Movie Review - Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist

Nick and Norah's Infinite Playlist (2008) -  Nerdy musician Nick (Michael Cera) is in love with alpha girl Tris (Alexis Dziena).  Sadly for him they went out for 6 months, she cheated on him the whole time and then dumped him.  Nick is still mooning over her and sends her mix CDs of indie rock groups.  Tris dumps them where her frenemy Norah (Kat Dennings) finds them and loves the music.  Eventually Nick and Norah meet, go on a rescue mission for Norah's friend and find something special between themselves.

This is kind of a silly movie.  A warm, charming and rather innocent silly movie.  The cast is almost entirely folks you never heard of (John Cho of Harold and Kumar and the latest Star Trek series has a REALLY small role, Andy Samberg has an even smaller one.  They along with Cera and Dennings are probably it for the "known names" in this one) and the story is very intimate.  The characters are mostly stock but that's OK.  They're only needed to perform stock dialogue while the story of Nick and Norah works itself out.  (Have we reached the point where the supposedly-shallow-sassy-gay-friend-who-really-has-a-heart-of-gold has become a cliche?).  They aren't asked to be anything beyond what they are and the actors playing them have such fun with them that you can't help but carried along.  The screenwriter, Lorene Scafaria limits herself to a single gross out joke and manages to turn the novel into a fun little rom/com.

I expected the music to play more a central role to the story but it's really just a backdrop for the story to play out against.  I'm thinking the soundtrack is a fairish collection of 2008 Indie Rock.  I happened to see part of one of my favorite "music nerd" movies right after seeing this (John Cusack in "High Fidelity") and thought "Nick is Rob as an even younger man".

Don't ask it to be more than it is and you'll have a great time.

Rating - **** Recommended

Intellectual Terrorism, Media Bingeing, Well Excuse Me

 "The View From the Phlipside" is a media commentary program airing on WRFA-LP, Jamestown NY.  It can be heard Monday through Friday just after 8 AM and 5 PM.  The following are scripts which may not exactly match the aired version of the program.  Mostly because the host may suddenly choose to add or subtract words at a moments notice.  WRFA-LP is not responsible for any such silliness or the opinions expressed.  You can listen to a live stream of WRFA or find a podcast of this program at wrfalp.com.  Copyright 2013 by Jay Phillippi.  All Rights Reserved.  You like what you see?  Drop me a line and we can talk.

Program scripts from week of September 23, 2013


My name is Jay Phillippi and I've spent my life in and around the media.  TV, radio, the movies and more.  I love them, and I hate them and I always have an opinion.  Call this the View from the Phlipside. 

Well Excuse Me                                                                                          

Let me start off by saying I have no delusions about the impact of my commentaries.  I know I have an audience among WRFA listeners because some of you have made the point of telling me you enjoy these programs.  And I know I have a small following of the blog that is connected to this show.  Just Google “The View From the Phlipside” and you’ll find it.  There you’ll not only find the scripts to each week’s programs but reviews of movies and books.

It’s that last fact that spurs today’s program.  I review movies and books because I love them.  My hope is that I can point folks in the direction of examples that they will enjoy, even help them choose from the enormous universe of these particular media.  Again, I have no illusions about what I do.  I do it because I enjoy it and because I’ve gotten some positive response from authors and publishers.

There’s a website called NetGalley that links up reviewers with publishers and vice versa.  You go on, fill out a bio sheet and then request titles.  Over the last year or so I’ve done about 8.

Last week I received a very politely worded e-mail from the folks at Viking Publishing telling me that I didn’t meet their standards as a reviewer and therefore they declined to offer me a copy of the book I’d requested.

For the record NetGalley deals in digital books, ebooks.  So there was no question about postage and handling and publishing costs and the like.

I’m not really angry about this rejection as much as I’m puzzled and bemused.  The cost of letting me review their book is effectively ZERO.  So from a cost to benefit basis it appears that Viking is saying my review has a negative value.  It’s just not worth anything to have me review the book.

In an age when legacy publishers like Viking are screaming about the future of their industry, when fewer people are reading, when ebooks are becoming the larger part of the publishing industry, when the Internet is becoming a bigger part of how all of us make decisions on what we buy will someone please explain to me how getting a review that costs you nothing and might just result in sales or word of mouth is worth nothing?

I’m not going to mention the book because I don’t want to punish the author.  But I think this is a case of the publisher being penny wise and pound foolish.

At least that’s the thought in this tiny and apparently unimportant little corner of the world.

Media Bingeing                                                                                     

Binge eating?  Bad thing.
Binge drinking? VERY bad thing.
Binge viewing?  That’s an interesting topic of conversation.

