An "Amazing" concept

Despite the appearance of being one of those "dry, boring, period piece" movies, here is why I think today's Gen-Xers, Gen-Yers and Generation Next-ers should embrace the new release, "Amazing Grace."

How many of us innately hunger for a life with meaning and purpose? The man at the heart of the film, William Wilberforce, absolutely embodied that. Who wants to have convictions? Real ones, that withstand time, repeated defeat, unpopularity, and even the political fringes of war? Wilberforce could give lessons, and in a way, this film delivers them. One of the early, noteworthy lines that stick with viewers (and several in it will) comes from a friend who reminds our hero that his devotion to his cause (in this case, the abolition of the British slave trade) has taken his youth, and his health. Who among us today would sacrifice either? And what kind of cause could possibly be worth it?

Here's a guy who literally gets ulcers after reading a letter from a fellow abolitionist about the brutalities seen against Africans on foreign soil. Here's a guy who'd rather fold his cards than take his rightfully-earned kitty of cash because an opponent has included his African butler as payment. Here's a guy haunted by visions of slaves bound-and-chained in the reflections seen from his mirror. Here's a guy so depressed after years of defeat and yet still so impassioned about the ongoing injustice of it all that he nearly bites off the head of the pretty young thing he's recounting his tale to. She tells him that's a sign that rather than trying to force himself to swallow injustice that is so distasteful, he should spew the poison out.

I daresay, I know peers that would give their right arms for that kind of passion, vision, verve. Had they a man to emulate like that, one grounded in the steady resolution that peaceful, moral, honest life cannot be lived unless a singular evil is completely eradicated, I do believe society might not know what hit it. And that is compelling stuff, because, as we learn from the film, what grounds Wilberforce is not his cause, but his faith. He knows his Creator, the same being whose workmanship he sees reflected in spider webs and wet grass, did not order a world where a man would enslave and dehumanize another man. That kind of conviction is utterly calm, and at heart, unshakeable, though all hell (ill health, war, false accusations from former friends) conspire to shake it. Is it any wonder Africans who never met the man called him "King" Wilberforce?

I love the history in this film. I love the humor in it (and yes, even the threads of romance.) I love how the power-hungry nuts that are so hard to crack with the god's-honest truth finally succumb to the weight of it. (Refc: 'noblesse oblige'). I love that people who may never have known the origin of the world's most famous hymn, likely performed most regularly on the bagpipes, can finally discover it was written by a repentant slave trader. By the end of the film it should be clear to the audience this man truly would have gone to his grave without regret had he never lived to see the fruit of all his labors. If that's not a hero, I don't know what is.

But don't take my word for it. Go see for yourselves.

And now, the real question ...

No, not will Scorsese win director? That was a given.
Not will Helen Mirren give a classy speech that comes in under the 45-second rule? Also a given.
But, is it even remotely possible to keep the Office Oscar?
I honestly don't know .... It doesn't bode well. In prior years, I've missed an average of six or so categories. This year, it was 10. Oy. My partner in crime, at least as pertains to the Column Central Oscar Review Crew, also missed 10. I find it hard to believe no one else in the office would not have bettered that statistic.
It'll be tomorrow before we know for sure, though. I expect I'll be conceding the little guy to someone completely unexpected .... we shall see.

Oscar miscellany and what-have-you

I love Clint Eastwood. I love his red handkerchief. I love that they let him present an award for lifetime achievement in scoring, given that he himself so loves music and scoring. And hello? Clint can translate Italian? (or whatever language this guy is speaking in?) Did I say I love Clint yet?

Question: Will we ever have an Oscar show where Celine Dion does NOT sing? Yes, the woman has a lovely voice, but as it was we still have 3 Dreamgirls numbers to get through and about seven more awards, not to mention the In Memoriam segment. We'll definitely be up past midnight here, folks. So much for that "thank-you" cam invention. Note to future Oscar producers: the way to shorten the show, folks, is by eliminating all the self-congratulatory "artsy-ness" like human body shadow dancers, and the multiple "in celebration of" reels. Sigh.

Ok, I do like this red dress Jennifer Hudson is wearing, and Beyonce' is also looking stellar. They both sound fantastic. I'm liking all these songs. And-- wait for it -- another upset. After all that staging, NO songs from "Dreamgirls" take home the gold. Instead, Melissa Etheridge adds to the Al Gore love-fest. Though I must say, Gore ought to give future wannabe politicos (Yes, I mean you Michael Moore!) lessons in tasteful, appropriate public speech.

