Dear Jack

Hi, Jack. How've you been? I was glad to hear you survived your ordeal with the Chinese. 20-months is a long time. In China do they still call it Chinese Water Torture or do they subject you to American Waterboarding? Just wondering. Anyway, I had been enjoying your sixth day of action in six years, marvelling at how well the formula still works. The scene with Curtis was classic '24'. It was at turns gripping, tense, emotional--a pure adrenaline rush and of course completely contrived (I mean c'mon, Curtis didn't have much of a character to start with, but that seemed completely out of line with how he'd been portrayed in the past). So I gotta say, you haven't missed a beat. But with that I also regret to inform you that I will no longer be able to follow your pseudo-real-time adventures in counter-terrorism. I know you won't miss me too much. I mean you've got fans numbering in the tens of millions, not to mention Rush Limbaugh.

You must be asking yourself, "Why? We've been through so much and right now you have a duty to your country to see this thing through--Chloe, damn it! I need that satellite coverage right now or we're going to lose him!" Well it's kind of complicated, Jack. You see at first I thought, "it's just a TV show." But then some good friends of mine pointed out that it's "just a TV show" that reaches tens of millions of viewers per week, not to mention the audience garnered from DVD and syndication. To put it simply: you've become a part of the public consciousness. You've joined the pantheon of immortal American iconic heroes such as John Wayne, Superman, John McClane and The Man from Atlantis (okay, maybe not him--he was cooler than ALL those guys). Having staked your claim on the vast cultural landscape has given you power--namely the power to influence perceptions.

This season's ostensible villains are Arab terrorists, Islamists presumably. In true '24' fashion, I'd expect that later on in the season the villain will turn out to be somebody else who merely used the terrorists as pawns, but that's not really important. What is important is the power of images and this season started off with a doozy. We see a suspicious looking Indian-looking fellow (who I guess was supposed to be Arab) detonate himself on a crowded public bus in downtown L.A. The storyline takes place in the unspecified near-future during the 11th week of terrorist attacks on U.S. soil. It is the definition of a "nightmare"-scenario. It is the realization of every Americans' post 9/11 fear--the moment when the 'barbarians' breach the gates, so to speak. As a dramatic hook, obviously this isn't bad. It gets the viewer hooked immediately which has always been one of the show's strongpoints. However considering we are: fighting wars in two Middle Eastern nations; employing a foreign policy that vexes and infuriates a great majority of the region; seeing increasing tension in European nations w/r/t their Muslim populations, I'd say that the scenario '24' posits is at best exploitative and at worst incendiary. It's grossly irresponsible to aggravate an already volatile situation.

In light of current events and trends, one could argue that ‘24’’s premise for this season hasn’t extrapolated that far from reality. ( I’d bet money that Michael Chertoff and Robert Gates watch the show, pen and pad in hand.) And maybe that’s what bothers me so much about the show these days. It’s not as if it makes light of the issue of domestic terrorism; it’s that this issue, the preeminent issue of the last decade is fodder for an entertainment vehicle. The show isn’t superficial in tackling the topic, but it’s not PBS Frontline either which to be fair it isn’t striving to be.

To watch the show, I find myself having to rationalize in the same manner I do when it comes to rap music. I love the Clipse, but they perpetuate negative images of black folks. So, I’ll say to myself, “Self, it’s okay to listen to them, because you are educated and have a job and don’t deal drugs and don’t ‘ride around shining’ (even if you think it might be fun just once).” But it’s really not okay is it, self? Bad self! But I digress. With ‘24’ I have to make an equally specious argument: “Well the people from the Middle East I know aren’t terrorists.” This completely evades the question of whether the images proffered are debilitating to image of Arabs (-American and otherwise).

Arabs in Western media have rarely enjoyed any kind of positive portrayal on the big or small screen. It seems like every bad guy from the 80's and 90's that wasn't Russian was of some unspecified Middle Eastern origin. I can't think of one Arab character from a sitcom or drama except for the Soup Nazi. Television, our default gateway into all experiences with foreign cultures, has been exceptionally one-dimensional w/r/t the Arab community both internal and external.

I'm sure there are a million reasons for this, not all as sinister as people might expect.

Despite this, Muslims should refrain from cries of double-standards. I always hear, “If it were the Jews being portrayed like this…” Yeah, so what? It’s not the Jews. And if the Jews do manage (and this is debatable anyway) to keep a tight leash on how they are portrayed in the media, why is this a knock against them? Don’t turn yourselves into a group of ‘Jeannies’. You remember Jeannie, right? She was the ever-annoyed/envious sister of Ferris Bueller. She spends the entire movie whining about how unfair it is that Ferris gets all the breaks from parents, teachers, total strangers, etc. Remember how much you disliked her? So follow the immortal words Charlie Sheen imparts to her in the police station scene: "You oughta spend a little more time dealing with yourself and a little less time worrying about what your brother does. It's just an opinion." Sound advice.

