There's a reason people tend to like ex-presidents once they are out of office.

I've been known to throw some harsh on W. but props go where props are deserved. There's sort of an unwritten rule that the most recent ex-president doesn't criticize the new administration in the first few months of the office. Sort of a "respect for the job" kinda deal. I get it. They are in an elite club and, politics aside, they uniquely understand the stresses of the gig. It's good to hear George is abiding by this principle even after being (deservedly) but viciously attacked in the Fall election

"Getting two standing ovations at his first speech since leaving office, former President George W. Bush said that if President Obama wants help, “he can pick up the phone and call.” Otherwise, Bush said: “He deserves my silence.” “There's plenty of critics in the arena,” Bush told a crowd in Calgary, Canada. “I think it's time for the ex-president to tap dance off the stage and let the current president have a go at solving the world's problems. If he wants my help and I agree with him, I'll give it.”

Of course, George being George, he couldn't help but stick his foot in his mouth once...

"I actually paid for a house last fall. I think I'm the only American to have bought a house in the fall of 2008.” Ohhhhhhh, not good.

Anyway, if only the prince of Darkness would abide by the same rules of consideration...course, he never had much class...

"This stands in sharp contrast with former Vice President Dick Cheney, who has twice hammered Obama in media interviews."

Read the rest at Politico.

There May Be Such a Thing as Too Much Giant Blue Penis

Ahh, the allegedly unfilmable fanboy's wet dream has finally arrived. Caught it last night, and I have to say, if you have read the Graphic Novel the Watchmen, and are a fanboy/fangirl, there's absolutely no reason to complain. Frankly, it's remarkably faithful in its adaptation. Yes, there's a conceptual change at the end that I won't ruin--but frankly it makes a heck of a lot of sense and it has no impact on the themes put forth by Moore and Gibbons originally. I may go so far as to say this is the most faithful cinematic adaptation of a written work that I've ever seen...I'd have to think about it a bit, but it's pretty damn close...

If I have any complaints, it's maybe too faithful. Yes, Dr. Manhattan is nude quite often in the graphic novel--but every time his blue penis showed up on screen the teenagers behind me in the audience started giggling and commenting (thus taking me out of the experience of the film). Most of the time, it wouldn't have hurt to throw that speedo back on the dude. I suppose this experience will be lessened by watching on video.

Also, Malin Ackerman is a little wooden at times-- (she's not "the worst actress in Hollywood as Mr. Philips claimed in the Trib)--but her line readings can be a little stiff. She MORE than makes up for it in the candy, eye department.

The only true disappointment I maybe have is that in the very first scene, there's an obvious early reveal that doesn't happen in the source material, and it kinda makes the later "ahh ahhh" moment less dramatic. Perhaps Snyder and Co. thought most of the audience would know this anyway, but judging by what I was hearing behind me in the theater, I think that's a misjudgment.

I'm with Roger Ebert on this one. There's a lot going on here and it's probably worth two viewings before making an overall judgment. Still, if you like comics, if you are fan of the original source material, it's mostly all on screen here for you. Don't Bitch.

Peace.

I'll Look Down and Whisper "No"...

Just a day and a half until the 12:01 midnight premier of Watchmen--and I have to admit if I hadn't been so stupid as to schedule something Friday morning work-wise, I'd have my ass in the theater at midnight (three hour run time be damned).

For what's it worth, the reviews are flowing like the blood of the Comedian (yea, geek reference) and they are decidedly mixed.

There's a great round up of the wanna be Eberts at an LA Times Blog, here.

I'm gonna take author Brad Meltzer's advice: "You have to go see it and decide for yourself. You have to. Don't read reviews. Don't be influenced. Make your own decision (just like when the comic came out). " Frankly, that's pretty good advice in regards to all forms of Art, and I shall exercise that idea right now as I listen to the new U2, "No Line on the Horizon" for the first time right now. Peace.

Dang, That Sounds Cold.

Last week, I missed most of my prime TV watching time because I finally picked up my copy of The Terror by Dan Simmons and dove in. I'd gotten the expansive novel for Xmas and it was on the vastly growing pile of books I planned on reading but sometimes never did. Once I started, though, it became a little difficult to put down, and I plowed through it like it was a cool piece of banana cream pie (with a couple of bad bites here and there).

Simmons mixes a true story with a bit of a supernatural spike (if you've ever read Simmons before, that's to be expected). From the beginning, it appears this is going to be a more grounded, semi-fact based account of the crew of two Ships in the English discovery service that in reality disappeared while exploring the Arctic north and trying to find their way thorough the mythical "north west passage." Apparently, "In 1845, the British sent forth an expedition to find the Northwest Passage. HMS Erebus and HMS Terror left with a combined crew of 129 men, led by Sir John Franklin and Francis Crozier. The ships disappeared, and the ensuing search lasted more than thirty years."*
Of course, this being Simmons--probably best known (or, at least to me) from authorship of the Hyperion series of science fiction novels--it's not enough to portray a harrowing account of men stuck on frozen ships in the Arctic Circle, running out of supplies, trapped by the hubris of one commanding officer (Franklin) and being given a slim chance of survival through the sheer will of another Captain (Crozier)...he's gotta add a snow monster.
This isn't just any regular monster, of course, it's a mythological creature of Eskimo creation ("Esquimaux", natch, in the novel) that turns out to live off both human flesh and the soothing song of a Lady without a Tongue (Yeah, don't ask...just read).

I found The Terror to be both fascinating and frustrating. It worked on a ridiculously high level when describing the "real life" trauma the crew faced frozen in time, surviving the unsurvivable, desperately waiting for a spring thaw that didn't come until it was too late. The exquisite detail and descriptions of the workings of these 19th century explorer ships had me feeling the wind in my face and the chill down to my bones. Then came the monster. Frankly, I'm not sure it was necessary. The tale was working well on its own merits without the dip into the Eskimo legend (plus, the thing bears pun intended too much in common with Simmons own "Shrike" created for the Hyperion novels). The ice monster took me out of the reality that Simmons created so memorably in the rest of the novel.

Nevertheless, I'm giving The Terror a high recommendation because (1) the intricately described adventure in the Arctic is worth the time even if you find yourself distracted by the unnecessary supernatural elements and (2) once I picked it up I couldn't put the damn thing down--which is really how one should judge these things.

Next up in the pile, I have either Christopher Buckley's Boomtown or Dennis Lehane's The Given Day. I'll let you know.





*Read some press, here.