Didn't I tell you the rest of Jodie Foster's dress would look great?

Upsets. Who'da thunk it?

Hmmm, Alan Arkin over Eddie Murphy. I'm actually a little sad for Eddie. I hope his pretty new girlfriend helps him get over the loss. But that was kind of interesting for Arkin to leave the statue sitting on the stage while he read his little note.

Speaking of ... what's with the little notes this year? Bring back the Black/Reilly/Ferrell factor ... please!

Oh, my. "Happy Feet" over "Cars." If this keeps up, the pundits might be eating their words about the best picture race. Yikes. This is nothing like the year "LOTR:Return of the King" took them all. More caffeine is probably in order.

Technically, animated short should be considered an upset too. I tracked about 8 critics to 1 going for "The Little Matchgirl."

Ooo, kudos to Meryl Streep for whipping off "imperious" at the drop of a hat with Anne Hathaway and Emily Blunt. Chilling. And my goodness, another upset: "Marie Antoinette" over "Dreamgirls" for costume.

Good grief. And now, "Pan's Labyrinth" over "Children of Men" for cinematography. Ok, now I'm not worried so much about losing the Office Oscar to Kevin as losing to somebody else.

In the first few minutes ...

... I love the white-screen opening. It reminds me of a few years back when they had everybody from Laura Bush to Woody Allen saying what their favorite movies were. And the riffs on those who've lost multiple nominations ... hysterical!

Ellen's getting in some good digs. And I love the boots!
Quick aside: Abigail Breslin looks sweet and appropriate for a 10-year-old.

I'm liking the color of Jodie Foster's dress. Promising. Maybe we'll get to see all of it?
Ok, the first award does not bode well for my picks this year. But at least Kevin (my editor, with whom competition for these picks can get a little cutthroat) missed it too.

OH MY WORD!! A Will Ferrell and Jack Black duet again --yes! Wait! John C. Reilly, too? We should BE so lucky! More of these acts will keep the show humming right along.

Cute bit with the kids and the short jokes. I swear, these short categories are the hardest ones of all to predict. Oy vey. If I can emerge with even one pick intact, maybe there's hope for keeping the Office Oscar. We'll see ....

ReD Carpet Fashions

Ah yes, one of my favorite parts of the Oscars -- the fashions!!
(Yes, it's my annual tradition to buy the PEOPLE and US Weekly Oscar fashion mags the week following the awards ceremony.)

So far, Lisa Ling gets a tip of the hat for daring to go short. It looks good on her.
Cate Blanchett is cool and classy, as ever.
WHAT is with that giant red bow on Nicole Kidman's shoulder? Oy vey! Someone needs to slice that bad boy off.
Jennifer Hudson: Oh my. Please honey, tell me you'll ditch the fantailed silver shrug before you get to the microphone.
Hmm, Emily Blunt ("The Devil Wears Prada") opted against the "dripping with diamonds" look with a bare neck and simple stud earrings. Simple, and sincere. I actually believe her when she says she's really a jeans and flip-flops girl.
Kate Winslet: Love the hair. Love the STYLE of the dress. But the color? Not her best choice. It's too pale for someone with her sparkle and verve.
Helen Mirren looks stunning and every inch a queen. Kate, my dear, please direct your stylist to take a few notes from Helen's on selecting colors that flatter and compliment hair and skin tone.

Oooo, it's starting. Gotta go!

Let the Countdown Begin ...

Yippee! Less than 19 hours til Oscar.

If you want some laughs about just how serious I get about this prediction business, be sure to read Kevin Frisch's "Funny Thing" column in today's Sunday Messenger. (And by the way, that photo is the only place you'll see me clutching my little Office Oscar. Ordinarily, he sits on top of my desk where I can keep an eye on him.)

So, you know how all of us viewers back home start yawning when the winners start rattling through a nonstop list of 50 bijillion names of industry insiders (like agents, attorneys, ninth-grade drama teachers, etc.)? Well, the Oscar organizers finally decided to get a little more serious about that 45-second rule than leaving it all in the hands of the orchestra conductor (whom Julia Roberts, you may recall, had no trouble man-handling when it was her turn at the microphone). This year, it seems they intend for a new little invention to restore dignity, spontaneity and warmth to the whole process of thank-you speeches (as opposed to the verbal air-kissing to which we have sadly, become accustomed). Not to mention, this little gem should keep the show from wading into embarrassing late-night punchline fodder with URL's like the one Billy Crystal sheepishly rattled off one year in his monologue: www.whyistheshowsolong.com
Naturally, a woman -- in this case, producer Laura Ziskin -- was the brainchild behind that creative solution. You go, girl!

