Staring James Caviezel, Guy Pearce, & Luis Guzman, Directed by Kevin Reynolds 2:11 (PG-13).
I watch this two nights ago because there was no football on and because I want to clear up space on my DVR for new movies that are on this weekend--HD movies take up a lot of space. It is a film adaptation of the famous book by Alexandre Dumas, which is in turn the only abridged book I've read because I couldn't find it at the time unabridged (and had heard the unabridged version was boring). I was originally enticed to read the book because it bills itself as a book about a prison break, when it's really about revenge. I watch the movie because of the cast, the 3-star rating, the description as a "stylized adaptation," and because there wasn't anything else good to record.
The movie was fine, fun to watch once. I remember while reading the book that I was disappointed the whole time because I expected more from such a famous piece of literature. My reaction while watching the movie was the opposite: I was surprised it was as good as it was and kept wondering why I'd never heard of it before when it came out just seven years ago. However, it was indeed an adaptation because the complexity of the revenge plotting and the Paris society was replaced with a lot of action sequences centered around swords. Oops. Considering that, the writing was good. I particularly liked the representations of Napoleon Bonaparte. I'm giving this movie an average rating, but might revise upward mentally over time.
Rating: **1/2
Friday, December 4, 2009
Thursday, December 3, 2009
Absence of Malice
Staring Sally Fields & Paul Newman, Directed by Sydney Pollack 1:56 (PG).
This movie had that great '80s up-beat feel despite being about corruption and murder--superficially. I suppose it was really about the ethical responsibilities of journalism and the nature of truth. But who's counting. The film was terrific, or at least dandy.
Paul Newman was publicly accused of murdering a union leader in Miami despite a complete lack of evidence because his relatives were involved in organized crime. The leader of the anti-corruption task force even admitted he didn't think Newman did it, but felt that he knew who did--or could find out--and that justified pressuring him. Therefore, he leaked that Newman was under investigation to journalist Sally Fields, who was happy to report the story. Well, this didn't go so great for Newman and there you have it, a movie is born.
The plot gets more complex as Fields falls for Newman and Newman plots to overthrow everybody. A lot of people may feel the movie is a bit slow, so you've got to be prepared for Sydney Pollack's artistry. I liked it.
Rating: ***
This movie had that great '80s up-beat feel despite being about corruption and murder--superficially. I suppose it was really about the ethical responsibilities of journalism and the nature of truth. But who's counting. The film was terrific, or at least dandy.
Paul Newman was publicly accused of murdering a union leader in Miami despite a complete lack of evidence because his relatives were involved in organized crime. The leader of the anti-corruption task force even admitted he didn't think Newman did it, but felt that he knew who did--or could find out--and that justified pressuring him. Therefore, he leaked that Newman was under investigation to journalist Sally Fields, who was happy to report the story. Well, this didn't go so great for Newman and there you have it, a movie is born.
The plot gets more complex as Fields falls for Newman and Newman plots to overthrow everybody. A lot of people may feel the movie is a bit slow, so you've got to be prepared for Sydney Pollack's artistry. I liked it.
Rating: ***
Monday, November 23, 2009
Nijo Sushi Bar & Grill
In Post Alley, between Madison & Spring.
I write about my second visit to this establishment, which was for happy hour last week. The first time I was here it was average, so I suggested it as a happy hour destination for a change-of-pace. Oops. Nothing about the experience, at least as was within the control of the restaurant, was enjoyable. The service was slow, the wait-staff inattentive, the fish poor, and the food bad. Oh, and it was horribly musty inside.
The first time I went there was for a regular, weekday dinner. Everything was very non-discript. Decent, if uncreative & nontraditional menu. Worth trying again, but nothing to write home/blog about.
This time was different. We had to wait an hour for any food, which at happy hour could be a problem if you're considering multiple courses. As it was, that didn't matter because one round of food was more than enough. We didn't finish everything because of taste and nothing was any good. The prices were ok for a happy hour menu, and there were a few more options than some others, but, given the abundance of sushi options in Seattle, go somewhere, anywhere else.
