The nominations have been announced for the 2011 Rock and Roll Hall of Fame inductees.  I can't help looking at the list of members and nominations and seeing some glaring omissions.  Here are some people who I strongly feel deserve to be on the list.  I'm sure that you can think of some of your own.

Joe Jackson

Grandmaster Flash

Bad Religion

Paul Wellar

Squeeze

The Smiths

Steely Dan

Deep Purple

Moody Blues

Bruce Cockburn

Television

...JUST TO NAME A FEW  Several on this list are long overdue, such as Joe Jackson and Paul Wellar.  Both have contributed over 30 years of innovative song writing and recording.  Certainly a lot more than Donna Summer or LL Cool J.

     I saw Waiting For "Superman" yesterday, the Guggenheim film about the state of education in the U.S.  This is a documentary, like his previous film An Inconvenient Truth.   From the general hype, I really expected more.  While it was a pretty damning condemnation of the American educational system, it came across more like a TV special than a feature film.  It often seemed unfocused and offered few real solutions. 

     Two things need to be said to put this film into perspective for Canadians.  Firstly, this is truly about the American system.  While there may be a few parallels, largely there is little similarity to our situation up here.  (Not that we're perfect or don't have our own difficulties.)

     Secondly, the primary culprit highlighted in the movie was the Teachers' Unions.  Again, I don't think that this applies to Canada or Ontario the same way that it does in the States.  Tacher bashing is such a popular pastime that I can see viewers quickly concluding that we have the same irrational unions up here.  We don't.  Teacher federations in Canada do act to protect teacher jobs, as any union or federation does, but it is possible to fire a teacher.  I have personally seen it happen with the joint cooperation of federation and employer.  (Again this is not to say that some scrutiny might be advisable here as well.)  Also there are teacher evaluation with consequences, all-be-it they are generally considered a bit of a joke in providing accurate assessment. 

     The best part of the film was near the end when you saw the young students who had been spotlighted in the film, waiting to see whether they would be lucky enough to be selected for enrolment in the charter school system.  Selection has to be done by lottery.  As you watch the joy in the eyes of those who won, and the tears in the eyes of those who lost, you can't help but wonder at system and a country where children who want to go to school so badly are forced to rely on a lottery in order to get decent education.  You also can't help but wonder about other children who take education for granted and don't appreciate the opportunities that they have. 

This film gets a B-

     “127 Hours” is not at all what you would expect from Danny Boyle as a follow up to “Slum Dog Millionaire”. 

     The movie retells the story of Aron Ralsten, the rock climber who was forced to amputate his own arm when it became pinned under a rock while climbing in a slot canyon outside of Moab, Utah.  The movie begins with some breathtaking action shots of biking and hiking through the spectacular Moab landscape.  I’ve spent a lot of time in this area and the cinematography does the area justice.  The main part of the movie documents the 127 hours that Ralsten spends trapped in a slot canyon with no hope of being found or rescued.  You would think that would make for a dull story, but with the addition of several flashbacks and careful editing, your attention is maintained.  I think the slow pace of the film in the middle contributes to your identification with the character and his plight, making the conclusion all the more moving.  Apparently, several people fainted at the premiere screening. 

     In the Q&A following the film, Boyle said that, with the exception of a few scenes such as the swimming hole scene near the beginning of the film, his depiction is pretty true to the actual events in all ways that are important.  Even that scene was included because it highlighted the contrast between the abundance and scarcity of water.  Both he and actor, James Franco spent a lot of time interviewing Ralsten in order to capture the authenticity of the story. 
   
     While it is definitely not a happy movie, the drama and the desperation of the film make it a serious emotional experience.  You end up wondering whether you could have done the same thing.

This movie gets a B+.

     “Submarine” was one of the best, most entertaining films I saw at TIFF.  It is a dark, coming of age comedy about an eccentric, 15 year old boy growing up in a small town in Wales.  Throughout the film I kept feeling that this is what “Youth In Revolt” should have been (instead of the pathetic massacre starring Michael Cera – who oddly got a credit at the end of this film).  It’s not as crazy as Youth In Revolt, but has that quirky humour and irreverence combined with the naivety of the too-intellectual teenager trying to make sense of a relationship. 

     The director, Richard Ayoade, demonstrated his own quirky sense of humour in the Q&A, where he answered such questions as, “Why did you shoot the movie in Wales?” with responses like “Because we wanted it to look Welsh!”  I’m not familiar with him, but apparently he is a comedy actor in his own right, and could get a job as a stand up comedian if he tires of making movies. 

     I really hope that this movie hits the mainstream screens.  It is well worth seeing.  The only criticism of the film is that the Welsh accents make some of the dialogue challenging to comprehend. 

This film gets an A-. 