Lunch with Little Rachel

It's not too often that a reporter gets an invitation to a birthday lunch with a reader's family just for the sheer why not of it. So, when the phone at my desk rang Friday morning and a Mr. Elvin Weaver asked if I would be free at noon to come out to see his daughter, Rachel, I wasn't sure what to think. The paper generally doesn't cover any birthday parties except the 100-year-old kind. I was trying to find a kind way to phrase that when he added that it wasn't a request to be in the newspaper. Rather, the "scholars" of the family would be home at noon when their one-room school house let out for the day, and if I was free then, he thought it would be nice for one Rachel to be at the birthday of another Rachel.

It hit me all at once Elvin Weaver was Mennonite, Old-Order Groffdale to be specific. (In laymen's terms, that's horse-and-buggy Mennonite to those of you who may never have read my four-part series on the influx of Mennonite families to the Finger Lakes.) It's been almost four years since I wrote that, and though there have been a few, rare articles that have served as touchpoints to their community since, I never met anyone from this particular family. I hung up thinking it was one of my most unusual calls and nearly dismissed it. But when I heard "Aww, that's sweet. You should go. How often does that happen?" from a handful of co-workers, I reconsidered.

A few hours later, I found myself, flower plant in hand, inside a neat, simple farmhouse outside Rushville. They'd held lunch for me while my car fought the snowdrifts that had blown back into the roads along the way. This was not just soup-and-sandwiches, but a full-fledged, farm-hardy spread: mashed potatoes, corn, beef-and-pork meatballs from the pig slaughtered last week, sweet gravy, macaroni-and-cheese, and homemade sweet pickles. The older boys -- Irvin, John David, and Timothy -- put quite a bit of it away. There was cake too, of course, a simple, single-layer strawberry cake in a rectangular pan that the older girls, Rosene and Norma, helped their mother decorate with icing, flavored mint chips and a few plastic flowers.
And I'm sure several children were involved in the makings of the bucket of hand-churned, homemade vanilla ice cream. It was rather humbling for a perfect stranger to be welcomed in and given a seat at the head of the table. Back in the days I knew attempting to gain the confidence and hopefully, respect of such conservative folk might be helped by more conservative apparel, I wore long dresses and skipped the jewelry. No such luck Friday, and goodness knows, the bright pink sweater, silver necklace, and blue jeans almost certainly had something to do with the whispers and glances coming my way from the kids. However, some cultural traditions are shared no matter what community you come from, and birthday cake rituals are certainly one of those.

Chubby-cheeked little Rachel Weaver stood on her daddy's lap and contemplated the burning candle atop her cake while brother Nelson, two seats away in his booster seat wasted no time in showing her how to blow it out. She promptly stuck her fingers in the frosting, like every one-year-old any of us has ever sung "Happy Birthday" to. The lone present, from her grandparents, was a set of plastic training pants and a hardy book with a kitten on its thick cover. As expected, she seemed more intrigued by the shiny, crinkly paper it was wrapped in.

Before I left, I was shown the stack of paper five-year-old Lamar has filled with drawings: silos, tractors, milk trucks, barns, and even snowplows he's seen. I heard about the English and arithmetic classes some of the kids had been studying, and how the farm is now a fully-organic
operation. As expected, a few references were made to my old news series and other articles Mr. Weaver had followed since. He enjoyed reading them, had been meaning to issue an invitation for some time, he said, and had heard about me from English and Mennonite neighbors quoted in my original series. For whatever reason, he'd remembered that idea Friday and followed through.

I left thinking it may have been little Rachel's celebration, but this Rachel was given the treat.
Unbeknownst to the Weaver family, Friday was my last day as a reporter for the Daily before I move to a new role writing for one of MPN's Monroe County weeklies. A momentary immersion in the Mennonite community again isn't technically "coming full circle," but it was definitely a delightful way to cap my daily career. Simple, sincere, sweet.

Little Rachel will probably never remember her first birthday, but I will never forget it.

A Letter on "Letters"

Dear fellow film fans,
For the next few weeks, you have an unprecedented opportunity to see a pair of movies exactly as their director designed them to be seen -- together.

