Mike Stutz is a bold soul, a filmmaker/artist, whose own fixation with self-deliverance — in part due to his mother’s own suicide — led him to concoct a very personal documentary that begs to never look away. DON’T CHANGE THE SUBJECT has its flaws, such as initial over-reliance on the director’s connection to the matter, but as soon as he indulges and embraces others’ perspectives, the movie picks up and creates a compelling catalyst for post-screening discussion.

During the award-winning first season of The High Bar, I welcomed The Stranger’s Brendan Kiley to join me in a frank and, at times, irreverent discussion of suicide, its history and its current, socio-political ramifications. The episode remains one of my favorites, even if the production values are lower than Sylvia Plath‘s lows. Suicide is far from painless for those who survive and surround the act; suicide affects us all. Thus it is worthy of far more study and talk. I’ll take the plunge. And you can do the same thing if you choose.

What do YOU think?

I have seen a lot of docs about the fate of our planet and this is by far the sharpest. It is logically constructed and lushly produced. The visuals feel fresh, appropriate and the talking heads are culled intelligently, creating a compelling narrative that explains the reasoning for our current predicaments while maintaining a refreshing optimism via tangible solutions or, at the very least, signposts guiding us to a (better) tomorrow.

I was offered an opportunity to pose questions to the co-director of SURVIVING PROGRESS. Below, Harold Crooks — whose documentary film credits include THE CORPORATION, THE WORLD IS WATCHING and BHOPAL: THE SEARCH FOR JUSTICE — praises the good fortune of campus fires, razes the notion of playing God and weighs the needs of the many versus the needs of the few, just like Spock did in STAR TREK II.

Enjoy The Warren Report’s exclusive e-interview with Harold Crooks below, then tell me… What do YOU think?

WARREN: Money-back guarantee? If nations were to multilaterally agree to forgive all debts, would that hit an environmental re-set button or just postpone the inevitable? HAROLD: The film explains how debt has been used as a tool to gain control over and extract resources and mercilessly plunder the environment and those who live in it. But these debts are not owed to nations. They are owed — as economic historian and former Wall Street economist Michael Hudson explains — to our modern-day oligarchy — now known, thanks to OWS, as the 1%. The annulling of these debts is what Michael call the political fight of the 21st Century. Of course what also must be annulled to save he planet is the replacement of short-term casino capitalism with economics that flows from a recognition that economies are part of the natural world and not separate from it.

WARREN: SURVIVING PROGRESS features a virtual rock-star slate of thought leaders — Margaret Atwood, David Suzuki, Stephen Hawking, Jane Goodall and Ronald Wright. Is there anyone you desperately wanted to include but could not lure on camera?

HAROLD: Someone we desperately wanted to be in the film and who refused is, in fact, int the film, I am speaking of technology historian Vaclav Smil of the Univeristy of Manitoba. We are first attracted to Smil through a paper he delivered — Energy At The Crossroads — to a global science forum conference on scientific challenges for energy research. What is fascinating about Smil is his big picture global thinking. For instance, he can tell you precisely how many terrawatts of untapped biomass — the living green stuff — the planet contains. His views interest people across the spectrum from Bill Gates to anti-corporate eco-activists. Despite being a contrarian, Smil subscribes to the “radical” idea (in terms of Wall Street ideology) that economies are subsystems of the biosphere. To ignore the limits of nature is to imperil humanity and we are on or near or maybe beyond the tipping point. But when we approached him he said if you’re interested in what I think, read my books. He complained that tv crews come, take up his precious time, use little and what they do use usually get wrong. We wrote him a three-page, single-spaced appeal explaining our film wasn’t a tv doc but a theatrical feature. He was so surprised by our effort that he agreed to be interviewed. But when the time came, he bowed out, saying he was leaving for Japan. One year later, during editing, we tried again. This time he said it was impossible. A fire in his faculty building had destroyed his office, we said no problem, we’ll rent a downtown Winnipeg hotel room. Thus did we interview him on one of the coldest days on record. And our persistence paid off, since at screenings from Montreal and Amsterdam to Dubai and New York City’s Lincoln Center, Vaclav Smil always ranks as one of the “stars” of our “rock-star slate.”

WARREN: There have been a slew of “doomsday” documentaries produced in recent years. Do these films represent a form of “progress trap” for the already-converted?

HAROLD: Our film is not a “doomsday” doc. In fact the majority of audiences find it to be “mind-expanding” and visually and aurally enthralling. That s not to say it does not deal with the epic challenges at this in the evolution of our species. We are the first generation in the 6,000 year old experiment of urban civilization to be so aware that our fate is tied up with the fate of the planet. But this is a recent awareness and films like ours contribute to a growing planetary self-awareness of the need for transcending progress-as-usual or, progress as it has been understood since the birth of the Industrial Revolution.

WARREN: Lyrically speaking, we’ve been told that what the world needs now is love, sweet love. Are you good with that as long as the sweet love doesn’t lead to procreation?

HAROLD: Most world religions and spiritual systems recognize a connection between ethical behavior (loving thy neighbor as thyself) and personal salvation. You do good on earth and you are rewarded in heaven. Or, at least you are liberated from the chain of suffering. What we now face is the interesting possibility — as best expressed in our doc by Robert Wright, author of Nonzero: The Logic of Human Destiny — is that the salvation of civilization as a whole will depend on a moral symbiosis with technology. Interesting turn of events in terms of the ancient idea of a Golden Rule!!!

WARREN: Maverick geneticist Craig Venter has engineered a synthetic life form. How worried should I be? I’m uncomfortable even God plays God.

HAROLD: To his credit, when asked what he makes of the charge that he is playing God, Craig Venter replied by saying: “I do not play fictional characters.” As for your concerns about the claims for synthetic biology being like the U.S. Calvary coming to the rescue of embattled humanity as its hour of maximum peril, our film takes the position that there never can be a purely technological fix to the converging threats to civilization. The key to minimizing the human footprint and walking far more lightly on the earth is through the socially just application of our unique human powers — for reasons we lay out.

WARREN: You have worked on an amazing array of documentaries, most of which spectacularly chronicle mankind’s failings. How do you maintain any hope?

HAROLD: My answer to this question is to quote the mid-20th Century Italian philosopher who talked about the “pessimism of the Intellect” and the “optimism of the Will.” Our pro-creative destiny is to keep the faith and re-imagine the world. Hope is hard-wired in the majority of us and that includes me.

WARREN: Dr. Daniel Povinelli makes a compelling case for the one question that separates humans from chimpanzees. In the spirit of our alleged evolutionary advantage: Why?

HAROLD: What is so remarkable — you might even say “dramatic” in terms of the human story — about the present world moment is how the Craig Venters represent the fruition of what Povinelli says distinguishes us from our primate cousins. In his words: “Thats the fundamental core difference, I believe between humans and chimps. That humans ask Why? — we’re constantly probing for unobservable phenomenon to explain the observable.” This inner probing — by making it now possible to create — as Venter has done — new replicable life forms using computers!!! — is what gives us what we might call “God-like” powers. The question remains however: we will evolve in time the moral intelligence to apply these powers for the well-being of the 99%? The film takes hope from the evolution of what we call a planetary brain that is allowing us as a species to transcend superficial human differences and recognize a common fate baed on serving the needs of the 99%.

** SURVIVING PROGRESS is currently playing in Seattle. Check here for venues and showtimes.

I speak with stars. I speak with smarties. I speak with thousands. I don’t get nervous.

I speak with authors and artists I greatly admire — Howard Jacobson, Guillermo del Toro, William Gibson, Sir Salman Rushdie — and actors I truly adore — Jodie Foster, Gary Oldman, Tilda Swinton, David Strathairn. I don’t get nervous.

I address CIOs and CEOs and the journalists of the BBC. I don’t get nervous.

On Tuesday, I hosted two men I revere; the iconic Dr. Cornel West, whose works (Democracy Matters; Race Matters) have strongly influenced my sense of our nation’s social (dis)order, and Tavis Smiley, whom I consider the best conversationalis in the business. (Or, on my more immodest days, one of the top two. ; ) And, I must confess, I got a little nervous. (When you watch the show — when it premieres in May — you may note I get a little tongue-tied during my opening remark.)

It was an honor to welcome Brother Cornel and Brother Tavis to The High Bar, their visit an unforgettable high point for our first three seasons. They were affable, gracious and unerringly professional, introducing themselves to every crew member and repeating themselves after any unanticipated interruptions. Personally, our talk — about poverty and their new book, The Rich And The Rest Of Us — provided me a career highlight that shall always make me giddy: the handful of times I got the two of them to laugh in unison, with surprise and almost conspiratorial delight. I rank Dr. West’s and Mr. Smiley’s warm, won, approving laughter right up there with a moment when hosting Robert Duvall and Luciana Pedraza, when the actor, during our q&a, covertly turned to his wife and whispered of me: “Who is this guy? I like this guy. He’s funny. I like this guy.”

I guess I can live with the fleeting jitters for such heartening rewards.

If you’d like to know a secret for why my nervousness quickly subsided, I’ll tell you, much credit goes to Jason Ganwich, the flip, yet unflappable producer of The High Bar and the amazing crew he assembles. Throughout Jason’s tenure, I have been blessed with a team of dedicated filmmakers, all of whom contribute monumentally to the increasingly high production quality of the show and, as importantly, to my peace of mind on-camera. For this particular shoot, my sincere thanks go out to: Del Brown, Javier Caceres, Jason Ganwich (again), Sam Graydon, Zach Hobert, Alexander Lloyd, Patrick Lloyd, Regan MacStravic, Ron Novak and Marco Scaringi. Thanks to Shoreline Community College for lending a hand and, more accurately, some equipment. Thanks to Emily Resling, Kamala Saxton and Marination Station for keeping the guests and crew fed… very, very well. Much gratitude to Leshelle Sargent and Raymond Ross for arranging the visit for Dr. West and Mr. Smiley and to Jolene Chavez and Volterra for inviting us into their luscious venue. And, even though they are not always on set, super-special thanks are still due to the following stalwarts of The High Bar: Mike Astle, Nancy Dragun, Brian Parker, Robyn Scaringi and Alexander Walsh.

** If you’d like to learn any of my other secrets for initiating and maintaining a conversation with celebrities or even family, please consider my Art of The Interview workshop this coming Monday, April 30th, 2012.

** For those who like to set their DVRs, just keep recording The High Bar on KBTC, Monday nights at Midnight, following Charlie Rose. We will premiere the episode with Dr. Cornel West and Tavis Smiley in May. We will announce a specific date soon, stay tuned.

American leaders like to proclaim that we get into wars either to bless other countries with democratic governments like our own or to protect American freedoms. Some would argue, we succeed at neither. One such naysayer, is former Marine Tim Thompson, a native of Tennessee appalled by the state’s new voter ID law. In this short film by David Earnhardt (UNCOUNTED: The New Math of American Elections), Thompson makes his case.

What do YOU think?

* For another take on grassroots politics, revisit filmmaker Stephen Gyllenhaal‘s appearance at The High Bar during Season 1.

* For more insights from documentarian and voting rights advocate David Earnhardt, please watch Part 1 and Part 2 of this Film Rap session, courtesy of The Warren Report.

Sharks may become extinct by the year 2030 — humans slaughter between 30-70 million sharks every year! — and Ava has become convinced she and, frankly all of us, need to act and act now. That’s why she asked me to help organize these screenings in conjunction with SIFF’s Films4Families series.

Won’t you please join us? Tickets are only $4. You may purchase tix on-line now.

http://www.siff.net/cinema/detail.aspx?id=22267&FID=112

* Please note that SHARKWATER has been rated PG “for images of animal cruelty, thematic elements, language and some smoking.”

In addition to the screening, there will be activities and a contest for kids along with a short q&a with shark and ocean conservation experts including Laura James.

If you are unable to attend, Ava offers these suggestions below.

What can you do to help sharks?

* Don’t purchase any products containing shark parts, including shark fin soup, sharkskin boots, etc.

* Support local and global legislation for the protection of sharks. (Visit www.PewEnvironment.org/Sharks for more information.)

* Don’t fish for sharks — practice catch and release or take photos instead.

* Tell your friends and help us make a difference! Visit http://www.sharkwater.com/ where you can take a pledge to save sharks — or make a donation to help bring SHARKWATER to China, so we can curb the demand for shark fin soup.

* You can learn even more about efforts to protect sharks and other sea creatures here: http://www.seashepherd.org/

Will we see you there?

I got great feedback from the filmmakers and film lovers in attendance, so I must have done something right. If you run a film school or a film festival, just know I’d love to bring the program to your city, too.

I disliked THE PHANTOM MENACE when I saw it at the Cinerama in Seattle. Truth be told, when I saw STAR WARS (the installment now known as A NEW HOPE) at the Loews Astor Plaza in New York CIty when I was about 13, I was underwhelmed. Sure, the special effects were cool, but even then, I recognized there was something off about this instantly beloved production. It was only later that I could identify the problem, and now, after my revisiting of the fourth/first movie I can say, unequivocally: George Lucas doesn’t know what the f**k he’s doing. Seriously, what is his talent? Is it casting? No. I’m sorry, Exhibit A: Mark Hamill. But even he is far more convincing than Jake Lloyd, the poor child plucked to portray l’il orphan(?) Ani Skywalker. He’s got all the charisma of Robbie Rist crossed with a spatula… only he’s flatter than the latter and less charming than the former. Does George know how to direct? All signs point to… No. He composes a shot about as well as a blind bartender in a funnel cloud. Does George know how to write? No more so than the proverbial hundred monkeys stationed at an equal number of typewriters, only George beat the odds and banged out some semblance of Joseph Campbell a long time ago,  in a screenplay far, far removed from the classics. THE PHANTOM MENACE script is filled with redundancies and misplaced, Earth-bound colloquialisms befitting Joe Biden babbling during a slow news spin cycle. “I don’t care what universe you’re from, that’s gotta hurt.” Indeed, it does. In light of these compartmental evaluations, it becomes more and more apparent that the “skill” of George Lucas was his ability to bind mythic structure with what were, at the time, ground-breaking special effects at the most fortuitous moment in Hollywood. His puerile take on good versus evil was the perfect, commercial antidote to the personal, passionate, political filmmaking of the 70s — he was Ronald Reagan to, say, Hal Ashby‘s Jimmy Carter. Like Reagan, Lucas is still worshipped today for his ability to distract the masses with the most most simplistic messages — neither was so much a great communicator as he was an average storyteller, whose fables were so mundane, so unchallenging as to render their toothless tales easily digested. I suggest it’s time for us to purge.

We ought to reject the comforting polarizations of Lucas  — and Spielberg and Bay — and return to more complex and compassionate narratives; movies that address social concerns with an empathy and rigor, allowing for fault and fortune to coexist within us all. We need fewer Jar Jar Binks and more Hugo Cabrets.

Sundance

NEW YORK accent helps redefine an approach to cinema verite with exceptional cinematography. FAT KID rules because it is that rare youth film that refuses to pander to either parents or festival programmers, that is, it represents teen lives honestly, not as a succession of PG fart jokes nor as a string of R-rated, drug-fueled escapades. The film’s fantastic lead, Jacob Wysocki, rings true because he acts natural, an amorphous, adolescent blend of humility, hubris and self-deprecating humor thats more misty than funny.

I had the good fortune of serving as one of Caleb Slain‘s instructors when he attended TheFilmSchool and have been honored to nurture a friendship with Matthew Lillard over the past few years and multiple interviews, including his trip last year to visit The High Bar.

Watch the show, see the movies. But first, a toast to Caleb Slain, Matthew Lillard and… the wise curators of SXSW.

After a short hiatus, I am pleased to announce the return of Going. Going! Gone?, for our final two “death panels.” Will you join me?

Dying is the No. 2 fear of Americans, public speaking is No. 1. Of course, you can always avoid the latter. However, in this three-part series, host and fearless public speaker Warren Etheredge (of The Warren Report and The High Bar) will tackle both phobias, inviting three fellow mortals — a seeker, a physician and a spiritual leader — to join him on stage for three separate, frank, funny and enlightening conversations about the nature of our existence and a better understanding of our alleged ends.

GOING!

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 16 AT 7 PM

With Hope Wechkin, MD, medical director of Evergreen Hospice and Palliative Care

THIS IS THE END, MY FRIEND. BUT IS THIS TRANSITION AS DEFINITE AS SCIENCE AND BUREAUCRACY CLAIM? WHAT SHOULD WE KNOW ABOUT OUR FINAL MOMENTS THAT MIGHT BRING US COMFORT, WISDOM AND LOVE?

GONE?

THURSDAY, MARCH 1 AT 7 PM

With Rabbi Ted Falcon, PhD, spiritual guide, author, teacher, therapist

TURN OUT THE LIGHTS, THE PARTY’S OVER. OR IS IT? WHAT HAPPENS IN OUR AFTERLIVES AND SHOULD THE PROMISE/THREAT OF AN ALTERNATE REALITY OR A SECOND GO-ROUND ALTER OUR BEHAVIOR IN THIS LIFE?

Bastyr University • 14500 Juanita Drive NE, Kenmore, WA 98028

Tickets: $12, sold at the door 30 min. before event

MORE INFO

I have not read Jonathan Safran Foer‘s Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close and yet I am certain I’d like the book more than the movie. At least, I hope I would. On screen, the effort to reduce the entirety of 9/11′s impact to one young survivor’s endurance of its aftermath is precious, contrived and, ultimately, trivializing. Proposing that Oskar Schell, a 9-year-old square who fits somewhere comfortably on the autism spectrum between a young Matthew Reinhart and a younger Rain Man — or, in other words, bright and awkward but not scary weird  — illustrate a city’s struggle to make sense of the non-sensical is a cinematic misstep. The character, despite Thomas Horn’s game performance, is not reasonably accessible; yes, he evokes sympathy but cannot induce us to transpose our comprehensions of the infamous day. I don’t care how caring or dynamic a dad Thomas Schell (Tom Hanks) appears to be, his son’s mourning does not cleanly correlate with the general public’s loss. Grief is not a parlor game and resolution does not necessarily equal catharsis. EXTREMELY LOUD AND INCREDIBLY CLOSE is hobbled by the hubris of its creator/s, as it is readily apparent that the author and the filmmaker wish for this Schell game to produce one winner to stand-in for the rest of us. Instead, this over-produced, sentimental hustle leaves one feeling more like the sidewalk sucker taken in by three-card monte. Even the tears are illegitimate.

Conversely, MARGARET, long-shelved yet expertly crafted by Kenneth Lonergan, doesn’t fall for the age-old scam or the long con. Instead, the stage-schooled writer-director has sculpted a unique tale with a familiar lead teen, Lisa Cohen (Anna Paquin), who fancies herself one-of-a-kind because her suffering is her own and of her own doing, not some emotional blowback of a landmark tragedy beyond her reach, her control. Thus she may self-centeredly wallow in her quintupled reaction to grief which bounces around Kubler-Ross’s convenient chronology. Sure, Lisa cycles through denial, anger, bargaining, depression and acceptance but her age-appropriate narcissism and cynicism — natural flip-sides of her burgeoning sense of mortality and a dispiriting deflation of idealism — is redolent of our own remembrances of our first, flush brushes with death and our sorry transitions to adult compartmentalization, our careless minimization of despair so achingly etched in Gerard Manley Hopkins‘ poem, Spring and Fall, that inspires this movie’s title. Navigating New York’s populous streets, Lisa still feels alone, in large part due to parental apathy and professorial navel-gazing… and other points south. Unlike the camera-ready citizens of EXTREMELY LOUD, the denizens of MARGARET‘s New York are so wrapped up in their own dramas, they barely register the girl’s existence and certainly can’t hear her muffled cries for help. It’s a damning condemnation of most adults’ sink-or-swim strategy with kids that often results in their needless drowning. Maybe the grown-ups ignore Lisa because they don’t care or, more likely, because they secretly wish to see her suffer, not unlike the victims of fraternal hazing who then brandish the whip for the subsequent freshmen rushing. In the end, if there is hope, it is only through uncommon connection, a fleeting, final embrace between mother and child when each fully recognizes the need for nurturing. We feels Lisa’s pain and, in turn, our own, wishing our partners may hold us tight before the curtain comes down.

Nearly a century ago, Gerard Manley Hopkins noted: “Sorrow’s springs are the same.” Indeed, yet only MARGARET taps them. Unforgettably.

What do YOU think?

I was fortunate to host Mr. Oldman just a couple of months ago for a very special edition of The High Bar — the only episode not to be shot at an actual bar! Even without the proper backdrop or the liquid courage on tap, our talk of trust and loyalty seemed to intoxicate the actor without any of the nasty side-effects.

I do hope we may welcome Mr. Oldman back when he has more time to visit and we have a bottle to share.

Norman Foster appears in URBANIZED and is also the star of the recent hagio-documentary, HOW MUCH DOES YOUR BUILDING WEIGH, MR. FOSTER?  Written and narrated by Deyan Sudjic — apparently, a critic in name only — the voice-over is so sycophantical I swore I was listening to James Lipton laud the early work of Chris Kattan. The film is a comely bit of archi-porn. And, like most porn…… it is tempting to fast-forward past the dialogue-heavy come-ons and get straight to the money shots. Ahhhhh. Yes. That’s good. Oh, God! There’s no denying Foster’s buildings are lush, supple and more sustainable than your average skyscraper. (Check out London’s “Gherkin” or the Torre Caja Madrid.) Unfortunately, there is no balance and little context to bolster his cinematic deification, other than a nod to his camaraderie with, according to Sudjic, the lesser Buckminster Fuller. (If you’d like a tantalizing sample of Bucky’s ground-breaking philosophies, I urge you to view Evan Mather‘s A NECESSARY RUIN.)

It is tempting to suggest that architects have it easy, what with their fancy wardrobes and jet-setting lives, yet a recent study from Georgetown University reports that college graduates with architecture degrees have the highest rate of unemployment, at 13.9 percent. While I feel sorry for those entering the profession, I wonder if there is an important opportunity intrinsic in this downturn: Perhaps we should stop building anything until we actually have, well, a plan?

I am heartened by the fledgling efforts of Decision Commons, housed at the University of Washington’s Runstad Center, that proactively seeks to streamline the process of culling input from all sectors — public, private and governmental — to determine the efficacy of proposed developments and how they might be tailored to serve everyone’s best interests rather than a few individuals’ bottom lines. For if ever there were an arena in which the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, the future environments (Capital E and small e) in which we all live, warrant a stronger foundation than just clever design.

What do YOU think?

Bonus: Here’s a link to another great animated short for bibliophiles, To Die By Your Side, a collaboration pairing filmmaker Spike Jonze and handbag designer Olympia Le-Tan. Be forewarned that the piece is not exactly family-friendly, so unless you care to have some ‘splainin’ to do, you may wish to keep the skeleton-on-skeleton action to yourself.

(Thanks to Thinking Caveman for sharing this YouTube link.)

For the inside scoop, I invited filmmaker Lev Anderson to visit The High Bar to raise a toast to and raise the bar for Fishbone. You can eavesdrop on our conversation once Season 3 of The High Bar debuts on UWTV and KBTC this February.

Cheers!

Although I AM is not on the Academy’s Short List nor was it in theaters long, Seattleites have a chance to see the movie once more, January 13th, 2012 at Wallingford Neighbors‘ screening series, Friday Night at the Meaningful Movies.

I encourage you to check I AM out on the big screen, then drop in at The High Bar for Tom Shadyac’s visit. The combo just may change your life or, at least, the way you look at yogurt.

What do YOU think?

On Monday, January 9th, 2012, I will host Ms. Paretsky again, this time at Seattle’s most charming staycation getaway, Pensione Nichols. The event is FREE and you may purchase a copy of her latest book at the venue for the best-seller to autograph. For more details and to attend, you MUST rsvp here.

The show will screen just before the movie, so arrive early, get your snacks — The Grand has some of the best popcorn in the region — and take a seat at… The High Bar with Gary Oldman.

A different sort of spoiler alert: It doesn’t hurt to read John Le Carre’s book first.

Jesse Peretz‘s OUR IDIOT BROTHER is deserving of four out of five cups from the punch bowl. The under-apreciated 2011 family comedy (or “fam-edy” as Adam Scott refers to it in the DVD extras) is a surprisingly sincere yet still flat-out silly tale of irritating, yet lovable relatives that gets it right. Yes, we may ruin each other’s lives, but that’s part of the charm, no? Paul Rudd is stellar as the titular, truthful shlemiel, harnessing his functional stoner charm for a role more meaningful than his unconvincing turns as the lead in too many half-baked romantic comedies. The rest of the movie is so charmingly cast, it is impossible to resist; I wish I were related to Zooey Deschanel, Emily Mortimer, Shirley Knight, Rashida Jones and Elizabeth Banks (even if she is reduced to approximating Parker Posey, bad hair and all). Throw in great bits by Kathryn Hahn and T.J. Miller and some sly, scene-stealing moments courtesy of Steve Coogan (though I could have lived without seeing his two egg cups and a kidney dish) and you have the possibility of the most uproarious reunion ever. In a year of strong comedies, OUR IDIOT BROTHER ranks in the top five. What do YOU think?

During Season 1 of The High Bar, best-selling author and trouble-making blogger Jennifer Worick visited to raise a toast to and raise the bar for the functional family. Grab a beer, pull up a stool and draw your own conclusions… or rewrite your will.

In the meantime, I’m going window-shopping. Would love to find the perfect suit… and upgrade my sibling.

Uh-oh. That time-honored excuse won’t help me now. I know who’s coming and am too intimidated to do anything about it. This week, I’ll be shooting new episodes of The High Bar and welcoming Eric Lanlard, one of the world’s most renowned patissiers, the owner of London’s beloved Cake Boy boutique and author of a similarly and humbly titled collection of his best recipes. How on earth will I thank him for his delectable contributions to the show?

Self-Compassion: Stop Beating Yourself Up and Leave Insecurity Behind

Here’s a little taste — an Amuse Booze, if you will — of what you can expect to hear from her when The High Bar premieres her epsiode on Thursday, September 22nd, 2011 at http://thehighbar.tv

Cheers!

It’s a bittersweet story that Lennie requests repeatedly in Of Mice and Men. At its core, it’s a soothing, happy-making tale but also one built on a blatant disregard for logic, the obvious and present circumstances Sometimes reading this forum, I am reminded that the homers, the realists, the dreamers and the haters often want to hear about the rabbits, too, rather than just the facts. Or, the possible. Or, the contrary. We find comfort in the familiar and the like-minded. I, for one, though am tiring of the echo chamber’s redundancy and, this past Sunday, forced myself to tune it out. I remembered that I watch my beloved Dallas Cowboys to be transported, not just entertained. The brilliance of live sports and fandom is the combo’s capacity for enabling us, for three hours or more, to live exclusively in the moment.

Like many of you, I thrive and dive along with the fortunes of our team. I have since I was six years old and celebrated my 47th birthday this Monday basking in the luck of Sunday’s victory over San Francisco and the quick-gelling legend of Tony Romo‘s fractured fairy tale.

That said, it was not always apparent this game was to have a happy ending. Dan Bailey shanks a chip shot and, at the commercial break, I’m in the Zone checking to see who else is worried. A drive stalls and I’m back. And again. And again. But reading the feed did not provide solace but the opposite. Sure, others shared concerns but too many were ready to write off not only the game but the entire season after one bad half. I was reminded of the lesson of folklore’s rabbit who names his fears and in so doing, calls them closer — sort of the reverse of The Secret, a form of negative visualization… for the most pessimistic. Worse, it reminded me of my father and brother who used to half-heartedly watch games with me when I was a kid, constantly screeching what an a**hole this player was or what an “incompetent turd” another was. They said they were fans yet seemed happiest not when the team would win, but instead when they tried to squash my faith… as if by squelching another’s belief they’d be freed of the burden of their own potential disappointment/s. Back then, I was too naive to know any better and simply ignored them, cheering the Cowboys on — to myself, for myself — knowing at all times, that anything is possible — any comeback, any Hail Mary, any post-season glory. I patted my legs, silently chanting “Let’s go Dallas, come on Cowboys.” My father and brother tried to beat me down verbally during games and physically beyond, yet I never gave up hope. I may have doubted my own happiness but I never abandoned hope for my team.

So, after halftime this Sunday, I turned away from my intermittent visits to CZ, just as I had shut out the belabored harangues of my family decades earlier. I tuned out the noise and focused on the game, far from certain it would end well but determined to allow for that possibility and thus enjoy my time spent viewing. I didn’t need to drink the Red Kool-Aid and I didn’t need to don rose-colored glasses, I just needed to let go of expectation and replace it with the joy of the not yet determined. And, I began chanting again. To myself. Let’s go Cowboys. Let’s go defense. Let’s go Tony. Of course they couldn’t hear me… or perhaps I was actually summoning luck to our side.

Many are quick to reply to optimistic posts by suggesting there are no such things as moral victories. Fine. But if you accept that theory, shouldn’t you also accept that there are no such things as, well, moral defeats? I can’t believe the legion amongst us who find dark clouds engulfing silver linings and foxes in the rabbit patch.

Tony Romo (helped) beat the 49ers and, moreso, his critics — the harshest seeming to come from his own corner, our team’s alleged fans. He played hard knowing his effort was as valuable as the win, a lesson we might all want to adapt from his heavy mettle. I will never forget this game nor our quarterback’s courage. It will embolden me to keep the faith if for no other reason than because it just feels better that way. There’s no shame in trying, plenty in giving up.

At the end of John Steinbeck‘s classic novel, Lennie begs to be told about the rabbits one more time before George puts an end to it, an end to his friend. It is an act of incredible kindness. May we now put to rest our weekly proclamations of falling or clear blue skies and consider such extremes only exist in poorly told tales; the most engaging stories are those we can’t anticipate, the kinds of stories that unfold on any given Sunday if only we remain quiet enough to hear them out.

Listen closely and you can still hear Jesse Holley celebrating.

Of course, there’s always more to learn, thus why we invited legendary sexpert Susie Bright to The High Bar: to raise a toast to and raise the bar for… erotic literacy. (Oh, and to seduce us with tantalizing tidbits from her new memoir, Big Sex Little Death.)

Enjoy this week’s Amuse Booze with Susie Bright. The complete episode premieres on September 15th, 2011 at thehighbar.tv

Mike Daisey

Let me offer you a little “amuse booze” from The High Bar, a preview of this very timely and controversial episode which premieres on Thursday, September 8th, 2011 at TheHighBar.tv

Researchers have determined that our reading comprehension and retention is severely minimized when we absorb information from websites and blogs versus our ability to grasp and maintain the same stories conveyed in print. It’s a fascinating argument and one that amiably accompanies my belief that there is a visceral sensation reading newspapers or books that goes beyond the mere tactile sensation.

The question is, if the Ducks’ docs are right, how does this discredit or undermine the rise of new media journalism. What do YOU think?

