Years of Poems and Spirits

Watched “There Will Be Blood” tonight. After the movie was over, Song and I stayed in our seats, didn’t know what to make of it. Finally, I said, “Boy, I never saw so much anger in one movie.”

Not sure it is my kind of movie but I can tell it is a good one. If it does become some kind of arty cultish movie, I can image why.

I remembered once I went with a church group to hike Mt. Adams. On our way back, the leader, Paster Bob, decided to go spelunking in a cave nearby. When we got to the cave entrance, I knew it was a mistake: it wasn’t so much an entrance as a rat hole on the ground. Following a thread-thin ray of daylight, I could see the hole expanding into profound darkness. We squeezed, crawled, climbed and pulled each other along half a mile. Turning on flashlight didn’t help much, since all I could see was the light beam being sucked into endless darkness.

When I finally shake myself out of the ground, I knew full well this would be my last and only spelunking outing. However, thinking back, I have to admit it was a very memorable trip.

That is how this movie makes me feel: I was very uncomfortable while watching it. But I can totally see why it is extraordinary or why there are others who will like it.

One more thing, I don’t know why the director chose the allegro from Brahms’ violin concerto for the sound track. It is rather strange seeing a primitive industrial machine slowly cranking under an oil rig in the middle of Navajo desert while listening to Ann Sophie Mutter playing her hearts out …

Nothing in particular, just some thoughts today:
1. Finished Blustein’s “And the Money Kept Rolling in (And Out)”. His main theme? Too much liquidity is bad for a small developing economy.

Note liquidity is not just “hot money”, as the term is highly charged and predisposed against currency trading (as Jesus would do). Instead, liquidity means zero-friction convertibility.

His proposed solution? If market is addicted to a quick buck, then impose an sovereign bankrupcy protection scheme that is enforced by international laws and institutions (e.g. IMF). Call it the Chapter 11 procedures for nations. It incurrs a mandatory suspension and restructuring of a nation’s debt. According to the author, some creditors were begging the Argentinians to organize such a “hair cut” across the board during the crisis.

The chance of his idea becomes a reality? Very small I am afraid. The creditors can easily influence the U.S. decision makers while the developing nations can’t.

2. Movies:
The Lives of Others (Das Leben der Anderen). A good movie that I’d recommend to others. Worthy of the Best Foreign Movie recognition. Other than the Dreyman character, everyone performs well. However, I am not sure whether the movies is trying to tell a story or to leave an impression. Its linear progression leaves little room for any explosion. The closest is Christa’s suicide–a perfect moment to paint a torn body and soul. Yet the shots on the blood, the twisting body and her last words are short, tentative and restrained. What is more, Dreyman’s devastation and the exposure of Wiesler in front of his boss are compartmentized. Now instead of having to face an angry lover and a furious master, Wiesler is totally out of picture. How about that for a bang?

Then I watched the Madness of King George III again–always one of my favorites. Love the performance–everyone: the King, Pitt, Fox, etc. Unlike the Germans who like to use lighting and cinematographic composition to tell a story, the British are actors. They use body language, facial expression and catchy dialogue to “shake” you into feel something. The screen writer tried somewhat half-heartedly to circumscribe the significance of KGIII’s illness (e.g. American independence). They don’t have to, because the way the actors act makes an audience think the significance is already known to them and is irrelevant. Now that is art.

3. The Democratic Congress
Usually, I don’t care for what is going on in D.C. any more. But noticed that recently the Democrats are having trouble getting their agendas into law. It really came to no surprise to me. A short while ago, I commented on the difference between being politically liberal and ideologically liberal.

The problem with the Democrats is that they politik too much and govern too little. Either by nature or by design, they are more of agitators than administrators. That is very unfortunate. Since some of them are pretty brilliant and progressive.

The second failed attempt to pass SCHIP and the decision to roll everything into a defense bill are just a few examples (if Clinton ever did something, it is an exceptions (given eight years) that proves the rule). They fail to see the value of their causes can only be realized if the legislations are enacted (i.e. in the governance domain), not when they are held as political hostages (i.e. in the political domain).

Watched the movie “Michael Clayton” tonight. Really enjoyed it: a simple story tightly developed into a brilliant thriller; Excellent casting, scripts and acting.

In terms of acting, we thought Tom Wilkinson’s stands out. I never saw his performance before but a five-minute dialogue between him and Clooney reminded me of Ian Holm in Joe Gould’s Secret. Very typical English stage acting IMHO.

Clooney wasn’t bad either. I liked the movie partly becuase I liked where Clooney is going: he is not afraid of taking on serious topics–topics that demand the “silent majority” to do some collective soul-searching. He is the “righteous guy” from the left and he is happy to throw in his fame and fortune at it too.

Is this Clooney’s new niche? I also liked Syriana. If that movie was a little too dark to be popular, Michael Clayton’s triumphant ending can certainly make a difference here (but I would act differently if I were him. $10 million is enough to buy a life, let alone truth).

One thing I noticed was that the villain in the movie is played by the only female character–is this Clooney’s view on gender equality?

Incredibly, I just read this story on WP: “A former Qwest … executive, appealing a conviction for insider trading, has alleged that the government withdrew opportunities for contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars after Qwest refused to participate in [the evasdropping program].” Nacchio’s case was a high-profile one. It was all over the news when it came out. Now this new twist? Only WP put it on its web front page. No others mentioned it ever. Looks like NSA got everything covered now that Nacchio is allowed to leak the story.