As I start this post, it is 3:23 in the morning. Now 3:24. My girlfriend is in bed sleeping and I am watching one of my favorite movies of all time, Finding Forrester. I love this movie. It combines two of my favorite themes of all time: writing and basketball. I’ve always wanted to meet someone like Jamal Wallace to tell me the history of BMW.

I get most of my writing advice from this movie and it kinda is true. I’m in a thoughtful mood, so bear with me if you could. Ever since I saw this movie for the first time on an airplane to Arizona, I have just started thinking this way about my writing, however good or bad that may be. “No thinking, that comes later. You write your first draft with your heart, and you rewrite with your head. The first key to writing is to write, not think.”

It’s easy to do, makes sense and you just let it go. Sean Connery plays Wiliam Forrester, a hermit-ish kind of guy who wrote a “great 20th century novel,” but afterward fell off the writing map and lives in seclusion in a ghetto part of Bronx, New York. You’ve all seen the movie, and if you haven’t you should, so I won’t bore you with a plot analysis. I really don’t have much to say, but watching this movie, or Californication or Good Will Hunting or some other kind of bull shit that is meant to be a feel-good, inspirational thing that can incorporate things that interest me, namely writing or narcissism, always make me want to be proactive and do something worthwhile, so I come to the blog because it’s my outlet for the 5-10 hits I get a day. But it’s late and I should get some sleep sometime. I guess that’s all for today. Enjoy your Who Dey Sunday. Night y’all.

Cheers.

“The words we write for ourselves are always so much better than the words we write others.”

Most Hollywood sports movies suck. They’re saccharine, pre-packaged and market-tested so as to be almost completely devoid of even the slightest thought. But some Hollywood movies are flat out offensive. The latest example is a movie called The Blindside. It’s based on a non-fiction book by the talented author Michael Lewis. Lewis has written winningly about baseball, the stock market, and the Internet boom. The Blindside is about football. Specifically, it refers to the blind side of the quarterback or the area beyond his vision while he waits in the pocket to throw a pass. Because of the quarterback’s importance (and the sizable contract he’s issued), the responsibility of protecting him has become only slightly less paramount than the job of the quarterback itself. This duty of protection falls on the sizable shoulders of very large but nimble men, who are paid handsomely, though not quite as well as the men they protect. In the book, Lewis ably details the relationships, developments, dangers and politics of The Blindside.

He also trains his eye on one Michael Oher. At the time of the book, Oher was still a teenager. He was born in Memphis to a crack-addicted mother. His absentee father was murdered. He attended at least nine different schools and repeated the first and second grade. No one had Michael’s blind side. Except Michael was well over six feet tall and tipped the scales in the neighborhood of three hundred pounds. A family friend, at the request of Oher’s dying grandmother, tried to get him enrolled at Briarcrest Christian School. He was denied at first, but after completing a home-study program of apparently dubious merits, he was eventually enrolled. While there he caught the attention of the children of Sean and Leigh Anne Tuohy, which given his girth was probably not hard to do. The Tuohys took Oher in. They fed him—no small task. They gave him a tutor. They paid his tuition. They basically were the parents that the young man desperately needed. He nudged his grade point average from 0.9 to 2.5. He eventually graduated from Briarcrest, accepted a scholarship to the University of Mississippi and last year was the first round draft pick of the Baltimore Ravens. He signed a contract for $13.8 million.

But Oher’s is not a simple feel-good story. There were accusations that the Tuohys only took an interest in Oher because they saw dollar signs in their future. Not that they needed it because Sean Tuohy is the announcer for the NBA’s Memphis Grizzlies. He’s also a graduate of Mississippi, which is where Oher ended up going after being recruited by dozens of schools. Then there’s the matter of Oher’s coach, who was given a job of little responsibility at Mississippi. Some thought this was a case of quid pro quo.

Oher’s story is hardly unique. High-level college athletics is filled with young black men who have been coddled, spoiled and sheltered by adults who do so, in the name of altruism and, often, God. Yet I can’t help but wonder if any of these adults would give so much as a fleeting glance to these kids if they weren’t such gifted athletes and, therefore, potential pots of gold at the end of a rainbow. Actually I don’t wonder that at all, I know they wouldn’t. I was a high school basketball coach for nine years and saw several instances of minority athletes given a chance only because of their physical exploits while other needier students were ignored.

I have not seen the movie and won’t because it focuses only on the kindness and “tough love” of the Tuohys, played by Sandra Bullock and Tim McGraw. What was so special about Michael Oher? How many other kids did they take an interest in? Were those kids athletes?

