Brave Creatures

So here I am on the Gold Coast for a couple of weeks looking after my mother, and having something of a vacation. I have heard good things about Peter Jackson's new film, King Kong, so after the gym tonight I took myself off to see it. Given I am a visual effects kind of guy, I figured I would enjoy it.

I have to say, I was really surprised. And pleasantly so. Its a really good film. Now don't get me wrong, its still a film about a giant gorilla living on a island with dinosaurs who is captured and taken to New York. Its fantasy, action/adventure and its intended to be entertaining. Its not meant to be deep. Its not "The Ice Storm. What is surprising about it however, is that it is really tender.

Now, truth be told, I am a bit of a romantic at heart. I know that is shocking, but its the truth. And there are a few scenes in this movie that really moved me. The relationship between Kong and Anne Darrow is well played and artfully set up. Kong is not overly anthropomorphized, but his motivations are clear and convincing.

What that means, is that Adrian Brody actually plays second fiddle as leading man to the great ape. It also means that Jackson has done a fantastic job of telling a complex story without overuse of dialogue - and that's no mean feat.

The execution of the film is pretty much flawless, all of the cast do great jobs and the visual effects do not swamp the story. Some of the situations the heroes get themselves into and out of are a little ridiculous at times, but in the name of fun its forgivable. Although the captians fortuitous arrival twice is stretching things a little.

Where the film really shines is in the silent moments between Ann (Naomi Watts) and Kong. The look of  love that passes between them is the sort of  thing that we all wish for, and it has been superbly captured on screen.

At just over three hours the film is a little long, but personally I didnt get restless. The characters were all set up well so we were able to relate to all of them. Given the success of Lord of the Rings and Star Wars, I am starting to wonder if audiences are beginning to look for longer and deeper engagement with characters on screen. Perhaps the two hour limit isnt the rule any more.

This is an excellent film. Well worth seeing on the big screen.

 

Tweet This Post

My mother is currently recovering in the Gold Coast Hospital from an operation for bowel cancer. It looks like she is going to be ok, but this has (of course) had me thinking about her a lot. This is my telling of one of my favorite of her stories.

---

After six weeks away from home, she was starting to really miss the kids. They were both in their teens now, and the divorce had really shaken them up. Then to loose the house as well, they were a little fragile. But it had been time for her to get out and do something, go somewhere, have an adventure. She picked up her next card and worried that this may have been a bad move.

The car was filled with smoke from those nasty Italian cigarettes so as she looked around the room and the other players, their uniforms rumpled and askew; things seemed a little more than slightly surreal. The mint juleps were probably not helping, what did they put in them anyway? What the WAS a julep anyhow?

As she raised the bet, she looked out the window at the mountainous Swiss countryside blurring past. Snippets of it briefly illuminated by the lights of the train, only to vanish again into the darkness before it could really be recognized; an impressionist nightscape outside, a surreal world of smoke and velvet inside.

It was like she was riding through Macarthur’s Park. All she needed to see now was loves, hot fevered iron, she was already wearing a strip-ed pair of pants.

Her trip on the Orient Express was going to be memorable at least. And while there wasn't going to be a murder, it looked like she at least would make a killing tonight.

“Full House, Royals and Aces High” she said as she laid her cards down. Groans and curses in four languages came from the crew as they threw their hands on the table. “You boys are all so sweet” she said “and I seem to be getting the hang of this game”. She pulled the pile of money from the centre of the table to join the large pile of winnings in front of her as she turned to Jean-Phillip, her cabin attendant, and said “would you be a dear and run to the dinning car to get me another drink? This one seems about done”.

Turning back to the rest of the crew she said “now just ONE more round of this interesting game before I HAVE to go back to my cabin and write to my little loves, they will be missing me so”.

Tweet This Post

Sometimes things happen in life that make you pause and reflect, and parents becoming sick is a big one.

My mother is currently recovering in hospital after a pretty serious operation. She was diagnosed a few weeks ago with bowel cancer and they were extremely keen to get in there and remove it. On top of that there were a few other things wrong which complicated matters, the most serious of which was an aortic anurism - a thinning of the wall of the major blood vessel coming from the heart.

If anything were to go wrong with that during the operation there would be, as the doctors like to understate, nothing that could be done.

Things like that really start you thinking about your life. Well it does for me at least.

My childhood was not the easiest. I am not complaining here, most of us can lay some claim to a troubled childhood, I am just telling it how it is from my perspective.

