I hate Fanty

December 8, 2008 / / 12 comments

So the Gang of Two consists of Mingo and Fanty. Mingo has some annoying eccentricities, but is basically the ideal pet. Independent yet affectionate, he’s even a good mouser.

His sister, on the other hand, is here on earth to drive me mad. And she’s succeeding. She’s so nervous that if you walk near her she runs and hides, and yet so demanding that she will cry near your hand until you pet her, and cry whenever you stop, for hours. (But only your hand. She’s terrified of being picked up.)

Fanty has occasional seizures (I know, I know). Previously, they’d been every couple of months, but then she had three in four weeks, so we decided to medicate her. Problem is, she’s nervous, so I was very concerned about giving her pills. My vet gave me Pill Pockets. You put the pill inside the treat and squish it closed. The first one, she refused to eat, and I had to force it down her throat. The second one, she ran from me when she saw it, and forcing it down her throat was harder. Somehow, though, she realized they tasted good, and the next dose she ate readily when I left it on the floor by the spot where she comes to cry at my hand, and soon she was begging for them.

The problem is that I have to get Mingo out of the way because he doesn’t have seizures and shouldn’t have phenobarbital.

This morning it was complicated. Mingo was in the bedroom and Fanty was not. I couldn’t get Mingo out, and then Fanty went into the bathroom, and I thought ‘Fine, I’ll give it to her there’ and shut myself and a pill in with her, but she became upset and cried. So I opened the door, got Mingo out, and shut us into the bedroom.

But now she was already upset and just cried and cried and cried. I put the pill/treat on the floor on her spot and dangled my hand, but she was having none of it, and just kept crying. So I thought I’d ignore her so she could relax, and started fiddling with my cellphone.

At which point, she got up on my bed and let loose a long, angry stream of urine.

Peed.

On my bed.

Sort of “Welcome to Monday” writ large.

What a great day

December 7, 2008 / / One comment

I never left the house yesterday. I have been so busy, I don’t know the last time I had an un-booked-up weekend. It was glorious.

I did a great deal of writing on a new book, I did work for the Mad Men blog, I mopped the front hall, did laundry and dishes, watched a movie, played computer games, caught up on a couple of TV shows, shaved my legs, listened to music, prepared my Christmas list and organized the presents I’ve already bought, and did some cooking. Very productive, very relaxing, very exactly what I wanted.

It felt great. It felt like me owning my life.

By the way, anyone who emailed me on Thursday, all my mail went away. Just for about six hours in the middle of the day, anything that arrived then went poof.

What do you do with stickers?

December 5, 2008 / / 10 comments

This is a serious question. I’ve got a collection of very nice stickers. Some are political and came with acknowledgment of or solicitation for a donation. Some are artistic and came with purchase of an artsy-craftsy thingy. Some I dunno.

I’m not talking cute little things, I’m talking 2-3 inches across, square, round, or rectangular.

Do you make a collage? Paper the bathroom? Seal very large envelopes? I’m kind of at a loss. I like them and don’t want to throw them away but they seem to serve no actual purpose nor have a natural home.

Cadillac Records

December 3, 2008 / / 2 comments

I heard an advertisement on the radio today for Cadillac Records. It was an NPR spot, very dry and announcey. They said it was about Muddy Waters, Chuck Berry, and Etta James, starring Adrian Brody, Jeffrey Wright, and Beyoncé Knowles.

Yep. It’s about 3 black people, starring a white guy and 2 black people. Can your ears do a double-take?

I thought about it. The story of Leonard Chess is certainly interesting, but is it a way of getting white people to see a movie about black musicians? Didn’t white people see Dreamgirls?

I remember there was an article about Eva Mendes co-starring in Hitch. They didn’t want to give Will Smith a black romantic interest, because they didn’t want it to be ghettoized as a “black movie.” On the other hand, a white romantic interest could be controversial. Enter the beautiful Latina.

So that’s…unpleasant. And I have to ask myself, am I, a white person, less likely to see a “black movie”? And the truthful answer is, maybe. Not consciously, but I think when I’m looking at what’s playing, I might definitely eliminate non-white movies when I decide what I’m going to see. Which shows me how far we have to go. How not post-racism we are. Because I look at black movies as movies I won’t necessarily relate to, as if those are people too different from me for me to form a connection to them. (Which is why Cadillac Records or Dreamgirls are exceptions; I connect to the music.)

And it’s true. I know fewer black people than white people (even though some of the black people I know are my relatives). I connect less to the culture. I feel like a stranger. It shouldn’t be true, it’s wrong that it’s true, but it’s true.

Tuesday Trivia: Twenty Questions

December 2, 2008 / / 60 comments

You can ask twenty yes/no questions (one at a time) to find this movie. Winner can post the next movie.

Movies are posted with a starting letter and number of words. Starting letter does not count the, a, etc. Number of words does count the, a, etc.

All films are posted using their U.S. title.

My movie starts G and has 7 words in the title.

GO!

Monday Movie Review: 3:10 to Yuma (Compare & Contrast)

December 1, 2008 / / 3 comments

3:10 to Yuma (1957) 8/10
Rancher Dan Evans (Van Heflin) is on the edge of losing it all when outlaw Ben Wade (Glenn Ford) is captured. Desperate for money, Dan agrees to help escort Wade to the town of Contention, where he will be put on the 3:10 train to Yuma prison.

So, here’s an interesting thing: I saw the remake of this (and reviewed it), then saw the original, then saw the remake again. The 1957 original is considered a classic of the genre, and as my loyal readers know, I loved the remake. So I thought that, instead of a regular review, I would talk about the original in light of the remake.