The story of Michael Oher is the perfect vehicle to raise the issue of how people involved in big-time college sports exploit young people for financial gain while nominally invoking academics and fairness. I don’t think for a minute that Tinseltown would address such a complex, controversial issue. Yet, not only is this given the kid gloves treatment in The Blindside, the movie perpetuates a niche within the sports genre: the black man who can only be saved through the benevolence and decency of white people. A short list:

Finding Forrester, Radio, Blue Chips, The Hurricane.

These are example of what are commonly referred to as institutional racism. Only slightly less insulting are the movies where white people hold black people in awe for the simple reason that they seem to be people of color who are (gasp!) smart, competent or determined. Examples: Remember the Titans, The Green Mile, The Legend of Bagger Vance and any recent movie starring Morgan Freeman.

For an honest tale of the complexities of race, athletics and corruption rent, the sweeping Hoop Dreams. It’s a documentary. It might be the best documentary, on any subject, that I’ve seen (And I’ve seen hundreds.) In the meantime, boycott The Blindside.

posted by: chemalopez

♣ El indomable Will Hunting

Good Will Hunting, (1997)

Discursos inolvidables

Si hace algunos años,  en algún momento de tu guión – un punto de giro, quizá, un story beat de importancia – dispusieses de un discurso hecho para marcar un antes y un después en la historia,  te hubiese recomendado la voz y presencia de Robin Williams. Al Pacino mediante.

El joven e ilusionado profesor del Club de los poetas muertos es ahora un hombre maduro, encerrado en sí mismo bajo el peso de una profunda crisis existencial. El bohemio (y sí, también altruista) profesor y psiquiatra conocerá a Will, con quien desarrolla una relación de tira y afloja dialéctico y emocional que es la verdadera riqueza de la película (los secundarios, cumplen; el final, previsible; la historia de amor, obligada y raquitica subtrama).

Quizá, lo realmente interesante aquí, es la metaevolución (no busquen la palabra, que no existe) de Williams, de aquel club de poetas pasados a mejor vida, a través del tiempo, desdoblado en dos personajes “diferentes” – que no son más que el desarrollo del mismo – en una línea cronológica natural hasta volver a guiar al más brillante de sus alumnos y, ahora sí, salvarse a sí mismo.

El Indomable Will hunting es la notable ópera prima como guionistas de Matt Damon y Ben Affleck (el último quizá debió replantearse la interpretación). Llevada a la pantalla bajo la dirección de Gus Van Sant, que pisa terreno “comercial” para repetir más adelante con un producto del mismo estilo: chico superdotado de barrio marginal y conoce a quien será su mentor-salvador (Finding Forrester, 2000).

Debajo, una de mis escenas preferidas. El brillante monólogo del profesor Williams ante un atónito Damon, cuyas palabras considero que forman (además de una verdad como una catedral) un momento memorable en la  historia del cine reciente.

“No thinking – that comes later. You must write your first draft with your heart. You rewrite with your head. The first key to writing is… to write, not to think! “

- FINDING FORRESTER

Sometimes it is difficult to craft a speech.  We have no idea what to talk about.  The well has run dry.  Or, we know our topic, we have a general sense of what we want to say, but we cannot get our ideas down on paper.

Authors aren’t the only ones who suffer from writer’s block at one time or another; public speakers frequently have the same ailment.  However, there are ways to work through it.  One of the best techniques is free writing.

Free writing (also known as stream-of-consciousness writing) is a straightforward process to help you break through writer’s block and get the creative juices flowing.  Here’s how it works:

1. Pick your preferred medium of writing (pen, pencil, computer).
2. Set yourself a specific period of time between 5 and 15 minutes.  You should not go longer as the exercise is designed to help you get the ideas flowing and pave the way for more focused writing.
3. Use a timer so that you do not have to keep checking the clock.
4. Begin to write.  If you have a general idea for your speech, try to write about that, but if nothing comes immediately, then write about anything.  The trick is to keep your pen (or keyboard) moving for those 5 to 15 minutes.  Even if you have to write “I cannot think of anything to write”, write it over and over.  Eventually a new idea will pop into your head and you can go where it takes you.  Whatever you do, do not stop writing.
5. Do not edit as you write.  Do not worry about grammar or punctuation.  Do not cross out or delete anything that you write.  Put your inner critic to one side for now.
6. When the timer sounds, stop and read what you have written.  Don’t worry if it is a mess.  It should be.  But buried in that mess, you might just find some nuggets of gold that you use as the basis for more thoughtful writing on a particular topic.

