Charlie Rose

Gelles  02/27/2012 08:31 PM Report

For a while or longer, it will take war to end war. So my desire to double our defense budget (for better enlisted pay and much better robotic weaponry -- lethal and non-lethal) is consistent with "Our game is political economy to end war and poverty". War movies may be the most popular and best products made by movie-makers world-wide. I believe, in the end, they will help to bring peace.

Crime movies and film noir, I fear, may cause us to accept real crime when we should not. I watched L A Confidential, with Kevin Spacey and Russel Crowe, on TCL's 31 Days with Oscar. It tells a cautionary tale of corruption in the police. It is true enough to be scary even decades after it was made.

Gelles  02/27/2012 08:08 PM Report

Something Else on TV In Addition to the Academy -- something I've enjoyed while writing to this archive:

[Google for this by entering Bill Maher:]

[EXTRACT copied at the teachable moment]

Bill Maher Tells Chris Matthews Why He Needed To Give Obama A Million Dollars by Jon Bershad | 6:40 pm, February 27th, 2012

If anyone didn’t get enough back-patting from the Oscars last night, there was plenty for them to catch when Bill Maher appeared on Hardball just now. Chris Matthews enthused that Maher was the “funniest, smartest guy in the room” and Maher talked about how all smart people watch Hardball every day.

Yay for friends! Anyway, amidst the meeting of the mutual admiration society, there was also talk of Maher’s million dollar donation to President Obama’s Super PAC and why he thinks it’s necessary.

[RELATED: Bill Maher Presents Obama Super PAC With $1 Million Check]

Maher explained that the game had changed since 2008. While Obama was able to bring in massive amounts of small donations then, the fact that corporate entities and billionaires can now give amounts upwards of many, many millions of dollars will completely alter the situation.

When Matthews jokingly asked him if he would be watching the Super PAC to see what percentage would be from him, Maher responded that, whatever it would be, it probably wouldn’t be enough.

“I was trying to throw a snowball to create an avalanche here to let the liberals who do think that this is already in the bag – probably because, like me, they watch Hardball every night and they see what idiots these Republicans are – but that’s not how the whole country sees it.

And, I promise you, when it comes to election night, it’s going to be neck and neck. It’s going to be a very tight race.”

The HBO host pointed out that half the country was still fighting against a fictional President; a Muslim Socialist who cut defense and coddled terrorists. Matthews asked how he, with such a liberal audience, connected with people with those beliefs.

Maher said that, while he didn’t want to connect with them, being on the road all the time enabled him to. Besides, he laughed, he got to talk to Tim Tebow at the Vanity Fair Oscars after party.

Oh, man, to be a fly on the wall during that conversation. Even if it wasn’t interesting, as a fly, you could get drunk totally easy at the open bar. Ah, that would be the life.

Anyway, Maher also took shots at the “idiots” running against Obama, joking that, with all the material Rick Santorum’s given him, he should have written him the check.

==== end extract by Jon Bershad

You see guys, the Oscars, their parties, their rich fans, all amount to more than nothing. They may be mere celebrities. But they often think exactly like me: I also say the election will be close. And I add, The President has failed to spend all the missing money we must. Sadly, his opponents want to spend less. Yet I have to admit that we must spend like the Cirque du Soleil -- with the consistent purpose to perform at the top of their game. Our game is political economy to end war and poverty. But are we consistent on this forum in wanting these goals?

Gelles  02/27/2012 07:37 PM Report

These comments are solely to let us read our own posts to ourselves and pretend most other commenter's offer inferior merchandise.

The inexcusable lack of post-send edit makes them worse than than they need to be.

The dog in "the Actor" shows Charlie Rose what to do: do your best Charlie -- not your worst. Add post-send edit to your system -- if only for minutes after sending.

