Showing posts with label Cuba. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cuba. Show all posts

Thursday, February 27, 2025

Completed Category: Documentary Feature

My second-to-last completed category!  One more nominee to see after this. 

Documentary Feature Film
Black Box Diaries
No Other Land
Porcelain War
Soundtrack To A Coup d'Etat
Sugarcane

Let me just say, once again, that whether a documentary is interesting or good is not based on the topic.

 There can be an amazing documentary about a subject in which I have no interest that has me riveted. Or, the opposite: a topic I would love to know more about can be covered in a terrible documentary, making for an excruciating 2.5 hours, such as is the case with Soundtrack To A Coup d'Etat.  Holy cow is this a boring look at the mid-twentieth century tragic and murderous foreign policy of Belgium and the U.S., and political shenanigans in the Congo, up to and including the murder of Patrice Lumumba. I am deeply interested in this history! This documentary bored me immensely. Also, it was irritating. There's this whole jazz motif going on, and it drove me straight up a wall.  I really don't like jazz and I'm pretty sure that's related to how much I hate this film.  The film is constructed of various jazz music that is sometimes lyrically appropriate and sometimes relevant because the film at that time is talking about when Louis Armstrong or whoever traveled to Africa at that time -- so many layers, like a piece of jazz music, right?  Ugh. It was awful. There were actually close-ups of people singing where you could see their saliva - gross, shudder.  And the shots of Dizzy Gillespie's puffy cheeks gave me the fantods. Now, on the other hand, the frequent clips of Malcolm X talking were by far a highlight of this film - more of that, please. Less of everything else.  Side note: this is not solely about "We Didn't Start the Fire" (Belgians in the Congo!) but also a fair bit of Car 54 Where Are You?  (Khrushchev's due at Idlewild!) 

Anyway. Onto the four good documentaries! 

Black Box Diaries - haunting, stunning achievement, quite personal while being globally relevant, as one woman documents her pursuit of justice in the aftermath of a sexual assault. Why are men. 

No Other Land -  depressing, infuriating look at oppressively macho Israeli military posturing over a bit of land that they would like to forbid Palestinians to live on, for no discernible reason.  

Porcelain War - still more depressing stuff, with art and nature and beauty struggling to keep their heads above the mass of violent warfare that is the Russian invasion of and war in Ukraine.  

Sugarcane -  another personal depiction that meanders through major trauma and its effects years and decades later on the survivors of "Indian schools" in Canada as well as on their descendants. I really thought this was well done, with the weaving of one personal search for healing amid the wider community and even world search for healing related to this horrible bit of history. 

There is really only one that I can't bear to see win, but my order in which I'd like to see them win:  Sugarcane, Black Box Diaries, Porcelain War  (really, any of those three!), then No Other Land

Order in which I think they'll win: 
Maybe Porcelain War? Or Black Box Diaries.  I might like Sugarcane more than some other people do, but I did notice Lily Gladstone's name as an Executive Producer, which probably means she'll have  successfully campaigned it to some extent.  No Other Land probably won't work for some people. I don't know who votes for Soundtrack to a Coup d'Etat ... Steely Dan fans? Overwrought fever dreaming men? I don't know. 

Which documentary did you think was the best? 



Sunday, February 25, 2024

Completed Category: Supporting Actress

 Yesterday I finally saw the new The Color Purple, thus completing a category!



In fact, I didn't just watch the new The Color Purple but instead made a day of it and watched the 1985 movie and then in the evening, this Awards Season's flick, which is an adaptation of an adaptation of an adaptation. You know, some Awards Season jabberers are really throwing around the nonsense that this new movie is "an adaptation of the book."  That is such a lie. For one thing it is based on the musical straight up. Like, your screenplay includes book and songs from the musical. Pretty sure those songs weren't in Alice Walker's book!  (I read it!)  And then, I suppose someone COULD skip over the 1985 film adaptation - but you didn't. It is absolutely referenced and incorporated in many ways.  Multiple cast members are on the record saying this. Let's be real. Anyway, none of that is the point of this post! 