My parents seperated and divorced when I was about 10 years old and that put a lot of pressure on all of us. They both had their own businesses, but they really struggled to deal with the divorce AND run them. While I didnt understand it at the time, now I can really relate to the pressure the loss of a relationship can put you under.

My sister, who is 6 years older than me was OUT OF THERE. She left just before she turned 18 to go to university and never looked back. To this day she has nothing to do with my mother. While this is incredibly sad, its mostly for her. She is not a very happy person to be honest.

So it was just my mother and me, and that was tough. We are similar enough to make things a little tempestuous. Over the years we have had our share of fights and disagreements, and there was a time when we really didnt talk much at all, but in the last 10 years, things have really changed.

I guess we both stopped dealing from our assumptions and began to learn about each other again. Not the easiest thing for mother and son to do, but circumstances demanded it. I guess I get my inquiring mind from her, at least in part, because we have both really enjoy exploring people. So we have found ways to explore each other a fresh. And while she STILL Drives me nuts at times, I actually really like who my mother is.

My mother is an incredibly expansive woman, she occupies a lot of space, even though she is quite small. She is excited about everything, pleased to see everyone, remembers details and loves to make a production and an event out of the smallest thing. She is gracious and generous, and she really tries to do the best for everyone. She is not without fault, but as long as you are prepared to sit back and enjoy the ride, she is a lot of fun. Problems only start if you try to control her, because it just cant be done.

I know this is kind of sentimental so if you need to reach for the insulin please do so. Things have been tough the last month or so and I wont pretend otherwise, I have been really scared that I am going to lose her now as opposed to some undefined time in the future.

But if I do lose her, I can honestly say that we have shared a wonderful relationship, particularly over the last seven or so years. We havent wasted our time together.

As they say "Life is a Banquet, and most poor suckers are starving to death". Lucky for me, my mother taught me to eat with both hands.

---

As a brief postscript, my mother came through her operation and is doing fine. Things are looking great and she is recovering very quickly. I am very thankful.

Tweet This Post

This week marked the real end of the school year for me, with the screening of the graduating films at Australian Centre of the Moving Image (ACMI) at Federation Square in Melbourne. It was a very celebratory night for just about everyone there with speeches, awards, screenings of about 1/4 of the graduating films and a hoochy media party afterwards.

My Directors, Kyle and Tonnette, and I did pretty well with out two films, Serenade and Wally, being nominated for five awards (including best film and best producer) and winning three, Best Cinematography, Best Third Year Director and Best Visual Effects. For only just being out of the gate, I am pretty jazzed to already have some recognition for the films we all worked so hard on this year.

The next steps for the films will be to enter them into festivals including Cannes, Berlin and Oberhausen to name a few. The best thing for us now would be to win an international level festival,and that includes Sydney and Melbourne. The competition is stiff, but the films are good so we will try and see where we get to.

I was very lucky this year with both Kyle and Tonnette. They are both not only talented, but professional, easy to work with and good people. Sometimes you don't get out of the film making process with friendships, but I think we did ok.

There are three other people who made this year possible for me, Shirley, Marie and James. They all believed in me in their own ways and I hope their faith has been rewarded.

So now its on to 2006, the VCA Masters program and the next step in my film career.  

Tweet This Post

Once upon a time it was seen as admirable and dignified to leave a bad experience behind and move on. To not dwell on it and certainly not to profit (monetarily) from it. Today it seems that if you don't give the press and the public EXACTLY what they want, they are baying for blood.

In the recent Schapelle Corby case, a middle class girl from Sydney was caught with, and denied prior knowledge of, several kilos of marijuana in her bogie board bag. Several months and a media circus later, the poor girl was sentenced to 20 years in a Bali prison.

20 YEARS?! For marijuana!!!?

I will admit it was a lot, but there seems to be some doubt about the case, even if the Federal Police seem to be down playing the connection.

Whatever the truth, the story captured Australia's attention and kept the news media sales up for months. Likewise the recent case of Michelle Leslie has kept our attention in Bali.

The Australian model arrested in Bali and convicted for having two (count em folks) tablets of ecstasy in her handbag at a beach party. Ignore for a moment the question of WHAT were the police doing in her handbag, and the fact that just about every 24 year old westerner on the planet has had or will likely have some sort of less than completely legal, recreational inebriant on them at some point. In any case there has been an enormous hue and cry raised over this arrest.