For some expert opinions and fun conversations about journalism, stop by The High Bar for my chats with Monica Guzman Preston and Brian Stelter of The New York Times.

For more about WFW’s incentive program and what YOU can do, watch this video.

Recently, the Puget Sound Business Journal asked me to comment on the potential demise of WFW and the ongoing debate over film incentives in B.C. Click here for the complete article.

What is so funny is that my character on Larry Sanders was a very schlubby guy. And then I play this character who is a shark and takes up all the oxygen in the room, and suddenly I’m typecast as that guy. But I really have to whip myself up to play Ari [Gold]. It requires a very specific type of frenzy. That’s not who I am. That sort of frenetic, abrasive, reactive energy is not my natural resting state.

I do not know Jeremy Piven, I have neither met him nor interviewed him like Benjamin Svetkey, yet I am reminded me of a wonderful story from Norman Mailer about my namesake — sadly, not my facesake — Warren Beatty:

Warren Beatty has a remark I love. I saw him in BUGSY, and afterwards, I was kidding him a little. I said, “Aren’t you concerned your friends might be afraid of you now?” because he had a violence in BUGSY that was really startling. And he said, “No, because most of my friends are actors, and what we know is you only need 5 percent of someone in yourself to be able to play it.” And Beatty grinned and said, “Of course, if you have 75 percent, it’s a lot easier. But 5’s all you need.

Regardless of resting states, I still wonder, purely percentage-wise, just how easy it is for Jeremy Piven to get into character.

What do YOU think?

* July 29, 2011

** excerpted from an article, also in Entertainment Weekly, January 19, 2007

While we’re waiting for our drinks, pick up a copy of Ms. July’s revelatory short stories, No One Belongs Here More Than You. It’s a charming, provocative read and one of the entries in particular serves as a wonderful preview of THE FUTURE . Then, revisit the quirky author’s quirkier feature debut, ME YOU AND EVERYONE WE KNOW, which plays out like GARDEN STATE, only with real humans in unreal yet familiar predicaments.

(This article was originally published on Sparksheet.)

The next James Bond film will reportedly receive $45 million, a third of its overall budget, from high-end on-screen product placement.

The sum is more than double the previous record for a single film (Steven Spielberg raked in $20 million for brazenly running ads for Guinness and the Gap in Minority Report’s “near future”), and threatens to lethally reduce 007’s latest adventure to little more than a big screen companion to the Sharper Image catalogue.

The Hollywood practice of funding films with advertising dollars is not only accepted, it now borders on a fiscal imperative for big budget flicks. Product placement appears in roughly 68 percent of Hollywood films today, according to several reports. The majority of these movies feature multiple products and, on average, each product is represented on screen in one way or another at least eight times.

Given the slow death of the 30-second commercial spot, ad agencies are happy to pony up huge sums, cognizant of the tweaked adage: You never get a second chance to make a million impressions.

Of course, evaluating whether product placement is classy or obscene is akin to identifying pornography; you know it when you see it. My general rule is that if the appearance of a soda can or an automobile’s insignia pulls me out of the story and leaves me clinging to narrative threads like Indiana Jones swinging from an old rope bridge, there’s a problem.

Talladega Nights, a movie branded from green flag to checkered flag, worked because the tongue-in-cheek tie-ins provided a sly swipe at the NASCAR culture it parodies. Carrie Bradshaw constantly pecking at her Apple computer is reasonable;she doesn’t seem like a Dell girl.

But when product placement clumsily works its way into dialogue – I’m thinking of Daniel Craig’s 007 informing a likely conquest that he’s wearing an Omega, not a Rolex, in Casino Royale – I’m ticked.

Television shows used to tout their sponsors openly. Viewers knew they were being pitched because the presenters made it explicit. Even Alfred Hitchcock sardonically prepped his small screen audiences, “And now a word from our sponsors.”

Product placement functions in the opposite manner: Filmmakers hope viewers won’t notice, while brands are banking on them remembering when purchasing their next meal, laptop or timepiece.

In POM Wonderful Presents: The Greatest Movie Ever Sold, Super Size Me director Morgan Spurlock takes the old-school approach to the extreme in order to explore the increasingly complex world of product placement in movies. The documentary tracks Spurlock’s quest to underwrite the very movie we watch unspool, with fascinating and hilarious results.

I sat down with Morgan on my show, The High Bar, where we discussed his self-reflexive new film and the implications of increased product placement on screen, in our schools and even in our dreams.

Jodie Foster stopped by to chat with me at The High Bar, my award-winning talk show. The BBC invited me to teach two master classes in London earlier this year. Morgan Spurlock(http://vimeo.com/23022648) and Chuck Palahniuk (http://vimeo.com/7580182) are repeat customers. Now, you can find out why the Brits and the super-famous consider me one of the world’s best conversationalists and and why best-selling author, Dan Pink says:

“Warren Etheredge is an extraordinary interviewer — one of the best in the country. He’s incredibly prepared for each encounter — and has an uncanny ability to absorb complicated material and distill it for audiences. He also has a terrific sense of humor that makes the interviews feel less like dutiful graduate seminars and more like a late-night talk show. Indeed, I think it’s only a matter of time before some media executive wises up and gives Warren his own show.”

Having conducted over 1,500 interviews with the likes of Woody Allen, Amy Sedaris, Calvin Trillin, Naomi Watts, Robert Duvall, Mariel Hemingway, Salman Rushdie, Nora Ephron, Michael Pollan, Charlie Kaufman, Augusten Burroughs, Andy Samberg, Vincent Bugliosi and, dear lord, Nicolas Cage, I have learned how to grill a star and how to coax truth from politicians, authors and everyday people. Now you can learn my secrets. Whether you are a journalist, a documentarian, screenwriter or none of the above, you’ll benefit from my valuable lessons regarding how to listen better so that you can learn more and influence others.

“Warren is the most knowledgeable and engaging interviewer and commentator on film that I have ever been engaged with. His insight and criticism are tempered with a keen sense of humor and irony. To be the subject of one of his filmmaking classes was both intellectually stimulating and a whole lot of fun.” —James Foley, filmmaker (GLENGARRY GLEN ROSS; AT CLOSE RANGE)

“…I found [our] conversations about 4 times more fun and thought-provoking than any other moderated talks in which I’ve participated.” — David Benioff (screenwriter, THE 25TH HOUR; THE KITE RUNNER; WOLVERINE)

“Warren Etheredge is one of the most probing and thoughtful interviewers–not to mention the wittiest!” —David Grann, author of THE LOST CITY OF Z

I am always flattered by the (unsolicited!) feedback I receive from the folks I interview. I am thrilled they appreciate the spirit with which I approach interviews. (Owen Schmitt , formerly of The Seattle Seahawks, refers to my style as “chill”… and who am I to argue with the 6’2″, 247 pound fullback?)

Now you can learn how I prepare for interviews and how I respond to the different challenges presented by questioning folks on tape, on camera or before an audience. And, I’ll share insights and a little bit of gossip from the 1,500+ interviews I’ve conducted.

You’ll learn why documentarian Peter Esmonde says: “I was more relaxed being interviewed by you than anyone before or since. It’s so clear that, aside from being attentive and intelligent, you know [your stuff] — and that makes the interview more of a conversation with a compadre.”

The venue for this special intensive will be the Phinney Neighborhood Association (6352 Phinney Ave N, Seattle WA 98103)

Tuition for this exclusive, 3+ hour workshop is only $100. reserve your seat now on EventBrite. Or, you may mail check or money order (made payable to Warren Etheredge) to: 1752 NW Market St #118, Seattle 98107. Or, pay using PayPal, sending money to warren@thewarrenreport.com

Space is very limited, so please reserve your seat today and indicate you’ll be attending on Facebook.

About me…

Warren Etheredge didn’t speak until he was 6 years old; he’s been going strong ever since, making a lively livelihood and the most out of every conversation, elevating small talk to high art, discourse to an ideal. He talks. He teaches. He interviews.

He has has conducted over 1,500 interviews ― in print, on camera, on stage ― with a wide range of filmmakers, authors, personalities and smarties including Amy Sedaris, Darren Aronofsky, Michael Pollan, Charlie Kaufman, Naomi Watts, Salman Rushdie, Robert Duvall, Alexander Payne, Nora Ephron, Augusten Burroughs, Michael Lewis and Chuck Palahniuk.

He hosts The High Bar, the award-winning weekly television series devoted to “raising the bar” through light-hearted conversation with people who care about culture that matters.

He is the founder of The Warren Report (www.thewarrenreport.com) and as such curates and hosts over 200 events every year.

He is also one of the founding faculty of The Film School (www.thefilmschool.com), former Curator for the 1 Reel Film Festival (at Bumbershoot), a published author, an Off-Broadway produced playwright, an acclaimed documentarian, a regular contributor to public radio and, internationally, a much sought-after public speaker on myriad topics.

Below, a transcript of my presentation.

Hi. My name is Warren Etheredge and I am NOT an alcoholic. Like Kim, I am a spirited drinker. In large part, I think this explains how and why we collaborated on countless events over a dozen years. I think we both see life, when properly navigated, as a series of contiguous cocktail parties with great food, good conversations and, ideally, no boring people. In fact, if Kim were here right now, I imagine she’d sidle over to me and whisper something like: oh, ferchrissakes, this is beautiful but can we open some wine and lighten up?  And (noting the cathedral wall behind us)… mauve? Really? Mauve?

Kim and I shared a tremendous capacity for criticism and many wrongly attribute this to sass, snark or cynicism when, more rightly, it is simply the flip side of idealism, a reflection of a shared faith in the redemptive power of literature. Kim believed we would be better as a whole if we just read more, ate better and canned more fruit. Honestly, I never understood the whole canning thing. Kim loved nothing more than the Good Book — that being the one she was enjoying at the moment.

Above all, Kim was driven by the notion that books can change the world… if only people read them. We were both appalled by the statistic that the average American household buys only ONE book per year… and just think of how all of us gathered here today skew that number. So Kim devised a multitude of public events to bring books and their authors to the people. To select guests, we would flip through publishers’ catalogues like kids trading baseball cards — “got it, got it, need it, want it, got it” — but instead we’d exchange insider baseball phrases like “hack”, “pervert,” “illiterate,” “Booker prize winner”… (and that was all the same author). I was honored to host Words & Wine and The Good Life series. Though they made no fiscal sense whatsoever — trust me — Kim was determined to introduce folks to greater ideas and lesser celebrated writers such as Ethan Canin, Dacher Keltner and Andre Dubus III. In short, Kim did more for literature and literacy than Nancy Pearl on a life-long Ritalin bender.

Of course, if you’re going to change the world or make some omelets, you are going to crack some eggheads. I remember early in our friendship when Kim completed my mantra: if you’re not pissing somebody off, you’re not doing it right. Consequently, I’d argue that Kim has never been recognized as she should, as a savior of bookstores by regenerating the passion of their patrons. Kim was unorthodox, at worst, and revolutionary, always. She reinvented systems from the outside, having learned that those running the inside just don’t get it.

I have always spoken extemporaneously. It’s sort of a trademark and I had hoped to do so again today. However, so desperate to honor Kim properly, I decided to craft a speech instead. Fittingly, about an hour ago,  I inadvertently erased my notes – twice! -and had to recreate it from scratchy memory. Forgive me. I know if Kim were here, she would have laughed, brought me another Tom Collins and reminded me not to sweat it. She’d say, “It’s no big deal, Warren. You’re just opening for Tom Douglas.”

It is tempting for journalists and obituary writers to remember Kim as an incredible behind-the-scenes force. However, I will forever see Kim as the headliner, a trusted colleague, a dear friend, one helluva woman, a role model, my only mentor.

I can think of no better way to pay tribute to Kim than to keep reading — I’ve picked up James Wood’s How Fiction Worksfor a reassuring sense of order — and to keep drinking.  I’ve brought my flask for a very necessary appreciation of life’s madness.  To Kim.

I went to sleep with visions of Emmys and woke with the dull, buzzing reminder of all the celebratory gin I had consumed hours earlier. Far worse, was the news I received moments later upon rolling over and checking my e-mail: my good friend and frequent collaborator, Kim Ricketts, had died. Sure, I knew she had been battling illness and yet Kim has always struck me as invincible; beneath her thin smile and strong facade, steely and pickled, I imagined her surviving the apocalypse and presenting author events with new life forms shortly thereafter.

I already miss Kim. I remain convinced that she did more to promote literature and literacy in this town than anyone and I remain frustrated that she never received the credit deserved for her noble efforts. (Too often, she got the quite opposite, sadly.) I am proud to have hosted dozens of events in The Good Life and Words & Wine series she conceived, the latter an obvious merging of our shared belief that communal high culture is best with hooch… and laughs.

Long before these series, a dozen years ago or so, Kim recruited me to host visiting authors at University Bookstore. She was one of the first and the few in this town to seriously consider the passion and levity I can bring to such occasions and for that I shall forever be thankful. Without her, and the exposure these events granted me, I am uncertain I would be filming The High Bar and inviting authors such as Booker Prize winner Howard Jacobson on to discuss The Finkler Question and what it means to be Jewish or Lori Gruen to talk about Animals & Ethics.

Like all of us, Kim had her quirks — such as savant-like knowledge of history and her magical ability to repeatedly double the size of any audience in her head — but all her eccentricities underscored her single-minded devotion to books and their power. The Warren Report has long touted that smarter audiences make better movies. I know Kim believed that smarter readers make a better world. It is inarguable.

I know there is nothing I can do to resurrect Kim just days after Easter yet I do know how best to honor her life and memory. Tonight, I will pour myself a good, stiff drink pick up a book I’ve been meaning to read — maybe Jose Saramago‘s Death With Interruptions would be fitting — and consume both with urgency, wonder and delight.

Here’s to you, Kim Ricketts. Thanks for all you have done and all you will still inspire.

Starring Ryan Reynolds, in a role that has convinced me, finally, that he is actually an actor not just a ridiculously buff goofball with dramatic ambitions, BURIED offers pointed critiques of American foreign policy and, more damningly, American corporate practices… though audiences can easily overlook these jabs by simply remaining spooked, an easy feat given Cortes’ direction that keeps us within the confines of both a coffin and real time. How and why our nominal hero finds himself trapped is slowly revealed thanks to Chris Sparling‘s tight script and Cortes’ innovative camera-work that, seemingly, never repeats itself and always offers new angles on the developing crisis. Additionally and wisely, the director served as his own editor, revealing how cleanly and calculatedly he must have plotted the shoot. Rodrigo Cortes’ work, completed under limited budget and over just seventeen production days, reveals an immense talent, a filmmaker with an intellectually rigorous approach to inherently visceral storytelling that is the hallmark of, yes, Hitchcock. BURIED is the PSYCHO of the Gulf War generation.

Thursday, February 24th, 2011 @ 7PM

Landmark Harvard Exit  (807 E Roy st, Seattle, WA 98102)

* PLEASE NOTE: If you would like to see this preview of I AM, please leave the name/s of those who wish to attend in the comments section below. I will respond with a confirmation. Seating can never be guaranteed absolutely, however, if you arrive early, your name will be on the guest list and your odds are at least as good as Lindsay Lohan returning to court. *

I AM, a prismatic and probing exploration of our world, what’s wrong with it, and what we can do to make it better, represents Tom Shadyac‘s first foray into non-fiction following a career as one of Hollywood’s leading comedy practitioners, with such successful titles as ACE VENTURA, LIAR LIAR and BRUCE ALMIGHTY to his credit. I AM recounts what happened to the filmmaker after a cycling accident left him incapacitated, possibly for good. Though he ultimately recovered, he emerged a changed man. Disillusioned with life on the A-list, he sold his house, moved to a mobile home community, and decided to start life anew.

Armed with nothing but his innate curiosity and a camera crew, Shadyac embarks upon a journey to discover how he as an individual, and we as a race, can improve the way we live. Appearing on-screen as character, commentator, guide, and even, at times, guinea pig, Shadyac meets with a variety of thinkers and doers–remarkable men and women from the worlds of science, philosophy, and faith–including such luminaries as David Suzuki, Noam Chomsky, Howard Zinn, Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Lynne McTaggart, Ray Anderson, John Francis, Coleman Barks, and Marc Ian Barasch.  An irrepressible Everyman who asks many questions but offers no easy answers, he takes the audience to places it has never been before, and presents even familiar phenomena in completely new and different ways.

The construction of this view-obscuring, life-saving budget-drainer inspired one of my favorite episodes of The High Bar on which I match wits with The Stranger‘s Brendan Kiley, debating the relative merits of the project’s costs versus the good done. (Watch it on Vimeo or YouTube.)

Since the show, the state has announced it will begin work on “strengthen[ing] bridge support columns, girders and trusses” to the tune of 9.3 million dollars. Um, in this economy, shouldn’t that have been done first as the structural integrity of the bridge will likely save more lives than the fence?

What do YOU think?

Wednesday, February 16, 2011 @ 7:00pm
Regal Cinemas Meridian 16
1501 7th Ave, Seattle, WA 98101
Directed by: Miguel Arteta
Written by: Phil Johnston
Produced by: Alexander Payne, Jim Taylor, Jim Burke
Cast:   Ed Helms, John C. Reilly, Sigourney Weaver, Anne Heche, Stephen Root, Kurtwood Smith, Alia Shawkat, Mike O’Malley, Rob Corddry and Seth Morris

** If you would like to attend, please leave your name and the number of tickets you would like in the comments section below, please. I will let you know if you are confirmed.**

In Miguel Arteta’s new comedy CEDAR RAPIDS, Tim Lippe (Ed Helms) was the guy people always thought would go places but then he just . . . didn’t.  He’s been living in über-sleepy Brown Valley, Wisconsin his whole life, still “pre-engaged” to his 7th grade teacher Millie Vanderhei (Sigourney Weaver), while selling insurance to protect other people’s dreams.  But now, Tim’s stalled life is about to get a kick-start because, for the first time in his 34 years, he’s headed to a “major” metropolis — Cedar Rapids, Iowa — where he must try to save his company at a do-or-die insurance convention that, for him, will be entirely nonconventional.

From the minute he checks into his hotel with his ancient American Tourister and cummerbund money-belt, it’s clear Tim has no idea how the modern world really works.  He is soon smitten with seductive Nebraskan insurance agent Joan (Anne Heche) and awed by his experienced roommates, the straight-shooting Wilkes (Isiah Whitlock Jr.) and the suspicious Zeigler (John C. Reilly).  Disheartened when he comes face-to-face with corporate corruption, Tim is ultimately lured beyond the lobby into an urban jungle he’s only ever seen on DVD and when it seems his life – and chances to succeed – have gone completely topsy-turvy, he finds his own unjaded way to turn it all around.

At several junctures in my life, I have felt compelled to “start over,” sometimes geographically by choice, sometimes fiscally by misfortune. However, while my methods have evolved, my madness remains the same. Seeking a cure, I joined Jeannie Yandel on KUOW Presents to discuss three movies (SECONDS, LOST IN AMERICA and UNKNOWN WHITE MALE) that explore starting over and how they parallel my own efforts to begin again. (Fin, again?)

Listen in on our conversation, then tell me: What do YOU think?

James “Thinking Man’ Lupori has already chimed in. Read his take on one of the movies I featured here.

Years ago, I hosted a Seattle preview screening of LITTLE CHILDREN with special guest, Todd Field, the director. I was fortunate to have dinner with him while the movie was unspooling, even though the Italian food served was as authentic as my Jamaican accent. After dissing his former classmates at AFI, including Darren Aronofsky, and discussing his collaborations with composer Thomas Newman, we chatted about something of far greater importance, our children, sparked by the moral conflict faced by the parents in his debut feature, IN THE BEDROOM. Todd spoke sweetly of raising his little ones in Maine and his desire to closely monitor the media they absorbed. I told him about my efforts to build a film library for Ava and he suggested I add… Pingu. I had never heard of the Swiss-animated series, but purchased it on-line immediately upon returning home that night. I am glad I did. The cartoons, in which the titular penguin and his family live life in an Arctic paradise of small-town values and pseudo-Scandanavian gibberish. The beauty of Pingu is how its good-natured charms translate universally.

This morning, Ava and I watched a new DVD of Pingu cartoons, giggling throughout. Ava has outgrown many other childhood entertainments, but not this one. I am thankful she has not and am grateful to Todd Field for his brilliant recommendation.

What do YOU think?

Today, we may be victims of our own aural prejudices. We want leaders who talk tough and/or sound smart, often failing to analyze the (mis)truths of their phrasings before passing our own sentences. To some, Sarah Palin comes across as candid, a woman of her convictions. To some, Barack Obama is erudite, a man of considered opinions. Either or both judgements may be correct but no one should come to these conclusions based solely on intuitive reactions to their speaking styles. To paraphrase one of our finest preachers, I have a dream we will one day live in a nation where politicians will not be judged by the colorfulness of their soundbites, but by the content of their rhetoric.

Till then, THE KING’S SPEECH best falls on deaf ears.

What do YOU think?

What do YOU think?

(Thanks to TLoML for sharing the review with me.)

This got me thinking about my favorite downbeat short films of all time and I feel compelled to share two titles with you. If you can find them, please do watch them. They are among the best films of any length I’ve ever seen.

Hollie Lavenstein‘s CLEAVE is a brutal rendering of the most vindictive tendencies of a broken heart, a suspenseful tale that surprises, even though it marches steadily towards its awful end. More devastating, Hilde van Mieghem‘s DE SUIKERPOT, which chronicles the fragile happiness of a little girl living with a drunken, impotent father whom she idolizes and a stern, yet caring mother whom she fears. When I first saw the short at the Seattle International Film Festival at the Harvard Exit, I had to stay in my seat when the lights came up because I was bawling… and continued to do so for another ten minutes. When I screened the film for another audience a year later, I had the same response. Even talking about it I can get misty, as I do when I look at my daughter who looks similar to the young actress.

I believe that we should embrace sadness when it comes; our acceptance of the emotion more critical to our happiness than, well, happiness.

That said, I am disappointed that Juliette Lewis was overlooked for her small, yet vital contribution to Tony Goldwyn‘s CONVICTION. She has only two scenes in the film and the first you almost overlook, as it takes to identify the actress beneath the big hair and garish make-up. However, when she returns late in the film, viewers may know it’s her but immediately forget as she so thoroughly embodies the role of a half-”baked,” guilt-laden loser with greater guile than good sense, that the actress disappears. While her character might have the power to exculpate Sam Rockwell‘s, there is always doubt as to whether she would if she could. It is a note-perfect performance — elegantly crafted by screenwriter Pamela Gray from transcripts and eyewitness accounts — that outshines Amy Adams‘ turn in THE FIGHTER. (Sorry, Amy. I still think you’re swell.) Sadly, not only did the Academy snub Juliette, so did the Independent Spirit Awards, though competition for the latter is more evenly matched.

CONVICTION was released on DVD today. Let this serve as your serve as a summons for cinematic jury duty. Watch the movie, wait for Juliette’s scenes and then render a verdict. Tell me…

What do YOU think?

However, the art I do know or, at least, feel confident opining about is comedy and this film provides a handful of gems that will outlive the screen-prints of Mr. Brainwash. Banksy’s timing and dry delivery are masterful, particularly when critiquing another’s filmmaking or confessing he’s abandoned his former habit of encouraging everyone to create Art: “I don’t do that so much anymore.” Brilliant. Put that in the Louvre.

I am a late-comer to the Banksy party, only becoming aware of him with the release of this movie and his hilariously subversive one-shot opening for The Simpsons. Suffice it to say, I am a fan, a convert. I am thankful for Banksy and his wit.

What do YOU think?

One journalist friend of mine told me a story of approaching Sheila Nevins, the head of HBO documentaries, at the outset of the Afghan campaign, to propose going on location early to live with the locals and see how the war affected them. Nevins dismissed the idea, saying that she “didn’t want to know about those awful people,” and had no interest “what they’re like.”

Oy. This reminds me of when I was on a panel programming shorts for a major international film festival. We had all watched the same movies and were convening to share our opinions and scores. We began discussing one title, a gritty — euphemism alert! — urban drama that received “A pluses” from everyone at the meeting but one juror. She gave it an F. When pressed to explain why her take was in such contrast to the majority, she calmly offered: “I’m just tired of movies about black people.” Yes, aren’t we all tired of all those damn movies with Jennifer Aniston and Bradley Cooper and Kristen Stewart and Leonardo DiCaprio… Whoops! They’re white, aren’t they? Oh, so the programmer who said that is an ass, isn’t she? Maybe she could get a job working for Sheila Nevins.*

The first two requirements for being a journalist or a curator or a gatekeeper really ought to be curiosity and compassion. If one can’t manage those two Cs, how could be expected to see the truth.

What do YOU think?

* Please note, I do believe Ms. Nevins has overseen the broadcast of many great documentaries, but stories like the one from Bad News do lead me to question her objectivity given the task or wrangling documentaries which, by their very nature, ought to provide unflinching looks at the world and peoples around us without prejudice.

Of course, that’s just my opinion based on anecdote, observation and experience, but now, I have Tom Fenton backing me up. The revered, retired CBS senior foreign correspondent details the dumbing-down of the evening broadcasts and the fiscal and ethical implications of this process in his searing indictment, Bad News: The Decline of Reporting, the Business of News, and the Danger to Us All. The book is almost a relic, a memento of what was once known as investigative journalism. Fenton interviews the last three archetypal old, white male anchors before they were dropped or walked the plank. (Peter Jennings is sharp, Tom Brokaw, candid and Dan, rather coy.) Fenton examines the excuses for the changes in network coverage and why they may be valid yet unacceptable. Fenton proscribes the (ir)responsible executives and, most importantly, prescribes solutions for saving both journalism and, in turn, our nation. In part, his answer is a return to former standards, specifically CBS News Standards. The author cites this significant preface to them by Richard Salant, who was president of the network’s news division back in 1976. It bears reprinting:

“We in broadcast journalism cannot, should not, and will not base our judgements on what we think the viewers and listeners are ‘most interested’ in, or hinge our news judgement and our news treatments on our guesses or someone else’s surveys as to what news the people want to hear and see, and in what form. The judgments must be professional news judgments — nothing more, nothing less.”

Sadly, ratings, profits and a patronizing disregard for Americans’ capacity for understanding, have diverted today’s journalists from their principled mission to an ignoble cliff-dive from the summit of Man’s knowledge to the pit of his fears. News at 11.

While we wag our fingers at the failed Fourth Estate, we might also ask ourselves how active we are in our pursuit of real information — not what’s fair, balanced or preposterously biased — but rather that which faithfully reports the facts so that we might assemble the truth from them. Yes, the truth may remain subjective, but wouldn’t you rather form your own opinion than adopt the one shouted at you?

I make it a point to take in multiple news sources including ones that don’t necessarily jibe with my world view, precisely for that reason. I love The Week for its sampling of different outlets’ perspectives on headline and back page items. I could still dig deeper and given Time or The Economist or Foreign Affairs, I will. (Anyone want to send me subscriptions, please?  You could be a PCH winner!)

As always, I am most interested in your opinion. What do YOU think?

Jeff Warrick‘s PROGRAMMING THE NATION traces the history of subliminal manipulation and examines its advances in the guise of political spin and product placement. He interviews Douglas Rushkoff, Dennis Kucinich and Noam Chomsky, amongst many others, for their candid opinions. Note: this is a fair-handed documentary, the message of which is, at all times, overt. Thus, viewers can decide for themselves: have they been saved from being brain-washed or have they been licked, reduced to all-day suckers?

Watch the movie, then tell me: What do YOU think?

What do YOU think?

For anyone fence-sitting about marriage equality, I encourage you to watch my interview with Charlene Strong and David Rothmiller, subject and director of the doc, FOR MY WIFE…, and the very first episode of The High Bar, for which my special guest was Steven Greenstreet, director of  8: THE MORMON PROPOSITION.

Recently, Mr. Martin, the pensive comedian/author/playwright/banjo picker, joined The New York Times’ Deborah Solomon for a closed-circuit-televised, on-stage interview at the 92nd Street Y in New York City. Like any good interviewer, Ms. Solomon focused on her guest’s latest work — An Object of Beauty – and quizzed him about the novel’s context: the art world. During their talk, a Y staffer delivered a note to Ms. Solomon urging her to refocus questions to concentrate on Mr. Martin’s more familiar career as joke-smith and movie-star. Apparently, a vocal segment of the audience wanted to hear more of his oft-told tales than actively listen to his extemporaneous and wise musings. If they didn’t get what they wanted, then they wanted their money back. Sadly, the Y gave the masses both. In doing so, the organization failed its self-prescribed goal: The  ”92nd Street Y is about people—the people of New York City and the surrounding area, the United States and the world. It’s about people who entertain and challenge, inform and educate. It’s about people who learn and discover, observe and participate.” On this night, it wasn’t. On this night, clearly, the 92nd Street Y was about serving the lowest common denominator. Shame on them.

I have interviewed over 1,500 folks — on stage, on air, on screen, in print and off the record. Whenever I conduct an interview, I feel honored… honored by the generosity of my guest and the opportunity provided both me and my audience to learn. In preparing for an interview, I do exhaustive research, the purpose of which is to best know my subject AND to avoid asking questions that have been asked so many times before. If the knowledge has already been drawn from the well, why submerge the bucket again? Need a refill? That’s why Al Gore created the internet.

Earlier this year, I hosted Dan Pink, the best-selling author and the VP’s former speechwriter. I asked Mr. Pink questions directly and tangentially related to Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us and none that begged him to regurgitate the book’s contents. I asked him whether Geoffrey Canada‘s extrinsically-motivated approach to education would, ultimately, backfire. I asked him whether there was enough heuristic work for Americans if most algorithmic work is getting outsourced. I asked him whether writing speeches for Al Gore was like choreographing dances for Stephen Hawking. I kept him off-guard rather than on-message and, consequently, Mr. Pink praised me:

“Warren Etheredge is an extraordinary interviewer — one of the best in the country.  He’s incredibly prepared for each encounter — and has an uncanny ability to absorb complicated material and distill it for audiences.  He also has a terrific sense of humor that makes the interviews feel less like dutiful graduate seminars and more like a late-night talk show. Indeed, I think it’s only a matter of time before some media executive wises up and gives Warren his own show.”

Of course, I was flattered; my guest was pleased. But not every attendee was happy. One blogger in the audience took me to task for not covering enough of the specifics in/of Drive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us so that he could write a review based solely on what he had heard at the event. When I suggested he read the book which was given him as part of his admission to Biznik’s vaunted Innovators Series, he still seemed incredulous and proceeded to rip me for my hosting inadequacies. How dare I not do his work for him?

We have entered a new age of crusades, only today, each righteous expedition is individual. Too often, we fight for our ideas regardless of the greater good or opposing viewpoints. Honest discourse is more endangered than humility, and that’s saying a lot in the era of personal branding. (Yes, I note the irony of this post appearing on my eponymous blog.) We’ve graduated from the snickering, service-oriented motto “the customer is always right” to the self-serving, solemn m.o.: “I am always right.” Well, says who? The like-minded “news”-caster you’ve self-selected? The maniac in the mirror? You?