Addendum:

Text by Christa Carone in Forbes:

More than 20 years after The New York times called Cirque du Soleil the “circus of the future,” it has grown from 20 to 5,000 performers in 22 unique shows across more than 40 countries around the world – and that’s just this year. Audiences remain enthralled: Cirque du Soleil’s “Iris” set the record for ticket prices at LA’s Kodak Theatre last year with a $253 ticket.

The company’s revenue will reportedly exceed $1 billion this year. Cirque du Soleil enters its third decade having become something all long-standing brands strive to be: consistently remarkable.

Many might attribute its success to the glitz of the show – the impeccable costumes, dizzying heights and fantastical imagery. But I’d argue the “secret sauce of Cirque” has to do with staying true to its purpose while remaining surprising. No sequins required, but lessons aplenty:

Quality and Consistency: From audience experience to mailers and merchandise, the Cirque du Soleil’s brand of creativity and surprise is communicated across all touch points.

Whether it’s a flier, radio spot or the food presentation in the VIP tent, most will instantly recognize Cirque du Soleil. Not only is it consistent – it’s consistently different. Even on the Vegas strip, surrounded by neon, the billboards for Cirque du Soleil stand apart. This is no easy feat for any company, let alone one that has a presence in more than 300 cities around the world.

Connecting with the core of a brand and expressing that across every single execution in an authentic, real way is the goal.

====== end extract from Carone on Forbes

Somehow REMant saw a $253 ticket as nothing special.

Gelles  02/27/2012 07:14 PM Report

Last nights segment by Cirque du Soleil was "magnificence" as a reward for "watching TV".

The comment against this awards show, the grand-daddy of the many shows that may congratulate job performance -- that excludes the doctors who saved my life and the hundreds of vocations of equal importance to "acting", is wholly without merit. REM and RIC do not know "what they are talking about". (The charge Obama makes against some of his critics -- not me, I hope.)

"Cirque du Soleil WOWS the Oscars", reads one Google response to their name. I might agree that Billy Crystal's efforts paled in comparison with the flyers of the Cirque. But Cristal may deserve some credit for the Cirque -- he certainly agreed to their appearance that was bound to "top" anything he might invent.

As to awards shows -- they are simple and try to find winners -- when there are always far more winners than the shows "elect". The way to watch them is to "join in the fun" and recognize in our own heads the multitude of winners who support our own enjoyments -- and to wish for more enjoyment by more, even all possible, ordinary people.

When we see what excites European football fans and Muslim street mobs looking for trouble, we ought to congratulate our commercial culture for telling us a silent French movie was the "best" movie of year. True it was only one of best -- but from what little of it was shown, you had to agree there was a dog out there waiting to do tricks on the big screen that you will "love" when you catch the Artist. I will, at any rate. And you two can amuse yourself appreciating your own sour notes.

REMant  02/27/2012 11:30 AM Report

I don't know why the Academy doesn't just give out awards to everyone, for participation. That's their shtick, isn't it? I mean, aren't the Oscars a perfect example of this country's unrivaled business acumen? A bunch of ppl in Los Angeles get corporations to give them money to pat themselves on the back and the public not only pays for it, they think they are getting something for nothing, and hours of it

Ricardo_Amaral  02/27/2012 05:15 AM Report

Each year the Oscar TV show is getting worse than the prior year.

There's only one word to describe last night's show: BORING...

Very boring....

.

Gelles  02/27/2012 03:48 AM Report

Documentary movies on the current global tipping point, in which American casino capitalism must adjust to Chinese, Russian, and European semi-planned capitalism, are necessary. But speeches, books and laws will have to do the job -- and in the end, it may take some time before we do what we did in January 1942--WAKE UP AND PRINT THE DEBT-FREE MONEY IT WILL TAKE TO CONQUER DEBT AND MISERY.

This does not exclude continued fractional reserve banking -- whereby we also create debt-based money created by the banking system.