Have you come across this concept before?  Binge viewing is watching episode after episode after episode of a TV series or movie series.  You might call watching a marathon on one of the cable networks binge viewing.  You could certainly do it if you bought an entire season of a TV show on DVD or Blu-ray.  But binge viewing really took off with the advent of services like Netflix that allowed you access to not just episode after episode but season after season of TV series for a single low price.  You can just plug in and take off for an entire day.  No commercials, no disc changing.  It’s not a marathon, it’s a binge.

The dictionary defines binge as an unrestrained, immoderate period of self indulgence.  The words uncontrolled and excessive also appear in definitions.

So this is generally not associated with behaviors that should be a regular part of our lives.  See binge eating and binge drinking.

So what’s the down side on binge viewing?  Well there’s that whole circles-under-the-blank-staring-eyes-of-a-zombie look.  It’s followed by the inability to talk about anything else for days which is then followed by a complete collapse into catatonia as your brain attempts to go back to processing real life.  So there’s probably no real long run negative effects.

But I’d like to argue against making binge viewing a regular part of your media consumption.  There are things that you have to give up when you go on a binge.  That’s any opportunity to savor what you’re seeing.  If the show you’re watching is just eye candy, like Baywatch or Dancing With the Stars, then go for it.  Gorge yourself.

But for shows that offer some depth, some story telling, some deep characterization do yourself a favor and take a break.  After every episode or two stop and give yourself the chance to revel in the quality of what you’re seeing.  Letting the show appeal to more than just the short term rush of enjoyment.  It’s the difference between just getting high and full engagement with an experience at every level.

So when it comes to media bingeing it’s mostly about picking your spot.

Intellectual Terrorism                                                                                                     

This week, the week of September 22, is Banned Books Week.  Each year the American Library Association highlights the attempts around our nation to ban certain books from libraries, especially school libraries.  What kind of books?  Books like these, all of which appear on recent lists compiled by the ALA:
Harry Potter by JK Rowling, Of Mice and Men by John Steinbeck, The Kite Runner by Kaled Husseini, Catcher in the Rye by JD Salinger, To Kill A Mockingbird by Harper Lee, A Wrinkle in Time by Madeliene L’Engle, the Goosebump series by RL Stine, The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-time by Mark Hadden and just to fill out our irony quotient for the week Farenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury.  A book that is about book banning.

Banned Books Week is designed to celebrate our freedom to read.  The freedom to explore ideas, even odious ones.  Let me be clear about two concepts.  

First I believe that people that want to ban books, to limit other people’s access to books they believe are somehow “dangerous” are intellectual and cultural terrorists.  Having no faith in the strength of their own point of view to stand up to a challenge they try to insure the supremacy of that view by banning opposing ones.  It’s pretty much the same technique used in political spheres by bomb throwing terrorists.  And should be fought against with the same energy and determination we bring to the bomb throwers.

The other thing is that I think this protection should extend to all books.  The most odious, vile, evil book I can think of is called “The Protocols of the Elders of Zion”.  It is a hoax created in Russia in 1903 that has been used for a century of violence and hatred aimed at Jewish populations worldwide.  There is not a micron of truth in this horrible book.
But it should not be banned.  Ideas need to be dragged into the light, to be examined, weighed and judged.  Only those who fear ideas want them hidden away.  Only those who do not trust humanity want to place blinders on their fellows.  Only those who can not compete in the market of thought will demand that theirs be the only thought permitted.

Pick up a book and read it.  Fight back against the terrorists of free thought and read a banned book.

Call that the View From the Phlipside

Book Review - Inferno

Inferno by Dan Brown (2013) - Robert Langdon is back again using his knowledge of symbols to save the world.  This time it is the philosophy of Transhumanism, which believes that humans need to enter into the process of their own evolution, that stands at the center of the threat.  One genius has come up with own solution to saving humanity, one that may just involve the end of humanity itself.

Set mostly in Florence and Venice Brown puts Dante's "Inferno" as the key to unraveling the mystery in this novel.  History, current events and ancient symbols weave together once again as Brown takes the reader on an exciting ride to the end.

So my real question is this: why would anyone come within a hundred miles of Harvard symbology professor Robert Langdon?  Disaster follows this guy like a new puppy.  But then so do beautiful women so it's not a bad life I suppose.

This book has all the positive and negative qualities of the Langdon series from Brown.  It requires a slight warping of history sometimes and there are some logical flaws but on the whole Brown can tell a story.  If you're reading Brown for history (or theology) you should probably be careful.  If you're reading him to get a great flavor of those subjects plus have a rollicking good read then you're in the right place.  I will admit that it's great to have a hero that doesn't need guns or fisticuffs to save the world.  You just need to be smart and pay attention.