In order to survive, we must work together. In order to thrive, we must learn from one another. If we cannot embrace the challenge of others’ opinions, we cannot imagine the unknown. And, if we fail to do that, we forfeit American dreams and proscribe innovation; we reduce ourselves from the roles of Einstein to… THE JERK.

What do you think?

SPECIAL OFFER: On Monday, December 13th, I will be hosting my workshop, LISTEN UP! The Art of the Interview, during which I am sure to defend Ms. Solomon and demystify my unorthodox approach. Bonus, admission is reduced for readers of The Warren Report. Just click here: http://listenupworkshop2-efbevent.eventbrite.com/

* The quote in myriad forms is attributed variously to Louie B. Mayer, Georgie Jessel or Red Skelton.

On Saturday night, I surprised The Love of My Life (aka TLoML), buying tickets for us to see irrepressible Masshole Bill Burr in concert at The Moore Theatre. If you’ve never seen nor heard Burr, imagine a stand-up cross of  Brian Regan and David Caruso. Burr’s a testosterone-fueled wise guy who does some very smart stuff (his reappraisal of the pit bull) and some very gruff bits (his dismissal of Tiger Woods‘ “whores”). Burr followed up  the latter line, by reasoning that if he had as much money as Tiger, he’d “tap out.” Like so many fellow Americans, Burr spends more time fantasizing about retiring than actually working. Clearly, he’d rather bang on the drum all day. Not to beat a dead bishop, but considering our jobs consume the majority of prime-time — that is, our youth, not our nighttime tv — shouldn’t we make peace with our paychecks by appreciating something more than the numbers written on them?

I’ve got my step-father’s number, he is a good man. The son of a butcher, he followed his father into the family business, promising himself that he’d make enough and save enough to retire by thirty. When he turned thirty, he revised the plan to quit by forty. At forty, he added another decade. At fifty, he was on pace to retire with his peers. Now, near 80, he still works at a job he’s good at but for which he never expressed any particular passion. It saddens me that so much of his life has been spent pursuing leisure time yet to materialize. You can see the disappointment in his labored gait. But, at the very least, he has a strong work ethic and that, arguably, separates him from younger generations.

In Brendan O’Neill Kohl‘s wicked short film, DAY LABOR, a Generation-Y bike messenger discovers… he can hire an illegal immigrant to do his job for less, thus farms out his trips, whistling while his street-side hire pedals. Soon, those around him follow suit. Even the suits. The movie’s brilliant coda condemns us all. We are quick to blame corporations, conglomerates and captains of industry for global outsourcing and they do deserve their share, but maybe we’ve made it easier by relegating work to one of life’s unbearable necessities like death, Texas and political punditry.

I have no secret for happiness, just a tip. Find a way to mesh your vocation and avocation, remembering the original connotations of both words. Be called to the work you love or develop a love for the work to which you’ve been called. I know this seems even easier undone than said. If so, read Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi‘s Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience which instructs one how to find joy in the mundane. It’s an idea easy to chide, and yet, some of my fondest work memories revolve around low-paying, brain-dead gigs like, say, packing mints or sweeping sawdust for which the compensation may have sucked, but I had found my flow. That is, in the author’s words: “being completely involved in an activity for its own sake. The ego falls away. Time flies. Every action, movement, and thought follows inevitably from the previous one, like playing jazz.” (Not smooth jazz, mind you, the real deal.) If that doesn’t help, remind yourself that there is always someone out there getting paid less for a much worse job. Watch CHINA BLUE, Micha X. Peled‘s bitter-sweat doc that exposes working conditions in a blue jean factory. Trust me, they’re not good, though better than the pay — 6 cents per hour, not guaranteed. Prefer your guilt delivered in fictive form? Pick up James P. Othmer‘s brackish Holy Water, a Catch-22 for our global economy. Othmer, a veteran of the ad trade, sends his own mad man packing to the third world to tout the bottling of liquid fool’s gold. It’s the toxic American dream exported for satirical consumption.

Granted, our jobs can be hard to swallow, but no one is force-feeding us. Yes, we must eat, but you can sweeten the pot simply by enjoying the meal before you, or,  by learning to cook for yourself.

What do you think?

Yesterday, I saw 127 HOURS along with the love of my life and a theater full of movie-lovers, all of whom, obviously, had survived Black Friday’s early a.m. “door-busting” specials and Altamont-style tramplings. Also in the crowd, a clan of living, witless Weebles who fell down into their seats, having determined that Danny Boyle‘s ripped-from-the-headlines-and-elbow-joints spectacle would be an appropriate entertainment not only for them but for their three-year-old as well. Thus, I saw the intermittently stunning movie with a soundtrack provided by A.R. “Top” Rahman and this poor, befuddled tyke who could only properly identify “water,” “baby” and “vewy big rock” as the visuals proffered them. The boy also extended multiple salutations to his kin and shouts-out to no one or no thing in particular. Loudly. At first, his constant aural barrage seemed an inexcusable distraction yet, gradually, his claptrap became metaphoric for James Franco‘s grueling on-screen trauma. Although while we in the audience felt equally trapped, to be fair, we didn’t have to drink our own pee. Just Mountain Dew.

Naturally, I was tempted to tell the child to clam up, but worried he might not comprehend my idiomatic request; the parents were more likely to understand. However, if they considered it wise to take their l’il one to an R-rated flick, I could not imagine them respecting a grievance voiced on behalf of myself and my fellow multiplexarians. Thus, in the time-honored tradition of cowards everywhere, I remained silent. Instead, I fantasized about running into these folks someday in Bluejohn Canyon and kicking them in the crevasse.

Now, what to do about Will and Jada Pinkett Smith? They work out. I think they both could take me. Yesterday, before my brush with grate-ness, I subjected myself to their daughter Willow’s Whip My Hair music video, an unsettling melange of inane lyricism, insipid imagery and imbecilic over-production. Andy Warhol promised fifteen minutes of fame; modern sound mixing guarantees anyone can have a career as a pop star provided she or he is attractive… enough. And, while I have come to accept this artistic compromise for those who have surpassed the legal drinking age and aren’t fit for modeling, I cannot condone the (s)exploitation of minors for the recording industry’s gain or parental profit. I’m not sure what Will and Jada were thinking. Perhaps they succumbed to their little girl’s protestations: “Jaden gets a tent-pole franchise and all I get is this lousy KARATE KID t-shirt?” Or, maybe the celebrity couple just wishes to nurture another revenue stream. (Times are tough, people.) Makes no difference, does it? Sure, Willow should be seen and heard… at home, like any other nine-year-old. But why expose the fresh princess to the world at such a young age? There is not a single note in Willow’s debut that suggests she’s a prodigy raised by Wolfgangs. At best, she’s a genetically-blessed charmer whose tune is even less substantial than her father’s oeuvre of catchy, yet shallow ditties.

Often, I question the entitlement of today’s youth. Kids seem spoiled and impatient, incapable of delayed gratification. Some say this is the result of new technologies that shorten attention spans and encourage multi-tasked wish fulfillment. However, I’d  argue the apparent change is a by-product of my generation’s lax parenting, a profound pendulum swing from previous generations’ adherence to Teutonic child-rearing. And while I am an adamant opponent of corporal punishment, I do believe that if you spare all parameters, you will spoil the child. But can you call CPS to report parents for being too permissive? At issue may also be my generation’s temptation to deify our progeny. Considering we lived through the Me Decade, it should come as no surprise we are ushering in the Mini-Me Decade. I confess, I am not above such behavior as I have granted space on this very website for my 7-year-old to post The Ava Report. Am I as guilty as Will Smith, just with less cash, access and box-office bankability?

It is natural to take pride in our children and, for some of us, showcasing their talents can seem irresistible, but shouldn’t we try? This is not the Borg we’re fighting, just our own egos. Kids can sing, but they needn’t do so on screen, on stage or in a movie theater. Let them develop their own voices, allow them to share their songs when they are ready and with whom they choose. If they want to make a bigger production out of it, let them pay their own way, not make strangers pay for your faith in them.

Children should be seen and heard, in context. Parents would serve their kids better simply by limiting their exposure.

What do you think?

(AP Photo/Rob Carr)

The scoreboard got it wrong last night. After the Cowboys’ grueling Sunday night season-opener, the Jumbotron at FedEx Field should have read:

DAL 7
DAL 13

While the game will be recorded as a “W”in for the Redskins, it’d be just as reasonable to declare victory for the Cowboys; after all, they did beat themselves.

Many fans seem determined this morning to divvy up blame as if it were a zero-sum equation. If the unrepentant Alex Barron isn’t responsible, Tashard Choice must be. If Jason Garrett‘s arrogant play-calling isn’t to blame, it must be Wade Phillips‘ avuncular leadership. Fans, fans, don’t fight. You’re all right. This was a team loss. Every player, every coach and, yes, every one in the front office, can claim a slice of today’s bitter special: humble pie. Yes, even our new-contract-worthy-and-Kardashian-approved wide receiver and our elite-level, salt-of-the-turf quarterback can grab a forkful. (Especially given that absolutely everyone forked up last night.)

Though it was our second-string right tackle’s holding penalty that dashed a dramatic comeback more cruelly than Simon Cowell reviewing a new Captain & Tenille album, the entire Cowboy’s organization should have been flagged for the greater infraction: complacency. Before the game The Cowboys disguised it as switch-flipping, Super-Bowl-bound self-confidence. I pray the team recognizes how transparent that costume appears in the mourning light. We could blame the Emperor’s new tailors, but shouldn’t we consider the roles of those so easily duped and short-sighted they feel (felt?) compelled to perpetuate the con, trusting that fans would fall for the flimflam, too? (And, we do. Boy, do we.)

In his tenure with the Cowboys, Bill Parcells made many mistakes — perhaps the most haunting, his failure to draft decent linemen. (Many proved themselves offensive, just not in the correct modifying sense.) However, Parcells gave words to a principle that led him to earlier successes and embodies the similar mindsets of such dissimilar predecessors as Jimmy Johnson and Tom Landry: “Never let good enough be good enough.” Sure, like all mortals, Parcells was better at sermonizing than harmonizing his words and actions — otherwise, Pat McQuistan and Bobby Carpenter would never have survived more cuts than Rocky Balboa — but his deftly expressed quest for the best allowed him to admit many mistakes as evidenced by… Parcells’ roster-churning… Johnson’s sacrificial-lamb-slaughtering… and, Landry’s divine discipline. Vince Lombardi also preached the pursuit of perfection, always emphasizing that the goal was unreachable and yet that excellence was the natural, thus attainable, by-product of the effort. (I fear the Packers still get the message while the Cowboys deem the notion “cliche.”)

Instead, this off-season, pre-season, and now, sadly, regular season, the Cowboys have been resolute, determined to stand pat when previous regimes would have addressed glaring concerns. It is tempting to believe Parcells, Johnson and Landry would have:

* flushed the offensive line’s depth following the playoff dross in Minnesota

* provided true competition for a kicker who’s a more sure open-field-tackler than field-goal-converter

* enforced greater repercussions for mentally-unfocused players who kill more drives than Jim Furyk

* established a hierarchy so that the sins of the assistants are assumed by the head coach… not by default, but by a reasonable, informed sense of accountability

And, it is tempting to believe that with such dynamic leadership and strict discipline, the players would respond more reflexively than they do to Keith Brooking‘s passionate, if belabored, pre-game wind-ups. (“We’re going to “bite… and scratch… and kick,” um, are you ready for some football, Keith, or some foreplay on Jersey Shore?)

It is hard to ask for help. I know. In the past year, I had great cause to seek aid and yet refused to acknowledge even the need for it many times. Was it Shame that prevented me from being honest with others and admitting mistakes so that my friends might help correct them? No, I worry it was Pride and, lest we forget, Pride is not a virtue, but rather, one of the seven deadly sins. (The eighth is running a play from your own 36 with only four seconds remaining in the first half of a tight ball game.) Like my favorite team, I was complacent; I assumed my problems — fiscal, professional and emotional — were subject to simple self-correction, as if I could do no harm that could not be remedied by waking up to another day. Like Jerry Jones, I assured myself: Succor is for suckers. Sleep tight. Wake up. Man up. Pull those bootstraps and claim what is rightfully yours. However, it is this very sense of entitlement that undermined my efforts to improve. It wasn’t until I could candidly admit my errors to my collaborators and my loved ones, that I could effectively right my wrongs. I blame myself for succumbing to the national trance; hypnotized, we believe there is no hardship that we can’t overcome ourselves. Hogwash. Failure is not the mother of all personal flaws. Failure is the mother of success. And like most moms, she is overworked and under-appreciated.

Now, I can and do ask for help when needed. I remind myself a hand up is not a handout. More importantly, I recognize that the admission of my errors is only the first step towards my recovery. Yes, I will drink to that. Gladly. Make that a double. And, I’ll pop the bubbly if the Cowboys confess their pre-season woes were indicative of some wrong-headed personnel policies, that last night’s play-calling and clock-management reflect troublesome leadership issues and that holding calls and fumbled balls are the consequences of bone-headed judgment on the field, not the sideline. Only once the entire team accepts responsibility for earning its reputation as a contender rather than marketing this image ’round the clock, will Dallas have a chance to advance. Only when I accept an active role in my future do I have the opportunity to live its glory. Better to work tirelessly into the night than wake up well-rested and self-satisfied… the mourning after.

From famed Japanese animators Studio Ghibli [specifically, director Goro Miyazaki] comes TALES FROM EARTHSEA, a sweeping adventure set in a mythical world filled with magic and bewitchment. An epic tale of redemption and self-discovery, the story follows the journey of Lord Archmage Sparrowhawk (voice of Timothy Dalton), the master wizard, as he searches for the force behind a mysterious disturbance that has caused an imbalance in the land of Earthsea—suddenly crops and livestock are dwindling, dragons have reappeared and humanity is giving way to chaos. Along the way he rescues Arren (voice of Matt Levin), a troubled young prince who has fled his home and is being pursued by an enigmatic shadow. Arren joins Sparrowhawk on the quest and, moving closer to their intertwined destinies, they cross paths with Tenar (voice of Mariska Hargitay), a former priestess, and her disfigured adopted daughter, Therru. With Sparrowhawk’s magical powers dissipating, all of them must band together to defeat the evil Cob (voice of Willem Dafoe) and his henchman Hare (voice of Cheech Marin) before Cob’s mania to find immortality destroys Earthsea.

After making a flip comment on Facebook that I intended to be provocative, author/radio personality John Moe took me to task for my alleged insensitivity. In light of his remarks and to honor my goal of getting others to truly think about issues rather than simply pay them lip service, I suggested I discuss the subject on air with Jeannie Yandel on KUOW Presents. I am glad she agreed, I am glad we did. Using three movies as touchstones, we examined Suicide from multiple perspectives, from motive to mourning. Click here for the piece that aired over the weekend. Then, draw your own conclusions and share your thoughts here on The Warren Report.

Also, stay tuned for an announcement about an upcoming episode of my new tv series, The High Bar, spotlighting Suicide with guest Brendan Kiley of The Stranger.

Many voters are unaware of the Constitution-blessed process of reapportionment, thankfully, Jeff Reichert has completed GERRYMANDERING, an engaging documentary that colorfully and carefully explains the title’s history, its role in present-day campaigns and efforts nationwide to alter its future impact.

After I published a summary of the movie, critical of some aspects, I exchanged (congenial) messages with Mr. Reichert, who kindly agreed to be interviewed for The Warren Report so that we encourage you to consider the machinations that disempower voters by diluting the significance of their ballots and question the quality of our choices before we even step up to the voting booths.

Once you’re read through our conversation, visit endgerrymandering.com and learn how you can make a change. Draw your own conclusions. You’ve got my vote. And, The Warren Report serves as an open-minded forum for your feedback.

WARREN: Your documentary explains the origins of the term, gerrymandering. In your research, was the process of redistricting essentially, unilaterally, corrupt from the outset? Or, were there exceptions as you suggest Iowa serves as today?

JEFF: I think instead of “corruption,” it may be better in the redistricting context to talk about “fairness.” The idea to elect representatives from geographically defined areas was borne from a certain conception of what “fair representation” would look like.  The problem with an idea like “fair” is that it’s fluid, and no one’s going to agree on what that actually means.  The Founding Fathers took a good stab at setting up a workable system within the context of a nation that allowed only white landowners to vote, but we’re now a few hundred years later electing representatives based on a modified and expanded idea of their “fair.”  So, some of the corruption of redistricting is intrinsic to the way we’ve decided to hold elections, and is really not the fault of any specific party or agent.  The real problems come when the weaknesses of the system are exploited even further, and this is what my film is largely about.

WARREN: There is an implication in the movie that Barack Obama‘s district was redrawn to increase the likelihood of his state-level election and that, in turn, dramatically improved his odds of winning on a national stage. Who do you believe was manipulating the process in Obama’s favor?

JEFF: This was very clearly handled by the Illinois State Democratic party — Ryan Lizza did a terrific job of reporting this incident in his Obama article for the New Yorker, “Making It.”  Obama, who had just gotten trounced in a Congressional race against a longtime incumbent, was given carte blanche by the party to change his district and he did so in dramatic fashion, as we show in the film.  The question then becomes: Did this redistricting put him on the fast track to the presidency?  It’s always hard to determine causality in something as nuanced as a political career, but I do think if he’d won that Congressional race in 2000, his path would have been very different.

WARREN: Typically, redistricting coincides with the completion of the census. However, GERRYMANDERING depicts the infamous efforts of Tom DeLay to cut up Texas to enhance the odds of Republicans winning seats. (And what do you know, it worked.) Can any state redistrict at any time? Need their be cause or a public acknowledgement?

JEFF: After the Delay/Texas incident one of the arguments made by those who litigated the case before the Supreme Court was that the plan should be thrown out because districting can only legally happen right after the Census.  The Court disagreed, in essence opening the door to constant gerrymandering.  That so-called “re-redistricting” hasn’t happened all over the country is a testament to how difficult mounting the process is within a legislature, but it doesn’t mean that it won’t.  Congressman John Tanner has recently introduced a bill that would at the very least require states to hold hearings on redistricting, that even this minor measure is unlikely to pass, suggests the degree to which the parties want to keep total control over the process.

WARREN: The great strength of GERRYMANDERING is that it calls attention to such an important factor in our electoral system. Why is so little press generated about this issue? How would you like the mainstream media’s coverage to evolve?

JEFF: I think part of the problem is that redistricting is terribly complicated and you need more time than the average news story gets these days to really tease out why the lines on a map really matter.  Redistricting actually has been getting a great deal of ink in newspapers recently, and I think there is a cadre of political writers out there who beat the drum about this issue every ten years in the hopes people will finally wake up.  But it’s one thing to read about redistricting and another thing to actually see it — to watch a map change, or spend time in the far corners of a district to see just how different it is.  We use in the film a terrific special program hosted by John Chancellor from the sixties in which they actually spent time doing just this, but there’s sadly no room in the current media landscape for this kind of exploration.

WARREN: GERRYMANDERING tracks the progress and eventual passing of Proposition 11 in California. Do you think this approach should be adopted nationwide?

JEFF: Not necessarily.  There are things I like about Prop. 11 and things I don’t like, and even the proponents agree that there are potential pitfalls in their approach.  They went ahead with it because they felt the system needed some kind of shock to help jolt it back into order, and the solution they came up with was very much tailored to the political realities of California.  We do need to change the way we do redistricting nationwide, but I think individual states need to look at their realities and see what kind of change works best for them.  That change may look something like Prop. 11, it may look like something else entirely.

WARREN: Prop 11 had the enthusiastic backing of The Terminator, er, the Governor of the state of California. In the film, one talking head proffers that Arnold only supported the movement because it made for good press. Are you equally cynical?

JEFF: I’m not, even though I did have my questions before we actually began filming.  Having spent time on the campaign trail with the Governor, and spoken with him directly about the issue on a few occasions, I do believe he understands redistricting and is sincere in his desire to reform the process.  Also, given how little press redistricting generally gets, there’s really no sound political upside to tackling it, especially in California, where attempts at reform have failed multiple times.  That he went after it twice, and is now engaged in an attempt to expand Prop. 11 to cover congressional districts suggests to me that he means business.

WARREN: Some skeptics wonder if America’s two-party system actually offers a choice or is it more like choosing between Daniel and Stephen Baldwin?

JEFF: I think now, more than at any point in my lifetime, the differences between the parties are starkly defined.  This ideological separation will fluctuate over time, but there are always differences, and I feel there’s a certain naivete in those who just kind of throw up their hands and say, “they’re all the same.”  To a certain extent that’s true — our electoral model tends to produce certain kinds of candidates, but there is a lot of room in the system for variance.  Can we honestly say that voting for Barney Frank is the same as voting for Michelle Bachmann?

WARREN: Can a third party — even one as histrionic as the Tea Party — ever have a voice in our government given the self-fulfilling prophecy of gerrymandered elections?

JEFF: Winner-take-all elections tend to produce a system dominated by two parties for reasons that are better explained by political scientists than filmmakers  – it’s incredibly complex.  As long as we use this system (where whichever candidate wins at least 50%+1 of the total vote is given the right to represent 100% of the voters) as opposed to, say, a proportional representation model, we will have two parties, and third parties will struggle.

WARREN: What constitutes meaningful representation? Should an elected official represent the needs of all voters in her or his district or should s/he vote purely in accordance with her or his conscience? If we all “are created equal,” why should redistricting even matter?

JEFF: That is a huge question, and one that we chose to raise in GERRYMANDERING briefly instead of really delving into.  Someone recently suggested to me that there might be another entire movie in this question alone.  Personally, I lean towards representatives who attempt to channel the various needs and desires of their constituents into legislation, as opposed to placing all my faith in the conscience of an individual and hoping for the best.  I believe we elect officials because we want them to do things for us, to act on our policy preferences.

We may all have been “created equal” but the world certainly doesn’t do us any favors post-creation, and that’s why we need politics and government – to help us get closer to this ideal.  We may decide at some point that we don’t want to continue using a system where we have to draw lines on a map to determine representation, and that’s fine, but until then we need to work within the limits set for us, while always remaining cognizant of other possibilities.  It was really important that we at least glance in this direction in the body of the film and I’ve actually been gratified how much our quick mention of this fundamental piece of the representation debate gets people talking and thinking.

WARREN: The Warren Report’s motto is: Smarter audiences make better movies. I also believe that smarter audiences make better voters. If you could offer readers one (or more) tip(s) as how to channel their outrage after seeing GERRYMANDERING, what would it/they be?

JEFF: I know we disagree on this a bit, but I strongly believe that the first thing voters should do after seeing the movie is learn the contours of their districts.  I think most will be very surprised about the kinds of communities they’ve been lumped in with and will recognize obvious inequities going on where they live and have questions about why these inequities exist.  The local is ground zero for real political reform and if viewers can take what the film imparts to them about how redistricting works and apply it to their individual situations, it will give them the tools they need to engage when redistricting happens again in a few months.  We are committed to making screenings of the film a place where the groups writing the reform measures can connect with newly educated voters, and have already swelled the ranks of several reform movements here in New York state.  We’re even working on a great online application to make this truly national at www.endgerrymandering.com.

No offense intended, but I think this is actually a far more concrete path to meaningful political reform than some of your suggestions from the initial article you wrote about my film, which, no matter how much I agree with their spirit aren’t particularly actionable.  I believe GERRYMANDERING is poised to move the needle on the redistricting debate.  The film will come out in October and we’re going to be engaging in a slew of activities to push this issue to the fore before people go to the polls in November.

During the morning Saiz will provide case studies, video samples, and valuable handouts to walk you through the basic steps towards making your project more competitive with this organization. In the afternoon, there will be an informal pitch session where attendees will get an opportunity to watch as twelve people present their proposals and Saiz provides feedback.

As the single biggest funder of independent documentaries on television, the Independent Television Service (ITVS) has become indispensable for filmmakers seeking major funding for their projects. This all day event is a rare opportunity for independent producers to meet Richard and grasp the essential concepts and principles of how to make your documentary more competitive when applying for ITVS funds.

When: July 10, 9am – 5pm (followed by a reception in West Seattle)
Where: Youngstown Cultural Art Center, Thelma Dewitty Theater
4408 Delridge Way SW, Seattle, WA 98106

Lunch will be provided. After the workshop we will have a happy hour reception (plenty of food and drink) for everyone at the nearby home of Ellen and Doug Frick. We’ll give location information and arrange carpools if needed at the workshop.

Tickets: Thanks to generous donations by ITVS and the former NDA, tickets are only $20, $15 for students.
Buy at Brown Paper Tickets:http://www.facebook.com/l/582ba;www.brownpapertickets.com/event/114687

Driving Directions:http://www.facebook.com/l/582ba;www.youngstownarts.org/contact_us/driving_directions

About Richard Saiz:
Saiz, Senior Programming Manager for ITVS oversees Open Call, the organization’s largest funding initiative. Each year, he reviews more than 500 proposals from independent producers throughout the country. He has more than 35 years experience as a broadcast journalist, producer, director and writer. His documentaries have won numerous awards, including the DuPont-Columbia Silver Baton and Best TV Documentary from the San Francisco International Film Festival.

Proposals:
We are now accepting proposals to present during the afternoon pitch session.

Each pitch will be allocated 15 minutes total: 5 minutes for the presentation and 10 minutes for Richard’s feedback. You may allocate your 5 minutes however you choose. Please note that pitching at the workshop is not a substitute for the open call application to ITVS. Be sure and visit the ITVS site to learn about the process. We expect that you’ll be familiar with the mechanics of the process before your pitch, as this saves time and allows everyone to focus on content rather than process.

Proposals should consist of a synopsis and treatment (no more than 2 pages total) and a proposed budget. If you have it, include a DVD of video no longer than ten minutes in length. This can be anything you want to show: e.g. an edited preview trailer, a string of selects or part of a rough cut.

Proposals are due by June 25 and should include your email and phone number. Mail your proposal to:
Documentary Northwest
1010 SW Elmgrove St.
Seattle, WA 98106

Those accepted to pitch will be notified by e-mail by July 3rd.

Last week, three theaters in Japan canceled screenings of THE COVE, the alleged Sino-baiting, graphic dolphin-bashing, Oscar®-winning documentary. The exhibitors’ excused their decisions citing fear of reprisals from nationalists who have been vocal in their disapproval of the Louie Psihoyos film. Maybe their fears are legitimate, maybe not. Regardless, it must be noted that THE COVE did screen at the Tokyo International Film Festival and was just shown at a civic hall in the capital city and featured a hearty post-show discussion (though, apparently, that talk veered more towards issues of censorship than the depicted animal cruelty).

While it is dismaying that broader audiences in Japan will have very limited opportunities to see THE COVE — and then, to draw their own conclusions — before we condemn them, consider America’s own similar, “silent” censorship practices. Have you seen THE END OF THE LINE or KING CORN on network tv? The former film warns of the depletion of our oceans’ resources, the latter clarifies the nefarious implications of our nation’s addiction to commercial corn. Strangely, none of the Big Four (and a half) networks have slated them to air. Like FOOD, INC., KING CORN has received a slot on PBS, but really, does anyone over 6 and under 60 watch public television? Is it crazy to suspect that corporate interests that support free tv with their ads have influenced the decisions to steer clear of these controversial docs that beg viewers to reconsider the entire infrastructure, sense and health of our nation’s industrial(ized) food system? Somehow,I don’t foresee McDonald’s underwriting an uninterrupted broadcast of FAST FOOD NATION, Richard Linklater‘s uneven, yet still potent adaptation of Eric Schlosser‘s investigative return to The Jungle.

Then, ask yourself why we’ve never seen a soldier’s corpse or coffin on a network or cable newscast or the bloody aftermath of our interventions in Iraq or Afghanistan. How could we embed that many journalists without getting a body count of contracted killers, opposing soldiers and innocent civilians in addition to our own official casualties.

Or, ask why it is that BP’s stockholders are guaranteed greater access to information regarding the company’s disastrous (mis)handling of its oil spill than the general public or those directly near it? Why the gulf between the fiscally-harmed and the physically imperiled?

Mainstream media does no more to insure our access to all of the evidence than JD Salinger did to supply the tabloids with celebrity fodder. So, while I pity the Japanese who will remain unaware of the heinous practices of one of its country’s fishing communities and the toxic consequences for local schoolchildren, I remind myself that Big Food — with a proactive assist from our government!  — bars Americans from seeing how our pigs, chickens and cattle are raised and slaughtered. I hated watching dolphins bludgeoned in THE COVE and I despise the (unseen) treatment of livestock at American CAFOs. But just like the Japanese, we jeopardize species including own, excusing our practices with the same, (wet) blanket explanation that ‘it’s part of our nation’s culture.’

Of course, you need look no further than cheese in your refrigerator to realize that some cultures,no matter how much you love them, just plain stink.

Below, RIFF’s official press release from its delightful curators, Win and Sarah Whittaker…

Heroic, Shocking And Revealing Films Highlight This Year’s Rainier Independent Film Festival Lineup

Screenings, workshops and gatherings will be held in unique venues in Mt. Rainier’s Ashford Valley from June 11 to 13, 2010

ASHFORD, Washington – June 2, 2010 – An eclectic blend of 28 poignant short and feature length narratives and documentaries will be screened at the Rainier Independent Film Festival (RIFF) on June 11 to 13, 2010 in the Ashford Valley. In addition to screenings, the festival, in its fourth year, offers a workshop, audience-voted awards, an awards ceremony, social gatherings, and the rare opportunity to mix and mingle with the many filmmakers and actors in attendance.

“What sets this film festival apart is the great opportunity it provides to meet and mingle with film industry people,” remarked RIFF Festival Director Win Whittaker. “The relaxed atmosphere and intimate venues are a world away from the hustle and bustle associated with the film business.”

The festival’s opening night film will be Calvin Marshall, directed by Gary Lundgren and starring Steve Zahn, Michelle Lombardo and Alex Frost. This heartfelt, baseball-centric feature-length comedy will be shown at the Mineral Lake Event Center on Friday, June 11, at 6:15PM, followed by the Opening Night Gala, at 8PM.

A block of four war/conflict-based short films – Letter Home, Hidden in Time, Juche Rules, and Sedako’s Cranes — ranging from Hiroshima to Viet Nam/Iraqi similarities to North Korea relations will be screened at Nisqually Lodge, from 11AM to 12:30PM on Saturday, May 3. Other films will take the audience from hippie farms in Washington (Back to the Garden) to the ancient ways of the Salish peoples with Canoe Way and on to Burma: Reflections on a Hidden Land. Woman’s courage and feats will be celebrated with Rise and Shine, The Lady & The Outlaw Horse, and Wings of Silver. Viewers will be taken into an imaginative world with Plant Girl and kept on the edge of their seats with the emotionally charged, student film Clemency.