After coming through what must have been a fairly hellish ordeal, the 24 year old girl pleaded guilt and was convicted by the court in Bali. Her sentence? 3 months, back dated to the time of her arrest. Result - she went home pretty much immediately.

WHA??!??

Rumors of bribes have been circulating and it appears that at least AU$250,000, raised by her family re-mortgaging their home, has been "spent" in Bali as part of the case. You would have to wonder if Schapelle would have done so well with a little more money to grease the Balinese wheels.

At long last however, Michelle is back in Australia but, to the horror of the media, she doesn't seem to want to sell her story. All she seems interested in is getting back to her "normal" life as a model.

It seems like its no longer good enough for someone to maintain a dignified silence and in the case of Michelle Lees, the press is screaming for details that might just be none of their business. She has been so harassed by reporters that she has had to make her get away by prearranged water taxi, and on another occasion by running into a police station.

Its eight years since Princess Diana died in a tunnel in Paris and it seems like the media has forgotten how to LAY OFF. I heard a press conference where one journalist said to Michelle, in a very aggressive tone:

"It's very simple. Were you planning on taking those ecstasy tablets?" 

I know journalists are supposed to be aggressive about pursuing a story but really, take NO for an answer. It seems the more polite and dignified Michelle is, the more she is attacked. Surely the press have better people to hound. Even the Prime Minister has weighted in to "warn" her not to sell her story.

For god sake, the poor girl has just been through a really dreadful experience. Whether its her own fault or not she has shown no sign of wanting to talk about it. All she seem to want to do is put it behind her and get on with her life. Personally, I can completely respect that.

The media today doesn't really seem as much interested in truth as they are in sensation. They appear ready to cross any line to seek it out and they don't much care who is trampled in the process. But the truth of the matter is even harsher, the media is really only doing what the public appears to want them to do.

If the Age or New Weekly didn't pay a fortune for a candid, embarrassing shot, do you think there would be the drive to get them. I don't think so! And the reason they pay the amounts they do is because those photos drive sales, because we all want to see them.

It seems that our voyeurism has been overfed and has in turn gotten hungrier, becoming unrelenting and trivia fixated. I mean lets stop for a second, so what if Michelle Leslie took ecstasy. What difference does it make to MY life if Victoria Beckham has cellulite? Who cares if Paris Hilton's boyfriend scraped her Bentley?

I mean seriously folks, given the impact the governments current three big ticket items - Industrial Reform, Anti-Terrorism and Welfare to work - are going to have on EVERYONE'S day to day lives, you would think we have better things to worry about. No wait, we do have better things to worry about, we are just too busy focusing on Michelle Leslie to know it.

Tweet This Post

Recently in Australia, the Intelligent Design debate has been quietly sneaking into the public policy arena. Wikipedia does a much better job of explaining the details of the argument, but basically Intelligent Design is the assertion that certain features of the universe and of living things are so complex that they appear to result from an intelligent cause or agent, as opposed to an unguided process such as natural selection.

Basically its back to William Paley's old watchmaker argument, or as that reductionist windbag Richard Dawkins aptly put it, the argument of incredulity - if one can't conceive it, it couldn't possibly happen.

The new approach, is dressing up creationism in science drag and accusing the scientific community of being too narrow minded and rigid to appreciate that there might be an alternate to evolution, something other than the strict, mechanistic, naturalist world that science today presents us with. You have to admire the mind of conservatives and fundamentalists, they have an amazing ability to grab at the high ground whether its theirs or not.

Suffice to say that the US is all a tizzy over ID, particularly since George W Bush came out in favour of teaching it in school science class. With the power of the Christian Right in the States, its not surprising that they are actually making headway with all of this. But here in Australia, I thought our natural cynicism would be a sufficiently high barrier.

Apparently not.

In August this year (2005) the Federal Education Minister Brendan Nelson told the Press Club that intelligent design could have a place alongside evolution in our schools if parents wished. As you would imagine, the scientific community wigged out and as a result a coalition of more than 70,000 Australian scientists rejected the theory as scientifically untested.

Firstly, I wouldn't have thought we HAD 70,000 scientists in Australia, so that must be pretty much all of them, and secondly, have you ever tried to get two scientists to agree? On ANYTHING!?

It appears that the creationists are wiggling a foot in the door and this debate is going to go on, for a while at least.

