that the lion caught hold of his watch and sent him to the hospital for three months.

The MIT Robotics Engineer 

The role of the robotics engineer was to highlight the ego of man.  I mean to think that man is capable of giving life to an inanimate object through the construction of some metal and binary loops is completely insane and laughable.  This guy has an ego the size of Mt. Rushmore.  This guy was so completely ridiculous as to make him pitiful.  He’s the guy that never gets the girl and doesn’t know why.  He may have really be lieved he was God (that’s a role reserved for doctors who think they’re God and lawyers who think they can beat God.  But that’s a whole other dynamic).  Anyway, I digress.  How could this guy reduce the beauty and mystery of life to a set of feedback loops and metal legs?  It takes more than that to create a life.  Every being needs a soul or an essence.  That is what was missing from the robots.  They will never have a soul.  They will never have a temper or appreciate the aroma of chocolate chip cookies fresh from the oven.  As I’ve said before, this man was the most dangerous in his belief that he could create life.

On a final note, I noticed the numerous times that things were being expelled from things.  For example, the men in the circus were shot out of cannons, bullets were shot out of guns, and the mole rats seemed to burst through their tunnels.  It made me think of childbirth.  I wonder if it’s a mere coincidence that Morris chose to portray men in the film “giving birth” to their creations.  It’s interesting that no women were interviewed or profiled.  Not sure what that part means or if it was even his intention.

April 5th, 2007 at 4:03 pm | Comments Off on Mitigating God | Permalink

After watching the rest of “Gates of Heaven” and “The Thin Blue Line” I don’t understand what all the fuss about Morris is.  GOH was mildly entertaining and touching in its portrayal of peoples’ love for their pets.  TTBL had value in that it may have released an innocent man from death row.  Of course that has tremendous value.  That’s the good I see in Morris.  However, what I don’t recognize is his greatness.  I mean this with the utmost respect for his efforts and for Dr. Campbell’s decision to include him in the course.

 I have noticed in both GOH and most strikingly in TTBL the way in which Morris uses the juxtaposition of red and white.  In the beginning of TTBL, we see the big ball in Dallas with all the white lights.  All around are blinking red lights.  If the red lights symbolize Hell, then the white lights must symbolize Heaven.  David Harrris is shown wearing his prision-orange jumpsuit (a shade of red), whereas Adams is shown wearing all white.  The patrol car depicted in the re-enactment is white with its bright red lisghts screaming.  I don’t know if Morris did this intentionally or not.  I’m tempted to say yes since Dr. C. mentioned the blinking red lights being representative of Hell.  Naturally, I took the binary opposition and ran with it.  I think after all, Morris just might be more concerned with making a connection to humanity than in making a really “good” film.

April 2nd, 2007 at 9:02 am | Comments Off on Still Don’t Get Errol Morris | Permalink

I don’t get it.  What is Morris trying to project?  What is his motivation?  He must have some deeper drive than to just show us how the other half lives.  Vernon, Florida is only interesting because I love animals.  I admire the devotion to the companion animals and their desire to honor their lives by honoring their memories, but that’s it.  So far, I have yet to see the genius that is Morris that everyone is raving about.  Maybe the second half will make jore sense.

March 30th, 2007 at 8:20 pm | Comments Off on I Don’t Get Vernon, Florida So Far | Permalink

This is the title of an article published in the Weekender section of the Free-Lance Star today.    The exhibit is at The Phillips Collection in D.C.  Among the attractions are Muybridge’s horse in motion and Rosa Bonheur’s  1855 painting “The Horse Fair.”  This cannot be a mere coincidence since we just talked yesterday about many of these very things discussed in the article.  Anyway, instead of trying to discuss what is in the article and showing just what I don’t know about film, I’ll just give you the facts.

What:  “Moving Pictures: American Art and Early Film”

Where:  The Phillips Collection, 1600 21st Street, NW, Washington, D.C.

When:  The exhbibt will remain on display through May 20.  Gallery hours are Tuesday -Saturday 10-5 pm, with extended hours on Thursdays 10-830 pm and Sunday, 12-6 pm.  Closed on Mondays.

Cost:  $12.00 for adults, $10.00 for visitors 62 and older and students, and free for visitors 18 and younger.

Info:  202.387.2151 or phillipscollection.org

Enjoy. 

March 29th, 2007 at 3:26 pm | Comments Off on ‘Moving Pictures’ Links Art and Film | Permalink

 Everyone has their own version of reality.  This includes filmmakers.  They create and manipulate our perceptions of reality to suit a purpose, whether it be artistic or monetary.  Our job as the audience is to decide whether or not we’re willing to be manipulated.  I am perfectly willing to be manipulated when it comes to watching a movie.  The ones I like best are those that I know could never really happen or those that leave me more than a little confused.  Anyway, I think there has to be a better word for it than “reality” but I just can’t seem to think of one right now.  The power of cinema is the ability to alter our perceptions for a short time and escape our current circumstances.  I don’t remember who it was that said that the film/camera was the only way to capture reality and thus the only pure art form (feel free to jump in as I’m unsure about this) but of course, I totally disagree.  The camera is more like an intruder into reality and because of its presence, is more likely to alter reality and change the natural course of events.  It interferes with spontaneity. 

March 28th, 2007 at 9:34 pm | Comments Off on What is Reality? | Permalink

Attending to details is what “Vernon, Florida” is all about.  Right off the bat, the turkey hunter tells us that he has to be real quiet and just listen for the sound of the “gobble.”  He talks about looking for the turkey tracks.  My favorite part though is the guy that talks about looking at jewels under the loop.  He doesn’t know why jewelers do that, or what they’re looking for, but he knows it’s important to do this.  I thought he had a lot of wisdom to offer if one could just empty their mind and attend to the little things in life.  Don’t ask me why this was important to Morris.  While watching the movie, I kept getting the feeling that there were all these little things I needed to be doing.  That is difficult though, because in order to do the little things one has to quiet their mind.  And right now my mind is a jumble of things to do before graduation gets here.

March 23rd, 2007 at 11:50 am | Comments Off on Attending to Details | Permalink