It is interesting to read many of the comments people make on message boards when it comes to shows like ‘24’. One popular argument seems to be that Muslims need to speak out against the terrorists, condemn attacks and the radicalization of their religion as if this action in itself will reduce the pervasiveness of the threat. However, just as a mainstream Christian would have little or no sway over a Branch Davidian practitioner of the faith in deterring him or her from engaging in perceived deviant behaviors, a moderate Muslim’s denouncement would prove equally ineffectual. In short, if a muthaf@$@# wanna act crazy, they gonna act crazy.

Going back to the central point: images have power. What does it do to a viewer to be constantly inundated with images of swarthy (a word made just for Arabs it seems) men with shifty eyes and sweat-dampened faces speaking fervently about wiping your family and its dog off the face of the Earth? Worse is when we see them actually achieve some modicum of success. This goes quite a long ways to reinforce the ever-burgeoning negative image most Arab-Americans must shoulder the weight for.

I imagine many Arabs here and abroad when they hear news regarding any kind of suspicious casualty-causing incident play the game most black people are familiar with, saying to themselves, “Please don’t let the suspect be Arab.” Imagine dealing with racial profiling, suspicious looks cast wherever you go, hearing people speak about socio-political topics with severely limited understanding and perspective. I guess what I’m saying is imagine being black. Well I don’t have to imagine; it sucks (not being black, I rather like that, but the obstacles you’re confronted with on occasion). This reductive division of the Arab populace into bad-Arabs (terrorists) and good-Arabs (those who aid you, Mr. Bauer, and the U.S. government) isn’t what I’d call a “fair” representation of Arabs unless you mean “fair” in the FoxNews sense. (And honestly I’m ambivalent towards the “good” Arab characters; Assad is a former terrorist apparently responsible for hundreds of deaths and Al-Rezani allows his civil rights to be blatantly violated in order to show just how much of a “good” Arab he can be).

I'd love to see and hear more varied viewpoints that deal honestly with the deteriortating situation we find ourselves in. There are so many voices that go unheard or rather can't be heard beneath the din of the cowboys and indians.

So, Jack, as you can see I've thought about this for a while. I'm sorry, but I'm sure you'll do just fine without me. After all, you'll always have Rush.

Slow-motion Car Wreck

There has to be some way to stop Lebanon from ripping itself apart. The people I met during my short stay deserve so much better than this. I hope the pictures are worse than the reality.

Damn, ESPN. Way to Play a Sister

Wow.

So That's Why They Call Him 'Hammer'

The year was 1994. Gangsta rap had taken over the airwaves, most prevalently in the form of Dr. Dre and the peaking Deathrow empire. MC Hammer, until then the most successful solo rap artist of all-time (U Can't Touch This was the In Da Club of its day), had become irrelevant. Not one to fold up his parachute pants and call it a day, MC Hammer underwent a Madonna-esque transformation, dropping the 'MC' and referring to himself as 'The Funky Headhunter'. Audiences first got a taste of the new Hammer with the song, 'It's All Good'. Fans, spectators and haters alike did a collective eyebrow-raise and asked, "What the f@#k is this $#!t?" At worst people thought it was a harmless misfire. Many forgot about it as soon as their fingers hit the remote. A few months later, 'Pumps and a Bump' dropped and there would be no ignoring it (in many senses of the word 'it'). The video was filmed at Hammer's home, his own personal Xanadu, replete with a bevy of bikini-clad women (in pumps, natch) and a waterfall--a remote controlled waterfall. This was before the advent of thong bikinis, because watching the video it almost seems tasteful considering how much skin isn't shown--at least with regards to the ladies. And that's where the problem lies: Hammer is the most overtly sexual thing in the video.



One poor wardrobe decision destroyed one of the greatest hip-hop careers ever. A pair of zebra-striped Speedos...man, dog, man dog! What was he thinking? We may never know. He tactfully avoided the question in many subsequent interviews. Although he did make a second version of the video abandoning the pool-party motif (with Deion Sanders making an oddly flat cameo) and Hammer himself fully clad in a khaki suit. It wasn't his fault that he was a 'show-er' as opposed to a 'grower'.

But that wasn't the log that broke the camels back. In the original video, Hammer does these full-body gyrations that are just...disturbing. I'm sure he thought in his head, "Man this is so dope! I've been working out for months. The ladies are so gonna dig this." But of course that never happened. Instead the cognitive dissonance between the images of old "party up/family fun time"-Hammer and new mutant sex-deviant Hammer proved too much for his audience to bear. What made it worse was that Hammer is the only male in the video in Speedos, thus making him all the more conspicuous. He's also got on his ubiquitous shades plus a pair of black gloves and black boots--making him some bizarre gangsta gigolo hybrid. Pay attention, Timberlake! This was the original FutureSex/Love Sounds! The world just wasn't ready.