EMILY BLUNT, Oppenheimer: She was fantastic in this. I know, I know, when is she not? But my goodness does she elevate her part to the very very most it can possibly be. You know Christopher Nolan wasn't going to write a killer female part in this manly male man-fest of maleness but Emily Blunt took what was written and made it the absolute most because she's one of the greatest actresses working today, period. I want her to win an Oscar! 

DANIELLE BROOKS, The Color Purple: She was definitely great. The whole talented cast of this was great, but I suppose we had to focus on someone and she sure was strong and confident and funny and heartbreaking and amazing in each of her scenes, so I am very OK with this nomination.  She also mentioned that in at least one scene she consciously paid homage to Oprah (who played the role in the 1985 film this is an adaptation of an adaptation of). Does that help her chances here? I say it couldn't hurt. 

AMERICA FERRERA, Barbie:  I almost forgot about this for a second! (or rather, a month, since the nominations came out)  Of course her monologue went viral last summer as everybody discovered Feminism 101 through Barbie, and listen: I am OK with Feminism 101 - y'all have to start somewhere! -  but she also had a little bit more going on in this film than just that.  Still, even if you score straight up zero picks on your ballot and lose your entire Oscar pool, if you take a side bet about which clip from Barbie will be shown for her clip for this category, you can still win something for the evening.  As for the actual award, here, I think she is in honor-to-be-nominated territory. 

JODIE FOSTER, Nyad:  Oh godz do I want her to win. However! I also have to point out that this was really pushing it on the Supporting vs. Lead thing, which you know is my pet peeve, and on which this year otherwise is doing very well overall.  Jodie really is a co-star of this movie. But she of course gets marketed as Supporting - and not because the role is in fact Character Who Supports The Other Star in her life and quests, but because this charade is the very favorite nonsense Awards Season charade we have to endure every year.  And because that is annoying, I won't be 100% mad when she doesn't win. But I also will be fine if she shocks the hell out of everyone and wins  - which could juuuuuuuust possibly happen because she is so well-liked and connected to SO.MANY. Academy voters, and because her performance was absolutely off-the-charts.  Pitch perfect every single second. 

DA'VINE JOY RANDOLPH, The Holdovers:  You know, as I was just typing her name, I wondered: what did kids with apostrophes in their names do for that bubble back when we filled in the bubbles on the standardized test and scantron answer sheets?  Huh. Have I really never talked about this?  Two of my close friends in high school had punctuation marks in their names. Anyway, Da'Vine (or is it Da'Vine Joy?) has been winning a few statues these past few months and it's looking likely that this will be another for her. It was the scene in the kitchen that did it, I think - but also she does throw a fair amount of sass to Paul Giamatti's character, which he richly deserves I might add.  Everyone loves a misfit friends story (at least I do) and she's a strong, kind, but also fun part of this one. 

Order I want them to win: 
Jodie Foster
Emily Blunt
Da'Vine Joy Randolph
Danielle Brooks
America Ferrera 

Order I think they will win: 
Da'Vine Joy Randolph
maaaaaaaybe Jodie Foster
Emily Blunt
America Ferrera 
Danielle Brooks

They were all so great!  What a cool-ass group of actresses. 

Seriously take that Barbie monologue side bet though, if you can get anyone foolish enough to go against you on it. 


Wednesday, October 29, 2014

How None of Us Learned to Stop Worrying and Love Ebola

I cannot believe -- and yet, I can -- how Ebola in the USA has been twisted into a political issue.