The tons of money we supply to put everyone to work to pay their bills, live well, and produce the energy, education, skills, etc., needed, will HAVE TO BE PROTECTED FROM TOO HIGH A RATE OF INFLATION. We are currently shooting for 2% inflation. We will have to avoid hyperinflation -- even avoid much more than single digit rates.

The magic bullets we use to go to full employment overnight, as we did 1942, are government contracts with the private sector in the public interest.

The powder behind the magic bullets will be the price controls and anti-hoarding laws common sense will demand.

In addition, we will have to rapidly reform government laws, regulations and language to make it really simple to know what to do, how to do it, why to do it, and how to systematize reform to make it responsive to results and current events.

Lawyer-language needs to be reformed on Madison Avenue and in academia until we can say what we mean in very short order.

At least one level of appeal from initial bureaucratic rulings must be available -- one that can correct stupidity before it hurts. One good general system is to team authority -- by having "executive decision first" and "command decision next" and only when needed -- hopefully rarely.

This is the Navy Way on ships at sea. The Executive Officer runs everything. The Commanding Officer does nothing. Nothing but EVERYTHING -- when the first decision gets in trouble.

Double teaming human decisions sounds expensive in man-hours. In does not really work at the speed of airplanes in combat. But, where there is the time and manpower, it can save us from bureaucracy (which is an agent for self-inflicted wounds).

The "filthy rich" discussed below are often clean and far from mean. They want more money -- but that is not necessarily a problem. When great enterprises get going, they can often produce far more than government and its banks are willing to finance all the way to our workers who really need more health and happiness.

If we use private savings to absorb money and cost accounting to help manage prices to accomplish LOGISTICAL OBJECTIVES (not random outcomes spurred by fear of loss and debt,) then the "more" reward, by way of profits, salaries and wages, we use, the more necessary goods and services we may be able to deliver.

Our eventual goal must be a robot for every chore, and a human hand and brain for every problem whose solution is a joy.

Gelles  02/27/2012 03:05 AM Report

Below 3 posts are one message -- start with first at 2:40 am

Gelles  02/27/2012 03:02 AM Report

User Reviews: see http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1645089/ Reviewed by

| bobbobwhite (san ramon ca)

.. Documentary makes its points without dramatizing them

.. 26 October 2010

Matt Daman narrates this Wall Street/Washington-bashing documentary on the economic meltdown and why it happened, with excellent fact-based analysis and easily understood graphics to illustrate same.

The case was well made and indisputable by anyone of even modest intelligence, even Tea Party members. On second thought, maybe not them.

Even though it didn't get the interview cooperation (duh) of many of the filthy rich top tier culprits who greatly helped cause the meltdown, it had enough interviews with second tier players making fools of themselves to effectively show how incredibly sold out some people can get when the chance for big dollars shows up, even high ranked educators and deans in some of our most prestigious colleges who willingly compromised their own schools' reputations for money.

The film showed that they too are no better than mere puppets of filthy rich power mongers when shown the color of big money.

The indirect but overriding point made most well in this film is that filthy rich business people and crooked politicians are turning America into a society where greedy money power rules over anything and everyone no matter that terrible society-busting crimes are committed to do it, and that greedy riches are fast becoming the end-all and be-all for a growing number of unspeakably dishonest people, and that these sleazebags are uncaring about any fairness, decency, honesty, compassion, duty and honor that built this country into what it once was but no longer is.

[The point is, also,] that Washington is a willing partner in all of it and that American citizens no longer have any legal protection or relief from [Wall Street's and Washington's] predatory ways that are leading this country into the abyss.

===================

64 of 87 people found this review helpful. Was this review helpful to you? [Gelles voted YES]

Gelles  02/27/2012 02:44 AM Report

continued from 5 min ago:

'Inside Job' provides a comprehensive analysis of the global financial crisis of 2008, which at a cost over $20 trillion, caused millions of people to lose their jobs and homes in the worst recession since the Great Depression, and nearly resulted in a global financial collapse. Through exhaustive research and extensive interviews with key financial insiders, politicians, journalists, and academics, the film traces the rise of a rogue industry which has corrupted politics, regulation, and academia. It was made on location in the United States, Iceland, England, France, Singapore, and China.

