Close Encounters of the Third Kind

After much suspense searching for a sponsor, Screen on the Green, the annual series of movies on the National Mall made its grand return. To debut this season, they harkened back to Steven Spielberg’s 1978/1980 classic Close Encounters of the Third Kind. Given the ubiquity of Spielberg, some of the more purely commercial movies of the earlier age tend to get lost – I mean everyone knows Jaws but how many free associate that with Spielberg. I remember seeing it on the old ABC Saturday Night Movie when I was something like 8 years old – frankly I barely remember, so I was approaching it fresh. We know the film was made in 1978 and then re-issued in 1980 with some changes – and it is the 1980 “Special Edition” that is the film of today. What I did not know was whether the film, effects and all, still worked nearly thirty years.

But work it does, and the sense of wonder and awe associated with the sheer notion of an alien race contacting us is latent. Along with Contact, Close Encounters of the Third Kind is the rare film that has the sort of academic fascination with extra-terrestrials that frankly, you’d expect in real life from actual scientists. The most amazing thing about something like Independence Day is the unusual lack of “holy crap!” sentiment coming from the characters – the most earth shattering site you’ll ever see, and yet it is played as if it is equivalent to a deer crossing (not that that is not exciting – hey, my life is boring too) Here, when the characters (most notably the family man played by Richard Dreyfus) see the UFO and are implanted with the image, they are awestruck and cannot shake what they have seen. Spielberg augments the acting with symbols everywhere – a sound pattern, a ship in the Gobi desert … like M Night Shymalan did in Signs (almost undoubtedly influenced by this film), the resolution of the signs are not important, but they evoke wonder and curiosity.

In fact, the Dreyfus obsession ends up causing his wife and children to leave, and this is where the film is very weak. Like many of the animated Disney fare, our hero needs to ford ahead with their quest (which this kind of is), but how do you get rid of the inconvenient family. The reactions of Dreyfus’ wife and children to his changed mood seems kind of ham handed and is thoroughly unconvincing. It was as if Spielberg did not how to get rid of the family and just picked any ol’ method. However, thankfully, this is just a small quibble, and it does set up Dreyfus’ journey to the site of his vision and the inevitable alien encounter, which is appropriately awesome, even thirty years later.

The site of the UFO is pretty convincing by 1980 standards, much more so than the effects of Superman for instance, which looks quite dated. The aliens when depicted, do work, and when we go inside the UFO, the columns of light and machinery are both amazing, implausible (in a good way) and mysterious. The road to the end is a little rocky, but the payoff is brilliant.

P.S. Yay, if you google “incest, olive garden”, look what you find!

Advertisements

Incest at the Olive Garden?

Is it just me, or is this a bit creepy?  Doesn’t this seem like a “date” at the Olive Garden?  I just hope that Mom is not trying to take Donna out of the picture …

UPDATE: ToS wiped out the youtube so linking to funny or die for now.

Ray’s Hell Burger

Ray’s was already on my radar screen before the news.  I mean, I like burgers.  Not McDonald’s so much, but good burgers, whether in Boston, DC or Atlanta.  One of my friend’s daft roommate (as it turns out, but she likes restaurants, so i trust her here) raved about Ray’s the Steaks in Arlington, and said this was the proprietor’s crack at an upscale burger joint.  So Ray’s was on my list, even IF President Obama did not get a burger there with Joe Biden.  Foodies like it, the president (I assume) likes it – and given the long line the two times I have been, the unwashed masses like it – so obviously I was intrigued.

The presentation of the restaurant is simplicity itself – a long line, you pick up a menu and then you order when you get to the register.  Then you find a seat (no taking tables until you have ordered) and wait.  When I looked at the window, I was a little asea with the myriad of burger choices – and the lack of sides (there are some sides available, but really it is about the burger).  Let’s put it this way, you don’t get to put bone marrow on a burger every day.  Confused by the choices, I chose one of their suggested combinations (pepperjack-fiery sauce-jalapenos-onions).  The toppings are excellent, but really the star is the meat.  I am no steak expert, but when I read that the place uses the high quality steak meat as the basis for the ground meat, it shows.  The burger just tastes different – juicier, more buttery (without being a Butter Burger).  The burgers are huge (10 ounces!) but feel light as I ate it.  The bun is not really well built to hold the burger – eating it is a big big mess.  However, the burger is delicious – just a different sport.

Up (and “Partly Cloudy”)

Up grabbed my heart and wouldn’t let go (to clarify, I mean the Pixar movie Up, not the Russ Meyer version which grabs another part of the anatomy).  From the dazzling short that opnened up the proceedings at the theater where I got to see it, to the remarkable opening sequence to the sight of a house being held aloft by myriads upon myriads of balloons, Up is a throwback of sorts to the “big movies” of the past, the sort of thing that is the best of what Hollywood has to offer.

While the common lament of how Rob Schneider gets movies green-lit when so many smaller slice of life pictures in the In the Bedroom ilk are left to rot in distribution is true, that is not the only sadness of modern movies.  I mean, sure, these sorts of films need distribution, but what about the movies that Hollywood do make?  There is slasher porn, movies based on crappy TV programs, toilet comedies.  But really, how many truly rich moviegoing experiences does Hollywood produce these days?