Decidedly better than the last (which I think is easily the weakest of the series) you'll have a great time reading the story then want to look up the history and finally go visit the places Brown has taken you in your imagination.  Can't think of much higher praise.

Rating - ****  Worth A Look

Movie review - The Next Three Days

The Next Three Days (2010) - A community college English professor decides to risk it all to break his wife our of prison.  She's been convicted of killing her boss but denies any guilt.  All the appeals have failed and she has attempted suicide he begins to plan a jail break.  The journey takes him to places he is utterly unprepared to survive.

This is a movie that I walked into prepared to love.  Shot in Pittsburgh with some incredible shots of my favorite city in the world.  Solid cast (Russell Crowe, Elizabeth Banks, Liam Neeson,  and a whole bunch of great supporting actors).  I can identify with a man who would do anything for the woman he loves.  This should be a movie that absolutely connects with me.

And somehow it never does.

The movie drops you into the middle of the action then bounces around for a while before settling into a linear groove.   The problem is that it's not quite clear what's going on at first (I assumed that the wife had killed her obnoxious sister in law at first rather than her boss) and you never really come to care about the characters. Curiously, the characters never seem to connect with each other either.  The husband/wife, mother/child, grownup child/adult parent, even the relationship with another parent, none of them feels connected, none of them make any sense.  Characters pop in and out at seemingly random points. The story wanders through the first half of the movie then picks up speed at a weird lurching tempo in the second half.

In the end a story that should have come together into a really nice adventure turns into something that just misses.

Rating - *** Worth A Look

The Cyrus Thing, What Makes Great TV? and New Reading Models

 "The View From the Phlipside" is a media commentary program airing on WRFA-LP, Jamestown NY.  It can be heard Monday through Friday just after 8 AM and 5 PM.  The following are scripts which may not exactly match the aired version of the program.  Mostly because the host may suddenly choose to add or subtract words at a moments notice.  WRFA-LP is not responsible for any such silliness or the opinions expressed.  You can listen to a live stream of WRFA or find a podcast of this program at wrfalp.com.  Copyright 2013 by Jay Phillippi.  All Rights Reserved.  You like what you see?  Drop me a line and we can talk.

Program scripts from week of September 15, 2013


My name is Jay Phillippi and I've spent my life in and around the media.  TV, radio, the movies and more.  I love them, and I hate them and I always have an opinion.  Call this the View from the Phlipside. 

New Reading Models                                                                                          

I have been a fair bit of traveling recently and that means my beloved Nook Color is getting a workout.  One of the advantages of an e-book reader is that I can carry around not only things I really want to read but also things that I think I probably will be interested in.  One of those is a very ebook kind of book called “Ebooks and Self Publishing - A Conversation Between Authors Barry Eisler and Joe Konrath”.  It’s actually the transcript of a live Google Docs discussion and for those of us interested in these kinds of things it is fascinating.  So imagine my joy when I got home and sat down to look for topics to find two ebook related stories waiting for me!

There are books that I would love to have on the Nook.  Roger Zelazny’s “Chronicles of Amber”, Isaac Asimov’s “Foundation” trilogy, Harper Lee’s “To Kill A Mockingbird”.  Books that I love to reread every couple years.  The problem is that building a new digital library is a huge expense for books I already own.  Well the folks at Amazon are looking at solving that problem.  Their newly announced Kindle Matchbooks program allows you to buy Kindle versions of paper books that you have purchased from Amazon.  There are two really cool things about this.  First it will cover any book you’ve purchased at Amazon going back to 1995 (which just happens to be the year they were founded).  The other thing is price.  Most of the ebooks will be priced between 99 cents and 2.99, some may even be free.  Curiously this is exactly the price range that the two guys in that book I read feel is the sweet spot for ebook sales.  It’s an interesting concept that actually makes a logical connection between the old and the new.  The first thought that came to mind was the video combo packs that combine Blu-rays, DVDs and, wait for it, digital versions.
The other story I think has great potential for an old line media.  The folks at Barnes and Noble have entered into a deal with UWire to be able to offer college newspapers on Nooks.  What I really like is that it gets an audience that has effectively given up on newspapers to start thinking about newspapers on their readers.  If you can get the future leaders of the nation in the habit of turning to their e-readers to get the daily news it might translate into a potential future for the rest of the newspaper industry.  As per usual it is NOT the industry itself that has figured this out but the thinkers outside the industry.

Which is exactly what would have been predicted by those two guys in that book I was reading.

What Makes Great TV?                                                                                     

Here’s a question that could make us all rich if we can just come up with the answer.  What makes compelling television?  What I mean by that is what needs to be done to create the kind of television that people will really want to watch?  It’s also called “appointment television”.  In the old days, you know like 2010, before you could watch television shows on the internet, most TV was appointment TV.  People would plan to be home at such and such a time on such and such a night to catch a show.