On Tuesday the 6th, Clint Eastwood's "Flags of Our Fathers" came out on DVD. I was one of the lucky folks who snapped up a rental copy this week and then managed to get to the nearest theater showing the companion film "Letters from Iwo Jima" in less than 24 hours. Seeing them essentially back-to-back made comparing and contrasting the two simple. It also made for a holistic cinematic experience. While each film can stand alone (and well), taken together, the message of each is more powerful and more profound.

Here's why I'm urging you to try and do the same:
First, if you're not familiar (or comfortable) with the style of a subtitled "foreign" film, starting with "Letters" might be chewing off a bit much at one time. The actors were filmed speaking Japanese, and for the novice film-goer, that takes a bit of getting used to. But because each movie serves as the backdrop for the other, you can't let a little thing like subtitles scare you away from one of the films or you'll only have one side of the story.

Second, you don't have to worry that because the films are telling different "sides" of the same major WWII battle, it's going to seem like watching a tennis match twice, just from seats at opposite ends of the court. There were a few rare moments in "Letters" where I caught myself asking: "Did I see this before?" But I think it only seems that way, in part because "Flags" was so fresh in my mind. And frankly, that was a good thing, because the films don't "mirror" each other. Rather, any common touchpoints from the battle for Iwo Jima (the raising of the American flag on Mt. Suribachi, for example) aren't American-vs.-Japanese perspective, but just threads that intertwine on the back of the tapestry of history. You can't look at all the knots and tangles on the back of a tapestry, focus in on one or two colors and figure you've understood the weaver's design. It won't make sense until you look at it from the front and see how all the threads came together to form the finished work.

Third, it's not so much the battle that Eastwood is trying to capture on film, but the personal battles each character faced. Just because the soldiers from each country were considered enemies doesn't mean they didn't have fears, failings, or fortitude in common. Yes, the critics are right and "Letters" is the better cinematic achievement of the two, and the better "war movie" of the pair, but that is almost irrelevant. (Almost, considering "Letters" could walk away with the Best Picture Oscar this year.)

What Eastwood wants to get at, it seems, is that while war is hell and the soldiers tasked for it do want to serve ably, and hopefully, nobly, the greater hell is going home without the guy that fought next to you. And it would seem that holds true no matter which "side" you were on, or under what circumstances you actually make it home. And further, it seems the truth of all of that is something that's sometimes too difficult for a soldier to share with the people he loves most. Eastwood seems to caution us against claiming to understand a battle or the soldiers that fought it if we're basing it primarily on a famous photo, or a letter from the front -- or just one movie.

Most sincerely,
your aspiring amateur film buff (me!)

In the Spirit of the Game ...

... let's have an informal poll, shall we?

Name the funniest Super Bowl ad you saw tonight. Admittedly, I didn't catch them all, but my top two picks were the Coca-Cola chugging senior citizen who suddenly found new zest for life (professing love to the cute grandma; getting a tattoo; driving a motorbike, etc.) and the wedding officiated by the auctioneer. (Think it may have been a Budweiser commercial?) Sadly, I missed the debut of the do-it-yourselfer clip that supposedly cost the amateur filmmaker just $12.59 cents to produce, but was sponsored by some big-bucks corporate outfit footing the bill for it to air during the priciest night of prime-time TV.

Sad, though, that just two of tonight's ads have stayed with me, out of the dozens that played. But the same is true for every Super Bowl year. There just aren't many really great ones to remember. But the good ones? Ah, they go on to live in infamy. Here are my favorites:

5) The Budweiser Clydesdales play football in the snow, while two zebras serve as referees. Even these "stripes" get criticized for making bad calls.

4) A number of stone-faced kids, filmed in black and white, prattle on about how their dreams are to grow up to be underpaid, overstressed, brown-nosers that can never get ahead. Oh, the irony!

3) Big-name athletes and coaches like Charles Barkley, Barry Sanders, Tara Lipinski, and Mike Ditka play bingo, share dorm rooms, etc. at a "retirement" home where they've all been put out to pasture. Retiring rich never looked so painful.

2) Rough-hewn cowboys representing some unheard-of dot-com company have to herd a bunch of unruly kitty-cats. This ad truly was "the cat's meow."

1) NFL player Terry Tate works as Reebok's "Office Linebacker" cutting down on the secret games of computer Solitaire, the personal phone calls on company time, the waste of paper at the copier, breaks that run overtime etc. etc. One word: Hysterical.

But do tell, ReD Zone readers, what were your favorites?