Pixar has succeeded completely on this level – even before the movie starts.  In the tradition of old time movies, the show started with a dazzling short “Partly Cloudy”.  Aside from perpetuating a myth about precisely where babies come from, it is beautifully animated, funny, cheeky, and just impossibly cute.  And then, the movie starts.

I am pretty sure that when the American Film Institute does its requisite specials in 2099 about the second century of film, the prologue that begins Up will be prominently featured – in its own way it should be as iconic as Pinochhio’s famous discovery.  It depicts a boy and little girl who discover a shared love of adventure, and the adventurer Charles Muntz.  The couple will fall in love, get married and she will pass away – leaving Carl (the old man) alone  with a house full of memories and sadness.  This is all done without dialogue, and if it does not move you, well I guess I am a marshmallow.

We pick up with Carl as he sits in his house alone, and not sure what to do with his life.  He is encouraged to go to a seniors’ home (in fact, a bit more than encouraged), but finally decides to visit Paradise Falls, in South America, where he and his wife had set out to live.  How he finally decides to travel there is a flight of fancy that is also a wonder, and certainly homage for anybody who has seen Fitzcarraldo (go figure – Herzog in Pixar?).

While traveling, Carl discovers a stowaway, a boy scout named Russell (who seems Asian-American looking), an earnest 8 year old who is having trouble at home, although in the convention of these sorts of movies, the old man is unmoved at first.  Really, the plot itself is not particularly original.  What is original, is the villain, the villain’s ship and indeed the villain’s henchmen, who are really, really, really funny.  But undercutting the entire movie, all the jovial moments, is the depth of Carl’s love for his wife and her memory – in fact, the movie plays the music under the prologue throughout – provides poignancy that you just don’t see.  Up is a great experience – I cannot imagine having a fuller experience with a mainstream American movie.

NBA Finals Preview

Coming off of their astonishing upset of the Cleveland Cavaliers, the Orlando Magic get to face the Los Angeles Lakers for the NBA title.  The Lakers of course are old hat.  This is the franchise’s 30th trip to the Finals and this bunch was the runner up to my beloved Celtics in the 2008 Finals.  Oh, that never gets old!

Anyway, with Game 1 on us as this is being typed and with the news of Jameer Nelson’s activation, things may have changed a bit.  Nelson is not 100% clearly, but he still averaged 28 points per game against the Lakers – he will help.  Otherwise, a quick breakdown:

CENTER – Dwight Howard vs Andrew Bynum … big edge to Orlando. Howard was magnificent in the last round, Bynum has been inconsistent all playoff long

POWER FORWARD – Rashard Lewis vs Pau Gasol … double sided mismatch.  Lewis will take Gasol way further than he wants to be, shooting threes at an insane clip.  However, Gasol can punish him down low.  Of course, the Lakers often forget to get him the ball, so could go either way.  Small edge Lakers in theory.

SMALL FORWARD – Hedo Turkoglyu vs Trevor Ariza … Ariza is a good complementary piece, but Turkoglu at 6’10” provides interesting matchup problems, he gets the edge

POINT GUARD – Rafer Alston vs Derek Fisher … Fisher has been lousy most of the postseason … Alston is wildly inconsistent, but hey, he has played big … edge to Magic but not by much

SHOOTING GUARD – Courtney Lee vs Kobe Bryant … edge Lakers

BENCH – Magic have gotten more production in the playoffs from Marcin Gortat, Mikael Pietrus and possibly Jameer Nelson.

BOTTOM LINE – the Lakers have some down low edges in depth and with Gasol.  They COULD punish the Magic, and that might be their modus operandi.  The Magic will shot a lot of 3s and if Howard plays well then there will be some openings.  But ultimately the 2-3-2 hurts the Magic.  Their home court edge is contingent upon beating LA three times in a row which is a very tall order against anybody.  Thus they might have to win twice in LA to win the title and that might be too much to ask.

Lakers in 7

Bangkok Joe’s

Well, after a brisk walk from my beloved Arlington, Virginia across the river to Georgetown, I decided to take a gander at the local Thai cuisine.  The trip took me to Bangkok Joe’s Dumpling Bar and Cafe.  Needless to say, the name piqud my interest.  Dumplings are obviously one of the world’s most perfect foods, so a place that makes a specialty of them – let’s say my hopes were raised.  Furthermore, when I went to the restaurant it was during its Thai New Year’s celebration – so more traditional special items.  Hooray!

But alas, the edifice of hope I had built up, the giddy anticipation was crushed in a quick series of blows.  First was the appetizer, Tri-Color Gems, three basic dumplings with minced pork in one, shrimp in the other, crabmeat in the third.  All of the dumplings were tough and sticky.  They all tasted rubbery and sinewy, like a Drunken Noodle Nightmare.  Then came the entree, the Kao Kruk Kapi, a rice dish with pork belly, salted baby shrimp, mango, shallots and egg.  This was better certainly, but the spice was modest compared to other Thai I have experienced, and for the price charged, not nearly enough.  The drink though, the Ginger Lemon Iced Tea, was delicious and refreshing.

The final blow was the bill of $70 for two people without alcohol.  While I cannot say anything too harsh about the restaurant, it was disappointing at any price, and for that price, even moreso.  If you have a car, driving out to Culmore or Rockville is many times more productive.