The ever-popular Warren Etheridge Workshop — “The Art of the Interview or How to Grill a Star” – will take place at the Media Center at Whittaker’s Bunkhouse on Sunday, June 13, from 1 to 2:30PM.

Filmed in Seattle, The Immaculate Conception of Little Dizzle, will be screened on Sunday, at the Mineral Lake Event Center at 6PM, prior to the Closing Gala and Awards Ceremony. “Simultaneously cynical and life-affirming, [Director David] Russo’s comedy manages to incorporate biochemical engineering, corporate chicanery, drug addiction and high-art pretension—all while maintaining an amiable, insouciant charm.”

A pass to all screenings, workshops and parties for all three days is $35. A day-pass for all screenings and workshops on Saturday or Sunday is $15. A ticket to the festival launch on Friday including the screening, the gala and two free drinks is $15. Tickets are available online through Brown Paper Tickets (http://www.brownpapertickets.com/event/114771), at Whittaker Mountaineering and at Whittaker’s Bunkhouse, both in Ashford. A ticket for a single screening or workshop is $5 and can be purchased at any of the three screening venues or online.

Just miles from the Nisqually entrance to Mount Rainier National Park, screening venues include the Mineral Lake Event Center, a refurbished 1940s grade school with a gymnasium seating up to 500 people; Nisqually Lodge Conference Center, seating up to 45 people; and the Yurt at Wellspring, in a tranquil setting amongst the trees at the Wellspring Spa & Retreat.

The Rainier Independent Film Festival is dedicated to providing truly independent filmmakers a venue to have their films screened. Nestled in the tranquil foothills surrounding Mt. Rainier, the Ashford Valley provides an ideal setting for RIFF.

For more information as well as a full screening schedule, please access http://www.rainierfilmfest.com.

MISS NOBODY

A mild-mannered secretary discovers that she has a talent for murder during her unlikely climb up the corporate ladder at Judge Pharmaceuticals…and love soon follows.

In attendance: Star and Executive Producer, LESLIE BIBB (Iron Man I & II, Wristcutters: A Love Story), ADAM GOLDBERG (Saving Private Ryan, A Beautiful Mind, Entourage, Friends), MISSI PLYLE (2 ½ Men, Sarah Silverman Program, Harold and Kumar Escape from Guantanamo Bay, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, etc) and BRANDON ROUTH (Chuck, Superman Returns, Zack and Miri Make a Porno) and Director TIM COX.

Screenings:

Thursday, June 10, 9:15pm Harvard Exit

Saturday, June 12, 1:15pm SIFF Cinema

THE FAMILY TREE

In the seemingly perfect American suburb of Serenity, Ohio, the dysfunctional Burnett family is coming apart at the seams. When a tryst gone wrong leaves Mrs. Burnett’s with short term amnesia, the result is a whacky series of events that will either bring the family together or ruin them for good.

In attendance: Director Vivi Friedman, Writer/Producer Mark Lisson (Bainbridge Island resident), stars John Patrick Amedori (Gossip Girl) and Madeline Zime (Californication, The Nanny)

Screenings:

Saturday, June 12, 6:30pm SIFF Cinema

Sunday, June 13, 1:30pm SIFF Cinema

1) The SIFF programmer introducing the movie and questioning director Jeff Reichert was as intelligible as Bronson Pinchot‘s Balki and as intelligent as Dan Quayle‘s Dan Quayle. (Is it too much to ask, SIFF, that your programming team show filmmakers a little respect?)

2) GERRYMANDERING may be the first political documentary I have ever seen to offer absolutely no solutions to the problem it details. I don’t expect filmmakers to cure all our ills, but the meager end credit prompts to “Know Your District” and to visit a website (www.endgerrymandering.com) seem under-instructive. (I don’t know how many slacktivists it takes to change a light bulb, but I do know that giving audiences achievable action items beats having no INCONVENIENT alternatives.)

3) Gerrymandering — i.e. the redistricting of voting communities in service of political hackery — is clearly a problem and, possibly, a great threat to our democracy. (Sorry, Texas Board of Education, I will continue to call America a “democracy” even if you propose textbooks redefine our nation as a “Constitutional Republic.”) But, is gerrymandering the sickness or is it rather, simply, a symptom of a more insidious disease?

Frankly, I don’t know what to do about the first issue I’ve raised and I can only wish GERRYMANDERING had been clearer what to do about the second. However, I’ll take a crack at the last. There is no doubt that if legislators can reapportion voters to increase the likelihood of incumbents’ re-election, there exists a conflict of interest that will, invariably, favor the powers-that-shall-always-be rather than their constituents. Yet, it is these very demographic calisthenics that suggest the problem runs far deeper, to the very heart of the politicians and the soullessness of the parties they represent. They indicate that self-perpetuation, influence-peddling and partisanship have overtaken true public service as the primary raison d’etre of our elected officials. This may not be news to many, but let us not become so jaded as to disregard this egocentrism as the cancer that must be removed in order to have any hope of recovery. It just could be that commissioners appointed by elected Republicans and  Democrats might be more efficient overseeing redistricting than California’s pending citizens committee (as voted in with the state’s Prop 11 in 2008), if the former were guided solely by the notion of good government instead of the self-serving maintenance of the status quo.

Of course, we may also need to redefine our notions of governance. Redistricting, even when managed impartially, suggests that certain populations — divisible by race or socio-economic backgrounds — require different representation due to different agendas. Yet if we are to embrace the Declaration of Independence and grant that we all are “created equal,” shouldn’t we assume that any honest politician (yes, oxymoronic, I know) would consider the greater good, thus benefit us all? The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, right? Or does that only work for Mr. Spock and fall flat in this era of political correctness? Perhaps it’s hard to believe, majority rule can respect minority interests once we accept that Americans are not independent but interdependent.

Near the end of GERRYMANDERING, an incredibly significant question is tossed aside like pedestrians in the path of Lizzie Grubman‘s SUV; the age-old debate: should politicians serve the people who reside within their districts or act in service of their own consciences? What do you think, dear readers? I’d like to see Mr. Smith — or Ms. Nguyen or gender-undefined Jones — go to Washington and represent an ideal or two. I’d like to witness governance by informed instinct of the individual, or, Leadership as it was once known. Screw consensus and second terms.

As we cannot legislate Integrity, I propose that our two-party system be overhauled, not by adding a third but rather by eliminating both. I’ve had enough of Democrats and Republicans… and Tea-Partiers, Green-Partiers, Libertarians and Lyndon LaRouchebags. Get rid of them all. Let’s ban political advertising and force candidates to meet their constituents and explain their positions face-to-face in complete sentences, not tailored sound-bites. If candidates were forced to listen to the voters instead of talking down to them, discourse would thrive and accountability would be revived. Finally, governance could achieve Abraham Lincoln‘s stated goal of being by the people, for the people… even if we didn’t always agree with the decisions made on our behalf.

Have I got your vote?

(For more about the need for election reform, check out my interview/s with David Earnhardt, director of UNCOUNTED.)

Eric Liu & Warren Etheredge

Kim Doyel: Just caught your interview with Eric Liu on Seattle Voices…I want a College of Warren sweatshirt! But that wasn’t all… your little mug popped up in a cameo for Sip & Ship! I thought I was hallucinating. When are you gonna get that 24 hour All Warren All the Time channel deal through?

WARREN: Just working out the details with CNN, Kim. Although I cannot yet report around-the-clock coverage , I am proud to announce that next month will see the launch of my new tv series, The High Bar, on SCANtv. It’s a genre-redefining program — a reverse(!) interview show — on which my irreverent cultural conversations with filmmakers, authors, artists and activists will encourage us all to reconsider our beliefs and challenge our standards… while laughing and getting drunk. Keep an eye on The Warren Report for further details.

And, for those who missed my appearance on Seattle Voices, visit their website and suggest they add it to The Seattle Channel’s video player. Eric Liu is a solid interviewer, a charming individual and the whip-smart (co-) author of several significant books including Imagination First and The True Patriot.

As for College of Warren merchandise, I’m unhappy to report that, currently, supply is meeting demand.    ;  )

Now, dear readers, draw your own conclusions: Is it time for a new, educational forum? Should The Warren Report begin matriculating students? Is it too early for our first kegger?

Paul Ringo:

WARREN: From my years of teaching, I’ve learned one of the most important lessons to share with kids is that it’s okay to say: I don’t know. No one can know it all. (Even Einstein couldn’t color-coordinate. That’s why he invented Garanimals®!) Well, Paul, in this case, I just don’t know. You’ve stumped me. However, the other lesson is to ask for help when you need it. So, I turn to you, cherished readers of The Warren Report, to put a title to Paul’s obscure film reference. Anybody? Anybody? Bueller?!?

Devin Hermanson

WARREN: Thanks, Devin. Sadly, I wasn’t even considered for RDJ’s stand-in despite my looking so much like his half-witted, less-attractive brother. I think of my kinship to Robert Downey Jr much like Clint Howard‘s to Ron. Granted, this a huge step up from the days folks compared me to Wallace Shawn and Gilbert Gottfried.

Devin Hermanson:

WARREN: Nope. Sorry, Devin. That’s not to say it’s a thumbs down, either. The free previews offered through The Warren Report are thanks to my relationships with the studios and their regional publicists. They contact me knowing that The Warren Report’s readership is comprised of savvy and connected movie-lovers. By sharing seats at these WOM (word-of-mouth) screenings, they hope to  build buzz for their films. Often, I am seeing the movies for the first time alongside you. (I am just as hopeful that the pairing of  Jonah Hill and Russell Brand will be hilarious but can be no more certain than you that it will be.)

However, when I feature a film in one of The Warren Report’s special screening series (Distinguishing Features, ACT NOW! or Film Rap) this is an indication of my strong, informed support of the title. Special event presentation is my stamp of approval. For instance, keep an eye out for SIXTY SIX, starring Eddie Marsan and Helena Bonham Carter, which I hope to showcase this summer.

Neil Navani: Did you see GOODBYE SOLO? If so, your thoughts?

WARREN : I have seen GOODBYE SOLO, Neil, and think it is one of the best films of 2009. Ramin Bahrani is an incredible filmmaker, one of the best of the new generation. (Have you seen MAN PUSH CART and CHOP SHOP?) He gets great performances, mostly from non-professional, inexperienced  or under-appreciated actors in roles that are refreshingly dynamic and NOT traditionally heroic. Ramin crafts compelling characters by concentrating on what it means to be human rather than that what it means to fulfill Christopher Vogler’s structural demands.

Souleymane Sy Savane and Red West are a formidable, if odd, coupling in SOLO. The unlikely kinship between a Sengalese taxi driver and a mournful, ol’ cuss provokes consideration of the societal evolution of America thru the eyes of the immigrant and the retroactively-disenfranchised. Ramin is the rare filmmaker  concerned with our nation’s working class, as opposed to the upscale doctors, lawyers, cops and rubes that populate prime-time television. Of course, his dedication to non-white perspectives are in Stark contrast to the tony playboys of this summer’s blockbusters.

I would see anything Ramin makes and urge you to rent (or buy) his previous films as soon as you can. (I need to track down PLASTIC BAG, his most recent effort, a collaboration with Werner Herzog.) They are honest, fascinating portraits of  folks on the alleged fringes that actually constitute the majority of our populace. To better understand our future, examine the passed… over.

For the record, I am working on luring Ramin Bahrani to Seattle to speak at TheFilmSchool in July.

Now, dear readers, what do you think of GOODBYE SOLO? What do you think of Ramin Bahrani? Is he the Paddy Chayefsky of our day, the cinematic Studs Terkel?

MULTIPLE SARCASMS reminds that the unexamined life is not worth living, but its protagonist makes the case that the examiners may not be worth living… with. Playing a fitfully charming, charmlessly fitful architect, Timothy Hutton, escapes his family and career inertia by immersing himself in playwriting. He locks himself in his bathroom to do so, an appropriate venue for most aspiring artistes. Odds and talent be damned, on screen, this novice succeeds, supported by an agent (the apparently age-less Stockard Channing) and tolerated by his wife (the lovely Dana Delany) and precocious daughter (the precocious India Ennenga), despite the fact Broadway’s rising star identifies himself as the center of any and every solar system. Of course, the distance between his skewed perspective and others’ reality may be many, many light years.

It is tempting to applaud the lead’s efforts to express himself, but at what cost? In a conversation with writer-director Brooks Branch, he assures me that all the characters benefit from Hutton’s egocentrism, though I’m not sure I buy familial estrangement and abandonment as “ones to grow on.” Are we meant to evolve individually regardless of the consequences suffered by others? Is there no room for compassion and maturity in self-actualization? Yes, we must seek our true selves, but can’t those closest to us join the quest?

Auteur Branch crafts MULTIPLE SARCASMS as a retro tribute to the works of Bob Rafaelson and Hal Ashby. The script rambles, the players amble thru its non-traditional narrative. It’s like a cinematic spin on a Choose Your Own Adventure book; in fact, one may sense a second viewing would alter the outcome. The production team does yeoman work recreating New York in the 1970s, though the film features three other anachronisms, the most jarring, a reference to a Ryan O’Neal movie that was released in the 80s. The cast is time-sensitive, too: Delany is sharp, though sparingly seen, Hutton is solid, if unsympathetic and the standout is Mario Van Peebles who steels his scene with an iron-clad commitment to playing gay… well, straight. (He also provides a hilarious capper to the end credits, which are already a delight due to the graphic montage that picks up where the film’s limited interstitials left off,  visual clues to one character’s own artistic future.) Only Mira Sorvino fails to synchronize her calendar, playing Hutton’s indefatigable friend as if auditioning for a hopeless NBC sitcom in the 90s, a spinoff of Caroline in the City, perhaps.

MULTIPLE SARCASMS — now open in Seattle at the Regal Meridian 16 and the AMC Loews Oak Tree 6 — explores the intersection of artistry and self-identity, promising profundity from self-reflection rather than the loveless damnation of Narcissus. Even though Branch assures Hope abounds in his movie, I strongly suggest Hutton — and the rest of us — question how much time we spend self-absorbed for, at some point, we may long for more than our own image and listen to that distant voice. Might that Echo actually be our soul mate?

Key lime pie is a highwire act, the baker must gingerly walk the divide between tart and sweet, solid and smooth. Defying physics and phobias, Porter channels Phillipe Petit, balancing a crunchy, crumb crust with a delectable curd, slightly sweet whipped cream with twisted, candied lime wedges that serve as an aesthetic and gastronomic flourish, allowing this key lime pie to cross over from dessert to literal manna. This is not a matter of taste, it’s not even question of faith, A La Mode’s Key Lime Pie is simply proof of the existence of the divine. Bless you, Chris Porter.

Pulling Focus

Join us for the last in our series of panels about the business of film featuring Stephen Gyllenhaal (LOSING ISAIAH, HOMEGROWN, Numb3rs, Army Wives) and Peggy Rajski (TOWELHEAD, HOME FOR THE HOLIDAYS, BEE SEASON, THE GRIFTERS)

Moderated by Warren Etheredge

CROSS-CUTTING
They say, if ain’t broke, don’t fix it. Problem is, a combination of technology, the economy and the great audience diaspora has shattered everything we thought we knew about modern media. So, it’s time to bust out the SuperGlue, don our thinking caps and get busy because “old school” is out for good. But before we can rewrite a business plan for the industry, we need to closely examine our former failures and embrace our revised goals. What constitutes success and how do we best achieve it in the biz? Is there a greater good than the bottom line? How do we profit in today’s era of tipping points and long tails?

Tuesday, May 11
Sorrento Hotel / Top of the Tower Room
900 Madison Avenue (Madison and Terry)

6:30pm     Doors

7:00pm     Discussion with Stephen Gyllenhaal & Peggy Rajski

Cocktail Reception hosted by the Washington Wine Commission to follow event.

Avanced Tickets Brown Paper Tickets:
$10 General Public
$5 Participating Organization Member.  Please contact participating organization to receive discount code.
http://www.brownpapertickets.com/event/109839

Tickets Day of Event (Cash Only):
$15 General Public
$10 Participating Organization Member

____________

About Pulling Focus:

Pulling Focus is a series of three panels about the business of film designed to speak to the diversity of audience members, from screenwriters to actors, from directors to producers and on to musicians.  The goal is to elevate the conversation and design a dialogue that will have a little something for everyone and simultaneously help to give our community a rock solid education about how business is done in the film industry.

Grunpeter died on the last day of production and his loss might be considered as tragic as the better publicized passings of Heath Ledger and River Phoenix. At least they had commercial successes to memorialize their skills. Grunpeter appeared in a couple of European tv series and had a small role in a flick with Julie Delpy and Steven Berkoff. TRACING COWBOYS should have heralded Grunpeter’s arrival, instead it serves as his cinematic epitaph: Truth lies here.

Edwards is seldom seen on screen, but is quietly captivating every time. She can charm comedically as in TATTOO, A LOVE STORY or tantalize dramatically as in COWBOYS. Physically petite, she still exudes enough energy to suggest an imminent starburst. Here, much of her work is relegated to voice-over, though it is the quest to find her that drives the story.

Indeed, TRACING COWBOYS is a back-handed homage to THE SEARCHERS. They are loosely paralleled narratively, while the John Ford western directly propels the leads in Jason Wuhlfson‘s deep southwestern. The two are connected visually, thanks to the awe-striking cinematography of David Robinson who reinvents Winton Hoch‘s sunlight-suffused vistas, cleverly juxtaposing them with tight, hand-held sequences that return us to the main character’s perspective, his near-suffocating pursuit.

TRACING COWBOYS is imperfect. Its pace taunts more than teases. Its resolution both rewards and disregards our patience. Nevertheless, the contributions of Robinson, Edwards and the late Grunpeter — in addition to a stellar soundtrack — advocate for home viewing on a rainy, heartsick night.

Perhaps we’d be wise to take a similar tack in confronting child abuse. In a recent interview with Jeannie Yandel for KUOW Presents, I highlight three movies that allow us to do just that. If we are to combat child abuse, maybe it best if we understood its root causes and consider the possibility that it is not an isolated consequence of Evil but rather a frightening potential within most of us… if it is ignored rather than acknowledged.

Please  listen to the interview, watch the movies (TOWELHEAD, THE WOODSMAN, DELIVER US FROM EVIL) and suggest your own solutions. Or, look into organizations such as Children’s Trust Foundation and all they are doing to stem the rising tide of child neglect and abuse.

Somehow, I doubt Mr. Grann (author of the best-selling The Lost City of Z) was compensated for his contributions to the “Torch” episode of SVU. And, I doubt producers made any donation to the Innocence Project. In light of these oversights, I urge you, dear readers, to do what you do best. Read. More. In particular, pick up a copy of David Grann’s provocative collection of essays, The Devil and Sherlock Holmes: Tales of Murder, Madness, and Obsession. It is the best book of journalistic non-fiction I have read in many years. (And I’m not just saying that because I hosted Mr. Grann at Words & Wine earlier this year and consider him amongst the best interview subjects ever.) Chock full of colorful characters and unbelievable storylines, you, too, may be tempted to write scripts based on what you discover in Grann’s book and, if you do, I trust you’ll do the proper thing and buy the rights first.

(In fairness, Cold Case apparently featured a similarly “inspired” episode, though I have not seen it.)

Moderated by Warren Etheredge

___________

DIGITAL UPRISING
The digital revolution may not be televised. While many boast about the democratizing impact of new, inexpensive technology, has it created false hope instead? Movie-makers may now be able to shoot for next to nothing, but how can the truly independent distribute and market their work? Does digital enable greater creativity or engender a greater dependence on established institutions? How can the film community avoid the pitfalls of analog paradigms and best profit from the latest advancements?

Tuesday, May 4
Sorrento Hotel / Top of the Tower Room
900 Madison Avenue (Madison and Terry)

6:30pm     Doors
7:00pm     Discussion with Michael Arrieta & Hanson Hosein
Cocktail Reception hosted by the Washington Wine Commission to follow event.

Tickets
$15 General Public
$10 Participating Organization Member.  Please contact participating organization to receive discount code.
Purchase COMBO tickets early for both May 4th and May 11th Pulling Focus events and receive a discount.

Brown Paper Tickets:
http://www.brownpapertickets.com/event/109837
Tickets also available at the door day of event depending on availability (cash only).  COMBO tickets will not be available for purchase on May 4th so make sure to get them early at Brown Paper Tickets.

Guest Bio:
Michael Arrieta
Founder & CEO Big Air Studios

Michael has over 20 years experience in the entertainment and new media business.  A true pioneer in digital media, Michael spent the last 12 years of his career at Sony Pictures where he oversaw the formation and operation of all Sony’s Digital Entertainment businesses as well as programming, games and services.  Michael established Sony’s licensing, ad sales and distribution relationships that drove new revenue sources from all business models across all digital platforms.  His divisions included Digital Content Production, Digital Distribution, Online and Mobile Video Networks, Online and Mobile Games, Promotional Websites, Digital Ad Sales and Technology/Advanced Platforms.

Through his leadership Sony Pictures was the first to offer film and television downloads on the internet, the first to offer full-length film on mobile phones, the first to offer film in virtual worlds, the first to create professional content for the internet and the first to launch a user-generated video service (Sony Screenblast, 2001).  Michael has produced over 200 websites including Sonypictures.com, over 75 mobile and online games – winning the coveted “Game of the Year” award in both 2005 and 2006 – and has produced over 35 made for digital series – including the first made-for-digital movie Angel of Death.

Michael has established deals with the biggest companies in the traditional and digital entertainment world, including iTunes, Xbox, PlayStation, Blockbuster, CinemaNow, Amazon, Best Buy, Walmart, YouTube, Hulu, AOL, Yahoo!, MSN, Netflix, Vudu, TiVo, DivX, Samsung, HP, Dell, Nokia, Motorola, AT&T, Sprint, Verizon, T-Mobile and Starz.

Prior to Sony, Michael worked for 20^th Century Fox and Morgan Creek Productions, and served as a strategic consultant in the Entertainment Group at Price Waterhouse.  Michael is a C.P.A and earned his B.A. in Economics and M.B.A from the University of California, Los Angeles.

Hanson Hosein
Director of the Master of Communication in Digital Media at the University of Washington in Seattle

Hanson Hosein specializes in storytelling, social media strategies and new models of communication. As President of HRH Media, he employed this expertise to direct the award-winning documentary films “Rising from Ruins” and “Independent America: The Two-Lane Search for Mom & Pop,” which have been broadcast around the world and widely distributed online via Hulu and Yahoo!. Hanson advises organizations and companies such as the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Boston University, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation and the Public Relations Society of America on media strategy. He has also won Emmy and Overseas Press Club Awards for his work as a television journalist with NBC News. He was embedded with the U.S. military in Iraq and covered the impact of the war throughout the Middle East, armed only with a laptop, satellite phone and camcorder. Hanson has a Masters degree in journalism from Columbia University, and law degrees from Montreal’s McGill University and the University of Paris. He’s presently occupied with writing a book on storytelling in the digital age, hosting TEDx Seattle, and building the Media Space at the University of Washington, which aims to be a hub and business incubator for the Pacific Northwest’s digital media community. Hanson serves on the boards of the Common Language Project, UWTV, Puget Sound Off and is an affiliate member of the Jackson School’s Middle East Center.

____________

About Pulling Focus:

Pulling Focus is a series of three panels about the business of film designed to speak to the diversity of audience members, from screenwriters to actors, from directors to producers and on to musicians.  The goal is to elevate the conversation and design a dialogue that will have a little something for everyone and simultaneously help to give our community a rock solid education about how business is done in the film industry.

A copy of the book, signed for you by the author after the interview, is included in the $50 ticket cost, in addition to all wines and appetizers.

Michael Lewis
The Big Short: Inside the Doomsday Machine
April 14
Sorrento Hotel
Doors open at 6,
interview begins at 7

Michael Lewis is the most entertaining chronicler of our modern times. He was a top bond trader at Salomon Bros before he left to become a writer. Liar’s Poker, his account of life on Wall Street, is one of the defining books of the ’80s.

	Michael Lewis

Lewis has gone on to tackle topics from Silicon Valley (The New, New Thing and Next) to baseball (Moneyball), to fatherhood (HomeGame). His book about football, The Blind Side, was recently adapted into an academy award nominated film.

His new book, The Big Short: Inside the Doomsday Machine, is a character-rich and humorous study of how the U.S. economy was driven over the cliff, with a cast of real-life characters that includes villains, a few heroes and a lot of people who look very, very foolish.

The historic Sorrento Hotel will host our event, and the evening begins with appetizers and wine at 6 p.m. with onstage interview at 7. The Chateau St. Michelle will be providing our featured wines for the evening, and all wines, appetizers and a copy of The Big Short are included in the $50 per/person ticket price.

Kim Ricketts/Book Events connects people by creating author events in non-traditional venues. When authors visit Seattle, we find innovative ways to celebrate their books. Keep an eye out for our COOKS AND BOOKS visiting chef series and THE GOOD LIFE: books for better living events taking place at great venues about town.

For more information about Kim Ricketts/Book Events, to inquire about a private event, or to sign-up for our email list, call (206) 632-2419 or contact us.

Christopher Hitchens

Recently, I was invited to appear on KUOW Presents on 94.9FM to showcase three films in which God is murdered or, at the very least, severely annoyed. (It’s just a flesh wound?) You can listen to my conversation with Jeannie Yandel for my take on CREATION, RELIGULOUS and THE INVENTION OF LYING. The first film is a noble failure in theaters now, the second is Bill Maher‘s “agnostic” ad hoc-umentary and the last is a brilliant satire co-written and co-directed by Ricky Gervais and Matthew Robinson.

What all of these movies have in common is an unsettling dogmatism as final and unflinching as any fundamentalist’s beliefs. Don’t misunderstand, I am  a cultural Jew who attends Quaker meetings, who shuns God in any anthropomorphized form yet who embraces the obvious existence of the imponderable. Not all great questions can be answered by mortals. Not all design is intelligent. (Witness the butterfly… ballot.) Science is no more my religion than Scientology is; for at some point neither adequately allows for the notion that, in our lifetimes, we just can’t know, we can only surmise. To say otherwise, is delusional or disingenuous. Right? Too few share Abraham Lincoln‘s sage and simple moral construct:  When I do good, I feel good, and when I do bad, I feel bad, and that’s my religion.

In CREATION, Charles Darwin — as portrayed by Paul Bettany — frets when his colleague applauds the pending publication of On The Origin of Species, saying: “Congratulations, sir. You’ve killed God.” But the author of evolution needn’t have feared: killing God only makes him stronger… in the eyes of His beholden. You can’t end Terrorism by uprooting a single, maniacal cave-dweller nor can you extinguish Religion by dousing a burning bush with alternative explanations. Terrorism and Religion both thrive on root causes that, few pundits and non-believers, will address: Humankind’s need for comfort and conformity in the perpetual grip of Uncertainty and Fear.

So, Atheists, you may kill the supreme being repeatedly, but you’re missing your marks. The devout are as determined as the makers of Doritos and will likewise persevere: Crunch all (the gods) you want, they’ll just make more.

Irish Reels Film Festival 2010 ~ March 12-14^th ~ Seattle

Screening venues: Henry Art Gallery, Seattle Art Museum & Seattle Center House

Co-Presented with the Irish Heritage Club

The Irish Reels Film Festival, a forum for award-winning features, shorts, and documentaries by independent Irish filmmakers, is proud to present three days of film screenings in Seattle, March 12- 14, 2010.

Now in its 12th year, the festival kicks off on Friday night, March 12th, at 7:00 p.m. at the Henry Art Gallery with a special screening of Saving Our Heritage: The Irish Georgian Society, a film which presents the work of The Irish Georgian Society in preserving Ireland’s rich architectural heritage. The program includes a lecture & slideshow by the Hon. Desmond Guinness, acclaimed author and authority on Georgian art and architecture, and President of the Irish Georgian Society.

Mr. Guinness is the great, great, great, great grandson of Arthur Guinness who founded Guinness Brewery over 250 years ago. He will be honored as the Grand Marshal of Seattle’s 2010 St. Patrick’s Day Parade, presented by the Irish Heritage Club. www.irishweek.org

The film festival moves location to the Seattle Art Museum on Saturday & Sunday evenings.

Saturday ~ March 13^th

At 6:30pm, Alan Gilsenan’s new feature documentary THE YELLOW BITTERN provides a revealing and surprising portrait of the last surviving member of The Clancy Brothers and Tommy Makem.  This intimate, confessional and highly cinematic film charts the remarkable rise to fame of these devil-may-care Irish singers, from their small-town beginnings in County Tipperary in Ireland to the folk hey-day of Greenwich Village in the Sixties where they absorbed black musical influences, played for JFK and out-sold the Beatles. The Clancy Brothers and Tommy Makem would go on to influence a host of popular artists from Bob Dylan and Pete Seeger to The Pogues, and become a powerful iconic presence on the Irish cultural map.

The 9:00pm feature presentation is THE ECLIPSE, Conor McPherson’s latest feature film which explores the challenges of love, fear of the unknown and release from the burden of grief. Written and directed by Mr. McPherson, the film stars Ciarán Hinds, Aidan Quinn and Iben Hjejle.

Both films have been nominated for awards at the 2010 Irish Film & Television awards. Winners will be announced on Feb 20^th. http://www.ifta.ie/

The short animated film Granny O’Grimm’s Sleeping Beauty will precede the feature presentation. The film, directed by Nicky Phelan and produced by Darragh O’Connell, has been nominated for an Oscar® in the Best Animated Short Film category.

Sunday ~ March 14^th

At 6:30pm, Lance Daly’s narrative film is the award winning feature, KISSES. The film takes us on a journey into the streets of inner city Dublin with two ten-year-old kids. Lance Daly’s vision of Dublin, as seen through the innocent eyes of the protagonists, is a kaleidoscope of magic, wonder and mystery. But as the night wears on, and Dublin takes on a darker character, the two kids have to rely on the kindness of strangers, the advice of Bob Dylan and their trust in each other to survive the night.

Introducing newcomers Kelly O’Neill and Shane Curry with a supporting role played by renowned Irish actor, Stephen Rea.

The closing night feature presentation at 9.00pm is WAVERIDERS, written and directed by Joel Conroy. Waveriders is a feature documentary tells the previously untold story of the unlikely Irish roots of the worldwide surfing phenomenon and today’s pioneers of Irish big wave surfing and the nascent world class surfing destinations available off the North West coast of Ireland. Waveriders won the prestigious Best Documentary Award at the 2009 Surfer Poll & Video awards. The awards, often coined the “Academy Awards of Surfing”, honors the pinnacle of surf culture.

Free screenings @ Seattle Center during Irish Week Celebrations.

The Irish Reels Film Festival is a featured part of the Irish week celebrations at the Seattle Center and all screenings at the Seattle Center are FREE. Starting after the St. Patrick’s Day Parade, at 12:00 noon the film festival presents two afternoons of engaging and provocative films on Saturday and Sunday, including:

The Liberties, a series of twelve beautifully crafted short films, each focusing on a different character in Dublin’s inner-city.