When done properly, free writing can be a fun way to work through writer’s block.  It can help you gain confidence in your writing and it can help you generate interesting and creative ideas.

In the movie Finding Forrester, Sean Connery plays a famous but reclusive author.  In the following clip, he explains the concept of free writing (without naming it as such) to a young student who has great literary potential.  The movie is worth watching in its own right.  However, for the purposes of this post, the operative part of the clip begins at 6:15.

Un tip intra intr-o farmacie. Multa lume, inghesuiala.
- Nu va suparati, va rog sa ma lasati sa intru in fata ca am pe cineva la pat.
Oamenii cumsecade ii fac loc si ajunge la ghiseu. Tipul se apleaca la ghiseu si spune:
- 3 prezervative va rog.

Sfaturile lui Lacatus pentru Banel Nicolita:

1) Nu te intorci in jumatatea noastra de teren decat cand e absolut necesar.
2) E obligatoriu sa te intorci in jumatatea noastra de teren, in momentul in care schimbam portile.
3) Portile se schimba intr-un meci, cel putin o data, nu te lasa pacalit!
4) Nu ai cum sa-ti dai seama care e poarta adversarului, deci trebuie sa intrebi.
5) Nu-l intreba pe Nesu ca se tine de glume.
6) Nu lovi mingea in cazul in care adversarul face pressing sau tribunele canta.
7) Alearga tot meciul si intra in teren doar cand/daca iti spun eu. Poti sa deschizi si ochii.
Daca e necesar sa atingi mingea, roaga-i pe Goian si Ghionea sa faca zid.
9) Tu vei antrena portarii in sectiunea de “Atentie distributiva si capcane de joc”.

Citatul Zilei:

Da-i unui om peste si va manca o zi. Invata-l sa pescuiasca si va sta toata ziua in barca cu sticla de bere in mana.

Filmul Zilei:

Finding Forrester (2000)

Nota IMDb: 7.2

Gen: Drama

Filmul aduce foarte mult a Good Will Hunting cu un sfarsit inspirat din Scent of a Woman dupa parerea mea. Deci daca v-au placut aceste doua filme probabil ca o sa va placa si asta. Este vorba despre un tanar de 16 ani care se imprieteneste printr-o conjunctura ciudata cu un mare scriitor iar acesta il ajuta pe baiat sa isi dezvolte talentul la scris. Marele scriitor american este interpretat de Sean Connery. Rob Brown care il interpreteaza excelent pe tanar are si un talent deosebit la baschet in film, fapt care il ajuta sa se faca remarcat.

O aparitie interesanta este cea a lui Busta Rhymes. Ma asteptam sa joace destul de prost dar s-a descurcat ok interpretand rolul fratelui personajului principal.

Cu toate ca filmul pare inspirat din unele filme precedente lui asta nu inseamna ca ii lipsestc elemntele de originalitate. Din punctu meu de vedere filmul este o capodopera careia nu prea am reusit sa ii gasesc multe cusururi. Poate doar putin previzibil.

Part of my 27th birthday celebration yesterday was to watch a great majority of the movie “Finding Forrester”. There was a scene in it that I would like to share.

Jamal and Forrester are in Forrester’s apartment hanging out and they are having a conversation and this except occurs.

Jamal: You don’t really believe that do you?

Forrester: No, but it’s like praying, it couldn’t hurt.

I absolutely love that. What could praying and faith possibly hurt. Whether you believe in the goodness of mankind or believe that “man” is innately evil; at some point you’re perception of the reality of man is going to be seen to be false. Why not take the risk and believe in the ultimate goodness of God? Why not pray, call out to a higher being and see what happens? If nothing happens with that request, then maybe your initial intuition was correct and there is nothing more to this world than what is is. But if that request is made, is answered in a way that you were expecting or possibly not expecting, then isn’t it possible that the risk you took was returned to show you something, to prove something to you.

Man has shown an impressive ability to adapt, learn and apply the things he/she has learned to improve our way of life. Unfortunately, we haven’t learned how to spread those technologies and innovations to every man throughout the world for an ultimately better life for everyone. I believe that God’s qualities do not change. He has always been loving, gracious, merciful, kind, trustworthy, provisional, relational. I also believe that when the followers of Christ act and live as he did, the world as a whole and the lives of individuals becomes a better place, a good place, a more equal and just place.