Leave it to the U.S.of.A., where all-or-nothing is the name of the game. Last week, if you're one of my "smart" and "rational" friends, you were supposed to post to Facebook at least once a day that the "panic" about Ebola was unwarranted and that you were far more concerned about (take your pick:) measles/flu/guns/unvaccinated children/marrying a Kardashian. If you were one of my wary-of-Obama friends, you were supposed to unleash a screed about federal/CDC incompetence and insecure borders.  If you were in New York, you were encouraged to be nervous and show your support for the mayor's swift action in response to the guy who rode the subway and bowled, because apparently liking the mayor is politically acceptable. But whoa, once the governor of New Jersey got involved with a detained nurse, it was time to start ranting about human rights, because Christie is apparently scandalous and likes to play with the forces of disorder, and traffic, for reasons best known to himself, or maybe he's just a Republican and therefore is surely denying someone of some civil liberty or other at all times.

If you were, say, me, and you had been following the Ebola-in-West-Africa story since the middle of the summer, fascinated by the facts (note: facts) since well before last month when apparently the "American people" "began" "following" it, and you had spent three of the formative Ebola-in-North-America weeks getting your news in the E.U., you might just feel a little bewildered, as you so often do, by your countrypeople.

I don't actually know a single person who is panicked about catching Ebola, but I do know a whole lot of people responding to "all" the "panic." For one thing, every journalist who writes a line like "folks are in a panic about Ebola" should be required to cite three examples of the alleged "panic" before continuing with the story. On the other hand, delightful stories about the good-humored cruise ship passengers, grateful for their vouchers and compensation from the "SS Ebola" that was not allowed to dock in Mexico, are much appreciated.

Now, regarding quarantines: you're supposed to pick a side here, too, of course, but all of the To Quarantine or Not to Quarantine talk obscures the actual issue, which is a lack of globally organized official universally enforced protocol.

As for Kaci Hickox, my goodness. Regarding how she comes across in the media, is this really the best she can do? My understanding is that she is trying to be some kind of light on a hill, speaking up and speaking out on behalf of all those (all? who?) who will come after and be subject to the terrible deprivations of human rights she experienced and blah, blah, blah. Well, I find her a bit annoying, to be honest. Why? Because I read her editorial. Her actual words (or, if ghostwritten, which I suppose is likely, the actual words she is claiming for her own). They were pretty terrible, those words. Lots of emotional manipulation (but, the C-minus kind, that actually fails to manipulate, thus not even rising to the level of a movie based on a Nicholas Sparks book) and a whole lot of intellectual disconnect, which is never exactly reassuring in a nurse. I mean, come on, lady. "What had I done wrong?" She said that a lot. "Wondering why this was happening to me." Are you actually serious? I mean, do you actually have any access to any media whatsoever? Yeah, uh, that's why this is "happening" to you, fresh off the plane from Sierra Leone. And just kind of by the way, leave your exhausting-layover-poor-pitiful-me -two-days-of-international-travel out of it. Because get over it. You're not the only person who has crossed an ocean and been tired upon arriving in your homeland. Enough. Whoever wanted a poster child for the Don't-Overreact-to-Ebola cause picked the wrong one. (Although, I am painfully aware that in a world where The Hunger Games and Gone Girl are considered to be well written, she might actually, tragically be the right one.)

I suppose there's nothing to be done if Amber Vinson and Craig Spencer and Kaci Hickox (oh, Andy, if you only knew how very many ways there are to get your fifteen!) want to be all defiantly cavalier about being out and about in the world, what with their professional know-how and their it's-so-hard-to-catch, and they want to go gallivanting off to bowling night and wedding planning weekend and other essential life events in the hours before they become symptomatic, but the disingenuous cries of what's-everybody-in-a-fuss-about have just got to stop. People are concerned (note: not in a fuss, actually, turns out) because they do not want a hemorrhagic fever that causes them to bleed and spew from multiple openings. They would like to just learn about interesting developing new stories in the world without having everyone falling all over themselves to prove that they are not hysterical by inventing more hysteria about the alleged hysteria. Being interested in Ebola does not mean "I am terrified I'm going to catch it," Wondering just what the hell a 21-day monitoring period consists of when it doesn't consist of, you know, monitoring is actually a fairly rational question.