Dublin 26.06.08 an eclectic, multi-authored impression of Dublin (within the M50) as it lived, died, breathed, made love, filled up and emptied, consumed, wept, was rained or shone on, grew bright and then darkened again.

Butte, America, a documentary which recounts the sometimes glorious, often sorrowful, but always fascinating story of the most lucrative hard rock mining town in United States.

The Bass Player, which chronicles Irish writer and filmmaker Niall McKay’s journey with his father, Jim, a Jazz bass player, on his return home from Zurich to Dublin following the death of Jim’s second wife Anna in a story about one retired immigrants search for love, adventure and a place to call home.

Frederick Douglass and the White Negro, a documentary by John J. Doherty which examines the effect Ireland had on Frederick Douglass’ activism & the role of the Irish in America after Douglass’ return. The film sheds light on the turbulent relationship between African Americans and Irish Americans, and the race riot that rocked NYC during the Civil War.

Waiting for The Light, directed by Ciarín Scott, a compelling biography of George Morrison, the towering pioneer and innovator of Irish cinema. Of his 42 films, Mise Éire and Saorise are internationally acclaimed and seminal masterpieces, defining Ireland’s modern history.

Dambé – The Mali Project, a musical journey to the heart of Africa with acclaimed Irish musicians Liam O’Maonlaí (The Hothouse Flowers) and Paddy Keenan (The Bothy Band) as they travel thousands of miles to the remote music festival – Festival au Desert.

For more information including complete film descriptions, photos, video trailers and advance ticket sales visit the Irish Reels Film Festival website at www.irishreels.org.

The Irish Reels Film Festival showcases contemporary Irish films with a focus is on independently produced work and those that have yet to receive international distribution. The aim is to inspire audiences with thought provoking and powerful stories, stories that are universal yet told from an Irish viewpoint by talented Irish filmmakers.

The Irish Heritage Club is a non-profit, non-political, non-religious organization that promotes Irish cultural activities in the greater Seattle and Puget Sound areas, especially activities that promote the Irish language, Irish music, Irish dancing, Irish history, Gaelic games, and cultural exchanges between the Puget Sound area and Ireland.

Greetings, followers of The Warren Report!
We here at FiveLabs had a blast developing the new-and-improved TheWarrenReport.com — and we thank Warren for offering to provide a little PR for us. If you are in need of some help on the technology front, please visit our site, and give us a call!

Here is a brief Q&A on *FiveLabs* <http://www.fivelabs.com>:

Q: What does FiveLabs do?
A: We build software — such as websites, workflow systems, or any other software that involves the management, transaction, or calculation of data and images. We plan and implement software projects, and technical architecture. We find and resolve major system issues. We also evaluate and assist with projects in mid-stream, especially if they seem to be falling behind or off-track. Our IT solutions solve business problems.

Q: So, if somebody needs something coded, he/she can contact you?
A: Well, yes. But keep in mind, our background and our value involves more than that — we represent many years of leadership, both in the form of technology AND planning: risk mitigation, issue resolution, and execution of technology projects. These skills allow us to save our clients time and money, making the most of what they invest in technology. Some people call it consulting; it’s really just a lot of experience mixed with the passion to get it right and be swift, thorough, and precise while we work. Our results represent our firm’s commitment. So, yes, we can code. More often we can do way more than just that.

Q: How large is the FiveLabs team?
A: We can do projects that require from 2 to 20 resources. We often work as part of a larger project, with resources from our clients, and even other vendors. We’ve worked with off-shore teams as well. Small firms use us to ensure their technology platforms and architecture is sound, as they start up, and as they grow. Large firms tend to use our services in a more targeted manner: to evaluate specific systems, or help with specific projects– in that case, we work with in-house IT staff.

Q: So, what would be some examples of your work in the past?
A: Well, glad you asked. Examples are at the bottom, in case that’s of interest.

Q: What is the first step if we think we might see an opportunity for you?
A: Contact us! We might be tenacious about following up on a lead, but we promise that we’re very easy to talk with. Initial discussions are no-charge, and we are up front if the fit is not right for our firm — we’ll do our best to find the right one for you.

Beth Lyons and Matt Francis, Partners
FiveLabs, Inc. <http://www.fivelabs.com>
1817 Queen Anne Ave N
Suite 303
Seattle, WA 98109
206.319.0230 x24

Examples of our work:

-Well, of course, there is TheWarrenReport.com<http://www.TheWarrenReport.com>.
We worked with Warren over a series of fun and pain-free meetings, where we listened to what he needed, reviewed options for the look of the site, asked for his frequent feedback, developed what he needed, and refined the site until it was ready for him to use. Our goal is for Warren to have a MUCH better time with his site in 2010, and to help him be more successful in the areas of event management, video blog presentation, and increased site traffic.

-FiveLabs assisted a well-known online retail site over a period of 18 months– beginning with a total re-platform of their site, since their old system was not able to scale with their impressive growth. This was followed by designing and building a long list of enhancements supporting
international expansion, improved (faster) performance, and better user experience. Our series of projects, all done in collaboration with the in-house client team, culminated in a full-site re-design that launched this past summer. It was featured in *The Wall Street Journal*.

-A large firm that designs and produces educational materials (K-12 and post-secondary) acquired a smaller firm in order to expand its overall offering, in terms of web presence and user-designed products. They planned to re-write all the newly acquired systems, in order to be able to process
orders uniformly, but the project faced major difficulty as time-to-market and cost projections skyrocketed. FiveLabs was asked to do a 2-day evaluation of the (woefully behind schedule) project. Our recommendation allowed the existing systems to remain intact, with a small, elegant custom
layer of software, directing and translating data for all technology involved. Cost and time estimates were revised and contained, and the full system was available for the next sales cycle.

-A major human resources consulting firm enlisted FiveLabs to review and evaluate an existing set of applications supporting their customer-facing Benefits offering. Some of the software was web-based, but designed and built in the early 90′s, and some was even older than that, and not
accessible via the internet. FiveLabs re-designed the offering to provide all features via an updated and re-platformed web interface, complete with high-end graphics and extensive customized reporting for the firm’s in-house consultants and clients.

DARBY may not fully intoxicate, but certainly can take the edge off any family movie night. O, Disney, won’t you please return to this sort of fare rather than the hyperkinetic inanity of G-FORCE? And now, The Ava Report, as dictated by my six-year-old-daughter…

This movie was a good movie but in two parts it was a bit scary. (There was a ghost that showed up two times and a carriage that took people when they died.) In one part, Darby went to where the leprechauns live and he was trying to get a horse. The horse got startled and then Darby fell into a hole where the leprechauns lived and two of them took him to their King. Here’s another thing, leprechauns like three things: drinking, dancing and hunting.It was funny when Darby put a glass of whisky in the sack with the king of the leprechauns and the king (Brian) drank it and threw the glass back out. In another part, the King Leprechaun got drunk and Darby pretended to get drunk but he was not. It was an interesting movie. Even though I’m 6 and a half, I think the movie is good for kids 8 and older.

So, what’s the verdict, critics and geeks? Is George Lucas a god amongst mortal movie-makers or a hack who happened tapped into the zit-geist?

Question what you see. Consider what you don’t. Draw your own conclusions.

Admittedly, since the death of Jerry Goldsmith — a loss far more traumatizing than the death of my own father — I have sought new, young composers to fill the void. Bear McCreary is one of the best, brightest hopes; he’s innovative, resourceful and committed. Single-handedly, he’s championed full-orchestra scoring for television shows such as Battlestar Galactica, Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles and, most recently and impressively, HUMAN TARGET for Fox.

2009 marked the breakout of another tremendous talent, Abel Korzeniowksi. His work on A SINGLE MAN contributed greatly to the movie’s warm critical reception. And, his score for BATTLE FOR TERRA, demonstrated a Romanticist’s flair for re-imagining space opera, respectful of the genre’s conventions while expanding its boundaries. Take a listen to Track 02 and delight in one the year’s most under-appreciated soundtracks. Then, nominate your own favorite film composers on the rise. Forget the ayes, in this case, the ears have it.

Well, chances are, even if you pay close attention you won’t hear Alec Baldwin’s speech tomorrow night at Seattle Repertory Theater’s re-staging of GLENGARRY GLENROSS. (Baldwin’s profanity-laced tirade wasn’t in the original Broadway play, it was added for the movie.) However, you will hear me talk about David Mamet‘s sardonic spin on Arthur Miller and its polished film adaptation during an exclusive, post-show discussion on Thursday, February 25th, 2010.

Seattle Rep’s production features some of Seattle’s finest actors — John Aylward, R. Hamilton Wright, Charles Leggett and Ian Bell — recreating roles assayed, respectively, by Jack Lemmon, Al Pacino, Alan Arkin and Jonathan Pryce in James Foley‘s big-screen version. Come join me afterwards to evaluate their efforts and the enduring value of Mamet’s workplace wind-down.

For a cheerier spin on Baldwin’s monologue, watch his elfin’ spoof from Saturday Night Live.

Breathing Media presents the private screening of TEETHING, a six-minute cinematic poem about being caught between childhood and adulthood. Through physical movement, lyrical narration, and a lushly orchestrated score, TEETHING ignites your imagination and reminds you that though we may get older, we never grow up. View the Facebook Event at http://www.facebook.com/event.php?eid=343439034761.

Teething trailer from Breathing Media on Vimeo.

Too often, we speed thru our decision-making much the way amateur shutterbugs do their photography. We miss opportunities because we do not take an extra half-second to focus on their worth. Today, I offer you my version of the half-press by sharing press for THE POWER OF HALF. On Tuesday, March 9th, I’ll host the book’s authors, the father-daughter team of Kevin and Hannah Salwen at The Good Life, the fabulous event series organized by Kim Ricketts Book Events. I trust that once you read the reviews, you’ll want to join me at The Palace Ballroom for this perfectly composed study in charity.

Purchase tickets here after you meet the press below.

NATIONAL

Parade Magazine, original article by Kevin and Hannah, January 17

New York Times, interview by Nicholas Kristof, Sunday, Jan 24

CBS Sunday Morning, segment, to air Feb 7

ABC’s World News with Diane Sawyer, interview, to air Feb 8

The View, ABC-TV, Feb. 9, LIVE

NPR, “The World,” Interview with Kevin and Hannah, to air Feb. 10

American Public Media’s “Marketplace Money”, interview, to air Feb 12

O, The Oprah Magazine, profile of Kevin and Hannah, April issue

Christian Science Monitor, review, run date TK

People Magazine, interview, to run March 1

The New Yorker, “Talk of the Town” interview, run date to come

INTERNATIONAL

The Globe and Mail (Canada), interview, run date TK

CBC Connections (Canadian prime time), air date TK

BBC Radio/The World Today, interview, to air the week of Feb 8

Radio New Zealand/Afternoons, interview with Kevin, air date TK

ONLINE

Grist.org, feature, January 26

AOL Housing Watch, interview, Jan 28

Grist.org, feature and interview with Hannah, February 10

USA TODAY’s Green House blog, February 11

MotherNatureNetwork.com, feature, February 11

Guideposts.com, interview, date TK

DarynKagan.com, interview, date TK

IN GEORGIA…

Creative Loafing’s Culture Surfing blog, “Atlanta’s Most Anticipated Books of 2010″ pick, January 11

Atlanta Journal-Constitution, feature, Feb 7

Profile on 11 Alive Morning News on WXIA-TV–the local NBC affiliate. Air date TK.

Voice of America, radio interview with Philip Graitcer, air date TK

*A shortened version of this interview is airing on WABE Feb 3

IN NEW YORK…

WOR, The Joan Hamburg Show, live interview on Feb 10, 2010

Newsday, review tk

IN NEW ENGLAND…

Concord Monitor, interview, Feb 11

WKXL-AM recording Gibson’s Books event for re-broadcast, air date TK

Improper Bostonian, extended event listing, early Feb issue

Boston Phoenix, extended event listing, Feb 12

Boston Globe, feature, Feb 13

IN CHICAGO…

Chicago Public Radio / Worldview with Jerome McDonnell, interview, Feb16

Chicago Tribune, extended event listing, run date TK

ON THE WEST COAST…

LA Times, review, January 24

*syndicated to several West Coast newspapers

KPCC / Patt Morrison, interview, air date TK

MISCELLANEOUS

Arizona Daily Wildcat, review, Jan 26

The Olympian (WA), review (from LA Times), Jan 27

The State (SC), review (from LA Times), Jan 27

The Modesto Bee, review (from LA Times), Jan 27

Victoria Advocate, review (from LA Times), Jan 27

Santa Rosa Press Democrat (CA), Kristof op-ed piece, Jan 27

© Scott Squire, NonFiction Media

“…I found [our] conversations about 4 times more fun and thought-provoking than any other moderated talks in which I’ve participated.”—David Benioff (screenwriter, 25TH HOUR; THE KITE RUNNER; WOLVERINE)

I am always flattered by the (unsolicited!) feedback I receive from the folks I interview. I am thrilled they appreciate the spirit with which I approach interviews. (Owen Schmitt of The Seattle Seahawks refers to my style as “chill”… and who am I to argue with the 6′2″, 247 pound fullback?)

Now you can learn how I prepare for interviews and how I respond to the different challenges presented by questioning folks on tape, on camera or before an audience. And, I’ll share insights and a little bit of gossip from the 1,000+ interviews I’ve conducted with the likes of Amy Sedaris, Calvin Trillin, Naomi Watts, Robert Duvall, Mariel Hemingway, Salman Rushdie, Nora Ephron, Michael Pollan, Charlie Kaufman, Augusten Burrough, Andy Samberg, Vincent Bugliosi, Nicolas Cage and others.

You’ll learn why documentarian Peter Esmonde says: “I was more relaxed being interviewed by you than anyone before or since. It’s so clear that, aside from being attentive and intelligent, you know [your stuff] — and that makes the interview more of a conversation with a compadre.”

Tuition for this exclusive, 3-hour workshop is only $75. You may mail check or money order (made payable to Warren Etheredge) to: 1752 NW Market St #118, Seattle 98107. Or, pay using PayPal, sending money to warren@thewarrenreport.com Or visit EventBrite for more options: http://listenup.eventbrite.com/

Space is limited, so please reserve your seat today and indicate you’ll be attending here on Facebook. The venue will be in the Ballard or Green Lake neighborhood.

About me…

As founder of The Warren Report (www.thewarrenreport.com), Warren Etheredge curates and hosts over 250 events every year, a podcast and television series. The Warren Report promotes “slow culture” through commentary, outreach, events and education. Our principle: Smarter audiences make a better world! Additionally, Warren is one of the founding faculty of TheFilmSchool, along with Tom Skerritt, Stewart Stern, Rick Stevenson and John Jacobsen. For six years, Warren served as the Curator for the 1 Reel Film Festival (at Bumbershoot), before that, he worked with the Seattle International Film Festival. Warren has staged over 40 plays in New York, published five books, written countless magazine articles and recently completed a feature-length documentary, HUMOR ME. He is in pre-production for a new documentary, TAPPED OUT: SOLVING AMERICA’S WATER CRISIS. He is the host of Words & Wine and The Good Life, conversation series with A-list authors, and is a regular contributor to Seattle’s NPR affiliate, KUOW. He speaks at festivals and conferences nationwide including The Screenwriting Expo, The Austin Film Festival and Conference, Bastyr University’s Founders Weekend and Gnomedex.

Jeannie Yandel invited me to discuss my take on traditional coupledom by offering three movies that dare swim up the mainstream to examine love affairs that defy traditional coupledom. Listen here for my spin on these Loves for which there are no Hallmark cards. (The piece aired originally on KUOW Presents, Friday, February 12th, 2010.)

Once you have listened in, please share your Valentine’s views on sweet-spirited kink, full-blown fetish and hard-core romance. Trust that I’ll love you for your candor. And, feel free to nominate your own favorite, offbeat on-screen love stories.

Happy Valentine’s Day,

Warren

Order the three movies I highlight on KUOW Presents below. They’d make great gifts for your loved ones!

LARS & THE REAL GIRL

CRASH

SLEEPING DOGS LIE

Did Dean have the right to reference the big-screen Christ-killer’s run-in with the LAPD or should he have  just stuck to the publicists’ script and pumped EDGE OF DARKNESS into the morning (show) light? Should Mel have acknowledged his misdeeds or was he right to demean Dean for alluding to this age-old altercation? Does a lame question warrant on-air profanity? Watch the video, then…

Question what you see. Consider what you don’t. Draw your own conclusions… And win valuable prizes! More after this word from our sponsor…

The New Year is well underway and we are excited to bring these upcoming book events to you. Included below are details about our brand-new series with Skamania Lodge as well as the next two events in our popular Good Life: books for better living Series.

Put these on your calendar now:

“Imagination is like fire. No — strike that. Imagination is fire now comes the question: to what ends shall you use that fire?” – excerpt from Imagination First

Join author Eric Liu on February 17 at the Hotel Andra as he discusses why innovation and imagination are the key to limitless possibilities. His new book,Imagination First, shows us how, with 28 (and a half) universal practices for opening minds at work, home and play. All of them are designed to enable anyone –from corporate executives to preschool teachers — to get unstuck, to reframe challenges and to help others do the same.

Eric Liu is an author, civic entrepreneur and founder of the True Patriots Network, has taught at the University of Washington, been an executive at Real Networks and penned the “Teachings” column for Slate from 2002-2005. Eric served as a White House speechwriter for President Bill Clinton and later as the President’s deputy domestic policy adviser, and is the author of two previous bestselling books: a memoir The Accidental Asian as well as Guiding Lights: The People Who Lead Us Toward Our Purpose in Life.

Come find out how you can bring imagination into your work and life!

This event takes place at the Hotel Andra at 6:30 p.m., with onstage interview at 7 p.m.

On March 9 in our Good Life seris we welcome Kevin and Hannah Salwen (father and daughter) who will be here to discuss their book The Power of Half: One Family’s Decision to Stop Taking and Start Giving Back. It all started when 14-year-old Hannah Salwen had a “eureka moment.” Seeing a homeless man in her neighborhood alongside a Mercedes, she said “You know, Dad, if that man had a less nice car, maybe that man there could have a meal.”

Until that day the Salwens had been caught up in the American Dream: providing a good life for their children, working hard, accumulating stuff. As a family they made the extraordinary decision to sell their Atlanta home, downsize to a house half the size and give half the profit to a worthy charity.

Learn about the many ways their family changed in the process!

All Good Life events are $35 and include appetizers, confections from Theo Chocolate, a signed copy of the featured book and an on-stage interview of the author by Warren Etheredge of The Warren Report.

Our Good Life series is sponsored by Children’s Trust of Washington, who make the lives of families in our state better every single day: http://www.childrenstrust.org/

We also thank these additional sponsors: The Warren Report, Seattle’s Child, Tom Douglas Restaurants, Lush Life Floral and Theo Chocolate — all folks who make our community a better place to live!

Announcing Skamania Lodge Bed & Book-fest!

At Book Events we are thrilled to announce our latest fun project with Skamania Lodge, an all-season mountain resort in the Columbia River Gorge National Scenic Area. Bed and Book-fest is a new literary series that gives book lovers an opportunity to get away to a beautiful, historic lodge and spend time with some of your favorite NW authors. The series will feature five author hosted weekends in 2010, and launches with Kathleen Flinn, the bestselling author of The Sharper the Knife, the Less You Cry, on February 19 & 20.

Each Bed & Book-fest weekend will include an exclusive author’s reception with readings and book signings, as well as customized, author-hosted workshops and a copy of the author’s featured work. Guests who attend the first Bed & Book-fest with Kathleen Flinn will enjoy an exclusive cooking demonstration during which Flinn will share a favorite recipe from her book, followed by an author-hosted lunch of the same featured dish, prepared by Skamania Lodge’s award-winning culinary team.

For reservations and more info, click here.

The second event in the series takes place March 13-14 and will feature Jennifer Worick and her latest book, Backcountry Betty: Crafting With Style. Jennifer has written or co-authored more than 20 books, including the New York Times bestseller, The Worst-Case Scenario Survival Handbook: Dating & Sex. Worick currently resides in Seattle and is the Seattle reporter for Allure.

We are always looking for fun and different ways to connect people who love books with the authors who write them — so check our website, join our mailing list and keep an eye out for soon-to-be-announced authors in our ongoing Words & Wine and Cooks & Books series!

We hope to see you at an event soon — and in the meantime: happy winter reading!

As ever,

www.kimricketts.com

Man in the Box 2013 Facebook Abuse – Watch more Funny Videos

Now, what’s your take? Is social media, blameless, akin to guns? That is: Facebook doesn’t kill people, people do?

Question what you see. Consider what you don’t. Draw your own conclusions.

.

Roman Polanski, at least, has avoided uttering equally barbaric soundbites since his confession to drugging and sodomizing a minor, though I imagine if he were in the States — and incarcerated — we’d hear more from the diminutive pederast-piggy. (“Her lips said ‘Non,’ but her quaalude-clouded eyes said ‘oui, oui, oui!’ all the way home.”) Nevertheless, his filmic prolificacy speaks volumes and I don’t like what I’m hearing/seeing: PIRATES. FRANTIC. BITTER MOON. THE NINTH GATE. (He gets a pass for THE PIANIST, although making a Holocaust film practically guarantees one will receive Hollywood’s, um, gold star, no?)

Now, you can get a glimpse of Polanski’s latest, THE GHOST WRITER, thanks to the good folks at iTunes (and others, I’m sure). This is the project that allowed the deviant movie-maker to bypass prison time in favor of house arrest and somehow escape extradition once again. I urge you to watch the trailer, then ask yourself if it’s worth it. Worth what? Worth the tens of millions spent upon a genre production in service of the creative ego of a convicted statutory rapist. What price Art? Better yet, what price Justice? Have we bartered one for the other?

Question what you see. Consider what you don’t. Draw your own conclusions.

© Joshua Trujillo/Seattle PI

Amongst the accomplishments I am proudest of, I count my role as one of five co-founders of TheFilmSchool. Certainly, it is one of the only instances I’ve experienced during which talk has led to action leading to actual achievement of the goals originally set. TheFilmSchool‘s three-week intensive is the populist response to the Sundance Institute, a chance for aspiring screenwriters to question their calling, then hone their craft within the comforting confines of a mentor-based haven. (A new session begins in March. Click here to apply. And, later this month, graduates and the prepared ought consider Substance & Sale, TheFilmSchool‘s weekend intensive for those ready to advance their careers.)

Moving Pictures Magazine recently published a short, yet insightful, article about TheFilmSchool, focusing on three of my colleagues, Tom Skerritt, Stewart Stern and John Jacobsen. I link to it here both for your edification and my self-esteem. Enjoy.

61_MPWinter09

62_MPWinter09

Saturday, February 6th, 2010    9am-5pm venue: tba (Seattle, WA)

http://www.eventbrite.com/event/526887936

Movies are a lot like football. Beneath the hype and circumstance, there is a lot of strategy, a lot of technique. And, like football, most Americans watch movies and discuss movies religiously without ever really knowing what they really are talking about. For those who wish to sound smarter and for those who hope to make movies, I offer this special Super Bowl session of LANGUAGE FOR MOVIES the day before the game. The class runs seven hours… which is just slightly shorter than television’s preposterous pre-game shenanigans.

If you want to visit France, it’s best to learn French. If you want to be a retail analyst, you’ve got to talk shop. And if you’re gonna talk smack with Dr. Doolittle, best brush up on your Marsupialese: the vet curses in fluent kangaroo. Can’t you? So why is it so many folks who love movies or want to make them, possess only the most rudimentary vocabulary for critiquing and constructing Film?

LANGUAGE FOR MOVIES, is a 1-day intensive during which we’ll examine the five major components of production — directing, shooting, acting, editing and composing — by reviewing clips to dissect the intricacies and artistry of each of these professions. After seven hours, you’ll fully understand the principles of film theory and the challenges of filmmaking. Most importantly, as the class title implies, you’ll have the vocabulary to best express your impressions of others’ efforts and your own grand visions.

Register now for this special session of LANGUAGE FOR MOVIES on February 6th, 2010. In honor of the Dallas Cowboys’ hoped for appearance in next year’s Super Bowl, I am offering a special discount. Yup, you can attend the entire seven-hour seminar for only $125 (a savings of twenty-five dollars!). Reserve your seat on-line via PayPal or send a check or money order — made payable to Warren Etheredge — to: 1752 NW Market St #118, Seattle, WA 98107. Better yet, go here:  http://www.eventbrite.com/event/526887936 Seating is limited, so act now. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at warren@thewarrenreport.com

About me…

As founder of The Warren Report (www.thewarrenreport.com), Warren Etheredge curates and hosts over 250 events every year, a podcast and television series. The Warren Report promotes “slow culture” through commentary, outreach, events and education. Our principle: Smarter audiences make a better world! Additionally, Warren is one of the founding faculty of TheFilmSchool, along with Tom Skerritt, Stewart Stern, Rick Stevenson and John Jacobsen. For six years, Warren served as the Curator for the 1 Reel Film Festival (at Bumbershoot), before that, he worked with the Seattle International Film Festival. Warren has staged over 40 plays in New York, published five books, written countless magazine articles and recently completed a feature-length documentary, HUMOR ME. He is the host of Words & Wine,The Good Life and the Biznik Innovators Series, conversation series with A-list authors, and is a regular contributor to Seattle’s NPR affiliate, KUOW. He speaks at festivals and conferences nationwide including The Screenwriting Expo, The Austin Film Festival and Conference and Gnomedex.

THE POODLE TRAINER screened at Sundance this week, the third of his shorts to be exhibited at the fest. The other two: LOSING LUSK and OCULARIST. Sadly, none of these are available on-line.* (For music lovers, all these films are scored, brilliantly, by Auditory Sculpture; these aural contributions a hallmark of Vance’s complete aesthetic control of the short form. Order Auditory Sculpture’s album, That Might Be You But This Is Me, here.)

I had the pleasure of……screening Vance’s first short doc, OCULARIST, at the 1 Reel Film Festival at Bumbershooot back in 2003. (I still consider it one of the five best short docs I’ve ever seen!) Subsequently, I commissioned — not fiscally, sorry, Vance! — another short inspired by my question: What In God’s Name? Renamed(?) WHAT IN THE NAME OF GOD, you can watch this film here. (A p.s.a. Vance shot, PERMISSION, can also be seen by clicking this sentence. It does more to challenge perceptions of a very divisive, public issue than a thousand progressive celebrity rants or right-wing bible thumpings.)

Please, let me know what you think. Then, drop Ken and Michael a line. Tell them to keep an eye out for the competition. Vance Malone has triumphed in the short form; I eagerly await his first feature.

*Truth be told, you can watch OCULARIST on Auditory Sculpture’s site, but it is far from the ideal forum to view such visually compelling work.

I like to think

Zinn’s populist tome, A People’s History of the United States, urged readers to re-examine the past from  multiple, under-represented perspectives beyond the average, American curriculum. Zinn was a champion of the masses and the media-oppressed. His death is a loss to all those who value freedom of the Press and a little something some call… the Truth.

In honor of Zinn’s passing, I challenge readers to submit their own exploration of a current event from an unheard, unseen perspective. Ideally, your own. The sharpest, or most satirical, entry will win a prize — Zinn’s best-selling book. (Winner determined by my whim, guided by my love of the pointed and the hilarious.)

Though as much as I appreciate good humor, I scream when the Texas Board of Education proposes revisions to textbooks (effectively, nationwide!) to address such kooky notions as Evolution. One ten-gallon board member, Don McElroy, calls the “theory,” a bunch of “hooey.” And while I could, possibly, live with a Creationists’ argument that both Darwinism and Intelligent Design ought be taught together, doesn’t it undermine the principle of fairness and balance when a key voter poo-poos scientific conclusions altogether, suggesting that Faith always trumps Evidence?

History is not a joke, nor is Science. Why then do we allow “administrators” to dictate content to “educators?” Why must intellectual rigor succumb to spiritually-biased opinion?

Of course, Zinn was more interested in the collusionary efforts of political parties and the dehumanizing impact of economic forces. Nevertheless, the lesson is the same: If the elected and fiscally-empowered can deprive the people of all the facts, they deny the people any hope. For without a complete education, Americans will become just a bunch of underachieving F-students. Prove the powers that be wrong. Demand more information. Accept nothing but the truth.

Question what you see. Consider what you don’t. Draw your own conclusions.

Then, submit your entries by February 15th, 2010.

Substance & Sale Overview

This course takes you through an in-depth development process, asking the same questions that a good producer would: does the screenplay have the underpinnings of a compelling premise? Does your original vision shine through a masterful working of the three-act structure? Does your lead character’s personal journey drive the story forward? Are there key turning points, a powerful scheme for the antagonist, and a number of other specific narrative elements which will catch the reader’s eye? Over three intensive days, we’ll work and rework through these craft issues at a professional level. We’ll also listen to log lines from Participants to make sure there is a story there worth developing. The end result is to learn how to make your script’s key dramatic intentions come across as strongly as possible in the finished work, and at best, this process helps move your material to the next level at the right production company.

Marketing your work

In the evenings, we learn to take off our artistic writing hats and put on the hat of the business person that hides within. All of us possess the skills to market ourselves, we just need to be shown how.

Participate or observe

There are two levels you can choose from to attend this seminar: Participant or Observer. The number of participants is limited to the first 20 that apply, and they should mail a one page synopsis in with their application. They need to agree to be open to criticism as the seminar’s panel determines which aspects of the material should remain intact, be embellished, or significantly changed. Observers attend all seminars and actively participate in discussions, but their work is not examined.

Dates: February 26–28, 2010

Feb. 26 (6:30 PM -10 PM); Feb. 27 (10 AM – 6 PM); Feb. 28 (10 AM – 6 PM)

Location: Seattle Center, The Alki Room (future home of TheFilmSchool)

QUOTES from last year’s attendee evaluations:

“Warren and John are awesome teaching partners!”

“This is the perfect next step after TheFilmSchool (3-Week-Intensive).”

“Detailed examination of work, helpful next steps to sell my script.”

“Seattle needs more of this.”

One of the most dangerous pitfalls for writers is the belief that their scripts have been fully realized, when in reality they remain obscure or not dramatized to their fullest potential. Failure in this area is perhaps the main reason so many screenplays get passed on by industry story analysts or “readers.”

This course is designed to help you bridge that pitfall.

For more information on how to apply to this course, please see here.

FANTASTIC MR. FOX was great. I thought it was interesting and exciting but at some parts I was a bit nervous because if Mr. Fox and Kylie did not hurry up, the farmers would find them. I also thought how the movie-makers made all of the characters was very interesting because I had never seen [animation] like that. I liked Mrs. Fox. She was a bit like my mom because my mom is tough. All the voices were good. I really liked Kylie [Wally Wolodarsky]. At some parts, Kylie got scared and just stared and stared. It was so funny when Kylie did that. I didn’t think FANTASTIC MR. FOX was the best at first but now I can’t stop thinking about it.

