about Jim Scott

because The Hurt Locker is a film and not a hybrid movie-cartoon.  I saw Avatar in 3D and thought it spectacular entertainment.  It was a magical experience and would see it again on the big screen. But that attribute alone does not mean it was a great movie worthy of Best Picture status. 

Judging from the box office, the public does not fully appreciate the genius of The Hurt Locker.  People who have been in war zones, like the screenwriter and this writer, probably view this film differently that those who have not.  The complex relationship between the three leads is what this movie is about, not the riveting action scenes. To be sure, a series of missions are the narrative heart of the movie.  Critics may see this as repetitive and unnecessary, yet they are needed to illustrate the evolving and abrasive relationship between the three men. The portrayal of the war itself is apolitical although many argue otherwise; the power is in the relationships, not the action narrative.

The small part set in the supermarket is a rare instance of pure cinematic wonder; powerful and complex in what it conveys yet so simple.  To me it rates along with my all time movie scene favorite in the war genre, the scene in the taxi and the front lawn in the opening moments of The Best Years of Our Lives.  If anything, just watch the first 30 minutes of this film, you will not be disappointed.   

The reason this film has grossed only $15 million thus far(Alice in Wonderland grossed over $100,000 on the first weekend) is that it is an unsparing and dark film about an unpopular war. As during the Great Depression, fluff movies were generally very successful for obvious reasons. Do yourself a favor and see this movie. I watched it in the theatre and at home on a large flat screen and it was just as powerful the second time around.

I was driving along Mission Gorge Road Sunday past and drove by a store that was advertising a deli sandwich for $1.99. While this may appeal to stretched consumers, the idea of pricing-to-survive troubled me. The Dow closed Friday over 10,500 and I presume will continue a slow march toward prosperity, no matter how ephemeral.

The two numbers speak volumes about where we have landed. I know I am fortunate enough to be in the lifeboat; but I am not so short-sighted to believe the drownings going on around me do not have the possibility of swamping my boat.

The health care debate sharply illustrates this divide. Those who have versus those who do not. No matter the scope of a final bill, which I believe will come to pass, the health care issue is a proxy for a larger question, deeply rooted in the past century.  Since the end of World War II, domestic social and economic policy decisions have really been an ongoing struggle over the scope and survival of the New Deal. This country has never adequately framed a permanent national consensus on the Fed’s role in our daily lives.

Some New Deal policies are firmly institutionalized such as unemployment benefits and Social Security. The New Frontier added Medicare to the mix and I can imagine the howling amongst the GOP faithful if that program went away.

So why is it that legions of recipients of New Deal and New Frontier largess are charter tea-baggers?  Sadly the answer is those in the boats do not want anymore company.