There is still some of that.  Most recently were the final episodes of AMC’s show “Breaking Bad” are shows that will have the shows fans glued to their seats.  Sure you could record it and time shift the program but the reality is that no one wants to miss really good TV.  That’s the compelling part.  You want to be able to talk about the show.

Now there are two things we do know about making compelling television.  First, that some people are already doing it.  The second is that plenty of other people don’t have a clue.  These are the people who need our help.

Now most commonly there are two ways for people who don’t really get it to try and fake their way to compelling programming.  The first is get as racy as possible.  It’s tough if you’re working on network TV because of the FCC regulations.  We’re seeing more and more cable channels seeing how far they can go.  A recent NPR story said that AMC actually has a limit on the number of times the “f-bomb” can be said.  In the end does that really create “Must See TV”?  Only in the short run.  The problem with relying on shock is that after a while the audience gets used to it and it’s not shocking anymore.  “Breaking Bad” has certainly been shocking in its run.  At the same time it has also offered memorable characters and great storylines.

The other way that folks try to create that special TV is to re-make the hits.  Steal ideas, do spin-offs and sequels.  If you pick the right ideas or follow the right characters from one show to the next.  So it’s interesting to note that now that “Breaking Bad” is ending its run the producers have to try and create some new compelling programming.

What are they doing?  Creating a sequel.

The Cyrus Thing                                                                                                      

I was really hoping that I could avoid this whole thing.  It’s stupid, and pointless and very much a tempest in a teapot.  I don’t care that it was the lead story on news outlets that should have known better the morning after it took place.  The fact that it is still managing to be news is astounding.  What’s worse is that by actually taking notice of it here I’m actually becoming one of those people who keep it high profile.

But it just won’t go away.

What is it?  It’s the Miley Cyrus...you groaned right there, didn’t you?  I don’t blame you.  It’s a stupid story about a stupid act.  

The latest bump up for this stupid story is an equally stupid story in USA Today in an interview with dowager rock queen Cher.  In the interview itself she pretty much trashes Miley.  Not because it was bad taste, let’s face it that’s a subject that Cher has no standing on, but because she thought it was badly done.  Once the story was published there was the inevitable backlash and Cher sort of backed away from her comments.

And that’s really the unfortunate part in my opinion.  Cher DOES have standing to discuss outrageous female stage performance.  That is almost certainly why McNewspaper asked her the question.  Sadly what Cher retreated to a “she’s pushing the envelope, being an artist” stance that smacks of PR timidity.

If what Cyrus did was in fact art somehow, and you can count me among those who find that concept dubious at best, then it ought to be able to stand up to scrutiny by people with expertise in that area.  That’s part of the whole process and always has been.
So by backing away from her criticism Cher is pretty much telling us that she realizes it’s more about the outrage than the art.

Which is, of course, what most of the rest of us realize from the outset.  So how do we fight back against the onslaught of these nonsense stories?  Two ways I think.  The first is follow the path Cher took before she lost her nerve.  Treat it like art and then take it apart.  It will become obvious quickly to the vast majority of people that’s it not worth the time and effort.

The second way?  What I wish I could have done from the beginning.

Just ignore it.  The stories die without sunlight.

Call that the View From the Phlipside

Book Review - More Forensics and Fiction

More Forensics and Fiction: Crime Writers Morbidly Curious Questions Expertly Answered by D.P. Lyle, M.D. (2012) -  D.P. Lyle has worked as a consultant to TV shows like "CSI Miami", "House" and "Law and Order".  He's also made quite a little cottage industry out of writing books about forensics science including a series of books where he answers questions he has received from authors doing research for their own books.  Dr. Lyle is quick to point out that he's not trying to help the bad guys but is just trying to keep things accurate in the world of fiction.

The questions can almost hysterically funny ("What injuries can result from depleted uranium bullets?", "Could my killer completely drain a human body of blood and make it appear as if a vampire were the culprit?") to the obscure ("How were comas treated in the 1500's?") to the painful ("How is a castration performed?").  The answers are fascinating in their detail and reasoning.

Not really bed time reading but great fun for people who love forensics or just enjoy learning strange stuff.

Rating - *** Worth A Look

Movie Review - Tortilla Soup

Tortilla Soup (2001) A retired Mexican American chef and the father of 3 adult daughters tries to find a way through life.  They are all looking for love and struggling with new directions.  Along they way they find their anchors in their family.

So what's the worst thing I can say about this movie?  It's utterly predictable.  Why not?  Ang Lee had already written the movie once before in "Eat, Drink, Man, Woman".  There's absolutely nothing that will surprise you in this movie.  Nothing.