The original movie does an interesting thing in its casting. Glenn Ford is a perennial good guy, handsome and always cast on the side of right. Van Heflin is generally a good guy as well, but more of a character actor, with a beaten face that can be open and kind, or very dark indeed. The first thought would be that Ford is playing Dan Evans here, but his sweetheart charm is perfect for Ben Wade. In fact, I was surprised to see how much the character was the same in the two films. I don’t know if Russell Crowe has seen the original, or if it was all in the script or the short story by Elmore Leonard or what, but the good-natured seductiveness of pure evil is all over both actors, and it works like crazy. The remake didn’t do this kind of tricky casting. Either man could have played either character; Christian Bale has already played both villains and heroes, and Crowe’s good guys generally have a poison within.

In both movies, Dan is a man looking for redemption. He is a failure, his ranch about to be repossessed. In the original, Dan is ashamed in front of his wife, while his children adore him. In the remake, his marriage is in better shape, if not exactly idyllic—it is his older son who disdains him. And having seen the remake, the gosh-golly adoration of those boys is irritating, but it leaves room for a very interesting marriage indeed. Dan and Alice (Leora Dana) are really working out something about respect and family, and, as Dan struggles to better himself in her eyes, ultimately it is Alice who must step up and help them both see it. In the remake, Dan’s relationship with his son is parallel to this, but how can I not appreciate a Western that gives a woman the kind of power that Alice Evans has?

Both films have intelligent plots, reflecting that the characters are intelligent people. The townfolk know that capturing Ben Wade is as much a problem as a boon, and they must outsmart his gang, and the Wade gang is very smart indeed. This leads to some clever machinations in transporting Wade.

The virtue of the 1957 film is in its tightness and simplicity. By contrast, the 2007 film makes a virtue of its sweep and action. It is an “opened up” film that succeeds in showing the West as a whole, whereas the original is interested in showing the Evans family’s little piece of it.

In the end, I like the remake better. A beautiful, modern Western is a thing to behold, and a rarity. In the canon of 1950s Westerns, the original is minor, if excellent. I can only suggest you see both.

In gratitude

November 27, 2008 / / One comment

Thanksgiving at its heart is gratitude for food on the table.

How easy to forget, if we are not farmers or animal herders, that this is not easy to achieve. If we are not too poor to buy food. How easy to forget that bounty is not for everyone, is not merely a matter of a very busy supermarket and days of preparation.

How easy to forget that the contentious and argumentative and really frickin irritating family you gather with is a family, a connection to the world and the knowledge you are not alone. That the crying babies are babies, life itself, the continuation of love in the world.

How easy to forget that the cessation of work is because there is work, and the harvest is achievement.

Let us not look inside ourselves and find gratitude. Instead, let us be grateful for that which is right in front of us.

Happy Thanksgiving.

My television debut

November 26, 2008 / / 9 comments

My co-worker Ajay writes a YouTube based sitcom. It is a huge hit, he tells me, with viewers all over the world. It’s also in Malayalam, so when he sent me episode links it’s not like I could tell whether it was well-written. The story is about Indian immigrants in the U.S., so there’s a smattering of English (like, “Okay, fine”).

For many months, Ajay has been offering me guest spots on the show—basically whenever he wants an American. I don’t know if he thinks I’m especially funny or charming, or if he just hits up everyone he knows when he needs guest stars.

So anyway, this weekend we filmed my first episode. I play an American woman married to a Malayali man. I walk up to an Indian gentleman sitting at a park bench and strike up a conversation. I ask where he’s from, he says Kerala, I say “My husband is from Kerala! He’s been trying to teach me Malayalam. I’ve been hoping to meet someone I can practice my language skills with.” Then I greet him in Malayalam and he looks uncomfortable. The camera zooms in on my smiling face. Tune in next time.

We did this outdoors. Often they film in restaurants and cafes, but the week before Thanksgiving, everyone was too busy. It was about 29 degrees out, with a punishing windchill. So naturally I’m walking up to a park bench and fixing my makeup. With gloves on. We were all numb from the cold.

Anyway, so here’s my new career as a sitcom actress. I have no idea what the other characters are about, but I figure that’s good for my character, who doesn’t speak the language; I have purposely not asked for back story for that reason. See? I’m Method.

Actor math all solved!

November 25, 2008 / / Comments Off on Actor math all solved!

That was FAST! You guys are too good.

» Read more..

Tuesday Trivia: Actor math (all solved!)

November 25, 2008 / / 17 comments

Let’s see if this works: I’ll describe two characters from two different movies, and then the third movie is one featuring the two actors. Got it?

1. Deranged veteran plus part of an Israeli hit team equals high stakes poker game.
Solved by Trevor J (comment #1) and Hogan (comment #9).

2. “Blondie” plus “Old Lodge Skins” equals a bunch of post-Civil War misfits seeking a homestead.
Solved by Melville (comment #4).

3. A crooked theatrical producer plus a real-life journalist equals a jewel heist gone wrong.
Solved by Tom Hilton (comment #14).

4. An evil Cardinal plus the President of the United States equals future noir.
Solved by Tom Hilton (comment #6).

5. An obsessed fan plus a chauffeur’s reluctant employer equals a Southern restaurant.
Solved by Tom Hilton (comment #7).

6. A femme fatale with a thermal problem plus a screenwriter’s twin equals a high school reunion.
Solved by Trevor J (comment #2).

7. A pirate plus a Philadelphia lawyer equals an obese mom and a mentally retarded brother.
Solved by melissa (comment #3) and Trevor J (comment #5).

« Older Entries   Recent Entries »
zeeReputation Theme