And don't even get me started about the heroes. Actually, I'm a little shocked and awed (see what I did there?) by how quickly people have taken to this whole healthcare-volunteers-in-Africa-are-heroes storyline, particularly because of the word choice. "These heroes should be respected upon their return," intone the talking heads (and writing hands). "Heroes," says Obama. "Heroes," says Governor Pat Quinn of Illinois. Heroes, heroes, heroes. What must our military heroes be thinking in response to this outright theft of their moniker?? All those thousands and thousands of soldiers out there around the world "defending" "our" "way of life" from the people who "hate freedom" must be good and pissed that a bunch of life savers are taking their label away.

But are the healthcare workers really heroes? Really?  Well, maybe. Doctors Without Borders is one of the greatest organizations known to humankind. Important parts of my life have been inspired by it, clearly (I'll give the slow among you a chance to get your heads around that one). (Hint: scroll up.) But the barrage of heroes-heroes-heroes in the media is gross and unnecessary for the usual reasons: 1. It's being carefully applied, have you noticed?, to United Statesians who trot off from the United States to West Africa to help fight disease before returning to the United States where they should be welcomed by their fellow United Statesians. My goodness, why don't any other nationalities send doctors and nurses to West Africa...oh wait. Right. 2. Like so very, very many things that are uttered, it says more about the speaker than the person being described. Just like the patriotic hearts-a-flutter folks who dutifully thank the military heroes every other month when a national holiday rolls around (they're allowed to take Columbus Day off), these "health care workers are heroes" people say it and then feel satisfied, as if their work here is done, now that they've busted out the h-word. No need for actual thoughtful discourse or critical thought. "I like heroes! See! I'm a good person! Now, get me back to my high-def LCD air-conditioned gas-guzzling meat-eating gluten-free vacuous oblivious life."

By the way, have you heard? If we quarantine these heroes-- or even sometimes if we monitor them, depending on whom you ask -- when they return from West Africa, then this will deter other heroes from going to help. Because, you know. The people who volunteer internationally, the ones who have medical expertise and know-how and are willing and able to travel to the location of a disease outbreak and who spend time on the ground in West Africa..? Yeah, they're going to be okay signing on for all that, but shit, throw in three weeks of monitoring when they get back, in the comfort of their home, while they decompress from the trip? That's it, people! The deal's off!  What the hell? It's almost as if the people talking about what international volunteers think don't have any actual international volunteer experience or something...

I'll just be over here in the corner with people who won't call someone a "hero" if s/he loses his/her shit when faced with the prospect of a 21-day monitoring period and would actually let that alter his/her plans to travel to West Africa to help with this crisis.

But that's just this week's narrative. The previous two weeks it was all about travel bans. Travel bans bad, chanted the forces of smart/rational people (who know all about this because...well, anyway, they're bad). Deny the visas, chanted the forces of psychosis who don't seem to understand how life works, for example, that the consular process of getting a visa doesn't happen overnight, or even overweek or often overmonth, so the people arriving from Liberia today on a visa didn't apply for it this past Monday, okay?

I heard that British Airways suspended its commercial flights in and out of Liberia weeks before the Dallas saga began. Frankly, I found this the tiniest bit reassuring when I boarded a British Airways flight out of Poland a few weeks ago, in the midst of the EU diagnoses, unlike the Dallas-Cleveland Frontier Airlines passengers felt shortly thereafter. But the larger point is about this whole travel-bans-don't-help-they-actually-make-it-worse narrative that you are required to adopt if you want to be one of the cool people. Sure, piecemeal, unenforced, uncoordinated travel bans don't work. But truly enforced ones might, because a disease cannot spread if it isn't spread. Should we all be worried about Ebola spreading uncontrollably? No, in fact, we should not. Because contact tracing and proper protective gear and other accepted Ebola processes will work, if allowed to do their thing. But that's not a reason to pretend you know all about travel bans when you've never in your life considered them before this month.