Indeed, FANTASTIC MR. FOX gets even better upon reflection. The (detachable?) tale tickles and the handmade imagery rocks. (To learn about the making-of, check out this wonderful video.)

Andy Dick-less?

Stars, they’re just like us… We’re reminded pictorially in every issue of US Weekly. Kiefer Sutherland goes shopping. Miley Cyrus looks ashamed of her dad. Lara Flynn Boyle bleaches her sphincter. All of the snapshots of our parallel celebrity lives are supposed to make us feel closer, more comparable to our idols. It’s almost as if we, too, could get our money for nothing and our chicks for free.*

Yet if we are willing to see ourselves in the mundane activities of the glorified, mustn’t we also recognize our failures in the transgressions of the rich and infamous? Doesn’t the fault lie in our stars AND ourselves?

Where is the US Weekly photo spread depicting Gary Coleman (allegedly) abusing his wife?  Or Andy Dick (allegedly) disrobing a minor… or (allegedly) groping a bouncer? Or of Charlie Sheen(allegedly) choking his wife, Brooke Mueller? Or, Charlie (allegedly) brandishing a knife? Or, Charlie accidently (and admittedly!) discharging a firearm and wounding then-fiancee Kelly Preston?

Gary Coleman-child?

It is tempting to highlight these incidents as the fleeting foibles of a few bad actors, yet we must acknowledge that these, too, are reflections of our own worst traits. We are the rotten barrel. Domestic violence is neither an exception to the norm nor a TMZ triviality. Check out these disturbing statistics culled by the American Bar Association…

• Approximately 1.3 million women and 835,000 men are physically assaulted by an intimate partner annually in the United States.
  

  Patricia Tjaden & Nancy Thoennes, U.S. Dep’t of Just., NCJ 183781, Full Report of the Prevalence, Incidence, and Consequences of Intimate Partner Violence Against Women: Findings from the National Violence Against Women Survey, at iv(2000), available at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/183781.htm

• Intimate partner violence made up 20% of all nonfatal violent crime experienced by women in 2001.
  

  Callie Marie Rennison, U.S. Dep’t of Just., NCJ 197838, Bureau of Justice Statistics Crime Data Brief: Intimate Partner Violence, 1993-2001, at 1 (2003), available at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/ipv01.pdf

• In 2000, 1,247 women and 440 men were killed by an intimate partner. In recent years, an intimate partner killed approximately 33% of female murder victims and 4% of male murder victims.
  

  Callie Marie Rennison, U.S. Dep’t of Just., NCJ 197838, Bureau of Justice Statistics Crime Data Brief: Intimate Partner Violence, 1993-2001, at 1(2003), available at http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/ipv01.pdf

Charlie (Lost His) Sheen

Granted, Carlos Irwin Estevez has done more harm than his share, but neither he nor the entirety of his hate-mongering Hollywood brethren can explain the horrifying prevalence of domestic violence in this country. This is not solely a showbiz phenomenon. Sadly, this is an American epidemic. And until we respond to it more seriously, spouses and partners are doomed to suffer both behind  closed doors and in the public eye.

Charlie Sheen returns to his sitcom and his well-documented ways. Andy Dick returns to the comedy club, bailed out by the owner, so that the show might go on. Gary Coleman returns to virtual obscurity, a Trivial Pursuit punchline. What is most alarming is that these alleged offenses are not the first for these two and a half men. Each has a string of arrests and allegations that ought eliminate the need for the “other side of the story” and validate the identification of the common denominator, the recidivist perpetrators themselves. Charlie Sheen should be incarcerated. Gary Coleman should be jailed. Andy Dick, at the very least, should see a therapist by court-order and serve the community by judge’s will, as well.

Tiger Woods cheated on his wife, lost many of his endorsement deals and has gone into hiding. Charlie Sheen has used his words, his fists, a gun and a knife in abusing a succession of mates and yet he’s still promoted on primetime tv? Maybe it’s time for us to boycott CBS or, at least, beg the network to re-title its hit show: One and A Half Men and One Chronically Abusive, Chauvinistic, Rage-aholic Ass.

* With apologies to Mark Knopfler and Lynn Schnumberger

It’s one thing to write poorly, that’s permissible in journals and personal correspondence. It’s another to have sub-par prose published in a major paper, indicating that both an editor and a bean-counter have somehow approved such amateur ramblings.

I deputize you, dear readers, to submit your own examples. For now, let me offer this shard of broken glass on which I pricked my eyes in this Sunday’s edition (1/10/10) of Parade Magazine. The article’s title: “Live Well With What You Have.” The perpetrator: Lynn Schnumberger. Under the subheading ‘Get What You Need,’ she begins…

“To paraphrase the Rolling Stones, you can’t always get everything you want.”

Wow. What a colorful and insightful phrasing to lure the reader, Lynn. So impressive, so illustrative, I decided to explore LexisNexis for more of Ms. Schnumberger’s lyrical lead-ins. Here’s what I found…

From “Spare Change – Where’d It Go?”:

Who amongst us hasn’t paraphrased Bono while turning over couch cushions in search of laundry money, “But I still have not found that for which it is I am looking.”

From “L.A. Riots Make Rodney King For A Day”:

The beaten but not broken Mr. King rallied the crowd, paraphrasing the old War tune, “Why cannot we develop meaningful friendships?”

From Cradle To Rave – Oh, How Kids Dance These Days:

They jumped. They jived. To paraphrase OutKast, they would “flip it, flap it, wave it around in the air hoping that regardless of the physics of chemical reactions it would develop faster like a Polaroid picture.”

Please, Ms. Schnumberger, return your check to the publisher or, better yet, donate your ‘earnings’ to the local literacy program of your choosing.

BEING SEEN

Caught in the ACT, a free script reading series featuring extraordinary work from alumni of TheFilmSchool, directed and perfomed by some of Seattle’s best professional directors and actors.

written by Sonya Lea

directed by Warren Etheredge

starring: Abby Brammell (LIKE DANDELION DUST; The Unit), Trina Willard (HUMPDAY), Todd Licea (ALIENS VS. PREDATOR 2) and Beth DeVries (The King & I)

BEING SEEN is based on an actual event and was first published as an essay in The Southern Review, for which Sonya Lea received an Artist Trust Award. Oprah Book Club author Bret Lott said this story “is strong and strange and haunting and moving all at once…(Sonya) has a voice and tone that are so truthful and authentic.”

BEING SEEN is a dramatic story about photographer Soph Newman, who is married to the magnetic physician Jack, and living a comfortable yet lackluster life when her husband is sideswiped in a terrible car accident. Soph is coping with his traumatic brain injury, when she discovers that her husband has forgotten everything he knew about becoming a lover; he has lost his remembrance of sex. Only her best friend Jules, the witty chef of the Dalai Mama Café, and Soph’s trusted confidante, can help her decide what is essential to preserve, and what’s worth leaving behind. It’s a tumultuous triangle that reaches its apex at Soph’s exhibit premiere, and takes a turn that no one, especially Soph, could have expected.

Sonya Lea has written three films and a television series, including an adaptation of Sandra Brown‘s New York Times best-selling thriller.  Lea has also won several screenwriting awards, including the Nicholl Fellowship (QF), has completed work with UCLA’s School of Film & Television, as well as at TheFilmSchool in Seattle, where Lea took this story to ‘workshop’ with writer/producer Warren Etheredge. Said Etheredge,  “Sonya is one of the few writers I’ve encountered whose brilliance transcends form; so whether crafting an essay, a script or a short story, her talent shines. It is just a matter of time till her work is regarded as highly as that of Francine Prose, Joan Didion and Melissa Mathison.”

Rated R for some drug content and sexuality.

www.itscomplicatedmovie.com

Cast: Meryl Streep, Steve Martin, Alec Baldwin
Written and Directed by: Nancy Meyers
Produced by: Nancy Meyers, Scott Rudin
Executive Producers: Ilona Herzberg, Suzanne Farwell

Writer/director Nancy Meyers (WHAT WOMEN WANT; SOMETHING’S GOTTA GIVE; THE HOLIDAY) directs Meryl Streep, Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin in IT’S COMPLICATED, a comedy about love, divorce and everything in between.

Jane (Streep) is the mother of three grown kids, owns a thriving Santa Barbara bakery/restaurant and has-after a decade of divorce-an amicable relationship with her ex-husband, attorney Jake (Baldwin). But when Jane and Jake find themselves out of town for their son’s college graduation, things start to get complicated. An innocent meal together turns into the unimaginable-an affair. With Jake remarried to the much younger Agness (Lake Bell), Jane is now, of all things, the other woman.

Caught in the middle of their renewed romance is Adam (Martin), an architect hired to remodel Jane’s kitchen. Healing from a divorce of his own, Adam starts to fall for Jane, but soon realizes he’s become part of a love triangle.

Should Jane and Jake move on with their lives, or is love truly lovelier the second time around? It’s…complicated.

(© AP Photo/Erich Schlegel)

Nature versus Nurture. The gridiron might seem an improbable arena for resolving this age-old riddle, but the Dallas Cowboys‘ December may unscramble the chicken/egg-like conundrum.

Statisticians, die-hards and certain head coaches will tell you the Past is insignificant. Numbers are immune to history as the Present resets odds habitually. And, they are right. On any given Sunday, any team’s fortunes are a 50/50 proposition. Just ask the Raiders who beat the Bengals only to lose, convincingly!, to the Cowboys on Thanksgiving, 7-24. Oakland’s more irregular than Deion Sanders‘ wardrobe.

Psychologists, cynics and certain talking jocks will tell you the Past is inescapable. The Past is precedent; late-season swoons are an insurmountable intangible. And, they may be right. Witness 2008′s year-ending, soul-crushing shellacking at Lincoln Financial Field. Question is: do these Dallas Cowboys have it in them to prove the latter group wrong? We’ll see this weekend. Dallas needn’t necessarily win, but a blow-out or last-second loss might devastate… which leaves little room for error and plenty for followers’ terror.

If the Cowboys defeat the New York Giants, the team solidifies its first place division lead and Nurture moves ahead. While I have been consistently critical of Wade Phillips‘ abilities as a head coach, a victory would make me, more strongly, reconsider my doubts than his current 8-3 (30-13) record already has. I would lend credence to the notion that this year’s team is most truly, finally “his,” not some bedeviled, if talented inheritance from Bill Parcells. Wade has assumed accountability for his strength, the defense, and suggested the offensive gameplan, while not called by him, is an accurate reflection of his philosophy… though he tinkers with the OC’s balancing (t)act weekly. The off-season and training camp were under his re-dedicated supervision. And, the regular season has proceeded as he’s directed, from Victory Mondays thru erratic Sundays. Jerry Jones has helped prune the offense to one that’s Romo-friendly and drafted a kick-off specialist who is field position-friendly… with benefits. If Dallas wins, Wade’s nurturing will have overcome doubters’ notions of the Cowboys’ un/natural self-destruction and Jerry can hog or halve the credit as he so whimsically desires.

In order for Dallas and Nurture to triumph, the team — not just its quarterback — will need to adopt Parcells’ commandment: Never let good enough be enough. Yes, the Cowboys beat the Raiders Thursday and edged the Redskins before that, however, neither victory should be regarded as good enough. We can enjoy them as fans, but the team must demand more of themselves. To wit…

* Dear Tony Romo, Ignore the labels, neither a bus-driver nor a gun-slinger be. Be yourself. That’ll get us the win/s.

* Winning may be what it’s all about Roy Williams, but posting some decent numbers or making a highlight catch would be better than beneficial… they could be playoff-clinching.

* Uh-oh, Kyle Kosier, even you got two flags thrown your way the other day. Contrary to popular belief, penalties needn’t be contagious. Just keep your hands clean… and away from opposing helmets. Same goes for your line-mates, even the new guy. May the Truth set you, Free.

* I don’t care if it’s duck season, rabbit season or mating season, for that matter, if the camouflage get-up helps you, Marcus Spears, wear leafy-skivvies on game day. This is a playoff hunt, after all.

* I’m convinced, Bobby Carpenter: you’re not a bust. But why not shame your critics by playing like an overzealous curfew-enforcer, that is, LIGHTS OUT!

* Love you, Nick Folk, but whether it’s the yips, your hip or Mat McBriar’s grip, you need to drop the Scott Norwood impersonation. It’s good, but I’d prefer you mimic Adam Vinatieri… or Christopher Walken.

* Good things — not just celebrity deaths — come in threes, Patrick Crayton. Take another one to the house and Cribbs will be remembered as that MTV show not some guy up in Cleveland.

It is tempting to let minor successes buoy you after surviving stormy seas. However, bobbing along ain’t no way to get back to shore. Or, The Super Bowl. I know I have allowed momentary stress-relievers to rebalance me AND then made me complacent only to lose myself to the lurch once more.

Some would argue my occasional tendency to implode is the result of my childhood, a tattered and battered affair that left me with good reason to give up in toughest times. Some, even my ex, have suggested that having suffered abuse as a kid, I am incapable of parenting or, hell, living, maturely, as I am bereft of role models or a lover’s consistent monitoring. And, from time to time, I succumb to her curse, this curse, believing my earlier experiences are the consequence of some (self-)loathsome core that cannot be denied; the victim’s irrational need to make sense by accepting responsibility for the unimaginable. And then, when I regain consciousness, as it were, I remind myself that sometimes, the fault does lie in our stars, not ourselves. Sometimes, circumstances collude, and in so doing, collide with our selves’ own true Natures. Looking back, clearly, I can be prouder of the fact I endured rather than dwelling on the misery of the endurance. It is my Nature to survive and thrive, not to be beaten down.

Plenty of pundits have analyzed the Cowboys’ collapses of years past. I beg you to believe these retrospectives are irrelevant. Do not condemn a team, a quarterback, any individual to future failures due to past mistakes or misfortunes. Prophecies self-fulfilled are the hollowest victories. Instead, enable a team, a quarterback, any individual, to redeem themselves from histories of which they are more ashamed than you. Let them embrace their genetically- (or God-) blessed abilities and the possibilities born of greater, later, nurturing. Or coaching.

Damn, in re-reading, I just realized, we may have a tie on our hands. To determine the Nature vs. Nurture champ, we may just have to go into relativistic overtime… or march into Giants Stadium, helmets held high, baggage stored neatly in the locker room.

Go Cowboys!

(© AP Photo/LM Otero)

How ’bout dem Cowboys?

Depending on the tone and inflection, this phrase is either a boastful taunt or confounded query. For fans, it is easy to waver between the two, uncertain whether to cheer, jeer or just endure the varying highs and indignities of supporting the Cowboys. In the team’s past two contests — the infuriating loss to Green Bay and the more frustrating last-quarter edge of Washington — reasons for hope and doubt have flip-flopped like Joe Cocker undergoing shock therapy. Yes, Dallas split the two contests, but they also provided more than enough evidence to make cases, either way, for their post-season chances. Tony Romo comes through in the clutch. Tony Romo is inaccurate. Miles Austin is a playmaker. Miles Austin can’t beat double coverage. The running game must be established early. The rhythm of the passing game must be established early. Heck, the only two elements of team play that appear conclusive are: 1) the defense is nearing top form; and, 2) Roy Williams is descending to the bottom-rung. (I appreciate his blocking skills but I’d love to see him use his hands to catch something, anything. A football, perhaps?)

My six-year-old daughter loves chapter books. Ava asked me how the Cowboys fared against their DC rivals. I told her they won, but I was a little distraught given how unconvincing the victory was. She reminded me of what she had just learned reading Pollyanna: “When you look for the bad expecting it, you will find it, Papa.” Well, who am I to argue with a head-strong girl or the writings of Eleanor Porter?

So, in order to practice positivity and in light of the holiday mandate, let us now give thanks for all that’s good about this year’s Cowboys…

* At 7-3, Dallas sits atop the NFC East and controls its playoff destiny.

* Marion Barber is getting healthy, his regained strength apparent running against the Redskins.

* Felix Jones showed burst on his opening kickoff return. Maybe he’s gaining confidence in his knee or his natural ability.

* Tony Romo can make plays when few others could. And, he’ll play through pain.

* Welcome to the offense, Martellus Bennett. Timing is everything.

* David Buehler can kick AND tackle!

* Mike Jenkins can pick off passes AND tackle!

* Alan Ball IS versatile.

* Anthony Spencer didn’t just come close, he made a decisive, game-changing play.

* Mat McBriar is even better than before and, somehow, never hits the scoreboard. Strange, eh, AJ?

* Wade Phillips is one heckuva defensive coordinator!

Know what? It actually feels good when you focus on the positive.

This past weekend, I was teaching workshops in Juneau, Alaska, one of my favorite pit-stops… because of the people and the pelmeni (the perfect drunk food!). As the Cowboys game was not locally televised, my hosts chose a fine drinking establishment, The Viking, equipped with DirecTV for our pigskin viewing pleasure. The  place smelled like the underside of John Daly‘s nutsack, ‘scuse me, rucksack and looked like a honeywagon on the SS Poseidon; a topsy-turvy excuse for a sports bar in which only two of the satellite connections functioned. Fortunately, I arrived early enough to claim one of them to watch my team before an already-inebriated fan showed up to watch “his Patriots”… three hours early. (Guess he was having trouble adjusting to the time zone?) When another patron decided more games ought be viewable, he brandished the remote control as if he were a disgruntled high-schooler in a black trenchcoat. And, in the midst of his infra-red shootout with the cable boxes, he lost the Cowboys’ transmission during the Redskins’ first scoring drive. I was pissed, yet passive. Finally, post field goal, he returned the game to the screen only to start futzing with the broadcast/s again minutes later. Once more, he botched the job and, this time, I calmly demanded that he give me the remote control and back away from the wall of tee-vees. Crestfallen, the Browns fan acquiesced and retreated to a far-off stool. I had succeeded in protecting my program, but felt bad having undercut the well-intentioned, if incompetent, whipper-zapper. Thus, eventually, I relented and returned the remote even though I knew in his state it should have been as dearly avoided as heavy machinery. Unconsciously, I chose to see the good in him rather than focus solely on my frustration with him. In turn, he bought me a drink. I suppose there is an upside to being an inadvertent Pollyana.

As a consequence of my Alaskan encounter and my daughter’s sage citation, I will approach the Cowboys’ Thanksgiving contest with the Oakland Raiders expecting nothing but the best, trusting I will find it. Visualize with me…

* Martellus Bennett has a break-out performance.

* Tony Romo hits Miles Austin in stride.

* Patrick Crayton takes another one to the house.

* Nick Folk regains his confidence, splits the uprights.

* Anthony Spencer records two sacks; Greg Ellis gets none.

* Terrence Newman picks six.

* Roy Williams earns his pay.

It’s easy once you try it. Happy Thanksgiving, all.

The Academy of Motion Pictures Arts & Sciences revealed the “short list” for Best Feature Documentary. While there are many fine contenders — including THE COVE, FACING ALI and EVERY LITTLE STEP — two titles were overlooked that are certainly superior to some others rounding out the list.

James Toback‘s TYSON is revelatory, allowing audiences to meet Iron Mike in a context previously unimaginable — the fighter’s own words. Edited deftly, the film is Tyson’s autobiography coaxed brilliantly by the director. Like all autobiographies, it may contain embellishments and contradictions, but it is these very flourishes that give the movie its richness. Hearing the fallen champ editorialize allows audiences to discern the true essence of the man rather than reabsorb the media’s misrepresentation of a caricature based on cherry-picked facts. Never has a documentary done as much to redefine a single celebrity.

Josh Harris may not be as well known as Mike Tyson, though within his circles he may be equally notorious. The self-identified godfather of social media, Harris foresaw our fixation with internet-fueled self-aggrandizement and the desperate, insatiable narcissism fueled by Warhol‘s promised fifteen minutes. Harris conducted the Web’s earliest, eeriest and most outlandish experiments invading privacies and defiling personal spaces. Were he not so socially maladjusted himself — an Aspie with delusions of grandeur? — he’d likely be touted as one of Utne Reader’s 50 Visionaries or Time Magazine’s 100 Most Influential. Instead, he’s been reduced to a world-class vagabond, hunted by creditors and haunted by his own aspirations. Shot over ten years, WE LIVE IN PUBLIC spookily chronicles Harris’ import, impact and implosion, utilizing some of the very footage that both made his name and he’d hoped to further exploit. Directed cooly by Ondi (DiG!) Timoner, the documentary serves as her parable and his penance. WE LIVE IN PUBLIC is pertinent to everyone who now uses Facebook, Twitter or YouTube and has never bothered to read nor consider the fine print. Consequently, the movie is not only the most important documentary of the year, but quite possibly, the most important of our generation. How the Academy could overlook its significance defies reason. (Fortunately, WE LIVE IN PUBLIC is in theaters now, including its continuing run at The Varsity in Seattle.)

Finally, the third film is not a documentary and not yet(?) Oscar®-snubbed. However, it is likely the best movie of the year… and yet so few will see it. HUNGER, directed by Steve McQueen — the English visual artist not the late Ibsen-loving actor — is the finest example of visual storytelling in over a decade. Chronicling the infamous hunger strike of Bobby Sands, the movie fully explores the motives and options of imprisoned IRA members with nary a stitch of exposition save a stunning conversation smack dab in the middle of this masterpiece. Many have tried to depict the cruelty of incarceration, this is the first to succeed by allowing us to slowly suffer the indignities and sadism rather than simply shock us with snippets of it. The cast/ing is exceptional, though it feels less like acting and more like enduring. I’d dare anyone to watch HUNGER and not reconsider a stance on Justice and the penal system.  HUNGER is available now on Comcast On Demand for free. Buried within the listings of RHI straight-to-video horrors and Cinemax off-casts from the 80s, you can find the most powerful film of this or many years.

So, you have been forewarned and forearmed. You know Ava’s tastes. Argue her opinions at your own peril. (That would be one of the classic blunders. The other being never get involved in a land war in Asia.)

THE JOURNEY OF NATTY GANN

Set in harsh economic times during which everyone’s desperate for work and will do just about anything to care for their kids and their families — um, the 1930s, not today — a penniless man (Ray Wise) must accept a life-threatening gig out West and must leave before he can tell his daughter (Meredith Salenger) where he’s going. Impervious to the dangers, the young girl sets out to find her father. Lainie Kazan and John Cusack co-star in this ferocious, sentimental tale that plays like a cross between Jack London and Walter Farley. Ava approves…

“It was great. It was also interesting. It was out in nature. I didn’t like the dogfight. I mean it was interesting but it was scary. I wish people wouldn’t make the dogs do that, though I guess sometimes they do in real life. I guess that some of it was a teeny bit scary. The dad had to go on a trip because he was kind of poor so he got a job cutting down trees in Washington. He wanted to tell his daughter he was going but he couldn’t find her. So she tried to find him. She made one friend, a wolf. The wolf was really, really smart. Whenever somebody tried to do something bad to her, the wolf protected her. The wolf always had a good idea. He would run away and make her follow when there was trouble or tell her to hide while he would bite someone who was mean. Little kids* should not watch this.”

* Apparently, that constitutes kids 5 and under.

WHERE THE WILD THINGS ARE

I loved this book as a kid and cherish my copy autographed by Maurice Sendak. My initial qualms about its adaptation were quelled by the hiring of Spike Jonze and Dave Eggers, then by hearing David Bowie‘s spin on Arcade Fire‘s “Wake Up” play thru the trailer. While the song does not appear in the feature, the spirit of the tune and the soul of the original 16-sentence text pervade this artful recreation. The wild things replicate the look Sendak created and reveal the author’s inspiration for them, his own erratic, Semitic relatives. Voiced emphatically by Catherine O’Hara, Chris Cooper, Paul Dano, Lauren Ambrose, Michael Berry Jr. and Forest Whitaker(!), the creatures are meticulously realized, each distinct in tone and temperament. Towering above all (performances), however, is James Gandolfini as the most hopeful yet scarred wild thing, Carol. His turn is Oscar®-worthy, though I fear the Academy will overlook the actor forgetting there are people under those costumes. Despite my enthusiasm, Ava’s less enchanted…

“I didn’t really like it because it wasn’t exactly very interesting. I like movies that are a bit more scary. I liked the wild things. I liked the one that looked like a bull. Some things were a little scary but not really. It was especially scary when the boy ran away from his family. But he had to go under lots of bushes and lots of trees and on top of things. I would never do that because what would I have to eat or drink? I learned to be brave like the boy who ran away and saw the wild things and wasn’t scared. I like to read books so I guess I like the book a lot, better than the movie. Anyways, sometimes the books are better than the movies. And sometimes, the other way. P.S. Try to see this movie because you might like it a lot even though I did not.”

THE LITTLE MERMAID II: RETURN TO THE SEA

Disney’s first spin on THE LITTLE MERMAID is one of their more ingratiating efforts of that era (despite the controversy surrounding the phallic spire in the background of the movie’s initial promotional materials). The Howard Ashman-Alan Menken songs charm, sold by the sweet Jodi Benson and Samuel E. Wright as the rasta-fied crustacean, Sebastian. Of course, like James Bond pics, kid flicks are dependent on nasty villains and Pat Carroll‘s unctuous Ursula is one of Disney’s darkest. Wisely, the sequel retains these significant voice talents while it rehashes the antecedent’s storyline under the guise of a generational reversal of sorts. Banking on the comforts of familiarity, the movie succeeds. Ava is even more positive…

“I really liked it a lot because it was interesting and maybe a bit scary. But I wasn’t really scared, I guess. But I might have been a bit scared. It was interesting because Ursula was not in it, Morgana was. Morgana is Ursula’s sister. She wants to get the trident from Ariel’s dad. I was a bit nervous at some parts because I thought that something good or bad was going to happen. It all turns out well. I was really happy Sebastian and Scuttle and Flounder came back. The end.”

Apparently, making a decent sequel is not… inconceivable.

367 lbs of wax. from More Dust Than Digital on Vimeo.

“It’s not who we play. It’s how we play.” Indeed. Thank you, Bradie James.

With their scrappy 20-16 victory Sunday night, the Cowboys demonstrated they would no longer rise and fall in accordance with their competition. Instead, they focused on performing as best they could, which was well enough to win. And, they could always be good enough, provided the team and its leaders continue to preach accountability. Tony Romo told Sports Illustrated’s Peter King: “Each guy doesn’t have to do anything but his best. That’ll be good enough for us to make the plays we need.” As inspiring as the quarterback’s short sermon may be, there’s a more compelling reason to have Faith in the Cowboys’ current four-game win streak: they’re smiling.

It is easy to suggest this year’s squad is significantly improved due to the off-season dismissals of tabloid troublemakers Tank, T.O. and PacMan. Certainly, it’s a neat story-line, one that’s easy for overpaid football pundits to parse and pass on while patting management (and themselves) on the back. And surely, the departure of these shamed, selfish players is beneficial, but not nearly as much as the remaining roster’s improved attitude. Somehow, these Cowboys learned to have fun again and, in turn, they’re much more fun to watch. Tune in to pre-game coverage and you see the difference. Remember the home-opener against the Giants? Recall the cameras scanning the sidelines? Dallas looked tighter than Joan Rivers‘ face bathed with egg whites. There was little joy to be inferred from the expressions on players’ faces, just queasy anticipation. Flash ahead to the endzone celebration in Kansas City, when the Cowboys claimed an overtime victory that ought have been more easily earned. Giddy teammates kept piling on top of Miles Austin as if they were all Bobby Carpenter in search of a defensive stat. Yes, they were happy. This is the bigger contribution Austin has made ever since; Miles smiles and his boyish enthusiasm appears contagious. (His touchdowns and YAC don’t hurt either.) Did you catch the jubilant outbursts after Sunday night’s fourth-down stop of Donovan McNabb or after Jason Witten‘s clock-killing first-down grab? You would have thought everyone on the bench was going to Disneyland.

Did the Cowboys ever seem happy playing for Bill Parcells? No. Determined, maybe. Fearful, more likely. Did they ever seem happy playing for Jimmy Johnson? No. Confident, unquestionably. Arrogant, arguably. Those Super Bowl champs sure had swagger, but a lot less soul. They expected themselves to be brilliant and were blessed to have the talent and coaching to back their self-assured bluster. I am still not convinced that Wade Phillips is the best coach in the best of all possible worlds, but to be candid(e), in the midst of this modest win streak, he manages the team’s emotions well. (Better than Andy Reid manages the game clock, for sure.) And while today’s Dallas squad may lack the depth and star power of its early 90s counterparts, I much prefer these Cowboys’ spontaneous exultations. They recognize good fortune as what it is: the sum of effort and luck. As brilliantly as Troy Aikman quarterbacked, the precision of his play was far from mirthful. Compare that to Jay Ratliff‘s primal outbursts when knifing behind the line of scrimmage to stuff a run or squash a passer. #90 clearly loves the game as much as do kids in a sandlot. Yes, one could argue that only results matter, but perhaps its time to reconsider how we evaluate our success.

Ever since Michael Corleone instructed “It’s not personal. It’s strictly business.”, many Americans seem to have embraced the mob/ster mentality. True, Life is simpler when we ignore our ethical obligations to focus on every matter as ones to be weighed professionally, pragmatically. Leave the emotions. Take the cannolis. But we do so at the expense of our happiness.

This weekend, I remembered how much fun I have when I simply do my job. Well. I remembered how much satisfaction I derive from sharing whatever knowledge I have with others and how much audiences and students have to offer me when I truly listen. Most of all, I remembered to smile. A near year-long stretch of anxiety, insecurity and instability had left me almost paralyzed and while I could still curl my lips upwards, it was an effort, an effort incomparable to the pleasure derived from smiling involuntarily.

Surely, I am not alone in readjusting to hard times. While sinking, it may be natural to concentrate on bailing out rather than consider pitching it all in. Captains pride themselves on going down with their vessels, but is that courage or hubris? Sometimes, the best answer is abandoning ship; recognizing the value of the crew is greater than the failing means of transport. Desperate times call for new measures, not necessarily desperate ones. Sometimes the riddle isn’t sink or swim. The answer is sink AND swim! Stop worrying so much. If you don’t know how to swim, let a smile be your life preserver.

Check out the new list of playdates for Yun Suh‘s boundary-breaking documentary, Surely, CITY OF BORDERS has been or soon will be at a theater (very) near you.