Finding Forrester is a 2000 film, about a teenager, Jamal Wallace, played by Rob Brown, who is accepted into a prestigious private high school. He also befriends a reclusive writer, William Forrester, played by Sean Connery.

Written by Mike Rich. Directed by Gus Van Sant.

[While Jamal is typing on Forrester's typewriter]
Forrester: Punch the keys, for God’s sake!
[Jamal begins to hit the keys harder]
Forrester: Yes… Yes! You’re the man now, dog!

There.

I recently saw Gran Torino and I really liked it. But a couple hours after watching the movie, I thought to myself. This seems familiar. What a second, I’ve seen this before. There’s something very “Finding Forrester” about this movie…

-Older white guy, living alone in a neighborhood that has evolved in the 20,30, 40, 50 years to become a mostly minority community.
-He’s crabby and doesn’t like to interact with anyone.
-He catches a neighbor, minority kid that breaks into his house on a challenge from the kids friends/family.
-Old guy befriends the minority kid
-Old guy realizes the kid has a talent and works to develop that talent
-Old guy provides the kid with tools to encourage the boy and develop aforementioned talent
-Kid works to bring the old guy out of his shell
-There is a 20-something “authority” figure who attempts to watch over the old guy, but the old guy doesn’t respect him.
-Kid gets in trouble and the old guy goes to save him, without the kid knowing old guy would do so.
-In the end, the old guy leaves his prized possession to the kid.

The fact is, I liked both movies. However, all I really want is some creativity. I bet you in three years, there’ll be another version starring Tommie Lee Jones or Jack Nicholson as an old guy with a boat. OR, they’ll switch it up and it will be an old minority guy that befriends a young white girl. Oh wait, Denzel already made Man on Fire..

ATREVIDO O APÁTICO ?

Apatía ante la vida, asco frente a la falta de todo lo que no sea sincero, espejo   roto de las propias mentiras, la brutal honestidad de los niños, la vagancia de causas, el saber que el sueño del éxito no está más a la vuelta de la esquina, desgano ante las estructuras tan rígidas de una sociedad pacata. Me quedé pensando sí es solamente a un joven que quiere retratar Salinger.

Si bien tiene mucho que ver con la locura y la confusión, no me quedó así tan claro que sea una prerrogativa de una sola etapa de la vida. Me dio mucha ternura Holden, el personaje central de ésta novela de Salinger, que frente a los carriles inamovibles de la vida se permite cuestionar absolutamente todo y usar su psique para jugar con su tiempo ante todo patrón establecido.

A los 90 años, J. D. Salinger, el autor de ésta controvertida novela, vive  enclaustrado en su casa de New Hampshire, sin dar entrevistas y tras 30 años de no publicar una sola palabra. No se refleja en él mismo también ese joven adolescente peleado con los egos sociales y las normas ??

A mi humilde entender los libros no solo deberían tener una forma de medirse, no solo utilizar una única tabla de clasificación para buenos o malos. Creo que debería ser mucho más amplia, quizá infinitas las paletas de colores a usar para definirlos; en definitiva los autores que dejan su alma en ello, no son más que eso, diversos seres, volcando cascadas de palabras desde lo interno, nunca inmaculadas de sus propias historias de vida.

Y así este pequeño subyugante, fue eso y nada menos. Un disparador cuestionante, con calma historia y tempestivo mensaje, huracanado.

Como ven incluso cambié hoy el orden familiar de escribir mis blogs, recién les contaré ahora como llegué a Holden Caulfield, y no a manera de prologo como lo suelo hacer.

Así como el bonshyo budista, a veces me sucede que ciertos conceptos empiezan a repicar durante algunos días y sumado a que Cosme funciona a modo de mi Wikipedia literaria, cuando se lo comenté, me dio tanto argumento para leer a Salinger que tuve que reconocer que era hora de anteponerlo a Africanus.

Cosme además me ofreció prestármelo así que ya no me quedaron excusas y empecé ese viaje incomparable que es acercarse a un ejemplar de un autor hasta el momento desconocido.

Ya saben que tengo la manía de no leer nada al respecto hasta luego de terminar la obra, es decir no leo otras criticas, ni ensayos sobre el autor, ni toda el bagaje subjetivo que haya escrito al respecto y que en este caso como sabrán es mucho.