     One of the films I most looked forward to at TIFF was the remake of the Norwegian “Let The Right One In”.  In the age of “Twilight”, this horror film about a bullied young boy who meets a young girl, who is more than a girl, was hailed as one of the best horror films of the decade.  Rolling Stone magazine declared that it was the best movie of 2008.  It’s kind of the anti-Twilight. 

     So when the American remake is made, naturally people are worried that the original masterpiece might be trivialized or butchered.  Have no fear.  “Let Me In” retains all the best qualities of the original and maybe even tweaks a few improvements. 

     “Let Me In”, directed by Matt Reeves, follows the original movie almost scene for scene, maintaining the dark, winter ambiance and capitalizing on the innocence of the characters.  Acting by Chloe Moretz and Kodi Smit-McPhee are heart-wrenchingly sincere, and Dylan Minnette truly makes you want to see the bully get his “due” at the end.  Slightly improved editing and a beefed up sound track help to intensify the at times almost too slow pace of the original movie.  Of course it is sanitized in the American way with more blood and less nudity, but aside from that it is only fair to say that it has retained all of the best points of the original.

This film gets an A-.

     As I took my seat in the theatre I could sense the tension around me.  Nearby, two guys were talking, wondering whether the Q & A would result in fisticuffs or just a shouting match. 

     “Cool It” is a film directed by Ondi Timoner, examining the work of Bjorn Lomborg, controversial author of the book The Sceptical Environmentalist.  In his book Lomborg, a Danish professor and founder of a Nobel Laureate think tank, states that while Global Warming is a real problem, we’re over dramatizing the effects and going about dealing with it in a completely wrong way.  He states that no efforts to reduce green house gasses have been successful so far, so it is necessary to  look at alternatives.  The $250 which has been budgeted for methods to reduce CO2 emission , he says, would have a minimal effect  on global warming and we are obligated to examine alternative strategies which might yield more success, such as investment in alternative energy or even geo-engineering.  He goes on to claim that people wanting to get their hands on part of the $250 billion are interested in producing a climate of fear about climate change.  For example, we’re presented with visions of endangered, cute polar bears while, in fact, the polar bear population has increased by a factor of four since 1950.

     One of my favourite points in the film was a discussion of why cities are getting hotter.  Increasing use of black roofs and roads absorb more heat and turn sunlight into thermal energy.  Any gr. 7 student can tell you that (or at least mine had better be able to).  So Lomborg suggests that we paint the roads and roofs white.  This would be a simple, cheap solution which his think tank says would have a huge impact on ambient temperatures in cities.
 
     I found “Cool It” to be refreshing and even-handed.  I consider myself a strong environmentalist, but saw no problems with the information presented in this film.  I’ve often said that, while efforts like recycling and energy conservation are good for PR and public consciousness, we’re deluding ourselves if we think they contain any real solutions.  I’ve recently discovered that recycled cardboard is stored in huge warehouses because there is no market for it.  The real solutions will only come on a much grander scale, such as how we build communities and technology advancements designed to tackle the problems. (A good example of this is the use of drain cleaners, where millions of litres of caustic chemicals are poured down the sink every year to clear clogged drains, while a much more effective solution would be to redesign drain pipes so that they don’t clog.)  This large scale, technological approach to our problems is known as “Bright Green Environmentalism”.  The reluctance to throw science at the problems out of a fear of worsening the conditions is valid, but should not exclude the use of rational, balanced, good science in determining how $250 billion will be implemented by governments and businesses.

     This technology exists.  Alternative energy research is on the verge of major breakthroughs.  Breaking our dependence on carbon fuels will be a lot easier when we have viable alternatives.

This film gets an "A".

     Seeing David Suzuki at TIFF yesterday was a real blast.  Suzuki spoke with humble ease and confidence, but also with a profound elegance which comes from a lifetime dedicated to communicating important ideas to the layman.  He is a national treasure and I don’t know if he’s received the appropirate honors, like the Order Of Canada, but if he hasn’t it’s a crime, and lets try to find some more for him while we’re at it. 

     His film, Force Of Nature, is a documentary half based on a lecture given in Vancouver which was billed as “What I’d like to say in my last lecture,” and half on a retrospective view of his life.  It often presents an emotional side to Suzuki that we never see, especially as he reminises about the oppression suffered by his family during the relocation of Japanese Canadians during WW2. 

     The central idea is that natural laws and human ones are not the same.  Human laws are created by us and can be modified, while natural ones are unforgiving.  One of his best comments was that if the economic model used by society doesn’t value the things we consider most important, such as family, security, health, a clean and aesthetic place to live, -then there must be something wrong with that model and it needs to be adjusted.  This is a powerful idea that has crossed my mind many times.  I’ve seen banks, which have made billions in profit annually, unnecesarily cut their work force in the interest of maximizing profits, resulting in loyal, experienced employees being squeezed out of their careers.  Societies, business, government, learning institutions all should be aiming at making a successful society, -not for a select few, but for as many as is possible.  If our society is healthy as a whole, the parts are more likely to be healthy.