So here is the thing that I don't get. As much as I am very comfortable with the theory of evolution, I don't see any particular conflict between it and the existence of a creating deity. As far as I can see, if a creator can go "poof" and there is a universe, they could just as easily go "poof" and an evolutionary system could be established.

Now this does preclude the whole seven days, bible as literal word of god thing so I guess I am not throwing that much of a bone to the strict creationists. But you would have to wonder, given all the evidence stacking up about the age of the earth (4.8 billion-ish years) and the extent of the fossil record, isn't it time to contemplate the possibility that mankind may have written some of the details down wrong, or copied something incorrectly SOMEWHERE along the way?

In truth, as science unlocks more of our (theoretical) past, it seems to me that more not less of the Christian bibles story of creation is supported - provided you allow some poetic licence. Take the current thinking of the origin of the universe, loosely referred to as the big bang theory.

In truth, as science unlocks more of our (theoretical) past, it seems to me that more not less of the is supported - provided you allow some poetic licence. Take the current thinking of the origin of the universe, loosely referred to as the .

Basically start with everything crunched up into an infinitely small point with nothing around it and then suddenly BOOM, and enormous explosion of energy and its all flying out becoming the universe we know today. Sounds a whole lot like the bibles version to me.

The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.

Now the Old Testament was written approximately 6,000 years ago during the end of the Stone Age. At the time most people lived in mud huts, a large community was a couple of hundred people, the world view was that the planet was flat, people lived to about 30 years old and the hight of technology was the donkey and a stone axe.

If you were a loving, caring god how would YOU explain relativity, quantum mechanics and cosmology to those people - and their donkey? Start with something simple I'd say. I mean there is all that fossil evidence, the finches on the Galapagos Islands and the like. You created mankind as a pretty bright bunch, so they'll figure out that you wrote things in many places (like the rocks) and in many ways (like interstellar radio waves).

But it seems that one way or another, the donkey has gotten in the way.

Fundamental religion, which ever one you choose, seems stuck with this aggressive, literal approach to the bible. Apparently we can't be expected to differentiate good from evil without having our hand held the entire way, without strict and unswerving guidelines that we are not supposed to interpret for ourselves. It seems that no matter how many times a prophet comes along to tell us we need to have a more personal relationship with god, that damn donkey still digs its hooves in.

I will admit that as an agnostic, I am not going to have the most sympathetic view of religious agendas. I figure I can't actually know what the great answers of life are and I don't imagine that I am smart enough to figure them all out. I also don't assume that whatever I do figure out is universally right. I just try and live my life with dignity, and to treat people with respect and as individuals. Not the most complex or all encompassing of philosophies, but it done me alright and it seems to largely keep me out of trouble.

Even I as an agnostic, I can completely agree with the basic tenants of the Christian faith; the sanctity of life, be nice to people, don't cast the first stone, we are all personally responsible for our lives and each of is should have a personal relationship with god. But that relationship is personal and based on our faith.

Now here is the thing that really surprises me about all of this, it seems to me that I have more faith than the creationists. If there is a creator, I have no problem seeing them creating something as beautiful and complex as evolution. I also don't have a problem conceiving that while the system appears to be "random", it may actually be driving towards some goal that is outside my comprehension. Basically I figure that if there is a god, s/he is significantly smarter than I am, and is likely to have plans that span time periods that I can't even start to get my head around.

This attempt by the proponents of ID to science-ise religion seems like a desperate bid to prove that god exists, to prove the ineffable. To me it implies that faith isn't enough and coming from the religious, that's a little disturbing. If the folks in the faith business don't think it's enough to simply believe, how do they expect to convince the rest of us?

Science has been working for centuries to explain the "hows" of the universe. This feeds our minds, placates our monkey curiosity and allows us to make our way in the world. But its only part of the picture.

Religion and faith have another job, explaining the "Whys". Science simply cant do that, and it doesn't try.

It would seem to me that the religious crusaders are getting mixed up and are no longer playing to their strengths. Instead of trying to fight science on its own ground, they should accept that they don't have a good handle on the "hows" and really don't need to have one.

When we are alone and scared, abandoned by the ones we loved, and pursued by a world that feels hostile and unloving, its not the hows that save us from extinction. Its not the hows that help us face our fears, and the dark. Its the whys.

Tweet This Post

You would think that the prospect of a two hour walk to get home after midnight would deter most people, but eleven year olds can get funny ideas sometimes. And I was always a particularly stubborn one.

