Ask a Hipster — Advice you didn't know you needed
Big Screen — Movie commentary
Blurt — Music's inside track
Booze News — San Diego spirits
Classical Music — Immortal beauty
Classifieds — Free and easy
Close to Home — What it’s like on the street where you live
Cover Stories — Front-page features
Drinks All Around — Bartenders' drink recipes
Excerpts — Literary and spiritual excerpts
Feast! — Food & drink reviews
Feature Stories — Local news & stories
Fishing Report — What’s getting hooked from ship and shore
From the Archives — Spotlight on the past
Golden Dreams — Talk of the town
The Gonzo Report — Making the musical scene, or at least reporting from it
Letters — Our inbox
Movies@Home — Local movie buffs share favorites
Movie Reviews — Our critics' picks and pans
Musician Interviews — Up close with local artists
Neighborhood News from Stringers — Hyperlocal news
News Ticker — News & politics
Obermeyer — San Diego politics illustrated
Outdoors — Weekly changes in flora and fauna
Overheard in San Diego — Eavesdropping illustrated
Poetry — The old and the new
Reader Travel — Travel section built by travelers
Reading — The hunt for intellectuals
Roam-O-Rama — SoCal's best hiking/biking trails
San Diego Beer — Inside San Diego suds
SD on the QT — Almost factual news
Sheep and Goats — Places of worship
Special Issues — The best of
Street Style — San Diego streets have style
Surf Diego — Real stories from those braving the waves
Theater — On stage in San Diego this week
Tin Fork — Silver spoon alternative
Under the Radar — Matt Potter's undercover work
Unforgettable — Long-ago San Diego
Unreal Estate — San Diego's priciest pads
Your Week — Daily event picks
The Movie Blog
Rickey: I loved Terminator. Fight Club was good, but it is highly overrated by you people that love it. Yes, it had a "message". So what? After school specials have messages. Doesn't mean they're great entertainment. Also, they tricked us in a slightly unfair manner.— April 28, 2009 8:34 p.m.
The Movie Blog
Good point, Lall. I forgot about Spaceballs and History of the World, two other okay comedies from Brooks. I've only walked out of three movies in my life, and his Dracula: Dead and Loving It with Leslie Nielsen, was one of them. He's just done so many bad movies, I didn't think anyone would consider themselves a fan. Planes, Trains, I thought was one of John Hughes least enjoyable films. Everyone else loves that, and I'm not sure why. A few good scenes, but....— April 28, 2009 8:33 p.m.
From Preps to Pros
Okay SD...I'm doing research. First, on a website (something called ACT...which is all about making testing fair), I found this item: Race, class and gender biases give White, affluent, and male test-takers an unfair edge. ACT scores are directly related to family income: the richer students' parents are, the higher are average scores. But score gaps between groups on the ACT cannot be explained away solely by differences in educational opportunity linked to social class. According to ACT research, when all factors are equal, such as course work, grades and family income, Whites still outscore all other groups. If the ACT were not biased, Asian Americans, who take more academic courses than any other group, would likely score even higher. Moreover, boys score slightly higher than girls across all races, despite boys' lower grades in high school and college when matched for identical courses. ACT has performed few studies of score differences in its test, making it difficult to pinpoint the sources of the score gaps. Here are a few likely candidates: Biased format: Research shows that a fast-paced, multiple-choice format favors males over females. Guessing, a risk males are more likely to take, is rewarded. Since multiple-choice items do not allow for shades of meaning they work against the most typical female thinking style. Biased language: Idiomatic terms such as "ball and chain" (to indicate a married partner) and "straight from the horse's mouth" may not be familiar to many test-takers, particularly those whose first language isn't English, causing them to choose wrong answers. NOW SD...MY QUESTIONS ARE THESE: Why is it hard to pinpoint? It shouldn't be hard, if it's an obvious bias. And, why are expressions like "ball and chain" or "straight from the horses mouth" such biased statements? First, if they are, get rid of any phrase of that nature. Second, isn't a form of "intelligence" hearing, reading, and being exposed to various words/phrases? When I was at a Mensa party, I got into a conversation with a guy about how he can tell whether or not someone is intelligent. He said it was simple. He has a joke. If they get it, they're smart. If they don't, they're not. Now, before I tell the joke, let me ask you...what if there are elements of the joke that the person hearing it aren't familiar with? Obviously, yes...that can be the case. There might be some very intelligent people that just don't know those specifics to this historic story (turned into a joke). But to this guy, a member of Mensa, you should know certain aspects of history. And it's how he judges people. Here's the joke: Socrates was with a small gathering, and took the wine glass to his nose and sniffed. He gentle shook the glass, peering into it, before taking a sip and swirling it around his mouth. He swallowed, held the glass up and said "It's a good hemlock, but not great." (discuss)— April 28, 2009 4:08 p.m.
Does a Bear Chase in the Woods?
And you know that man sauntered home and said "I voted for the woman having the right to vote!" And when it won, both were happy. Had it lost, he would've shrugged and said, "Well...I don't know about Harold or any of the other guys I went to the polls with. But I voted for it."— April 28, 2009 3:40 p.m.