What's the best thing I can say about this movie?  The cast is warm and wonderful and easy to like.  They are talented and carry forward a predictable story beautifully.  Kudos to Hector Elizondo, Elizabeth Pena, Raquel Welch and even Paul Rodriguez in a small role.  The whole cast does a nice job without much to work with.

Watch the movie for the cast. And to drool over the food.

Rating - *** Worth A Look

Bad Story Telling, Life with Cell Phones and Super Bowl Sales

 "The View From the Phlipside" is a media commentary program airing on WRFA-LP, Jamestown NY.  It can be heard Monday through Friday just after 8 AM and 5 PM.  The following are scripts which may not exactly match the aired version of the program.  Mostly because the host may suddenly choose to add or subtract words at a moments notice.  WRFA-LP is not responsible for any such silliness or the opinions expressed.  You can listen to a live stream of WRFA or find a podcast of this program at wrfalp.com.  Copyright 2013 by Jay Phillippi.  All Rights Reserved.  You like what you see?  Drop me a line and we can talk.

Program scripts from week of September 9, 2013


My name is Jay Phillippi and I've spent my life in and around the media.  TV, radio, the movies and more.  I love them, and I hate them and I always have an opinion.  Call this the View from the Phlipside. 

Super Bowl Sales                                                                                           

It is the second week in September.  The first games of the 2013-14 NFL season are just passed.  Everybody in the league is either 1-0 or 0-1.  You probably still don’t quite have that football season feeling really settled in yet.  We still aren’t sure just how bad the Bills are going to be this year.

And yet the Super Bowl advertising sales season is rapidly drawing to a close.  Yes, that’s right the sales time for advertising for the 2014 Super Bowl, a game which will not take place until February, five months from now, is rapidly coming to an end.  I mean when you run out of ad time to sell you need to wrap things up.

As of a report from August 23 in USA Today the folks at Fox said that 85% of the advertising time was already sold and they expected that to hit 90% sold by the time of the first game.  The game they played LAST WEEK.  So by the time the kickoff of the Broncos-Ravens game last week 9 out of 10 available spots had already been sold.

If there is anyone out there who still has any delusions about what is the most popular sport in these here United States let them put that fantasy to rest.  When you call sell most of the advertising for the championship game six months before the game is played, weeks before the first game of the season is played you are talking about a very desirable commodity.  

Think about it.  These companies are laying down orders for advertising time that will cost them, on average, four million dollars for a thirty second spot.  Just one mind you.  30 seconds.  About a fifth of the length of one of these commentaries.
And they have no idea who is even going to be playing in the game!

Now of course we’ve noted before that the Super Bowl has become its own thing.  The game in large part is less the event than the ads themselves.  Unless your team is playing in the game, you have a bet down on the game or you’re a hardcore football fan my bet is that people talk through the game and pay closest attention to the commercials.

And THAT explains a lot about why people have been spending that kind of money for a game that is almost a half a year away.

Life With Cell Phones                                                                                      

When it comes to cell phones there are two things that are absolutely beyond dispute.

First, cell phones are everywhere.  Not everyone has one, it just seems like it.  At the same time a survey done in June of this years shows that there are more cell phones in the United States than there are people.  In fact in relationship to the total population of the country cell phone usage stands at almost  104%.  So there are enough folks running multiple phones to make up for all the people who don’t have one.  That’s pretty amazing when you think about it.

The other item beyond dispute is that people insist on using those phones at inappropriate times.  Somehow we seem to have lost any sense of appropriateness when the phone rings.

Case in point, the news conference at UCLA last week.  It was a far more serious moment than usual.  The press was meeting with head football coach Jim Mora.  Just a few days before wide receiver Nick Pasquale had been killed by a car while walking along the road.  In the middle of the tribute to the popular player a TV technician’s phone rang.  Faux pas.  Then he answered it!  Making matters worse, following the apparently loud conversation, the tech then told the coach to “Go on”.  Mora stormed out of the press conference.  I can’t blame him.

At some point we need to draw some lines about polite cell phone use.  For me rule number one should be to remember that your call is NOT private.  If you’re in line at the store, or on public transportation or at a restaurant all of the rest of us can hear.  Rule number two is NONE OF US WANT TO HEAR YOU!  Get up, leave the room, find some place to have the call.  Or, and here’s a radical concept, let it roll over to your voice mail.  Stunning announcement - you and your messages aren’t that important.

On the other hand you can overreact too.  Take the case of a film blogger working at the recent Toronto Film Festival.  After becoming annoyed by someone in the front row using their phone during a screening (and possibly recording the movie) this person called 911. The emergency operator apparently laughed at him.

I can live with that too.