Más en lo profundo debo confesar que a veces incluso cometiendo una herejía insolente no leo ni siquiera el prólogo; siento que así es la forma más virgen de llegar a un autor, la forma más fresca, despojarse de toda apreciación externa, para poder ensayar una interpretación mucho más directa de lo que el escritor quiso transmitir.

Debo reconocer que muchas veces me he embarcado en laberintos donde un libre albedrío interpretativo poco usual asienta algunos escollos en la llegada al autor, pero es para mi quizá la forma más interesante y pasional de descubrirlo, aún a costa de tener luego que ajustar mis caminos.

Con Salinger, fue mucha más piel que ciencia; mucha más emoción que teoría, y recién después de meterme en la historia y descubrir los segundos planteos del personaje, los que quedan retumbando después de varios días de haber terminado la lectura es que procedí a acceder a todo lo que hay escrito sobre él y su obra.

Y así leí, que Salinger ha atravesado más de dos divorcios, ha mantenido en sus últimos años un interés profundo por el budismo zen y ha coparticipado en dar a luz a una hija pseudo escritora que saca a la luz las escalofriantes experiencias que tuvo a causa de la vileza de su padre, y con la que seguro nos quedaremos sin saber si utilizó de amuleto para obtener un poco de fama.

Reitero que es la sencillez de un personaje descarado pero transparente, que a muchos nos rechina ver, y que volcamos a la basura con el útil mote de adolescente convulsionado, sin permitir leer un poco más allá de ese primer diagnóstico.

No creo que Salinger haya intentado un juego maquiavélico, solo nos mostró un espejo y nos dejó pasar tiempo con él, si es que teníamos la voluntad y el coraje de hacerlo.

Holden Caulfield nos traslada a varios espacios caóticos de su vida. Su aristócrata universidad, de donde es expulsado; sus amigos, todos para él un personaje donde ve más sombras que luces, sus afectos familiares por los que se siente en gran parte incomprendido a excepción de su hermana Phoebe ( a mi entender su más grande reflejo) a quien le permite cuestionarlo y movilizarlo, la que se da la libertad de plantearle que no sabe lo que quiere desde su muy cortita edad. Y así su mundo entero, quizá no más que colores, que preguntas, que decisiones diferentes pero extremadamente valientes.

Leí también que muchos creen que este libro, trae mensajes secretos, que instan a asesinar (ya veo que no solo yo practico libre albedrío de interpretación, debe ser el punto más loco que he visto al respecto), ya que por ejemplo era el libro que estaba leyendo Mark Chapman antes de asesinar a Lennon.

Hay una película de Sean Connery también basada en Salinger, "Descubriendo a Forrester", como ven mucho marco referencial para consumir.

Comparto con ustedes el trailer de dicha película

Entonces queridos lectores, elijan ustedes su camino. Con o sin bagaje previo, con o sin preconceptos, solo una sugerencia: no dejen de leerlo.

Gracias,

Alice.

One of the coolest things to me is when you’re selecting the teams for a pickup game and you have an extra guy, so the last two guys shoot free throws and the first one to miss doesn’t get to play.  Hence, this scene is pretty cool (go to about 2 minutes in).  Closest I’ve gotten is making 3 in a row.  The other guy made four.  The other guy was eagles.  F U eagles!

A few weeks back, I was able to watch Finding Forrester again and of course heard a line that I have tried unsuccessfully to live by the past 15 years of my life: to just write.

A writer is supposed to write. Though I cannot quote the exact phrase, he said to stop all the thinking, the brainstorming, the analyzing and to simply just write. Every day I try to remember this and every time that I do, I will as immediately forget.

But today… Today! Today! Today!

Today is something different!… Though it took 2 hours from the time I thought about doing it to actually typing a few random incoherent words, today is still going to be something different. So before I get absorbed in deciding what I should be writing about, I would just pick out a fun reminder for me tomorrow.

Perhaps in the course of me writing, I would also come to a realization of why the days seem too short. Let me chronicle the 2 hours that passed and what sidetracked me from doing what I claim to love best.

The first delay reason is simple: My Mafia Wars Energy got replenished!

For those who play Mafia Wars, I know you are nodding your head right now and absolutely understanding why I had to use up all my Energy before doing any other task. Normally, it should have taken less than 5 minutes to click on jobs and consume all points but not when you’re doing the Underboss Level. It’s a ridiculous level because all the jobs require Illegal Transaction Records or some other kind of loot!!! Instead of simple clicking, there’s now an extra step to finish all my Stamina in the hope of finding some useful loot.