"I always sit down to enjoy an arous-, I mean rousing round of dominoes with my homeboys in my Speedos. It doesn't bother you guys, right? I mean we're all friends here, right?"
"Uh, sure...(as long as the checks keep clearing...)"

Too often we fear and hate what we don't understand.

My Favorite (non-Porn) Movie of 2006

Last year I attended the Toronto Film Festival for the 451st consecutive year. I mostly saw a lot of decent films--close to twenty this time, down from nearly thirty the previous year. Only a couple of movies stuck with me, but they were so good that I didn’t really need more. The first was Deliver Us From Evil, a documentary about a Catholic priest who molested an unfathomable number of children over a period of nearly two decades--with the church's complicity. It is a very disturbing, yet riveting film that will leave any viewer outraged, shocked, angry…in short a real ‘feel good’ time at the flicks. After seeing that film I have to say—and no disrespect to Catholics, but—the entire Vatican theocracy can DIAF.

The other was Guillermo del Toro's Pan's Labyrinth. Maybe I loved this movie so much because I wasn’t expecting much. Don’t get me wrong; I like del Toro, or rather I thought before seeing this film that he was a competent filmmaker. I’ve seen most of his work, beginning with 'Mimic' which I thought would be just another generic serial-killer/monster flick, but turned out pretty good. I netflixed 'The Devil’s Backbone' and thought it was well done, but a bit too heavy on atmosphere and light on story. 'Blade 2' and 'Hellboy' were both mixed-bag experiences. 'Blade 2' was pretty much what you expected it to be. Nothing memorable, but not an embarrassment by any means. 'Hellboy' considering the source material was a minor letdown, similar to how I felt about the first X-Men movie. All the ingredients were there, just not in the proper amounts. Then comes Pan’s and from start to finish I was absolutely enthralled.

The film takes place in Spain around the end of WWII. A little girl tries to escape the horrors of the spasmodically winding down (wish I could phrase that better) war through excursions into a fantasy world she discovers in the ruins behind an army encampment. She also has to tend to her sick pregnant mother and contend with her wicked prick of a stepfather.

Let’s start with the heroine, Ofelia, played by Ivana Baquero.

Too often (I generalize of course) in American films, the child actors don’t act like children. We praise them for their precociousness and how ‘adult’ they act (see: Haley Joel Osment, Dakota Fanning, the Culkin clan). Here, Baquero manages to convey the innocent awe a child would experience delving into such a fantastic world and gets the viewer to abandon his or her own modern effed-up cynicism/skepticism. Credit the actress and the director. Guillermo’s ability to direct children reminds me of early Spielberg. He just gets the most natural and effective performance possible from this young lady. She never over-emotes, yet I feel her sense of wonderment, fear, stubbornness, compassion, etc. Another accomplishment is that I never felt manipulated.

I would argue that all films are manipulative in some way; it’s just that the best ones never feel like they’re manipulating you. In Pan's Labyrinth I became fully invested in Ofelia's plight to escape the horrible realities around her. As the movie reached its climax, I was completely in tears. That takes a lot (or maybe as I get older it doesn't, but I swear only five films including this have ever made me cry and that's: E.T.,Antoine Fisher (when his family invites him to eat and they all introduce themselves...total sucker, I know), Honey, I Shrunk the Kids (when Anty dies) and 4 Little Girls).

Another performance that anchors the film is Maribel Verdu’s.



I hadn’t seen her in anything since Y Tu Mama Tambien, where she played the dying MILF. I left that film thinking how absolutely stunning she was physically. I left this film thinking how absolutely stunning she was as an actress period. It’s not that she does anything special, rather she plays the role about as perfectly as one could imagine. The film’s villain, Captain Vidal, played by Sergi Lopez is acted equally well.



The man epitomizes evil. There are no redeeming qualities to his character which make his comeuppance oh so satisfying.
The film exists in a Manichaean universe. Good is good. Evil is evil. Morality is painted in broad strokes; there is no gray. Some may lament del Toro’s lack of subtlety, but this is a fairytale (an adult fairytale, but a fairytale nonetheless) and that is consistent with the universe that all fairytales inhabit.

People will walk away from this film and say "it's not a kid's film" or "it's not really a fairytale," because the film is rather dark. I'd argue that before the 'Disneyfication' of our children's stories, most fairytales were dark. If you've ever read the original Brother's Grimm stories, they weren't very cheery. They were cautionary tales: Hansel and Gretel end up as meat streudels. Pan's Labyrinth harkens back to those types of stories.