Bad Story Telling                                                                                                      

Long ago, in another lifetime, I invented the hot new thing in TV watching.  It’s called recapping and I was doing it in 1983.  Recapping is the hot new service where you no longer have to actually watch TV shows.  You go to a video channel or a blog and someone tells you what happened on your favorite TV show.  That’s right you no longer have to waste your time actually getting involved in the story, you can ignore character development, all the time and effort that goes into shooting and editing the shows?  Pfffffttttt!  That is so 20th Century.

Now please be clear.  We are NOT talking about time shifting, where you record the show and watch it some other time.  No, this recapping thing allows you to avoid the whole sitting and watching the show altogether.

Recapping advocates will no doubt tell me that this is just a way for folks to catch up on episodes they miss and to provide a place for fans to gather and discuss the episodes.  It’s a way to respond to the changing needs of the audience.

What nonsense.

My favorite explanation was the one that included a line about how it helped the audience deal with the subtleties of the story telling.  Oh, so it’s to help the members of the audience who are too dumb to follow along.  This from a medium not exactly known for its subtlety. 

As a storyteller I hate this concept.  This kind of “Cliff Notes” version of the TV show is utterly repellent.  It denies all of the art of the medium and reduces the story to its least interesting parts.
How do I know?  Because I invented it, remember?  In the summer of 1983 I was unemployed.  Mrs. Phlipside still had a job and she was a HUGE fan of the soap operas.  We didn’t have a VCR yet (hey, we were poor) so it became my job to watch the shows, write down what happened and report back to her as we prepared dinner.  Given that I thought the soaps were idiotic my renditions of the story came with a certain acerbic edge.  In the end it wasn’t a particularly satisfying experience for anyone.

I can only hope the current version dies off as quickly as that early experiment.

Call that the View From the Phlipside

Book Review - The Crime of Julian Wells

The Crime of Julian Wells by Thomas H. Cook (2012) - What do you do when your best friend from childhood commits suicide?  Julian Wells is a well known crime writer who specializes in getting inside the heads of some of the worst serial killers around the globe.  Did his subject matter finally become too much for him or was there something else?   His best friend, Philip Anders, must look back into their shared history to find the answers.  The journey will takes Anders to places, both physical and emotional, that will put him in great danger.

This book reminded me very quickly of the classic Graham Greene novel "The Third Man" that involves a very similar mystery.  This is not a story with lots of action and violence.  It's commonly described as a "cerebral mystery" where little is as it appears and memories are found to be distortions of the truth.  Some folks are going to find this book slow because of that but for those looking for some serious mental stimulation along with a mystery they will be rewarded.  Cook is an author with a long record of success and very competent story teller.  At the same time I can't say I was blown away by the book.  Glad I read it, don't know that I'll ever pick it up again.

Rating - *** Worth A Look

Movie Review - Goodbye Mr. Chips

Goodbye Mr. Chips (MGM 1969) - Based on the novel of the same name by James Hilton (review) this is the story of the modestly talented but much beloved Mr. Chipping, an instructor at the Brookfield School in England.  The book is a brief (40 pages!), sentimental look at the public school (what we Americans think of as private school) system in England at the turn of the last century.  It marks the brief but happy marriage of "Mr. Chips" and his eventual rise to headmaster.  It is gentle and quiet and refined.

So why some genius at MGM decided to make it a musical is beyond me.

As a general rule I do not review movies that I have not seen from beginning to end.  I'm just so astounded at the wretchedness of the concept here that I'll bend that rule.  I watched the first 20 minutes or so and simply couldn't bear it any longer.  You'd think it would be better with music by John Williams and Petula Clark and Peter O'Toole.

Peter O'Toole in a musical.  There's where you realize the movie is in trouble.  Actually I knew I was going to struggle when I saw it was a musical.  Then it had an Overture and I KNEW trouble was coming.  The problem really comes down to two problems:

First, Peter O'Toole can not sing.  You would think this might be seen as a problem in a musical.  They tried again 3 years later in "Man of La Mancha" where his singing was so bad it nearly destroyed my love of that show.

Second, this is simply an awful choice to make into a musical.  Musical require some level of grandiosity, some level of big drama or large personality to carry off the theatricality of the story suddenly stopping for a song.  "Goodbye Mr. Chips" is the perfect antithesis of this.  It is small, and quaint and cerebral.  It is gentle and laconic much like its title character.

That's what makes this so utterly, irredeemably wrong.

And that's why I stopped watching it and sent it back.  I have higher hopes for the 1939 version which won Robert Donat an Oscar for his portrayal of Chips.