Down 35 Stamina points later with 2 side trips to the hospital, I got myself one lousy Illegal Transaction Record. Without any more stamina to fight, I decided to use my precious energy points on a job that gave out ITR. I searched and searched and searched but I couldn’t find the job… enter GOOGLE. The thing I hate is about Google actually gets you the most relevant post to your search but not necessarily the latest one (imagine newspaper archives arranged by sales generated)… so add a couple of mins for clicking several links before finding a concise wikianswer.

In between the search and the wikianswer, I stumbled upon “Confessions of a Capo” which as the article said is the ultimate guide to playing Mafia Wars. Just wanted to have a quick peep and figure out if it was worth adding to Delicious… Of course, the internet jungle does not follow the shortest route path rule, so I clicked on two more articles that talked about the same site before I found a direct link to the site. I am really in awe of how people had made the internet such a mess! (another possible blog idea here— changing font color to remind me) 30 minutes after, I am finally spending the needed 5 minutes to use up all my newly replenished Mafia Wars Energy.

45 minutes after my initial thought of writing random words into my blog, I have finally logged into blogger. The ritual that I have when blogging is to open the post page first and then view blog in another tab to check the visitor counter. That’s when it occurred to me that my new blog, which chronicles all my rantings/ravings, is deprived from all my FB friends. Knowing it only took a few minutes the first time, I decided to configure Blogger into Facebook first.

Hmmm… Perhaps it’s the new layout but I just couldn’t remember how I was able to link my WP blog to Blogger. I mucked around FB first trying to click on every link that would make sense: account settings, notes… then I thought maybe I need to setup via blogger so I went to layout and scanned through all the options. Hmmm. Another mystery and though I have already complained about it several times… Enter Google.

Like the Illegal Transaction Records, it was another fun/frustrating search. I found a lot of articles!!! Google even managed to confuse my query into its reverse (I clicked on a couple that was about how FB links to blogs). There were interesting articles about FB Apps that do the job: 1 out 3 seem to be working (the 2 others have a ton of complaints written in the Wall). I imagine whoever developed the importing application did so before the notes importing option was available and probably stopped developing it since it can easily be done through the site.

I did find the page where you can import blog posts into FB notes (plus I figured out how I got so confused in the first place). I was in the right track when I clicked on notes… When you get to notes, click on “Older Posts/See Older Posts” (there’s a link to the right of your post below all the notes you’ve made and there’s also a link at the bottom of all your notes on that page). Once you’ve clicked on this, the display links to the right of your post changes, you should now see Notes Settings with Import and Privacy links. Click on Notes setting and you should be able to import posts from one blog.

One Blog. That proved to be a new problem for me as I decided to maintain two seperate blogs: one dedicated to just my original poetry and this one. Knowing a ton of people are also maintaining multiple blogs, I know there is one great solution out there. I could have gone through some more checking and experimenting but the clock was still ticking. I had already wasted a good hour and a half in finding a solution that would allow FB users to read my blog… but then what good will the capability do if I didn’t have any post to share anyway?

So I wisely decided to find a solution some other time.

Finally, I found my way into a blank page.

Following Forrester’s advice, I didn’t think about SEO or what topic would generate traffic into my page or what is more relevant.

I just started what felt right…

…and ended up with 1059 words.

Madison Square Garden is the hottest club in New York!

Kobe Bryant scored 61 (including going 20-for-20 from the line) on Monday and LeBron James notched an arguably more impressive 52-point triple double on Wednesday night. (And I have the good fortune of having both of them on my Yahoo! fantasy team.) In post-game interviews, each paid homage to, as Kobe put it, “the last building that’s still alive,” an encouraging compliment for a struggling Knicks franchise that is not-so-secretly wooing LeBron for his 2010 free agency.

Dubbing MSG the “Mecca of basketball” is accurate. With Boston Garden and the Great Western Forum no more, MSG is all that’s left of great NBA arenas. Chicago’s United Center may have housed 6 championships in the ’90s, but it was never the thumping circus that made MSG such a scary place to encounter in the regular season or (especially) the Playoffs. In the Jordan era, I was terrified of the Knicks’ squad, featuring Patrick Ewing, Charles Oakley, Mark Jackson, John Starks, and Captain Bizarro himself, Anthony Mason. That team played hard, fought for every loose ball, and was consistently on the cusp of greatness. After they made the NBA Finals in ‘94, they signed Larry Johnson, Chris Childs, and Allan Houston in ‘96 and I got spooked again.