From Preps to Pros
SD...you are obviously a lot smarter than I. I have no problem admitting that. And...I love the "snap" on me about changing my mind. That was hysterical. But instead of me "researching" the subject, can I ask a question? Since you're in the teaching field...why do tests that have bias still get passed out? Why does any university look at SAT scores, if there are genius, 149 IQ kids out there scoring poorly on them? I'm guessing because those tests are a good barometer for intelligence. And, I have no problem believing their can be one or two questions that might be tricky because the person doesn't know what "bisque" is, or has even had it. My stepbrother once griped when the newspaper showed 10 questions from an IQ test and we took it. One of the questions had 3 parts. You had to name the kind of horse, and it was in hang-man style, with most of the letters missing. I got two of the three. He didn't get any, and claimed he knows nothing about horses. Well, neither do I! But I've heard of Clydesdales and Shetland Ponies, the two I got. But an IQ test isn't just going to have random questions about things you know nothing about. They have logic questions and all kinds of things, to get a bigger scope of your knowledge. Is it really necessary to spend so much money to continue coming up with tests, that make everyone feel warm and fuzzy because everyone scores the same on them? And, why would it be so hard to come up with questions like that? Are we going to say that if a question has a train leaving Denver going 75 miles per hour, but making three stops, and it's traveling 450 miles...(etc)...we can forgive a get for not figuring out the math problem because he's never been on a train?— April 28, 2009 3:39 p.m.
Lots of Copies, Lots of Flavors
Jim Gaffigan does a great routine about people in Costco tasting something because it's free and how they always say something like "These would probably be good at parties. Let me try one." You chew it, smile like you love it. You swallow it, there's some uncomfortable silence before you simply walk away without purchasing whatever it was you just scarfed down.— April 28, 2009 3:25 p.m.
The Movie Blog
Wow. SD knows a helluva lot about film. Although I liked Erasurehead, I put Lynch on the overrated list. Herzon on the underrated list. I wanted to see Syndeocoche (sp?) New York, but it got enough bad reviews that I stayed away. But yeah, Phillip Seymour Hoffman might be the most versatile actor working today. He's great in everything. I loved him in that movie, with Laura Linney as his (wannabe) playwrite sister. The Savages, I believe it was. I really think NOBODY can call themselves a Mel Brooks fan. Because, he did three great films, and a lotta turkeys. Blazing Saddles was good. Young Frankenstein was better (but actually written by Gene Wilder, not Brooks). The Producers is a classic. I'm not even sure why they remade it. But...I saw that Will Ferrel played the Nazi, and I saw a quick scene that made me laugh. But why make a movie that came out in 1970, and still holds up well enough? Lall...feel free to take this thread in any direction. No need to have me do it. But, regarding Clint Eastwood, the guy could've gone down as one of the best directors. But I think he lost his way with Gran Torino, which had to many corny/cliche moments. And Million Dollar Baby, which could've been great, but was merely good; and very flawed. He first directed Play Misty for Me, in the early 70s. For those that don't know, it was Fatal Attraction before that film (which borrowed heavily from it). I'm not a fan of the western, but he made Unforgiven, which is flat out amazing. Regarding horror movies, the problem is, they just don't make good horror films anymore. We'd all just be talking about Rosemary's Baby, Exorcist, and Shining. But if you have favorites, I'd love to hear 'em.— April 28, 2009 3:23 p.m.
Does a Bear Chase in the Woods?
Yeah, can you imagine the scene. It's 1920...the man has put on his Sunday best (including hat, because...them guys really loved their hats back then). He's heading to the poll. He kisses his wife goodbye, and she's standing there with a rolling pin in her hand. He asks what that's all about, and she says "You know. You know what's on the ballot today. And you know what's going to happen if it doesn't pass..."— April 28, 2009 9:46 a.m.
From Preps to Pros
SD...listen, I didn't mean to offend. You obviously know more about the subject than I. But it just gets so damn frustrating listening to people talk about why certain people do worse on those tests. Can someone explain to me WHY 15 white firefighters did better on a test than others of a different race? And then that test got thrown out, because an ASSumption was made that it must've been culturally biased on some level? Seriously. It's stuff like that that just gets old. I'm all for the work place having to hire a certain amount of various races, because I believe if we didn't do things like that, you'd run into the good ol' boys just hiring "their own". But when companies have tests, and certain people don't pass them...do we really need to "wonder" if something is wrong with the test?— April 28, 2009 9:44 a.m.
The Movie Blog
Good idea for a category, sattin. Although Roget Ebert once said that no good movie is ever too long. If you love it, why do you mind spending an extra hour with characters you enjoy? The only one on your list I disagree with on length is English Patient. I liked it, and didn't feel it needed anything taken off it. magic: Romy and Michele is funny. I didn't care for the other films on your list (and never saw Legally Blonde, but I loved Clueless) American Beauty was good, but a bit overrated. The bit with the neighbor (one of my favorite actors, although I can't think of his name right now)...who didn't see that coming? The Cable Guy should've been on my most-underrated list. This is such a funny dark comedy, yet so many people I know hated it. I loved Carreys accent. I loved Broderick as the straight guy. Jack Black on the basketball court...this comedy had everything; even Ben Stiller as the Mendez Brother take-off murders.— April 28, 2009 9:33 a.m.