julianjenius
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
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
Frost/Nixon
An interesting insight comes when one of the two researchers discloses his real mission for the interviews. Is it to find truth? Is it to find a deeper understanding of Nixon and his possible motives? Is it to at least present a fair and balanced interview exposing both sides of every issue? Nah. This is post-Watergate, after all, and every "journalist" now has an agenda: to shape the news to a more liberal point of view. Truth be damned. This researcher's motive is to "give him the trial he never had." And his crusade is complete with the usual rants of how Nixon wiped out an entire race of people in Vietnam while showing his journalistic skill by ignoring the vast amount of Vietnamese still living. A precursor to the era of 9/11 truthers and liberal bloggers. It was all similar (deliberately so, I'm sure) of the liberal clap-trap of the past six or so years with the force furor of those wanting to put Bush on trial for war crimes and such. And the whole premise (wanting to hear Nixon's apology) is so like the recent Washington Press Corps. idiotic questions of Bush during any press conference--the sole purpose one could gather was to, again, hear that all important "I'm sorry"--that it's like a vomitous case of deja vu. You keep tasting the bad lasagne from two days ago all over again. Getting to the actual movie, it was so slow and Langella so quiet it was hard to hear. I kept waiting for any deep revelation. Instead what we see was, sadly, all there was then or could be today: two groups (Frost/Nixon and cronies) sparring with each other as if it is a contest to see who was the best BS'r. I came away assured of that which I have known for years; that the world of politics (those involved and those covering) is one full of superficial fools who are led more by ego than substance of character, and anyone wishing to find deep meaning in that world is equally the fool.— February 14, 2009 10:49 a.m.
Struggle and Strife
Duncan, your own views about how we should weep for "the long struggle" are out of place within a movie review and out of touch with reality as evidenced by the last election. Damn voters. Wish they'd stop opining on my parade.— February 6, 2009 1:21 p.m.
Seasons Go
A few things about Dark Knight. It was too long. It just kept grinding away long after my interest. You have to dismiss the fact that since no one (9/11 'truthers' aside) could rig all the explosives it would take to blow up a building or boat in so short a time, the Joker would have been caught or rendered harmless in a few hours of impotence. Lastly, I doubt this movie will stand the test of time. It was good to see it once, but I have no need to see it again. That is what makes a classic.— February 1, 2009 2:21 p.m.
Favorite Few
Burn After Reading. Hmm. My wife and I went to the La Jolla Playhouse and saw a really well done production. The acting was great, the scenery was great, the lighting...etc. The play was about a family and their daily doings. Walking back to the car I said to my wife: "You know, everything was done really well, but nothing really happened." She agreed. That is our review of 'Burn After Reading.' Really.— February 1, 2009 2:13 p.m.
Woodwork
I was surprised at how WRITTEN this movie was and how few surprises were in it, though the scenes with Cruz and Bardem were, surprisingly, the most natural. Other than that we have Woody's nebbish character showing up along the way. First it's in Christina, worrying about Vicky going off with Bardem. Then it's Vicky being overly apologetic in the plane on the way back. Then it's Christina's husband, obsessing over the fall of civilization when he hears of Vicky's menage a trois. Woodyspeak has a distinctive pattern and meter, and I wish he could have left it home and let the characters have their own lives. As it is, you get Woody's perspective and agenda (free sex without guilt good /traditional view of marriage unenlightened) and the preaching runs thin. And in the end you're left with the fact that nothing really happened. And who really cares about these people, anyway? Self-obsessed and worried about problems that don't exist. (The following paragraph is out of order, so please read it first.) Have to agree that the voice-over was a bit annoying and made the whole movie sound like it came from an unfinished short story. I wouldn't be surprised if such was the case. Hmm, I guess that wasn't so out of order, so you can read it last.— February 1, 2009 2:05 p.m.