But the legacy extends beyond the 1990s. Before my time, there were the great moments courtesy of Willis Reed, Clyde Frazier, and Bill Bradley. The world’s biggest musicians have played there. Jim “Cinderella Man” Braddock fought there. The characters of Seinfeld and Spike Lee frequent games regularly. Finding Forrester had a major scene there. MSG is a big deal and I am in awe of its power.

Back to the game itself: Will Paul Pierce or Ray Allen go off on the Knicks this Friday night? I doubt it. The Celtics are a far more balanced scoring team than the Lakers or Cavs and rarely do the Big 3 + Rondo individually eclipse 30 points. Unless one of them finds a flaming hand in the first few minutes, as Kobe and LeBron did, expect business as usual for Boston.

Milk
Starring: Sean Penn, Josh Brolin, James Franco, Diego Luna, Emile Hirsch, Alison Pill, Victor Garber, Lucas Grabeel
Director: Gus van Sant
Writer: Dustin Lance Black

While likely never by design, Milk comes to the wider filmmaking market at a startling prescient point in history which adds further weight to its message and attaches a sense of pessimism for modern life with yet further hindsight allowed. A film which focuses on likely the most famous political figures in the gay rights movement, a centrepiece of which was his defeat of Proposition 4 in California which would have allowed gay teachers to be fired over their homosexuality, comes to us amid the recent failure of modern California to beat Proposition 8 which took away the right for homosexuals in the state to be married. Whether Gus van Sant and Dustin Lance Black meant for this to occur is highly questionable but you cannot watch Milk with that knowledge in mind and not feel anger and disappointment, maybe even falling far enough into philosophical cliché to consider how far we have not come.

Although that’s the thought that comes through, and certainly provides much of the power to the film on any external level, it doesn’t feel like the purpose. Van Sant seems mostly to be looking to explore the life not only of Harvey Milk himself in California in the 1970s, but also the environment experience as a homosexual in that period of time. It’s structured in three primary acts, defined by the single relationships he harbours during those times.

The first, and most effective of them all, is the earlier, formative part of his political and activist career and relationship with Scott Smith (James Franco) where the drive to become the figure he would later be comes through everyday experience, fighting for little but important issues for homosexuals in and around his life and aiming to build bridges with the wider community. The relationship between the two seems one of equals, two intelligent and passionate people who worked to find time for each other while also trying to support the movement. Those cracks begin to show as the first act closes and Scott’s departure is key in Milk’s life. Never however does it lose the atmosphere of their time together, all quiet and respectful of each other, the kind of relationship that the majority of people want to experience, while their intimate moments and sensual and sexy, van Sant filming with his usual dream-like quality but entirely unafraid to place us right inside those most intimate times. The performances by both Penn and Franco during those scenes warrant Oscars on their own, subtle and loving and entirely convincing as a secure pair.

The second act then follows the beginning of difficulties in his life as Milk succumbs to the less challenging company of Diego Luna, his other key relationship. Luna’s Jack Lira represents an entirely different side of relationships to Franco’s Smith. He’s unstable and politically inactive but doesn’t provide any threat or difficulty to Milk during his off-hours from his increasingly fraught and stressful political career. As this relationship grows, so too does Milk’s success as a political figure, maybe because he is able to focus on it without having to bring it into his home. Yet his spirit seems to be sapping during these portion of the film. Again, the sex scenes between Penn and Luna work well in grasping the different type of relationship he has, far less intimate and much more lustful and concerned with minimal-strings fucking. Luna though derails certain points of the film with his performance. He never manages to access anything beneath the surface of his troubled character and eventually paints a two-dimensional sketch of an important piece of the puzzle in understanding Milk and the progression of his life.

The final portion of the film then focuses on the combative relationship between Milk and rival councilman Josh Brolin’s Dan White, the man who would eventually become Milk’s killer. White himself could have been played as such a monstrous creation, a rampant homophobe and ignoramus who wanted only to prevent the rise of homosexuality in his city. Instead, Brolin plays him with a degree of empathy, trying to portray an essentially good man who could not understand the evolution of the world around him and struck out to try and stop such change. He is a family man and seems almost a reluctant hater of Milk’s cause, unable also to play the political game with the same sense of ruthlessness that Milk himself can access. White couldn’t quite access that kind of skill in getting what he wanted and making deals, finally succumbing to the pressures he felt to try and ‘protect’ his family and community from the rising power of homosexuals in the city.