Rating - No Rating

The Coolness of Pod People; Here, Go Away; Rating the Internet

 "The View From the Phlipside" is a media commentary program airing on WRFA-LP, Jamestown NY.  It can be heard Monday through Friday just after 8 AM and 5 PM.  The following are scripts which may not exactly match the aired version of the program.  Mostly because the host may suddenly choose to add or subtract words at a moments notice.  WRFA-LP is not responsible for any such silliness or the opinions expressed.  You can listen to a live stream of WRFA or find a podcast of this program at wrfalp.com.  Copyright 2013 by Jay Phillippi.  All Rights Reserved.  You like what you see?  Drop me a line and we can talk.

Program scripts from week of September 2, 2013


My name is Jay Phillippi and I've spent my life in and around the media.  TV, radio, the movies and more.  I love them, and I hate them and I always have an opinion.  Call this the View from the Phlipside. 

Rating the Internet                                                                                           

I must admit to being utterly conflicted on this next subject.  On the one hand we are going to face an ever increasing avalanche of content without any means to sort it.  On the other hand the system that some people are suggesting as a model is one of the worst examples of fraud I’ve ever confronted.

Here’s the problem - with the growth of online content being available to us in our living rooms and family rooms through boxes like Apple TV or Roku or the newest entrant, Chromecast, we are now being confronted with all the content of the wild, wild web in a venue that used to be fairly safe.  Our living room or family room TV set.  I want you to think for just a minute about all the stuff that is out there.  All the stuff you may have seen yourself or just heard about.  The stupid stuff, the weird stuff, the stuff that you don’t even want to think about.  You know it’s out there, right?  Well with this new technology it’s now just as easily seen on the big screen in the main room of your house.  I just came across a mention of an adult video that was filmed using the new Google Glass technology.

Seems like some way of rating all that stuff might be useful before it all just comes spilling out into your living room.  A rating system, like the one we have for the movies, right?

Oh dear God I hope not.

The movie rating system is something that only works if you don’t think about it or ask questions.  Watch the movie “This Film is Not Yet Rated” and you’ll never look at the ratings the same way again.

Here’s the problem.  Who shall do the rating?  Based on what standards?  And how will we be able to use the rating system to control what is coming into our homes?  Right now you can simply block entire channels but there’s a goodly dose of cutting off your nose to spite your face in that approach.

Do we turn our choices over to an aggregator channel that guarantees us that they’ll only share videos of a certain kind, certain style, certain approach?  That doesn’t strike me as a particularly grown up way of dealing with the issue either.

The networks are controlled by the rules of the FCC.  The Internet is proud of it’s no rules stand.  I’m not so sure how that’s going to play when the stage for that performance is in America’s family rooms.

The Story That Got Away                                                                                      

There’s nothing quite like having a story just fall apart on you.  I had written and recorded a story about the latest round of the ongoing battle between the TV networks and the cable/satellite folks.  Sent it off and went to bed.  Woke up the next morning to hear that the dispute had been settled overnight making my story sound, well, lame.  It no longer made any sense whatsoever.

In the words of Pepe LePew - Le Sigh.

While the lucky folks in Dallas, L.A. and New York City now have their CBS stations back the underlying silliness of this battle still gets me.

The argument goes like this - the TV networks say that they put up all the money, take all the risks, in creating new content.  The cable/satellite people just use that product to make money for themselves.  As the content provider the networks want a bigger piece of the pie.  Since no business person WANTS to give away more of the money they make the cable folk resist.

What got me this time was that Time Warner (the cable company in this episode) was not only telling their customers to watch TV on something other than cable they were giving those customers the technology to do it.  They were giving away digital antennas.  That’s right, a pay TV service is giving you the means to watch TV for free.  What was really fun was that this left CBS in the position of explaining to their affiliates, the local TV stations, why this was a bad thing.  Of course it’s NOT really a bad thing if you’re the local station.  It’s really just all confusing and stupid posturing that ends up with the viewers getting the short end of the stick.
I don’t think any of this actually works to the benefit of the networks or the service providers.  Annoying your consumers and making them think about getting their TV in some other way is just a bad plan in the long run.  The big business types may not yet realize that they’re battling over the bones of a dying system.  The battle is just speeding up the death spiral.

So did the two combatants come to a meeting of the minds on the issues at hand?  Almost surely not.  The reality is that the NFL season is about to begin and the cable folk caved rather than miss out on the audience and advertising dollars associated with pro football.

The story kind of came apart on them as well.

The Coolness of Pod People                                                                                                      

So imagine my immense surprise to discover that I had suddenly become one of the cool kids.  This, I am sure you will be stunned to discover, virtually never happens.  My last two cars were built by a company that no longer exists.  I’m not a technology early adopter and I have no interest in what the latest fad is except as the subject for one of these commentaries.

And yet here I am, among the growing audience for podcasts.  That’s right, I said growing.  The folks at Apple note that the number of downloads of what is now an old school technology has been increasing over the last couple years.  About 10% of us over the age of 12 listened to a podcast in  2006.  Last year that number had grown to 26%.  This is a technology that folks like the New York Times had abandoned because they didn’t see it making financial sense.