The film’s visual look is a character unto itself. Everything is soaked in blues and de-saturated browns. The movies palette is comprised of elements: water, earth, wood and blood. A handful of spectacular phantasmagoric creatures populate Ofelia's fanstasy world, the best of which is Pan himself. Pan the faun is a haunting creature made of earth, wood, horn and flesh; it's a version of the creature I'd never experienced before. The below creature is also well designed, but even it is not as montrous as del Toro's fascist Captain Vidal creation. You can tell he's really evil because he polishes his boots until they're real nice and shiny.



What keeps bringing me back to the film is the question of whether or not Ofelia's fantasy world is 'real' or not. No other character in the film experiences it which is not unusual in films of this nature. However, what usually does happen is that there is some evidence that exists to suggest that the fantastic things experienced by one character are not solely the creation of his or her own imagination. You know the parents find some artifact of the fantasy world which in turn acts as a wink and nod to the audience to suggest, 'hey, this really DID happen'. Nothing like that exists in Pan's Labyrinth which leaves the ending completely up to your own interpretation. For instance, the below scene parallels a 'real world' scene that happens earlier making the below scene rife with symbolism. It further confuses whether these things are actually happening to Ofelia.

The film then becomes a sort of litmus test for the viewer. It can conclude happily or tragically. Margaret Atwood in talking about the book, The Life of Pi, talks about this same thing. The character in that book, Pi, the sole survivor of shipwreck that takes away his family that had set sail from India with their circus in tow, is being de-briefed in Brazil (I think)by a couple of Japanese insurance agents (don't ask, just read the book). The insurance agents conclude that Pi's story could be interpreted two ways: one fantastic, the other not so much. Pi in turn asks them which one they like better and they both agree that they like the former. He bursts into tears and thanks them. Pan's Labyrinth works much the same way, but it leaves it up to the viewer to choose which one they believe more strongly in. Either way, the movie is quite moving.



Upon a third (!) viewing of the film, I realized something interesting: it could work completely as a silent film. The movie is in Spanish, but if you didn’t speak Mexican (as The Shrub would say), you’d understand almost everything that happens on screen. That is the work of a great visual storyteller. More kudos to del Toro.

Guillermo del Toro has now become for me a 'must-see' director along the lines of Scorcese, Mann, Nolan, Linklater, Lee, the Coen Brothers and of course McG.

'24' - Greatest Show Ever or Nefarious Neo-Con Tool for Further Poisoning the Arab-American Image in God's Country?

I am an unabashed fan of '24'. I missed season one when it first aired, dismissing it as too gimmicky. But then through the magic of Netflix, I discovered the awetasticness that is Jack Bauer. I must have watched the entire season in like four days. It was a bit sickening. As preposterous as the second season was, it only deepened my affection for the show. How far would the producers go to keep amping up the tension? Cougars and Matt Dillon's crazy brother? No problem! I loved it. However, my friend Maher refused to watch the show, because Jack finds himself fighting crazed Islamic terrorists about 50% of the time. Maher is Lebanese and although Jack never fights anybody from Beirut, I can understand his frustration. It'd be an understatement to say that Arab-Americans have an image problem here in the states and abroad. The question is whether shows like '24' and others that depict Islamisist terrorists perpetuate negative stereotypes that further deteriorate the already battered image of Arab-Americans, especially Muslims.

Yes, Americans are not the most sophisticated people when it comes to being informed about world politics. That much I concede. But do shows like '24' really inflame the situation worse? You could write a dissertation on the subject. I'm not. I'll just say that I think the show is fairly ingenious and that it presents scenarios that do lie in the recesses of the American mind. Is it so crazy to imagine a suicide-bomber detonating himself in a crowded metropolitan area? After the London bomb attacks, I think decidedly not. Is this scare-mongering? I don't think that's the producers' intent. The show for me is about how would we be forced to deal with any of the myriad nightmare scenarios that it presents. Jack Bauer is undoubtedly a neo-con wetdream, but I think the viewer is supposed to be uncomfortable with some of the choices that he makes. Then I start asking myself questions about how far should/could the U.S. go to protect itself from a very real threat.

More later. Tired now. And pissed that CNN ruined the end of season six's 4th episode. Bastards...

C'mon, Everybody's Doin' It...

When I'm not completely exhausted from work, I will be posting here about things that are worth talking about such as (but not limited to): movies, sports, books, food, beauty care products, 24, velociraptors and environment friendly cleaning products. Feel free to join in!

Part of the reason I started this is to keep in touch with my friends who chose (unwisely) not to live in NYC. So for all (three of) you guys, you can check here periodically and see what the hell I'm up to and what's crackalating here on the right coast. So check in early and often, because I'm a busy worker bee...