LesGaiCineMad (Madrid, Spain)
http://www.lesgaicinemad.com/peliculas/documentales/city-of-borders
Tuesday October 30 10pm Lola Bar
Tuesday November 3 3pm Universidad Carlos III de Madrid

Gender Bender Film Festival (Bologna, Italy)
http://www.genderbender.it/ita/dettaglio.asp?id=285
Wednesday November 4 10:30pm Cinema Lumière

Regent Park Film Festival (Toronto, Ontario)
http://www.regentparkfilmfestival.com/filmbydate.html#borders
Friday November 6 7:30pm Nelson Mandela Park Public School

Global Visions Film Festival (Edmonton, Canada)
http://www.globalvisionsfestival.com/filminfo.php?fid=80
Sunday November 8 8:00pm (Closing Night) Stanley A. Milner Library Theatre

Reeling Film Festival (Chicago)
http://www.reelingfilmfestival.org/film.php?fid=42
Tuesday November 10 9:00pm Landmark Theater

BiMovie (Munich, Germany)
http://www.bimovie.de/links15/filmuebersicht.htm
Wednesday November 11 7:00pm Maxim Kino
Friday Novemer 13 7:00pm Maxim Kino

Aarhus Film Festival (Arhus, Denmark)
http://www.aarhusfilmfestival.dk/en/programme/love/
Friday November 13 2:30pm Ost for Paradis A

Queersicht Film Festival (Bern, Switzerland)
http://www.queersicht.ch/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=21&Itemid=24
Friday November 13 11:00pm Kino In Der Reitschule
Sunday November 15 1:00pm Kino In Der Reitschule

Holebi Film Festival (Leuven, Belgium)
http://www.holebifilmfestival.be/programma/film/921
Saturday November 14 8:00pm Cinema ZED
Tuesday November 17 5:00pm Cinema ZED

Other Israel Film Festival (Manhattan)
http://www.otherisrael.org/films
Sunday November 15 7:00pm JCC
Wednesday November 18 7:00pm Cinema Village

Temple Beith El Aptos (Santa Cruz)
http://www.tbeaptos.org/index.shtml
Monday November 16 Jewish Community Center

New Orleans Middle East Film Festival
http://nolamideastfilmfest.blogspot.com/2008/03/new-orleans-middle-east-film-festival.html
Saturday November 21 9:30pm Zeitgeist Multi-disciplinary Arts Center

Florence Queer Film Festival
www.florencequeerfestival.it

Young Rowan Isaacson was virtually unreachable until he escaped to a neighbor’s farm and mounted an old mare. His immediate, obvious and calming bond with the horse propelled his parents, Rupert and Kristen, to journey with their son to Mongolia to visit with wild horses and wily shamans. The trip is as cinematic as it is inconclusive, but it is this majestic trajectory and very indefinite messaging, ultimately, that is the documentary’s strength. Rowan’s parents are convinced the emotionally exhausting trek was beneficial; others suggest that THE HORSE BOY‘s improvement may be purely coincidental. It’s a conflict of correlation versus causality with the viewer left to draw their own conclusions. What is certain is that parental care and others’ acceptance is as pertinent in the response to Autism as shamanistic rituals and Western medical intervention.

THE HORSE BOY offers editorial insights from Temple Grandin, Roy Richard Grinker and Dr. Simon Baron-Cohen. (Yup, related. He’s Sacha‘s cousin.) I, for one, don’t believe Autism need be cured, just better understood. Perhaps it is an evolutionary “advancement,” a mutative adjustment to our changing society in which more and more people turn inwards, whether by genetic design or social media. (Consider the predictive experimentations of the Asperger’-addled Josh Harris documented in WE LIVE IN PUBLIC.) Or, perhaps it is a defensive upgrade to cope with a progressively dispassionate world. Either way, we gain nothing by denying Autism’s existence and have much to learn by accepting our own placement on its spectrum.

BONUS: For an earnest, elegant depiction of Asperger’s, check out the fictional feature, ADAM, headlined by Hugh Dancy, whose title performance ought be Oscar®-nominated though, sadly, is likely to be forgotten by awards season.

(And, if you need more, want more Trillin, check out my interview with the wit taped earlier this year at Words & Wine.)

(For more about Polanski, revisit my interview with the filmmaker’s unauthorized biographer, Christopher Sandford.)

What Whoopi Goldberg (‘Not a Rape-Rape’), Harvey Weinstein (‘So-Called Crime’) et al. Are Saying in Their Outrage Over the Arrest of Roman Polanski

by CALVIN TRILLIN

A youthful error? Yes, perhaps.
But he’s been punished for this lapse–
For decades exiled from LA
He knows, as he wakes up each day,
He’ll miss the movers and the shakers.
He’ll never get to see the Lakers.
For just one old and small mischance,
He has to live in Paris, France.
He’s suffered slurs and other stuff.
Has he not suffered quite enough?
How can these people get so riled?
He only raped a single child.

Why make him into some Darth Vader
For sodomizing one eighth grader?
This man is brilliant, that’s for sure–
Authentically, a film auteur.
He gets awards that are his due.
He knows important people, too–
Important people just like us.
And we know how to make a fuss.
Celebrities would just be fools
To play by little people’s rules.
So Roman’s banner we unfurl.
He only raped one little girl.

“…astonishing and thoroughly masterful… by several light years — the finest and truest film yet on the moral and emotional repercussions of the 15-year-old genocide that wracked Rwanda. Pic’s supremely confident, simple storytelling and relaxed, slightly impressionist visual style follow a conflict that emerges between two friends as one makes a long-delayed homecoming. This is, flat-out, the discovery of this year’s Un Certain Regard batch.”

Donations will fund reconciliation and micro-development practices in Rwanda. Please consider attending this very special event.

Below, the details…

October 17 – One Show Only!
MUNYURANGABO
Dir: Lee Isaac Chung
2008, Rwanda, USA / Color, Video / 97 min.

Come see the film MUNYUNRANGABO and help support a reconciliation project in Rwanda. Winner of film festivals, Roger Ebert says this story “involves one of those miracles that can illuminate the cinema.” Your ticket funds reconciliation practices and micro development practices in Rwanda. In 1994, Rwanda suffered a horrific genocide where over 1 million people lost their lives in a span of three months. The communities of Rwanda now have to reconcile in a difficult economic environment that is made even more challenging by the communal rift that exists between the perpetrators and survivors of the genocide. Sponsored by Groundwork Opportunities who will be available to answer questions after the showing.

Purchase your ticket by making a $20 (or more) donation at http://www.groundworkopportunities.org/projects/rwanda.htm you will receive an email from GO to confirm your seat. With only 60 seats available, and our web guy still working in Africa, we’re using this creative method to assure you a place at the screening. We look forward to seeing you there!

Doors open at 11:30am. 12pm showtime.

Of course, there was no guarantee they’d all make the pros, but I can guarantee that ten of you will win MORE THAN A DREAM prize packages that include:

* Run-of-engagement passes good for two to see MORE THAN A DREAM

* a MORE THAN A DREAM t-shirt

* a LeBron James headband

* a MORE THAN A DREAM soundtrack

* a MORE THAN A DREAM mini-poster

To win these exclusive prize packages, all you have to do is remit your answer to the following compound question by Friday, October 16th at 10am:

Who is the greatest athlete of all time… and why?

Winners will be determined by the wisdom and whimsy with which they are presented. To enter, just take your answer to the post (this one) or e-mail me at warren@thewarrenreport.com

And now, a little more about the movie…

Five talented young basketball players from Akron, Ohio star in this remarkable true-life coming of age story about uncommon friendship in the face all too common adversities. Coached by a charismatic but inexperienced player’s father, and led by future NBA superstar LeBron James, the “Fab Five’s” improbable seven-year journey leads them from a decrepit inner-city gym to the doorstep of a national high school championship. Along the way, the close-knit team is repeatedly tested-both on and off the court-as James’ exploding worldwide celebrity threatens to destroy everything they’ve set out to achieve together. MORE THAN A GAME combines a series of unforgettable one-on-one interviews with rare news footage, never-before-seen home videos and personal family photographs to bring this heart-warming and wholly American story to life.

MORE THAN A GAME is written by Kristopher Belman & Brad Hogan and directed by Kristopher Belman. The film features LeBron James, Sian Cotton, Dru Joyce III, Willie McGee, Romeo Travis and Coach Dru Joyce II.

A Lionsgate film, 102 minutes, rated PG

Bremen Queer Film Festival
http://www.facebook.com/l/c28d9;www.queerfilm.de/6/film_anzeige6.php?id=361
Wednesday October 14, 2009 6 p.m.

Tampa International Gay & Lesbian Film Festival
http://www.facebook.com/l/c28d9;www.tiglff.com/film.cfm?filmid=117
Thursday October 15, 2009 7:30 p.m. Muvico Baywalk

Reel Affirmations Film Festival
http://www.facebook.com/l/c28d9;reelaffirmations.bside.com/2009/films/cityofborders_reelaffirmations2009
Sunday October 18, 2009 12 p.m. DC Jewish Community Center

Barcelona International Gay & Lesbian Film Festival
http://www.facebook.com/l/c28d9;www.barcelonafilmfestival.org/2009/uk/city_of_borders.htm
Monday October 19, 2009 7:30 p.m. National Film Theater

Seattle Lesbian & Gay Film Festival
http://www.facebook.com/l/c28d9;seattlelgff.bside.com/2009/films/cityofborders_seattlelgff2009
Tuesday October 20, 2009 6:00 p.m. Egyptian Theater

Copenhagen Gay & Lesbian Film Festival
http://www.facebook.com/l/c28d9;www.cglff.dk/film/index.php?film=52
Sunday October 18, 2009 4:45 p.m. Cinemateket
Thursday October 22, 2009 4:45 p.m. Cinemateket
Saturday October 24, 2009 2:15 p.m. Cinemateket

Boston Palestine Film Festival
http://www.facebook.com/l/c28d9;bostonpalestine.bside.com/2009/films/cityofborders_bostonpalestine2009;jsessionid=1C9ECE5EAE44A1D991A4E83B1FD4E8D8
Thursday October 22, 2009 7:00 p.m. Boston Museum of Fine Arts

United Nations Association Film Festival
http://www.facebook.com/l/c28d9;www.unaff.org/2009/f_city.html
Friday October 23, 2009 8:20 p.m. Stanford University – Cummings Art Building

Viennale International Film Festival
http://www.facebook.com/l/c28d9;www.viennale.at/en/viennale/
Wednesdsay October 28, 2009 12:00 a.m. Urania
Saturday October 31, 2009 1:30 p.m. Künstlerhaus

Seattle Magazine has published an article trying to identify the city’s next (first?) breakout auteur. I was interviewed for the piece and was relegated to only a couple of quotes. Strangely, they skipped my more insightful/sardonic remarks for two more hopeful comments. Am I a changed man? Kinder? Gentler? Sober? You decide. You can read Jamie Friddle’s article right here.

Once you have, cast your vote here for Seattle’s brightest (directorial) star. Not to peddle influence, but my pick is David Russo of THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION OF LITTLE DIZZLE.

The Warren Report

This Friday night, the 14th Annual Seattle Lesbian & Gay Film Festival kicks off with its Opening Night Gala Screening of AN ENGLISHMAN IN NEW YORK, starring the inimitable John Hurt. Readers of The Warren Report can attend for half-price! That’s right, for only $15 — rather than thirty — you can see the movie and meet a member of its amazing cast, Denis O’Hare, whose prior credits include MILK, MICHAEL CLAYTON and Alan Ball‘s True Blood. To order your exclusively discounted tickets — which cover both the movie and the party to follow! — visit Brown Paper Tickets and, when prompted, type in The Warren Report‘s specially-assigned code: WRNGF09   **Please note this discount is available only for advance purchases. It will NOT be available at the door.**

After the film and post-show frivolity, return to The Warren Report and provide your reviews, please. I’d love to know what you THINK of the ENGLISHMAN.

And now, a few more details from SLGFF‘s rambunctious Rachael B…

Opening Night Gala of

The 2009 Seattle Lesbian & Gay Film Festival
October 16, 2009       7:30pm
Egyptian Theatre

AN ENGLISHMAN IN NEW YORK

In the highly anticipated AN ENGLISHMAN IN NEW YORK, John Hurt reprises his role as Quentin Crisp, this time in the latter years of the legend’s life. The film begins in the late ‘70s when Crisp is invited to New York to dispense his unique brand of advice from the stage in an one-man off-Broadway show called “How to Be A Happy Person.” The tumultuous love affair between the wry eccentric and the Big Apple begins instantly upon his arrival; the bond is cemented when he attains resident alien status based on his “unique qualities.” Through the years, his talent and wit bring a host of uncommon characters into his circle, but it’s also that same outspoken nature that occasionally puts him at odds with the gay community.

With an outstanding ensemble cast that includes Denis O’Hare, Swoosie Kurtz, Jonathan Tucker, and Cynthia Nixon, and a nostalgic, infectious soundtrack, AN ENGLISHMAN IN NEW YORK will please both longtime fans of Quentin Crisp and those encountering this delightful, prolific, and influential gay pioneer for the first time.

Your ticket includes the Opening Night Gala at Sodo park, 3200 First Ave. S. Enjoy delicious food and taste a variety of refreshing beverages–all included in your ticket price.

Leave your car at the Egyptian Theatre and hop on the big yellow bus, which will provide round trips from the Egyptian Theatre to Sodo Park. Ample parking will also be available.

In person: Denis O’Hare MILK, MICHAEL CLAYTON and Alan Ball‘s True Blood)

Link to the film description and watch the trailer:
http://seattlelgff.bside.com/2009/films/anenglishmaninnewyork_seattlelgff2009

Link to buy tickets:
http://www.brownpapertickets.com/event/83568

The special code for Warren Report members to get $15 tickets (half price) is:
WRNGF09

Having recently opted not to renew the lease on my car — in order to be green and save green — I have enjoyed walking and endured busing. So nice to watch this and be alerted to the potential joys of the latter. Take a look and let me know if I’ll soon see you on the 17.

The Cowboys went the distance, but the journey sure was rocky. In overtime, they edged the Chiefs, 26-20, in the least publicly convincing win since Bush beat Gore. As then, the outcome has polarized the country, leaving experts and enthusiasts to reveal their glasses: half-empty or fully rose-colored. Consciously or not, Dallas fans, no matter where they reside, now live in a blue state, grateful for the win, yet fearful of the future. Sad.

Of course, it didn’t have to be this way. The team could have met expectations, whether reasonable or not, and trounced the Kansas City squad that previously had shown so little life the game was previewed as the Cowboys’ triumphant weekend at Bernie’s. But Dallas failed to bury their opponents, instead intent on self-destruction; a muffed punt and bungled snap gave KC an early and panic-inducing ten point lead. The ‘boys response to this disastrous start could be analyzed as indicative of the remainder of the season.

So, what have we learned?

First, what we haven’t:  Reflexive evaluations of single-game performances are pointless. Yes, Miles Austin had a record-setting day. He caught ten balls (and more tackles) for 250 yards receiving… and two touchdowns that established the late lead, then won the game. However, note he also dropped other passes that could have negated the need for his fifth quarter heroics. He is still a work in progress, not the second coming of Bob Hayes. Tony Romo posted good numbers yet still has Miles to thank and miles to go before I sleep. Let’s skip the weekly flip-flop between anointing and finger-pointing. The quarterback’s progress will only be determined at (post?) season’s end.

Instead,  let’s consider the demeanor of two key figures, Wade Phillips and Jay Ratliff. Their differences are as telling as the final score. They model the superlative extremes of leadership, the much ballyhooed intangible too often ascribed to the loudest and/or most charismatic. Neither the coach nor the nose tackle meet this base criteria, but their behaviors mark the distinction between being a character and having character. Jay Ratliff is as solid an individual as he is a player. Considered under-sized for his defensive role, Ratliff has proven last year’s Pro Bowl selection was neither a popularity contest nor a fluke. Ratliff’s seemingly unshakable self-confidence fuels his refusal to be double-teamed, doubted or defeated. Rather than rally the troops histrionically, he lets his play set the standard. It has all season. He may have only had four tackles yesterday, but his block of Ryan Succop‘s fourth-quarter field goal attempt was testament to his talent and determination, a model for his teammates. Vaulting the narrow gap between two blockers, he swatted down the potential game-changer as if furious the Chiefs would even dare think of taking the lead again. More tellingly, in his post-game comments, Ratliff deflected credit as thoroughly as he had the kick. “You’ve got a guy like Igor as big and strong as he is and Spears doing the same thing, getting low, it just opened up a path for me.” Say what he will, it is clear watching the replay: Ratliff single-handedly altered the course of the afternoon. Had the Chiefs scored then, the Cowboys may have deflated, as aware as the fans of their meltdowns versus the Giants and the Broncos. Ratliff’s effort allowed Austin to shine as the day’s lone star of Texas.

On the other hand and on the sideline, Wade Phillips continues to demonstrate why he is unfit for his nominal title as Head Coach. He is simply playing the role and doing so poorly. One could argue this is a consequence of Jerry Jones‘s puppetry, but even if the owner is pulling some strings, Phillips’ cornpone act is more wooden than Pinocchio‘s, pre-wish. Hi-diddle-dee-dee-yee-ha, folks. Wade ignores sloppy play during games and excuses it after the fact, wishing upon his “stars” as if they were all as sage and capricious as Jiminy Cricket. Granted, not all coaches need spout fire, but sporting a pulse seems a minimal requirement. I am positive that every single Dallas fan gnashed teeth, clenched fists and shouted epithets after the defense accrued four offsides penalties in a single drive… and Marion Barber remained in the backfield when clearly hampered and Tashard Choice was having a better day… and Alan Ball enabled the Chiefs to convert on 3rd and 26. Don’t get me wrong. Phillips didn’t remain calm. (That could be perceived as leadership of a Landry-esque sort.) Worse, Phillips didn’t react at all. If ever the answer on Jeopardy is “Nothing,” the question should be: What Would Wade Do? Now there’s a bumper sticker for the uninspired.

What Wade can’t muster and Jay thrives on, is rage. Ratliff looks back in anger and avenges his teammates’ failures on the next play. Wade seems content just to have a job… which is somewhat understandable given how many remind he should be unemployed. However, the coach should not and can not be satisfied. If the owner won’t fire him, Wade owes it to everyone else to get fired up. Bench Bobby Carpenter. Move Crayton to the slot. Tell Garrett to dumb it down and dial up a few plays for Martellus. Get involved. Get angry.

In the face of personal adversity, I have questioned my own strength and considered withdrawal. (Run away. Run away!) It is easy for Fatigue to triumph in Crisis. Sleeplessness, self-doubt and sloppy performance can overwhelm Ego. I know. In these times of financial hardship and individual malaise, my fight-or-flight mechanism malfunctions, swinging wildly between the two preservational options. Unchecked, I can become hermetic or hysteric. In retreat, I am certain to lose all. In combat, though, Anger may propel me to unanticipated reward/s.

Victory is impossible if we refuse to compete and highly unlikely if we passively accept the possibility or repercussions of defeat. It is time for all of us to follow Ratliff’s lead or, better yet, adopt Rocky Balboa‘s attitude. In his climactic rematch with Clubber Lang, (see: ROCKY III) the southpaw takes a beating all the while taunting his opponent: “You’re not so bad. You’re not so bad. You’re nothing.” The pounding worries Apollo Creed, now in Rocky’s corner, until Paulie explains his brother-in-law’s strategy: “He’s not getting killed, he’s getting mad.”

You’ve taken enough body blows and upper cuts. Get mad, Cowboys. Get mad.

* Photo credit: (AP Photo/Charlie Riedel)

(Note that this is part five of an ongoing series. To read Lesson #1, please click here.)

Author M.J. Ryan is a crisis climatologist, an expert aggregator of strategies fro coping with Change. Her latest book AdaptAbility: How to Survive Change You Didn’t Ask For is a survival guide for those floored by financial recessions or spousal transgressions, lost jobs or lost hopes.

Recently, I hosted the inspiringly calm Ms. Ryan at The Good Life. While we covered a lot of ground, a few questions remained. She’s been gracious enough to answer my follow-up queries below. Read on… then head for your local bookstore. Or order AdaptAbility: How to Survive Change You Didn’t Ask For by clicking on the title.

WARREN: Maya Angelou leads by example: “I can be changed by what happens to me. but I refuse to be reduced by it.” Easier said than done, yes? How do we stay positive when confronted by significant adversity?

M.J.: I think what she’s talking about is not equating your self image with your circumstances. It’s easy when something fails–a business, a marriage, a job–to take it personally, to think, “I’m a loser.” Of course it’s important to acknowledge our part, but it’s also crucial that we stay out of shame because shame is a toxic emotion that keeps us stuck. When I work with folks who feel ashamed, I ask them to come up with 7 reasons outside of themselves that the bad thing happened. And 7 things that are good and true about themselves even now.

Ultimately we need to change our attitude toward “failure” and “mistakes.” The more we can adopt a growth mindset, that life is about learning and that everything good or bad is a chance to learn, the happier and more successful we’ll be. It’s the reason, by the way, that Iceland is the happiest country in the world, according to Eric Weiner author of The Geography of Bliss.

If you want to learn more about a growth mindset, see Carole Dweck‘s work as well as my book Trusting Yourself, which teaches you how to see your life as a learning journey.

WARREN: The Quakers speak of the “way open” and the “way closed.” As one can often mimic the other, how do we, accurately, discern the difference?

M.J.: This is such an important question and one that’s really hard to generalize about. Because there is always a chance that if you just keep pushing harder or try another tactic, you will succeed. For me, ultimately, it comes down to the risk you’re willing to take with your well being. I personally wouldn’t gamble on myself financially beyond a certain comfort zone. I’d want to preserve a cushion and so would be willing to walk away from a business idea that didn’t appear to be working before I invested my last dime. When it comes to people, however, I am incredibly persistent. I’m not sure that I wouldn’t still be unhappily in my previous relationship, still trying to make it work if I hadn’t been dumped. Because it’s very hard for me to give up on a human being.

If you feel like you’re not sure, besides the counsel of your own deepest wisdom, I’d suggest seeking out others and ask them to give you a reality check. Ultimately I don’t think we have the right to judge anyone for their choices in these things because we all have to live with ourselves.

WARREN: You suggest that distancing oneself from Failure is critical to surviving Change. But how far can you remove yourself from Failure before you’re up that Egyptian creek, Denial, without a paddle?

M.J.: …If you truly embrace learning then you are not in denial. Besides asking yourself what can I learn from this, you can also ask others what you should be learning and ask how what they say is true. It’s a great antidote to denial.

WARREN: You tout the significance of transparency. As Change remains a buzzword in political campaigns might politicians improve their electoral odds – or better yet, the country! – by adopting Transparency as the mantra, if not their m.o.?

M.J.: The more people feel like they are part of the thinking about what’s going on, the more they will be able to adapt to change. However, it has to be genuine on the part of the ones asking, not something their management consultants advised and they do in a pro forma way. Because of brain cells called mirror neurons we can feel the emotional intentions of others and so sincerity is crucial for transparency to work.

WARREN: Is it a small world, after all? You work with clients and lead workshops worldwide. Have you discovered any vast differences in how other cultures cope with change?

M.J.: All of my clients around the world are in the corporate world, which each have their own company cultures which often transcend geography. That being said, one of the cultures I’ve gotten exposure to in the last few years is the Arab world. They tend to be much more feelings based than Europeans and so are more comfortable with strong emotional expressions at work. They want to talk about change and experience one another’s feelings about it, where Americans and Europeans try to be more “business-like.”

WARREN: You advise that individuals build their brands. Certainly, this is applicable to many, particularly those in creative fields, but if you’re day laborer, a parts-assembler, a housewife, are there brands to build and to whom are you marketing them?

M.J.: I am not enamored of the word “brand.” I used it because it is a concept that so many people have embraced. Here’s what I really mean–you need to understand your gifts and talents, what you uniquely bring to any situation whether a housewife or a day laborer. Know what those are enables you to promote yourself better–here’s what I offer–in situations when you need to market yourself. But they’re important to know also in other situations, like why you might be a great mother but terrible at housework (strong at relational thinking, weak in procedural). It helps us know who we need to partner with and what we might want to let go of.

WARREN: Studies show that the average brain generalizes from an “example of one.” Frightening, but true. Are their exercises we can do to counter our tendency to simplify our predictive abilities?

M.J.: One is to be aware of this tendency to generalize and to ask ourselves when we believe something, who says? What has led us to conclude that? What are other perspectives we aren’t considering? To ask others: What I am not thinking of? Where am I wrong?

WARREN: Is resilience truly common as you imply or is resilience only common when the crisis is? Yes, united, we stand. But divided, are we doomed?

M.J.: It’s often the case that we are at our best in crisis or our worst. I think it brings out both of those things. The beauty of understanding the common behaviors that create resiliency is that we can then learn them, as the field of positive psychology has been finding and teaching for the past 10 years. We can change for the better and use those habits whenever we want to. Easy? No, but with practice we can create healthier habits. I know because I have done it and helped many other folks as well. Do it perfectly? Never, the old pathways are still there and under stress we tend to jump the tracks to the old low road. But more and more choose higher brain functioning and healthier behavior? Absolutely, that’s the amazing thing about being human. We have the ability to change until we draw our last breath.

WARREN: Worst-case scenario: Fall turns to Nuclear winter. In a post-apocalyptic world, do theories of AdaptAbility apply or is it everyone for her or himself?

M.J.: I have no idea, only fervent prayers that we turn toward one another in compassion and caring, now and in the future.

Thanks Warren for all your work and your great questions.

You’re welcome, MJ. Just for you, I’ll never change.  ;  )

(AP Photo/ Jack Dempsey )

It is easier to find ways to lose than win. And, over the past couple of seasons, it often seems Jason Garrett has stuffed the Cowboys playbook with Ivy League strategies for defeat. Yesterday, the coordinator’s offensive modifier took on an unfortunate double meaning. Fans and critics are right to question his final two, goal-line calls that doomed Dallas to a 10-17 heart-breaker in Denver. While there were countless penalties and questionable calls prior to these tactical miscues and some horrendous clock management — at the end of both halves — the team still had a chance to tie (and thus win), with seconds to go and the best-possible field position to do so. They tried, they failed. Worse, they looked foolish doing so. They ought be ashamed. Clearly some are. But Shame is fickle: it inspires some and conquers others.

A loss is a loss no matter how it’s accrued. No one credits the 2008 Detroit Lions for any moral victories. They were winless. That’s what was recorded and that’s what we’ll remember. And as that hapless team proved just as the Tampa Bay Buccaneers did decades earlier, losing can be habit-forming. But why? Is it lack of talent or a troubled mindset, an unconscious indulgence of “negative visualization?”

The Cowboys are confounding because they don’t lose all the time, just half the time. They have proven their ferocious inconsistency over the past 24 games. Their 12-12 tally during this stretch suggesting they are no more capable of stringing together back-to-back victories, than a praying mantis’s mate might score a second date. So, it is reasonable to assume they have enough ability to win but not the will power to execute when they must.

The Dallas defense improves weekly, fueled, I suspect, by Keith Brooking whose post-game comments reflect a positive response to Shame. Despite his personal, on-field success, he recognizes that he and his teammates must still do more. Practice harder. Play harder. Accept nothing but the desired results. He did not celebrate his fourth-down run stuff with the press, he focused on the plays that slipped away and how to insure they won’t happen again. He hounded the Broncos from sideline to sideline, hurdling some to make tackles no one would have blamed him had he missed. (Wouldn’t you love to hear Anthony Spencer state a similar desire to refocus this week or acknowledge his uncanny capacity for the near-miss big play?)

But its tough to blame the ‘Boys’ defense. Considering the presumed firepower of the offense, Dallas should still have been able to win. Thus, we turn to an offensive unit which could score only one touchdown while handing seven points right back to the opponents when Tony Romo coughed up the ball on a blind-side hit that everyone felt coming but him. It has become as easy to pick apart the quarterback as it is for Champ Bailey to pick him off… and this warranted criticism may itself be the root of Romo’s infuriating play under pressure. If anything, he puts too much on himself. He’s begun to hear voices (like Roy Williams may begin hearing footsteps after having been hung out mid-field in the fourth quarter). Jason Witten has alluded to his buddy’s internalization of defeat and if you revisit his reaction to the Seattle Slip, it seems clear that he takes it all very personally. Then, when he attempts to play it off — as he did so last year, reacting to the season-ending loss to the Eagles with an oratorial ineptitude matched only by Miss South Carolina in 2007 — he is chastised more harshly. (Trust that I believe, deservedly so.) In all the off-season chatter about leadership, he overlooked the most important element that it is not so much what you say as what you do. The answers don’t matter, the attitude does. Romo is so concerned about making the right choices — whether when addressing reporters or reading defenses — that he is disassembling the very traits that made him successful in his first season. He is an instinctive player who is allowing Shame to change him rather than charge him.

Jason Garrett is victim of his self-regard as well. Originally touted as a boy-genius, only to have the title stripped after last year’s late-season meltdowns, the OC’s become pre-occupied with restoring his rep rather than doing whatever it may take to win. How else to explain his bull-headed goal-line play-calling against both the Broncos and, a week earlier, the Panthers? Versus Carolina, a single run would have sufficed. Versus Denver, give Witten or Williams a shot at the game-tying touchdown. (If Roy’s the anointed number one receiver, he ought be on the field no matter how much his ribs might ache.) Garrett seems intent on proving his smarts when all Dallas need do is dominate. As much as I admired the finesse of Tom Landry‘s teams, at some point, at the goal line, brute force tops brain power. Garrett is allowing Shame — and his professional stock value, perhaps — to dictate strategy rather than Garrett allowing his best players a chance to dictate the outcomes in squeakers.

I empathize. I have experienced Shame on levels multiplied by a “nurtured” self-loathing and a wavering sense of worth. In good times, my ego overrides Shame’s heckling. I hear its jeers as challenges. That’s easy. But in crisis, as I am now, as the Cowboys are now, Shame’s critiques are amplified and I am felled, temporarily paralyzed, incapable of drowning out the droning self-doubt it conjures. I will try to follow Keith Brooking’s example. No, I will follow his example. First, I will disavow the disclaimer “try to,” permitting myself only the possibility of betterment. I will place my failures behind me more rapidly and resolutely, refusing to succumb to the grief they have and can inflict. Instead, I will acknowledge these mistakes but refuse to repeat them, judging myself only on my record from here on out.

Today is the first day of the rest of the season. The Cowboys can choose to linger on their disappointing play and replicate these results week in and week out. Or, they can make a contract with themselves to forbid the Shame of under-achievement to sabotage their playoff potential. On any given Sunday, Dallas can beat any other team in the league. On any given Sunday, Shame, handled wisely, can help them win.

(Note that this is part four of an ongoing series. To read Lesson #1, please click here.)