Milk doesn’t quite manage to sidestep all the problems that normally come with biopics, primarily the issue that the audience, if it has any knowledge of the man, knows precisely where the film is going. How they get there is mixed. Van Sant does imprint some personality on the storytelling style, meaning that his avoid being a basis A-B story of a life. But the scenes with Luna do derail portions of the film and the probing of Milk’s psyche is not done as well as Van Sant attempted in Last Days, a flawed but more meditative and ultimately investigative attempt to understand the motivations of its lead character. The performances are, excepting Luna and in certain parts Emile Hirsch, uniformly great. Penn is astonishing, inhabiting the character and pulling off both the intimate moments and the rallying speeches with aplomb. His Milk is a gentle man but a ruthless politician, a perfect combination for any cause, and Penn’s creates a character that would be welcomed with open arms into the gay rights movement of modern times. Franco is brilliant and calm as Smith, playing his role with restrained emotion and intelligence while Brolin gives extra dimensions to a character which could have been an uninteresting monster. Also worth mentioning is Alison Pill as Milk’s latter campaign manager who bring a youthful knowingness and realism to her role beyond her years. Van Sant’s direction is beautiful, a more successful combination of the ethereal qualities of his indie pictures (Elephant, Paranoid Park) with a mainstream style than Good Will Hunting or Finding Forrester in the past, while the cinematography by Harris Savides (a regular Van Sant collaborator and shooter of Zodiac) is stately yet character-filled, adding to the picture while only occasionally drawing attention.

A worthy film and certainly one with modern relevance, Milk may well shine an unfavourable light on the modern gay rights movement, but it also serves its audience on a wider political level, concerning itself with another charismatic and optimistic politician looking to unite the American people in a style not far removed from the rhetoric espoused by Barack Obama. It’s a brilliant film on many levels and, if it never really gives a full understanding of the personal motivations of Milk, it doesn’t really need to and therefore becomes essential viewing for anyone interested seeking a biopic which doesn’t fall headlong into cliché and presents a character worth mourning.

MOD Rating: ♦♦♦♦1/2

Finding Forrester IMDB Link

Directed By: Gus Van Sant

Written By: Mike Rich

Starring: Sean Connery, Rob Brown

An inner city kid who everyone assumes is dumb is actually brilliant and forges a bond with an elderly guy who helps him not only emotionally but intellectually. Nope, it’s not Good Will Hunting, it’s Finding Forrester and I remember all I could think of when the movie came out was “way to ride the Good Will Hunting wave Van Sant.”

But what’s the best thing about the film? What’s the one thing everyone will remember.

“Your the man now dawg!” said by Sean Connery and delivered with the Sean Conneryness that only Connery can deliver. This quote spawned the asshole of the internet www.ytmnd.com which popularized the phrase with a bunch of gifs and sound clips. I think my version of ytmnd is Lawrence Fishburn saying “this place is a tomb” from Event Horizon which still makes me laugh anytime someone quotes it.

I started with saying it looked just like Good Will Hunting and it is. The kids brilliant, he forges a bond and there are many intellectual ownage scenes where he owns someone who thinks he’s dumb. This time, no apples line although Damon does make a cameo.

This film  can succeed as two separate movies. As a corny yet well done “awwwwww-group hug” feel good movie like Dead Poets Society and Scent of a Woman but also as a “Sean-Connery-is-comedic-gold” movie. They both work and it can be either of these films if you want it to be. I had a hard time being serious though when Sean Connery is yelling “Punch the keys god dammit!”

Van Sant brings his usual artistic yet not story hampering approach the film with interesting angles and composition. I’ll tell you one thing in the film that I was pretty surprised at was he shot the basketball scenes pretty well. I didn’t think he had it in him.

But mostly I’m still interested in the duality of the film. If that line was never written in and that website never spawned then Finding Forrester wouldn’t be an infamous film but rather just a well made yet corny film. But it is what it is and what enhances it is Van Sant’s directing which takes everything extremely serious. You can tell he’s fighting the Hollywood story by bringing in his different directing approach. This again helps the duality of the pictures because it makes the writing scenes more interesting and engaging or just completely hilarious that they are making a writing scene so serious. And with that, I kind of want to watch Good Will Hunting again as a complete comedy. Just right now I can imagine the “It’s not your fault” scene being comedic gold.

Look I’m not a Van Sant hater or a Good Will Hunting hater I just think it would be a hilarious experiment. And maybe after I do it, I’ll be the man now dawg.