     And that goes a hundred fold for the health of our environment. When asked about hope for the future, he said that it will probably take more natural disasters  like Hurricane Katrina, for people to mobilize enough to make a difference, but that once that mobilization occurs, like the decade when we worked to put a man on the moon, anything will be possible.  He also harshly criticized the Harper government, stating that it is ironic that a government with such a strong "law and order" policy, totally ignores international law when it comes to the ratified Kyoto agreement.   His final comment was that we should not wait for him to do things, but find ways to take positive action ourselves.  Current environmental groups and practices are not strong enough to be effective.  ... Or in more plain terms, it's time to walk the talk. 

     I promise to make negative reviews short and relating to something worthwhile.

     Saw “Erotic Man” tonight at TIFF.  Stop laughing!!!  I saw it mainly because it is part of the Danish submissions and I thought it would be neat to see a movie in a foreign language to see how much I could understand, being born in Denmark myself.  Admittedly, the theme of exploring the international nature of the erotic kind of intrigued me as well. 

     If you are going to make a movie about eroticism from a philosophic point of view, you’re treading on dangerous ground.  If you’re filling it with lots of naked women and sensual shots, you are treading a fine line between being visually poetic and outright exploitation.  In order to have merit, the film has to either tread on some solid philosophical ground, or needs to be aesthetic.  Unfortunately, “Erotic Man” by Jorgen Leth was neither, and so came across as the self indulgence of a dirty old man. It rambled on, was extremely repetitive and was entirely filmed on what must have been a $25 video camera to have produced such grainy video quality.  In the Q&A after the film, Leth admitted that it was entirely an egocentric film. The film was heckled at one point as being exploitation, and you could see from the look on many people’s faces that they weren’t disagreeing.  I seriously doubt you’ll ever come across it in either a theatre or DVD, but if you do, steer clear.  ...Unless you are titillated by an endless, but rather meaningless parade of T & A. 

This one gets a D+.

     The Hugo Awards are one of the two sets of awards presented to outstanding SciFi achievements every year.  This Year's awards were just announced and can be found at Tor.com.

     I have to say that my main interest was in the award for best nove.  Having recently red "Wake" and "Watch" by Robert Sawyer, our very own home grown author, I was disappointed when they didn't win.  These two fantastic and thought provoking books are amoung the best I've read in years.

     The winners are unfamiliar to me, so I'll have to check them out.  One of the other nominees, "Julian Comstock" by R.A. Wilson, is on my to-be-read shelf and just moved to the front of the line.

     One thing that I think should be added to these awards is a category for Young Adult Fiction.  With great books like the "Mockingjay" series and the "Chaos Walking" series coming out, they deserve some kind of spotlight.  Perhaps there is seperate award for them.  I'll check it out, but they still deserve some acknowledgement from SciFi's most prominent awards.

    To limber up for the TIFF, I caught a film downtown, which was so connected to movie stars that it's a crime that it wasn't entered in the Festival.  The movie. "Teenage Paparazzo", examined the life of paparazzi photographers who regularly plague the life of celebrities.  It contains interviews of both stars and photographers to examine the issue from multiple sides.
    The move centers around an encouter between Adrian Grenier (star of Entourage) and a 13 year old paparazzo.  He decides to get to know the boy in order to learn more about this life style and what motivates him/them.  He ends up turning the cameras on the paparazzi, and soon begins to question the whole idea of celebrity and what it means.  (Ironically, Grenier plays a movie celebrity in his TV show as well.)  Towards the end of the movie, it develops various serious themes and ideas, including society's need for celebrity, and Grenier questioning his own complacency.  The fragile personality of the young teenager adds an added layer and perspective, as we see the boy consumed by the life he's chosen. 
    I found it to be an interesting, entertaining and thought provoking documentary.  I actually thought it was pretty bold in it's view of the Hollywood mentality and glitter.  While I certainly don't have any interest in movie star tabloids, this movie transcended the ordinary to shed light on some really interesting issues and ideas.  See it if you have a chance. 
    On a side note, this movie was showing at the AMC at Dundas and Yonge.  It is great to see that the Carlton has reopenned.  Toronto needs theatres which are smaller venues in order to screen the less known movies that are never going to be the blockbuster.  Unusual movies are often some of the best ones out there.  They need a home, too.  North of Steels, there's nothing showing these foreign, art or documentary movies.  The Elgin, in Richmond Hill, used to reserve one screen for this type of move, but discontinued that years ago.  Hence, I often have to make treks into the city to catch these excellent films at the Carlton, Cumberland, Bloor, or now (it seems) the AMC 30.