I assure you, nay, I guarantee you that I am at least as passionately in favor of international travel and freedom of movement as you are. Let me tell you a little story. When I was in Cuba (behold! exhibit A in my see-I-really-mean-it-that-people-should-be-able-to-travel-wherever-they-want case), I was based in Havana but also traveled to other areas during my time there: Trinidad, Cienfuegos, ViƱales, the Isla de la Juventud, Varadero, etc. One place my travel companion and I wanted to visit was Santiago de Cuba, way at the other end of the island (near Guantanamo, for anyone keeping political score at home). Unfortunately, we couldn't travel to Santiago because there was an official quarantine due to an outbreak of I think dengue fever. (Forgive me, as I was still very much sinking-or-swimming in my Spanish and some of the talk about it involving the eye symptoms confused me, but I think it was dengue.) No going in or out. But we really wanted to go to Santiago...and how long does this quarantine last...and as a 22-year-old from the spoiled USA no one tells me what to do...sure, maybe those thoughts passed through my ingenue head, and guess what? Too bad. No Santiago travel. And guess what else? The disease didn't spread across the island. The outbreak was contained. And the sassy muchachitas had to live without Santiago on their itinerary. I'm just saying, maybe what we need here is the heavy hand of communism!

I'll let you all decide for yourselves how serious I am about that last part. I lived in China during a bird flu season, and hey, I appreciated the posters that appeared in my apartment building lobby illustrating hand-washing and how to properly deal with a chicken. Good lookin' out, man. I also had forehead-sensing thermometers pointed at me every time I crossed between the mainland and Hong Kong. I did not react by writing pitiful editorials demanding to know what I had done to deserve this fate. A few years ago, when I traveled to Tajikistan, it just so happened that there had been some cases of polio there. Polio? Who had ever thought about polio in the past decade? Turns out, Afghanistan (which helpfully borders Tajikistan), Pakistan, India, Nigeria, and a handful of other countries, that's who. Also WHO: a World Health Organization worker was deployed at the gate of our flight and we had to either take her offered up polio booster droplets (who knew?!) or waive the vaccine, attesting that we'd been vaccinated. You know what? That was awesome! I like when there are people in charge, and the people in charge are in charge, and not a bunch of jabbering minions who want to make sure they're on all the right sides politically but just end up saying a lot of stupid crap.

No one (that I know) is picking on anyone. No one is disrespecting health care workers. But frankly, all my United Statesian peeps who are so eager to talk about how "We don't have to worry" are just revealing that, as usual, their self-centered worldviews don't include empathy for thousands of people in Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Guinea who would possibly like to "worry" and make sure precautions are taken, and who may well be in favor of following protocols that might inconvenience someone just a teensy bit.

Friday, June 11, 2010

Good Sports

And now for something (completely?) different: USC vs. North Korea

As Brian and I like to remind each other, courtesy of a fabulously hilarious Onion commentary, "Professional sports is very interesting." (You should definitely click on that link to read it after you read this blog entry of mine.) There is certainly a lot of sports excitement swirling around me right now. For one thing, the Chicago Blackhawks just won the Stanley Cup after a decades-long drought. Good for them! I witnessed much joyous revelry just outside our apartment windows on Wednesday night after the Blackhawks' victory. Then, of course, there are the NBA Finals, although I am still a little too devastated by the Phoenix Suns' loss to really get into the whole Amazing-Happening. I really, really thought one-eyed Steve Nash and his team of BFFs were going to do it this year. Crushing! Steve does get to report on the World Cup from his birthplace, South Africa, though.

And that is biggest of all, of course, right now: the World Cup started today! (And I correctly predicted the 1-1 tie between South Africa and Mexico!...on some silly Facebook app that rewards me with nothing.) For those who haven't heard, I even went so far as to invest in the World Cup this time around. Ever since attending a World Cup qualifier while we were in San Pedro Sula, I have deemed myself a new fan of the Honduras national team and I am cheering for them, in addition to the U.S.A. In consultation with Brian, I placed a small wager on Honduras getting out of their group, and we think that has a chance.