So why are people turning to podcasts?  Well let me tell you why I have.  My job involves a fair amount of long distance driving all over western New York.  I love radio but too often I end up hearing the same thing over and over again.  Even NPR repeats stories during the day.  And I prefer a slightly higher IQ than most talk radio can provide.  So what do I do?

Books on disc are fine but you need to invest some long hours to those.  I need something to cover the hour and a half to two hours that my drives usually involve.  Plus with podcasts I can find programs that cover just about any of my rather diverse interests.

My current list of subscriptions include “This Week in Technology”, the literary podcasts from “The Moth”, NPR’s “Wait, Wait Don’t Tell Me” plus several history podcasts, creativity podcasts and TED talks.

One of the big adjustments that the media has to make in moving away from a broadcast mentality to a narrowcasting or niche model.  Podcasting is the ultimate in targeted audience because we chose what’s on our media.  And we’re investing more time in those programs. Not so curiously advertisers have figured this out and are moving more dollars into that marketplace.

So I’m either old school and the new cutting edge.  I’m not sure I care either way.  I’m just looking forward to many more hours of smart, funny, interesting listening on the road.

And THAT’S cool.

Call that the View From the Phlipside

Book Review - Flesh and Bone

Flesh and Bone by Jefferson Bass (2007) - Set against the backdrop of the University of Tennessee's legendary "Body Farm" forensic researcher Dr. Bill Brockton finds himself accused of the gruesome murder of a beautiful medical examiner that he had been working with on a case.  Video evidence seems to seal the deal so he turns to the most successful defense attorney in the area, a man with whom he has dueled many times in the court room.  Together they will try and find the truth.

Jefferson Bass is the pseudonym of a writing partnership (journalist Jon Jefferson and the actual founder of the Body Farm Dr.William Bass) so you know they get the facts right.  For a fan of forensics this book is a great mystery novel with all the right bits of forensic blood and guts mixed in.  There is some odd additions of politics that are sure to set off some people.  Too often characters in books seem to live in these sterile, opinion free worlds so to find some that have normal conversations about things that come up during the story is fine with me.  I don't agree with everything said but that's pretty realistic too.  At the same time there was the usual number of "dumb moves" by the main character.  Can't believe his attorney let him do several things that happen in the book.  Get a little tired of characters who turn out to be their own worst enemies.

Won't call this the best mystery I've ever read but it was well worth a look.

Rating - *** Worth A Look

Movie Review - Spartacus

Spartacus (1960) - A highly fictionalized version of the slave uprising in 73 B.C.E. led by a gladiator named Spartacus.  Rising against the Roman Republic an army of slaves gives the Roman legions just about everything they can handle.

Sigh.

This is one of those movies I'm supposed to like.  It has a classic line of movie dialogue ("I am Spartacus!) and a scene at the end that gives you chills.  It's got big name stars (Kirk Douglas, Laurence Olivier, Jean Simmons, Charles Laughton, Peter Ustinov, Tony Curtis), it has a big name director (Stanley Kubrick), and the screenplay was written by Dalton Trumbo who had been blacklisted just a few years before.  It's popular among some LGBT folk because it has a clearly homoerotic scene between Olivier and Curtis that is played with an astounding level of civility given the time of its creation.  This scene was cut by the censors at the time and so entered into legend.  It has been restored to the current version.  (Interesting to note that the original dialogue soundtrack had been lost when it was restored.  Curtis could re-dub his lines but Olivier was dead.  Anthony Hopkins was brought in because he could do an impeccable Olivier impression.)  It is the only Kubrick movie where an actor won an Oscar for their work (Peter Ustinov).  In fact it won 4 Oscars.  It's listed as the #5 greatest epic film of all time by the American Film Institute.

It's LEGENDARY!

Color me underwhelmed.

It starts off with an overture, which is never a good sign in my opinion.  For those not familiar with the theatrical tradition it is a musical "introduction" to the performance.  Usually involves pieces of the music that is to follow.  You find them often at the opera or musicals.  At the movies it is inevitably accompanied by a black screen with the single word "Overture" on it.  It's pretentious.  As is the "intermission" half way through.  Of course when the movie runs in excess of 3 hours folks are going to need a potty break.

There are some great moments here and some wonderful performances.  But not 3+ hours worth.  Too often dull, plodding at times, more than just a little preachy, this movie needed a really good editor with some control.  Sadly producer/star Douglas kept a stranglehold on control of the movie.  That's clearly a mistake.

In the end let's put it in that category of movies you should see once.  My bet is very few of us would willingly go through the experience twice.

Rating -*** Worth A Look