Rating: *
I write about my second visit to this establishment, which was for happy hour last week. The first time I was here it was average, so I suggested it as a happy hour destination for a change-of-pace. Oops. Nothing about the experience, at least as was within the control of the restaurant, was enjoyable. The service was slow, the wait-staff inattentive, the fish poor, and the food bad. Oh, and it was horribly musty inside.
The first time I went there was for a regular, weekday dinner. Everything was very non-discript. Decent, if uncreative & nontraditional menu. Worth trying again, but nothing to write home/blog about.
This time was different. We had to wait an hour for any food, which at happy hour could be a problem if you're considering multiple courses. As it was, that didn't matter because one round of food was more than enough. We didn't finish everything because of taste and nothing was any good. The prices were ok for a happy hour menu, and there were a few more options than some others, but, given the abundance of sushi options in Seattle, go somewhere, anywhere else.
Rating: *
Friday, November 20, 2009
The Bridal Party
By F. Scott Fitzgerald, as reprinted in The Short Stories collected by Scribner, 15 pages (1930).
The trouble with doing book reviews is that I have to read the whole book before doing them. I like reading, so it's not so much a problem for me, but it makes the time between posts rather long. To counter my dearth of reviews lately, I've decided to do a short review of a magnificent short story (contrary to my usual view) I just read.
The story opens with a Fitzgerald-esque victim of unrequited love who has just learned that his subject is betrothed and that the wedding "moreover, was to be held, not in New York, decently and far away, but here in Paris under his very nose." What jerks for not thinking of his feelings. This character then proceeds to meet the bridegroom and they are instructed to become friends. The two have a bit of a gentlemanly struggle and actually do.
The story ends well, if you're not a romantic, but it's the feeling of class and the flow of life that make the story enjoyable. If you can conveniently get your hands on it, I think it's a story that anyone who likes Fitzgerald would enjoy--managing to capture the feel of his books in just fifteen pages.
Rating: ***1/2
The trouble with doing book reviews is that I have to read the whole book before doing them. I like reading, so it's not so much a problem for me, but it makes the time between posts rather long. To counter my dearth of reviews lately, I've decided to do a short review of a magnificent short story (contrary to my usual view) I just read.
The story opens with a Fitzgerald-esque victim of unrequited love who has just learned that his subject is betrothed and that the wedding "moreover, was to be held, not in New York, decently and far away, but here in Paris under his very nose." What jerks for not thinking of his feelings. This character then proceeds to meet the bridegroom and they are instructed to become friends. The two have a bit of a gentlemanly struggle and actually do.
The story ends well, if you're not a romantic, but it's the feeling of class and the flow of life that make the story enjoyable. If you can conveniently get your hands on it, I think it's a story that anyone who likes Fitzgerald would enjoy--managing to capture the feel of his books in just fifteen pages.
Rating: ***1/2
Friday, November 13, 2009
Phizer to Leave City That Won Land-Use Suit
By Patrick McGeehan, N.Y. Times, November 13, 2009, at A1.Proving that the topic for my work-in-progress article on eminent domain is still current, an article was published on the front page of today's New York Times about the case that is the "hook" for mine. For some quick background, the most important case in federal eminent domain law is Kelo v. New London, which some commentators feel takes all the teeth out of the "public use" element of the Fifth Amendment's Takings Clause; I disagree, but there's not room for that here. The case came down in 2001 and arose out of New London's condemnation of some houses in what it considered a blighted neighborhood to create a larger lot for commercial development. The villain of the case was Pfizer, who owned some adjacent land and was to be the primary business beneficiary of the economic development plan.
Accelerating to today, Pfizer is leaving after just an eight year stay. They're moving the 1,400 jobs in New London to another Connecticut town, where they have a large office anyway, as a cost-cutting measure. This is too bad for the residents of New London: they gave Pfizer a ten-year, 80% tax cut to put jobs in the community and now Pfizer will be keeping the tax savings but renting its office building out, probably to existing New London businesses who will be able to save on rent by locating in the lower-tax building. This is good news for me though: I've just gotten some free publicity on my issue for shopping around my article--maybe Connecticut Law Review or Yale Law Journal will be interested now.
Rating: ***
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