I also have what most call a foolhardy bet on North Korea to win it all, because, as I joked, with a mere $10 bet I could pay off my law school loans if I win. In case you aren't aware, that's because North Korea is the longest of shots. Not only are they not a powerhouse, and maybe not even good, but they are in the toughest group, with Brazil, Portugal, and Ivory Coast. (For those not in the loop: yes, the Cote d'Ivoire is good, too. North Korea is totally cursed.)

Here's my point: yes, part of me acknowledges that my North Korea bet is a bit of a sarcastic move. But there is more to it than that. It is also a symbolic statement about the way much of the world - and I daresay many of you - write off North Korea in the geo-political scheme of things. When I first went to (South) Korea (it's one country, people! It should be again!) and read about the extremely limited options for visiting "The North," the general response from people was one of horror: "Why would you want to go there?!" I hate that mentality. I got a fair amount of it about Cuba a decade ago and hated it then, too. First of all, if you've got issues with a country's government, you don't have to hate its citizens. They are just people, too! I was similarly adamantly opposed to any and all threats to boycott the Olympics in Beijing. The best thing you can do is gather dozens of countries together for the Olympic games, in peace and friendly competition. (Or have your Korean students write about it.)

In fact, the minute someone ever says, "Why would you want to go there?" I take it as a sign that I most definitely want to go "there," wherever it is, because people in the world need to travel, and need to meet other people in the world, and should be free to visit any country they want to. ANY country - including Cuba, or Iran, or North Korea.

Travel embargoes may be the dumbest thing I've ever seen passed off as legitimate national policy. The thinking seems to go like this: "We, the U.S.A., are awesome and free. That country there? They are not free. They are bad and terrible and monstrous. Just to prove how awesome and free we are and how not-free they are, we forbid our citizens to go there." Hello?

Because North Korea is such a "pariah" and really, more accurately, such an unknown entity to so many, I will cheer for them even more.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, my alma mater USC is having a little trouble in its own sports departments, you may have heard. The institution and some of the athletes - who were decidedly not supposed to be professionals and/or getting paid - committed a bunch of dastardly deeds and are now being punished -- oh, wait. Actually most of the wrongdoers have LEFT THE UNIVERSITY and the punishment is being meted out on some athletes playing there or being recruited to play there now. I know a two-year ban on post-season play sends quite a message, but it doesn't really effectively punish its target. In that sense, it's a lot like some U.S. foreign policy.

Meanwhile, just as things were getting underway in South Africa, tragedy struck. Nelson Mandela's great-granddaughter died in a car accident, now under investigation for possible drunk driving guilt by the chauffeur, on her way back from the big, celebratory, star-studded World Cup kick-off concert. Nelson Mandela himself understandably did not therefore attend the South Africa-Mexico match today. I have been thinking so much about him over the past year, and especially in connection with his nation's sports after seeing Invictus and reading Playing the Enemy. I am so sad for him, and wonder how much tragedy and sorrow one amazing, peaceful, brilliant man has to suffer in his lifetime? He is so much more newsworthy than Reggie Bush and O.J. Mayo's egos.

Let's all think about our sanctions and bans and boycotts, and more importantly, let's all come together to watch the world play nicely, in friendly competition. Let's admire the magic of professional sports, where people are pushed to be better than they are. I hope that the guilty Trojan parties can acknowledge that they made mistakes, and then strive to be better. I hope the NCAA can acknowledge its mistakes, too. I hope that North Korean political leaders can acknowledge their mistakes, and most of all I hope the bullying U.S. can be kind enough and open enough and honest enough to acknowledge its many U.S. mistakes and give North Korea a reason to play along, nicely.

I shall cheer for my team U.S.A. - but I shall also cheer for "my" other teams. I like the World Cup. I like the world.