It was summer holidays and I had been at work with my father all day, helping out and trying to spend time together. Predictably the divorce had made creating a connection between us difficult and I think he was trying to find ways for us to get closer. Hanging out in the office wasn’t really the answer, but it was worth trying.

End of the day he had decided to take me to his favourite restaurant, the Leichhardt Tavern, for dinner and a few drinks with his friend Len Rigby who drank too much. Both my parents drank a lot during the years of the divorce, which was tough on me and my sister, so anything that encouraged them to drink more was not wonderful. Len was not my favourite person.

The Leichhardt was a pretty standard pub restaurant that had pushed up market, up market that is for Brisbane circa 1980; ferns, down lighting and travertine. The big attraction for my Father was his new girl friend, the barmaid Gillian; a tall, dark haired, calculating woman with oversized nipples and a very forward manner.

She was the sort of woman who seduced just about every man she met on one level or another. At least she tried. In my case, even if I hadn’t hated her for taking my mothers place, she was talking a foreign language. I knew what she was doing, but it was meaningless to me.

Between the two of then, Len and Gillian, my father was keep pretty distracted for most of the evening. So much for quality time.

Around 11.30, after four hours of this another bottle of wine was ordered and Gillian was finishing. It looked like things were going to kick on for a while yet. That was the point I snapped. So I excused myself, to go to the bathroom I think was the excuse, and headed for the door. It didn’t seem that far home. And I was pretty sure I knew the way. And in any case, I was pissed off. So I just left.

I think part of what I was doing was an attention getting exercise, but I was also out to show my Father that it was not ok to ignore me. So I started walking.

Late at night, and for an 11 year old, Brisbane is pretty quiet. Not much traffic and what there is, is pretty industrial. The streets between the city and where I lived were pretty grungy, at least to begin with. I suppose I should have been scared, but it was kind of exhilarating.

About 1/3rd of the way, dads friend Len found me. He pulled up beside me and told me how angry Dad was with me and that if I didn’t get in the car right away so he could take me back, there would be no end of trouble.

The problem for him was that at this point, I had gotten a taste of independence and I was not letting it go. I told him that I was not getting in the car, I was going to continue walking home. If Dad wanted to talk to me he could do so himself. And if Len go any ideas about making me, I would fight him and scream for the police. If he wanted to be up on a sexual abuse charge with a minor, he was welcome to it.

Len backed off. I walked home.

Dad caught up with me just as I arrived outside the house my mother and I were living in. He was furious, but he also recognized that I was just standing up for what I believed in. We made our peace in the car and agreed not to tell mum about it.

My Father had realized that I was not just a child any more and I think it was at that point that we started to develop a relationship based on mutual respect.

Tweet This Post

On a random browse of the internet (I was looking for Australia's territory in the Antarctic) I stumbled on a map with a slightly disturbing caption - "This color map of Australia is courtesy of the CIA Factbook".

THERE IS A CIA FACT BOOK? And its online!!

So of course I had to have a look. Interestingly enough its pretty detailed and, in its own way, factually pretty up to date. The obvious place to start with it was Iraq.

Some of the detail includes:

• A fairly good map, which is actually(better than the Australian one.
• Lots of detail on the geography, including that they don't have a name for the highest mountain, but they can tell which one it isn't.
• Population facts
• Economy
• Politics and
• Some history

The details in the fact book are fairly clearly skewed to the US governments current political agenda, but I am not sure anyone could reasonably expect anything else. Apart from that it was concise and pretty interesting.

The question I have is what else can they be telling us? Surely the CIA has better things to talk about than gross national product and the international organizations that country belongs to. You have to wonder if there isn't SOME sort of juicy gossip they could be letting out that doesn't a/ endanger the US national interest; and b/ risk starting a war with someone.

Surely there is some fresh kiss and tell type gossip that could serve to distract the global public from the actual events of the day.

Perhaps a daily index of the colour of heads of states underwear. Or maybe what they had for breakfast, or the last time they had sex with their spouse (or others). This last one could give us some real insight into some of their reactions to events. It would make it clear to us that if Tony was a little tetchy, it was a least PARTIALLY because Cherie wasn't giving him any sugar.

Given the sort of funding the CIA, and the rest of the global intelligence services, receive on a annual basis, surely the least we, the tax paying public can expect is some quality tabloid style entertainment.

Tweet This Post