Barlow boasts chutzpah and craftsmanship. With the audacious assistance of director Maria Aitken, this adaptation unspools energetically on stage. The technical cleverness of the production is worth the price of admission. How often will you see a train-top chase or NORTH BY NORTHWEST‘s bi-plane rundown materialize below a proscenium arch? No question there is enough flash to stun theater-goers and to appease movie-lovers. But what about the laughs? Barlow recognizes the humor in the time-honored. He re-plays the screenplay’s set-ups at 78rpm, an obvious and successful student of the louder, faster, funnier school. He also indulges the cheap seats with shouts-out to many of Hitchcock’s most famous titles, allowing even the dimmest patron to feel in on the joke/s. However, both creator and cast have trouble nailing the essence of camp, thus far, failing to transition from note-hitting send-up to irreverent, yet earnest, homage. Ludlam’s genius was his ability to satirically deconstruct classics while secretly celebrating their enduring magic. Ludlam, with partner Everett Quinton, could plunge a dagger into Shakespeare‘s back while smilingly shaking his hand and being honored to make the acquaintance. It is conceivable that this cast will eventually come closer, but at the preview I saw — the first, I believe — the actors appeared preoccupied with hitting their marks moreso than embracing the duality of their roles. Camp is best when its players can maintain the veracity of the characters while still engaging the audience by luxuriating in the theatrical artifice and textual tomfoolery. (I suspect that Scott Parkinson and Eric Hissom, already amusing, will come closest to fully embodying the spirit.)

THE 39 STEPS surpasses the two cinematic remakes (1954, 1978) and provides a diverting night-out capable of making me neglect — never forget! — Hitchcock while pining for the absence of Ludlam.

I prayed Miyazaki wouldn’t let me down.

With that in mind, I provide the second installment of The Ava Report, our father-daughter tag-team reviews of family films. Whether you learn anything from us is another matter altogether.

PONYO

As much as I admire Pixar for the consistency of their story-telling and their advancement of computer-generated animation, it is Hayao Miyazaki whose work I truly revere. His old-school approach, simple yet mature plotting and complex emotional content make every one of his movies a kids’ classic. PONYO, surely, is not his best, and still, the Master’s spin on The Little Mermaid charms with its mix of mystery, magic and humanity. The pace is markedly un-American and that is a bonus. Thankfully, Ava was rapt throughout, but did she buy in?

“In the beginning, it was pretty funny. It was really funny when PONYO was telling all her sisters to [hide] because she wants to go up to the surface and if they say a lot, their dad will find out and tell PONYO she can’t go. This part was the funniest but the rest was a really good movie. I don’t think I really learned much but it was still a good movie. Maybe there’s a lesson that you should believe in magic… because PONYO is magic. And the boy learns to believe. Everyone does. Even the old people. But I think the guy who made it could have told me more.”

Back to the drawing board, Hayao?

CLOUDY WITH A CHANCE OF MEATBALLS

Must everything be in 3-D now? I have yet to see the family film that benefits from the embellishment and, frankly, my daughter along with many of her peers seem somewhat jarred by the technology. (Ava preferred watching most of G-FORCE without her recyclable glasses… while I’d have preferred a blindfold for that one.) Distractions aside, CLOUDY engages just enough to prevent parental boredom, though it still provokes the critical chestnut: the book’s better than the movie. What did Ava takeaway from the adaptation…?

“It’s pretty funny because it’s true that water can NOT turn into food. The lesson is if one thing doesn’t work out the first time, you should keep trying. I like that. It’s true. You have to try. That’s the most important thing. The ratbirds were funny because they were half rats and half birds and they can take away little kids. It’s funny because usually rats are pretty mean but birds are really nice so I don’t know why [they're] bad because birds are supposed to be nice.”

Check back later this week for my longer post sparked by CLOUDY‘s edible forecast, along with its odd relation to THE INFORMANT!

CHRISSA STANDS STRONG

At Rain City Video, sometimes, we just take a chance. I spied this dvd — from the American Girl series — and thought, what the heck. Ava is starting to lean towards live-action features and this seemed innocuous enough. CHRISSA plays like an Afterschool Special… as made by professionals. Directed by Martha Coolidge(!) and starring Timothy Bottoms, Annabeth Gish and Jennifer Tilly, the movie follows the title character as she relocates to a new town and an new, inhospitable homeroom. Life is tough for the fourth grader, but did my first-grader relate?

“I love this one. There is a lesson that you should be brave because it shows you that you should stand up to bullies. The bullies weren’t nice at all. I know I will be brave when I face bullies now because if I do, I will find friends who will be on my side. No one likes a bully. I would tell you more but you probably would want to see it yourself.”

Gotta love a critic who knows better than to provide spoilers. CHRISSA STANDS STRONG is worth the watch. And while parents may learn little, it is a delight to see little ones embrace bigger life lessons. After all, that’s what the movies are for, right?

© AP Photo/Ralph Lauer

(Note that this is part three of an ongoing series. To read Lesson #1, please click here.)

Lesson #3: Be careful how you are identified. Labels have a tendency to stick.

Tony Romo is an elite quarterback.  Terrence Newman is a shutdown corner. Roy Williams is a #1 receiver. The Dallas Cowboys are perennial Super Bowl contenders. All of the above may, or may not, be true. Doesn’t matter. The labels have been affixed, the team and the players identified. They will be judged.

Last night, Dallas played their second home game in their new, Brobdingnagian stadium. Last week, they lost to Giants. Last night, they stood tall over the Liliputian Panthers, winning 21-7. However, like Gulliver on his travels, it is important to note the globe-trotter never changed, the team hasn’t shape-shifted, only the scale of those they’ve encountered have, and yet, judgements are drawn according to the the varying specs of their competitors rather than in relation to the team’s own true measurements. Thus, the first problem with labels is that they fail to recognize context. Beating Carolina’s 0-3 squad led by Jake Delhomme, a quarterback whose shoulder and confidence haven’t fully recovered from 2008 is no more proof of Dallas’ might than the last-second loss to New York served notice that the Cowboys are dust… mites.

Back in the ’70s, a couple of supermarket chains introduced “no frills” products. Others experimented with the concept. By the early ’80s, “generic brand” items populated shelves, distinguished by their hype-less, black-on-white labeling. Customers could buy “no name” green beans, cake mix or cola. And while sales briefly surged — a reflection of the tougher economic times, more likely, than a public embrace of Amish-envied “plainness” — the ‘labels’ Americans had previously attributed to these items led to their ultimate dissatisfaction with the brand-less contents regardless of taste. Cola’s not cola unless it’s Coke. Cake mix isn’t cake mix unless it’s boxed by Betty Crocker. Green beans aren’t green beans unless they’re canned by the Jolly Green Giant and Little Sprout. Thus, the second problem with labels is that they are prejudicial. Once we have the perception cemented in our minds we allow engineered expectation to color honest evaluation.

Most quarterback play fluctuates. Tony Romo throws for over 300 yards in the season-opener, throws three interceptions a week later then throws almost exclusively to Jason Witten last night. During this stretch, pigskin pundits have yo-yoed in their critiques; Romo’s gone from godsend to goat to bus-driver. Yet there is always the stink of disapproval Romo for not living up to the elite status they accorded him prematurely. But frankly, he’s the same guy week to week, a free agent find who idolizes Brett Favre and emulates both the best and worst of his hero’s actions, only the results vary… wildly. If you want the playmaker who, last night, threw a bold (unwise?) cross-field “screen” to Tashard Choice you must also accept the playmaker who threw an unwise (bold?) deep route that was picked off by New York’s Kenny Phillips last week. Tony Romo is not Troy Aikman. Don’t condemn him for not being a first-round draft pick with laser accuracy. That’s not Romo’s pedigree no matter how much you might argue it should be.

Clearly, Pro Bowl cornerback Terrence Newman likes a challenge. It seems his game improves when isolated on the opposing team’s star receiver as he was against the Panthers’ Steve Smith. Newman’s 4th quarter interception return for a touchdown sealed the victory for the ‘Boys against Carolina. A week earlier, Dallas played a soft zone — Newman included — that allowed the Giants’ Steve Smith to catch 10 passes for 124 yards. Did Newman’s coverage skills suddenly blossom or did the scheme and his teammates contribute to the difference in his quality of play?

But of all the Cowboys whose perception plagues him, currently, I relate most to Roy Williams. Acquired last year in a trade, Jerry Jones overpaid the Lions a first, third and sixth round draft pick for the rangy receiver. During the off-season, the Cowboys unloaded their premiere wide-out, Terrell Owens, and promoted Roy to #1. Consequently, everyone expects him to replace or replicate T.O.’s production when that has never been Williams’ m.o. He’s a possession receiver not a game-breaker and criticizing him for not being so is akin to blaming Jay-Z for not singing more like Judy Garland. This season, Roy’s made one spectacular play and failed to make a few catches you wish he would have. Sadly, though, most overlook that his contributions have been in keeping with a more accurate assessment of his talents. When thrown to, in traffic, on third downs, he converts. Lob him a jump ball and he’ll come down with it. Sadder still, watch closely, and you’ll see what most fail to note: the most dedicated downfield blocker the Cowboys have had in years. Dallas has had two consecutive games in which they’ve rushed for over 200 yards. Replay any of those longer runs and you’ll discover Roy making crucial blocks allowing his backs to scamper further. Truly, his dedication to this aspect of the game is award-worthy. T.O. may have flashed the ability to do the same, but R.W. is consistent in his efforts.

I empathize with Roy Williams because there have been many times in my life that I have felt judged by others’ presumptive desires for me rather than by any realistic analysis of my potential or acknowledgment of my passions. Having tested well as a kid, my intelligence was determined to allow me to succeed at anything “I put my mind to.” Of course, this universal, parental pat-on-the-back rarely calibrates for the fact that there are some things kids would just as soon as not put their minds to and other challenges they’re truly not equipped to overcome. This is not to suggest we shouldn’t try, but at some point, isn’t it smarter to play to your strengths than assume you can conquer all? Isn’t it wiser and more productive to hone your skills than to stretch to achieve mediocrity across the board? I will never be exactly the friend, lover or collaborator others wish I was. I work hard to accept and respond to constructive criticism and be respectful of others’ needs in these relationships, though I can never fully alter who I am at my core. I can be me. I am candid, sometimes abrasively so, but ask me for an opinion and I’ll proffer a well-considered one. (Everyone loves a straight-shooter until they’ve been shot.) I write this not to excuse any bad behavior — I am painfully aware of my faults — but to attempt to reduce the self-flagellation I inflict for my own shortcomings. Yes, I may suffer from external expectations but the penance I serve for my failure to adhere to others’ labeling is far more punishing.

So, as I learn to adjust my expectations of Roy Williams’ play in accordance with his capabilities and with admiration for his best traits, I will try to show myself a similar compassion. Rather than habitually critique myself for not being, say, a better-budgeter or friend-juggler, I will catalogue these mistakes and archive them. For the first time in my life, I fully understand the Serenity Prayer. (Forgive me, I pay about as much attention to prayer as I do Lady GaGa‘s lyrics.) I will accept the things I cannot change, courageously tackle the things I can and, if lucky, find the wisdom to know the difference.

In turn, I will not proclaim the Dallas Cowboys Super Bowl contenders after a victory of a dubious opponent nor will I write them off having failed to topple the NFC’s (current) best team. Three weeks into a season, labels needn’t be affixed. Let the team find its way. Play now, judge later.

(Note that this is part three of an ongoing series. To read Lesson #1, please click here.)

In BIG FAN, Patton Oswalt‘s loyalty to the New York Giants supersedes typical socialization. He maintains a humbling gig as a garage attendant, endures a humiliating home-life under his Mom’s roof and foregoes dating accepting self-gratification as a substitute for true love. His only friend is a fellow football fanatic who reveres Patton’s practiced late night calls to a local sports-radio jabberfest.

Both Oswalt and co-conspirator Kevin Corrigan — (t)his generation’s Christopher Walken — embody these lonely enthusiasts so convincingly, BIG FAN takes on the feel of peculiar surveillance video, at times. It is a tribute to writer and (debut) director Robert D. Siegel that their humanity shines through the desperate lunacy. Siegel, the former Editor-In-Chief of The Onion, tempers the satire with a sincerity that also guided his script for THE WRESTLER. Had distributor Fox Searchlight not been shilling so hard for SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE, chances are both Siegel and Darren Aronofsky would  have been Oscar®-nominated. (For my review of BIG FAN, click here.)

Mr. Siegel awarded me with answers to my ten questions below, and even if I can’t fully coax him to prognosticate, trust that his responses are as provocative as anything uttered by Jimmy The Greek.

BIG FAN is in theaters now. For venues and showtimes, click here.

WARREN: Many Americans love their sports more than their spouses. Why do men like Patton’s BIG FAN have an easier time relating to athletes than paramours?

ROBERT: Probably because they don’t have to actually deal with them. Sports fandom, unlike spousal fandom, is a one-way relationship. It’s just easier.

WARREN: BIG FAN and THE WRESTLER could be classified dramas, but both have their darkly comic edges. Does this explain the casting of Patton Oswalt… and Todd Barry and Judah Friedlander?

ROBERT: I’m not in favor of stunt-casting. Like, “Ooh! Look at the comedian in the drama! Wasn’t that a bold, brave casting choice?” It just so happens that those guys were right for those roles. They look the part. Also, I like actors who have interesting faces and, generally speaking, I find that there’s a higher percentage of comedians with interesting looks than dramatic actors. Take a look at the comedians who are out there, and you’ll find there’s a greater variety of shapes and sizes than there are in the world of dramatic actors, who tend to be more traditionally handsome and, by extension, less interesting to me. And, yes, the fact that those guys you mentioned have comedy chops is a plus. It’s important for me to have people who can be both funny and serious. And it’s easier to get a funny guy to be serious than to get a serious guy to be funny.

WARREN: Is sports radio the last bastion of true discourse or just another example of how polarized our nation’s become?

ROBERT: I guess it depends on your definition of true discourse. As with any media, there’s good sports radio and bad sports radio. Some shows, you tune in and hear an intelligent, incisive exchange of ideas between host and caller about a the Jets’ decision to go for it on 4th and 9. And some shows, you hear some crazy dude ranting about how the Raiders are gonna kick the Broncos asses on Sunday. It’s really no different than political talk. Some shows are Charlie Rose, some are Bill O’Reilly.

WARREN: Growing up, every kid who loves football wants, initially, to play quarterback. When you entered into screenwriting, did you always want to direct? Is about the control… or the glamour?

ROBERT: No, I had no intention to direct, but looking back, I shouldn’t be surprised it went that way. I always gravitate toward positions of control. When I was with The Onion, I started out as a writer with no plans to move up the ladder, but within a couple years I found myself editor-in-chief. There’s just a part of me that likes to make decisions and delegate and do all that sort of authority/leadership stuff.

WARREN: Quiet on the set. Were you… even on the set at all for THE WRESTLER? If so, did you steal some directorial tricks from Darren for your debut feature?

ROBERT: Yes, I was on set during THE WRESTLER. What I stole, though, was not so much directorial tricks but crew members. I was in pre-production on BIG FAN when THE WRESTLER was shooting. And while on set, I’d go around to the different department heads trying to snag people for BIG FAN. I’d ask the sound guy if he had a talented young protegee who might be willing to work cheap for a good film credit. Same with wardrobe, makeup, etc. That’s where a lot of my crew came from.

WARREN: BIG FAN was well-received at Sundance… but that’s an audience comprised of leisure-skiing, coke-snorting, filmmaking wannabes and studio reps. Seems like the ultimate presentation would to be to screen BIG FAN on jumbo-trons at football stadiums nation-wide. Would you care what the fans think?

ROBERT: Absolutely. As well-received as it was at Sundance, it plays better with non-film snobs. If I had my choice of this movie playing arthouses or malls, I’d take the malls.

WARREN: Quantrell Bishop is a fictive creation, yes? Any similarities to Plaxico Burress and his premature discharge are purely coincidental? Is QB reflective of any of your own idol worship?

ROBERT: Quantrell predates Plaxico by about six years. I wrote this movie in 2002, way before Plax tucked that gun into his sweatpants. Back at the time I wrote it, the big sports-world scandal that people thought the movie was based on was Ron Artest. He’s the Pacers player who went up into the stands in Detroit and punched a Pistons fan. This stuff has always been around and always will. As for whether this is reflective of my own idol worship, I’d have to say no. It’s basically just a story I made up.

WARREN: Presumably, the NFL did not cotton to your take on its fan base. Did you even try gaining the league’s support? Did you wish you could have shot a game, gone inside a stadium?

ROBERT: I never tried to get the league’s support. That just wasn’t going to happen. That said, I wasn’t looking to get sued by the league. I consulted very closely with a lawyer, who told me what was legally safe and what wasn’t. And going inside a stadium definitely wasn’t.

WARREN: The Giants are legitimate contenders this year. Care to offer a prediction regarding their November 1st trip to Philly to play the Iggles?

ROBERT: The Giants will beat the Eagles asses. Or vice-versa.

WARREN: Now, if I admit that I’ve been a Cowboys fan since I was five, will this interview be over?

ROBERT: It IS over.

OCTOBER 19, 2009

We’ve all seen them, documentaries built on boring, lifeless interviews. We’ve all read them, profiles that don’t even hint at the motives of the person behind the story.Warren Etheredge has spent a career interviewing filmmakers, authors and ordinary people on screen, in print and in person and has an uncanny ability to bring out insights his subjects never imagined they’d share. During this program Warren offers structures, tips and strategies to turn mundane questioning into the Art of interviewing. It is an art that Warren has honed in more than 1,000 professional interviews with such personalities as Amy Sedaris, Sir Salman Rushdie, Zack Braff, Michael Pollan and Naomi Watts. He is currently producing The Warren Report television series in which he conducts in depth interviews with filmmakers and experts on the issues brought up in their films. During this workshop you will not only learn the secrets of solid interviews but get to practice the craft yourself under Warren’s watchful eye.

**Register now for this special session of THE ART OF THE INTERVIEW on October 19th, 2009. The class fee is only $75. Reserve your seat on-line via PayPal or send a check or money order – made payable to The Warren Report – to: 1752 NW Market St #118, Seattle, WA 98107. Seating is limited, so act now. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me at warren@thewarrenreport.com**

© Scott Squire, NonFiction Media

About me…

As founder of The Warren Report (www.thewarrenreport.com), Warren Etheredge curates and hosts over 250 events every year, a podcast and television series. The Warren Report promotes “slow culture” through commentary, outreach, events and education. Our principle: Smarter audiences make a better world! Additionally, Warren is one of the founding faculty of TheFilmSchool, along with Tom Skerritt, Stewart Stern, Rick Stevenson and John Jacobsen. For six years, Warren served as the Curator for the 1 Reel Film Festival (at Bumbershoot), before that, he worked with the Seattle International Film Festival. Warren has staged over 40 plays in New York, published five books, written countless magazine articles and recently completed a feature-length documentary, HUMOR ME. He is in pre-production for a new documentary, TAPPED OUT: SOLVING AMERICA’S WATER CRISIS. He is the host of Words & Wine and The Good Life, conversation series with A-list authors, and is a regular contributor to Seattle’s NPR affiliate, KUOW. He speaks at festivals and conferences nationwide including The Screenwriting Expo, The Austin Film Festival and Conference, Bastyr University’s Founders Weekend and Gnomedex.

I had no idea what I would do or what I would see, but once I took the mic, I was thrilled I had accepted the invitation. Staged at ACT, within their lovely Allen Theatre (-in-the-round), I was honored to introduce a succession of mesmerizing performances kicked off by Elizabeth Rose, a trapeze artist who somehow imbued her innocent routine with a graceful sensuality that was both soothing… and titillating. Other highlights included:

* a wordless theater-piece by Esther Elderman, the Artistic Director and Co-Founder of the UMO Ensemble that was trippier than a pill-popped dive down the rabbit hole

* Blazer‘s skeletally improbable contortionism that left me pondering the onanistic possibilities of such flexibility

* NANDA, a group of high-strung, far-flung “Acro-Ninjas” whose comically choreographed tribute to filmdom’s fight scenes played like quartet of Jackie Chan clones… who juggle!

And then, there was Bob, a virtual novice whose rope-act, an homage to James Bond, was the crowd-pleasingest stunt I may have ever witnessed. Granted, at least a third of the audience came to see Bob specifically, but the applause he received and I encouraged the crowd to revisit throughout the show impressed. The man, obviously, has a license to thrill.

I must also acknowledge the contributions of Berry Hatton — a research fellow in Dr. Jim Olson‘s lab, who explained why donations to the cause are critical — and Thomas, a limber-limbed audience member who volunteered to help me vamp thru a particularly long changeover by demonstrating that joints, not just drinks, ought be doubled.

Finally, thank you, Jenn Wrenn, for extending the opportunity. I am proud to have participated. And, unlike my stint as a mint-packer, I’d be delighted to return to this “job,” any day.

(UPDATE: Jenn Wrenn reports that this year’s edition of CIRCUS OF DREAMS raised at least 20k for pediatric cancer research and they are still tallying donations!)

(Note that this is part two of an ongoing series. To read Lesson #1, please click here.)

Jerry Jones must love FIELD OF DREAMS, for the owner of the Dallas Cowboys heeded the voice of God (or was it the voice of constructive reason?) as obediently as Kevin Costner. “If you build it, they will come.” So, Jones built it. And come they did.

Last night, 105, 121 ticket-buyers (and presumably, fans) engorged Cowboys Stadium — the team’s brand-new $1.2 billion office park — to witness the team’s grudge match against divisional rivals, the New York Giants. The crowd smashed a record for attendance at a regular-season NFL game. Even folks typically inured to football mania (and indifferent to the Emmys) were, likely, exposed to the televised hype surrounding the opening of this gargantuan arena, teasingly referred to as the Jones Mahal. It may be a wiser comparison than the wags realized. Yes, the joke may be that the intent of the stadium, born of Jones’ ego, is to stand as one of the modern, man-made Wonders of the World. Surely, its size, scope and sheer audacity compels one to consider it’s the first American sporting venue designed by Albert Speer. However, there may be a greater irony in the comparison to the Indian tourist attraction and that is in the original structure’s raison d’etre. Let’s remember, the Taj Mahal isn’t just a photo op in Agra, it’s a mausoleum. (Shah Jahan built it, mourning the loss of his third wife, Mumtaz Mahal, who died delivering their fourteenth child.) And despite the grandeur of Cowboys Stadium, given today’s troubling economic free-fall — or, from a robber-baron’s perspective, free-for-all — it may also represent the final resting place for corporate capitalism and Texas-style consumerism. (You can wash down that $10 dish of Truffled Macaroni & Cheese with a $14 Cowboyrita!) Hard to imagine public and private financing pairing again to break-ground for such a mammoth, limited-use structure.

But Jerry Jones built it. The fans came. They saw (the action on the field and the world’s largest video screen). Only, the Cowboys forgot to conquer. They lost, 33-31, on the literal last-second, a Giants’ field goal spoiling the home-team’s inaugural party. Of course, the defeat was not in the game plan. The oil-baron-turned-owner-and-general manager had essentially promised that his ‘Boys would rise to the level of the edifice. (This is as ridiculous a notion as raising an idiot’s test scores by letting him take the SATs at Harvard.) Just before the game, Dallas’ Pro Bowl linebacker, DeMarcus Ware, repeated what so many others had claimed, that the team would win buoyed by the raucous support of the apocryphal “12th Man.” And herein, lies today’s lesson.

Every team trumpets The 12th Man, the notion that the presence and volume of their fans at home games gives them a distinct advantage. The crowd will generate so much noise that visiting offenses will be penalized for false-starts and delays-of-game overwhelmed by chants of “D-Fence” or “Suck it!” or whatever it is beer-barreled, booze-fueled supporters scream. And, on occasion, it appears the crowd can make a difference. (The Seahawks honor their un-drafted “teammates” with their very own flag!)  But I’d argue the impact of The 12th Man is about as great as the Prophet Elijah‘s. Jews save him a seat at every seder and every circumcision, but I don’t think he’s drinking the wine or taking tips. (As Gentiles might protest: ignorance is bris.) The 12th Man is a brilliant, psychological strategy, co-opted by marketers to maintain the interest and attendance of followers. And, in my own way, I have fallen for it since I was five. I have believed that my behavior actually influences the games. If I just complete certain rituals in prescribed orders, the Cowboys will win. If I don’t, they will lose. Over the years, my superstitions have evolved from rhythmic chants to abstinence before games to positive visualization. And as absurd as they all must sound, even to me — and I’m leaving out some of the doozies — I still find it difficult to fully debunk the probability of their effect in writing. I am devoted to my team and need to believe there is a causal connection between my spectatorship and the team’s fortunes. But there simply isn’t. And while my fandom is quixotic, at best, any football player’s belief in the 12th Man ought be certifiable. For whether we are on the turf or in the stands, we must recognize that our victories and defeats come by our own hands. The Dallas Cowboys did not lose last night because the Giants got lucky. They did not lose because neither I nor the hundred thousand plus in attendance didn’t draw the opponents offsides. They lost on their own terms. They did not play well when they absolutely had to. Tony Romo threw three interceptions. Yes, one was fluky, but the others surely were not. Felix Jones fumbled a kick-off having felt less contact than a frotteur in a straight-jacket. Orlando Scandrick approached tackles as if reaching for a figurative brass ring. If the Cowboys are to achieve post-season success for the first time in over a dozen years, they must not depend on the 12th Man. They must hold themselves accountable for their miscues as diligently as they celebrate their touchdowns. If I wish to reach the next level of success professionally, I must stop counting on the sudden, divine appearance and intervention of my own, imagined 12th Man, a producer, speaking agent or publisher who will recognize my potential and champion it to the world. I must make the most of opportunities presented, create more on my own and not bungle those I don’t comprehend, certain others might bail me out.

I will always appreciate the support of the faithful but will not presume my fortunes are dependent on them. And, I will continue to struggle to accept that all my superstitious, game-time rites don’t inform the outcome of the games. Last night, I wished the Cowboys had won, but wishing didn’t make it so or Romo throw… more accurately. By embracing accountability, we can triumph.

As James Earl Jones assured Kevin Costner: “This field, this game: it’s a part of our past… It reminds of us of all that once was good and… could be again.”

(Note that this is part two of an ongoing series.To read Lesson #1, please click here.)

Last week, Crystal Lee Sutton died of brain cancer. Few noticed, few cared. Months earlier, Farrah Fawcett “lost her battle with anal cancer” and a nation wept, glued to her eleventh hour NBC special. Now, I’m not knocking the model-turned-actress. She seemed like an affable, if somewhat daffy, individual. However, her contribution to the world was feathered ‘dos and postered walls. Crystal Lee Sutton accomplished something. She fought. She made a difference. She changed lives.

Of course, you don’t know Crystal Lee Sutton by her given name. If you know her at all, it’s by her nom-de-cinema: NORMA RAE. Sally Field won an Oscar® for her portrayal of the reluctant rabble-rouser. When Ms. Field took her trophy, she famously assured herself: “You like me. Right now, you like me.” I wonder how often, if ever, Ms. Sutton enjoyed such a moment of validation? When did Jack Nicholson applaud the unlikely labor-organizer? When did water-cooler conversation revolve around the feisty Southerner’s improbable decision to stand on her work table, with a hastily-scribbled cardboard sign emblazoned: UNION! Ms. Sutton’s courageous action eventually led to the unionization of the JP Stevens textile plant in North Carolina, improving the lives not only of her co-workers who initially shut off their machines in solidarity, but of all those who followed at the factory. Significantly, despite JP Stevens’ passionate resistance to their employees’ organizing, the company prospered, remaining in the Fortune 500 for many, many years.

Nevertheless, since then, unions have been marginalized and/or demonized, dependent on who’s spinning the spin. However, has there ever been a time when unions were more needed than now? How is that big businesses get government bailouts while government employees get indefinite furloughs? How is it that CEOs take home nine-figure salaries while prematurely-retired staffers lose their homes and their pension plans? Why do we tacitly, yet continually, condone a system that rewards corporate ineptitude while it punishes worker loyalty?

We have failed to live up to Crystal Lee Sutton’s standards. And, we have failed to give Crystal Lee Sutton her due. Worse, we’ve also stood by as she suffered one final indignity. Crystal Lee Sutton might be alive today if it weren’t for our profit-driven, results-disoriented health care system. Ms. Sutton was denied potentially life-saving medication by her insurance company for two months as they deliberated the efficacy —or was it the cost? — of such treatment. (Odd, isn’t it? Sounds like her insurers had convened their own de facto “death panel,” yes?) Eventually, they approved the treatment, but far too late to combat the cancer. No one will ever know if Ms. Sutton’s life would have been saved, but I bet bean-counters can tell you precisely how many dollars were saved while they played passive god.

Once you’re done paying your respects to the dancer-turned-actor or the filmmaker-who-made-teen-angst-funny, ask yourself this: Where is today’s Crystal Lee Sutton? And what should her contemporary cardboard admonishment to America’s workers be?

UNION?  PUBLIC OPTION?  REST IN PEACE?

“A photo of Sally Fields in the movie “Norma Rae” hangs in Crystal Lee Sutton’s home in Burlington, N.C. (By Joseph Rodriguez — Associated Press)”

Frankly, sometimes I wonder if it’s under-appreciated or over-rated. Heck, I lost consciousness during A WALK TO REMEMBER and remain convinced it’s completely forgettable. Must we be aware at all times? Or is the issue more a matter of focus or… intention.

Dr. Amit Goswami, aka THE QUANTUM ACTIVIST, posits that our “reality” is just the manifestation of our collective consciousness, that our world is manipulated by a (sometimes passive) group-think, of sorts. If we alter our intentions we could alter our destinies. However, to do so requires our willingness to shed black and white notions of existence. He lays out his arguably scientific reasoning in Ri Stewart & Renee Slade‘s documentary which wisely peppers a filmed lecture with more candid exposure to the good doctor. In turn, we discover a man who has battled his own very human insecurities — foremost, jealousy — and has reinvented his world, at least, finding humor and self-styled success on the journey. Even if you doubt the theories he espouses, it is difficult to deny his personal findings.

I had the pleasure and privilege of hosting Dr. Goswami at the sold-out(!) premiere screenings of THE QUANTUM ACTIVIST in Seattle and Portland. I was delighted to question the 60-something(?) physicist/philosopher for each answer played out like a thesis project co-written by Deepak Chopra and Johnny Carson. (Gotta love a man who can find new explanations for the universe and admit to being confounded his ex-wives.) Yes, the converetd were happily preached to, but I spoke with a number of skeptics in attendance who confessed the film provoked a reconsideration of their more grounded, secular beliefs. THE QUANTUM ACTIVIST may not sway everyone, but if it compels you to reexamine your life, then change truly is possible. For only in formulating our true goals and values can we ever hope to achieve them.

Call it Consciousness, if you like. Use it or lose it. Or, beware Brion James‘ ominous slap-upside-the-head in BLADE RUNNER: “Wake up, time to die.”

UNTIL THE LIGHT TAKES US lets the convicted crooner, Vikernes, lyricize about his political leanings and musical ambitions. Documentarians Aaron Aites and Audrey Ewell also check in with his foes, friends and fellow rockers for both perspective and the saner side of the black metal movement. Commendably, the film foregoes shock value in favor of fair-minded story-telling and surprising portraits of the major players in the case.