Above Written by Anonymous

Gelles  02/27/2012 02:40 AM Report

Laser-Shark~

Nice comment. I went to your target "Inside Job" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1645089/ -- and I would like to copy some of it here. The easy way to do this is with several posts.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  02/26/2012 10:13 PM Report

I also love the Academy Award Nominated Short Films.

They used to put an entire years worth of nominees on one DVD. I have seen several years of nominations on DVD, and when the county library still had the money, I could request them from any library in the country.

Here is the one for 2005: http://www.amazon.com/Collection-Academy-Award-Nominated-Short/dp/B000FSMEDS/ref=sr_1_3?s=dvd&ie=UTF8 &qid=1330312081&sr=1-3

2007: http://www.amazon.com/Collection-Academy-Award-Nominated-Short/dp/B0014D5R9Q/ref=sr_1_2?s=dvd&ie=UTF8 &qid=1330312081&sr=1-2

2006: http://www.amazon.com/Collection-Academy-Award-Nominated-Short/dp/B000NU2TJW/ref=sr_1_4?s=dvd&ie=UTF8 &qid=1330312081&sr=1-4

SharkswithfrikingLazers  02/26/2012 09:34 PM Report

I LOVE the movies. I try to see one every week but it is usually on DVD.

I have gained a wealth of knowledge from the movies and the local Community College has really helped in this regard with many a film series.

"Moneyball" is a movie that has lead to many discussions in my world.

"The Help" is a movie they showed at the Community College this month for Black History Month.

For 2011 though, the best two movies I watched are "Inside Job" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1645089/ and "Exit Through The Gift Shop" http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1587707/.

Gelles  02/26/2012 05:48 AM Report

Everyone wants to be never unhappy and always important. The more important you feel the unhappier you may become. Movies bring this to mind.

I have only seen "Marilyn" of the movies mentioned these interviews. "The Artist" is the only one I'm likely to see in a multiplex. The others will meet me on the flat screen TV. But CR has made me want to see "The Descendants" for sure. Downtown or at home, I'm not sure.

This interview is off the recent guest list (but on the Movies, TV Theater list.) So I am alone so far on comments. Not as much fun as having a LITTLE company.

Try this one on for size: In the future individual lives will be recorded in real time by cameras attached to us that see whatever we see and hear whatever we hear. They will not see us seeing and hearing. But we will be inserted into the record by artificial means. Then the real time recording will be condensed to keep only the time worth remembering because it is more interesting rather than less. These "movies", machine made, will be like an fa,ily album and individual diary. If they never get invented, something else will serve the same purpose.

Gelles  02/25/2012 07:13 AM Report

There is real life. And then there is the movie. Finally we have the contest to find the winner. Whose life, whose movie, whose performance was or is the winner? Whose few seconds of comment after winning is another winner? And, in the audience are those who really care -- and those who could not care less but are there too. Quite a tempest in a tea cup. Quite a lot of nothing about something -- once a year. One thing is for sure -- it's better seen at home on the VCR in bed than anywhere else -- not much after the real event, but enough not to interfere with your own real life.

The best academy awards ever were given on the night Lawrence Olivier topped all other's contributions to this appreciation of the idea of making movies if you can.

Movies at Radio City Music Hall in the 1930's were shown between the live entertainment on its stage. I was there in the audience in the middle of the Great Depression. Not often. But sometimes.

Watching a good movie and remembering it later is a treat we've all enjoyed. It's not the same as making one and not the same as living through a real story that ought to be a movie. But compared to how we otherwise spend our time, movies are the cheapest reproductions on the market. See one today, on Turner Classic Movies, for free.