'; //-->

Monday, February 21, 2005

OSCAR 2005: MY THOUGHTS ON THE BIG RACE

Before making my bold Oscar predictions, I want to remind readers that K. and my adventures in Maryland over Valentine’s Day weekend are available here: CUPID AIMED FOR THE HEART, BUT MUST HAVE TAGGED HE... You can also go to the blog of kari herself, who is currently visiting the Land of the Rising Sun. Now, on with the show!

WHO WILL TAKE HOME OSCAR COME FEBRUARY 27TH?

At the risk of damaging my credibility before I even get started, I admit to not seeing all the Best Picture nominees (I have seen "The Aviator"). I do, however, know quite a bit about the recent history of the Academy Awards, and I’ve been tracking such awarding bodies as the Los Angeles Film Critics Circle, the New York Film Critics Circle, the Directors Guild, the Golden Globes, etc, over the past few months. I feel this accumulated knowledge should be very helpful in making accurate predictions in the really competitive categories.

AS FOR THE NON-COMPETITIVE CATEGORIES: It would shock me if Jamie Foxx didn’t win Best Actor for "Ray," Hilary Swank failed to take home Best Actress for "Million Dollar Baby," and if Morgan Freeman lost the Best Supporting Actor prize for "Million Dollar Baby." Those awards seem to be locks. I agree, let’s move on.

BEST SUPPORTING ACTRESS: The finalists appear to be Cate Blanchett for "The Aviator," and Virginia Madsen for "Sideways." A really prominent critic for the Chicago Sun-Times predicts Madsen to win. Apparently, she has long been beloved in Hollywood, and since the Best Supporting Actress Oscar typically goes to character actresses (Marisa Tomei for "My Cousin Vinny," Judy Dench for "Shakespeare in Love"), why vote against her?

I’ll tell you why. Look at the winners in that category over the past three years: Renee Zellweger for "Cold Mountain," Catherine Zeta-Jones for "Chicago," Jennifer Connelly for "A Beautiful Mind." Sure, Marcia Gay-Harden took home gold for "Pollock" in 2000. But the year before that, Angelina Jolie won for "Girl, Interrupted."

Noticing a trend? Neither Zellweger, Zeta-Jones, Connelly, nor Jolie have ever had a reputation for being a character actress. Typically, they’re movie headliners, leading lady types who opted for smaller roles in the aforementioned flicks and had their sacrifices generously rewarded. I don’t know how many lead roles Virginia Madsen turned down in favor of a few weeks in the wine country. I couldn’t tell you how many Cate Blanchett turned down, either. But something tells me she had more choices.

BEST DIRECTOR: Martin Scorcese for "The Aviator" versus Clint Eastwood for "Million Dollar Baby." A few weeks ago, the Directors Guild prize went to Eastwood, so he’s the winner. Foregone conclusion, right?

Actually, while there has been a high correlation between the Directors Guild and Oscar since the DGA’s inception, the two parties have disagreed twice in the past four years. That only makes it a 50-percent correlation since 2000.

That year, Ang Lee took home the DGA prize (And the Golden Globe for Best Director) for "Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon." With Steven Soderbergh nominated twice for "Erin Brockovich" and "Traffic," Lee seemed to have a clear path to victory. But what happened? Soderbergh won the Oscar for "Traffic."

Leap-frog ahead to 2002, where the DGA bestowed its highest honor on Rob Marshall. Even Roger Ebert predicted that the Best Director Oscar would go to either "Chicago" director Marshall, or Martin Scorcese for "Gangs of New York." The eventual winner? Legendary director Roman Polanski for "The Pianist."

So, while Eastwood has collected prizes from both the Directors Guild and the Hollywood Foreign Press (Golden Globe) this year, Oscar voters may still go with Scorcese, who will be the sentimental favorite until he finally wins. Eastwood already has an Oscar for directing "Unforgiven." Maybe voters will decide to share the wealth with the auteur who has six nominations, but never a victory.

BEST PICTURE: Every article covering Oscar 2005 says it’s neck-and-neck between "The Aviator" and "Million Dollar Baby," with "…Baby" opening a narrow lead. Horsesh*t, I say. Of the three most competitive categories this year, Best Picture is the one I’m most confident predicting.

"The Aviator" won the Golden Globe for Best Dramatic Picture about a month ago. "Sideways" won their other Best Picture, for Musical or Comedy. "Million Dollar Baby" only received Best Director and Actress.

In the last decade, where overlap between the DGA, the Producer’s Guild of America, the Golden Globes, and the Oscars has been less than complete, the Best Picture Oscar has almost ALWAYS gone to a Golden Globe Best Picture winner. You’d have to go back to "Braveheart" in 1995 for the lone exception. That year, "Sense and Sensibility" won the Golden Globe for Best Drama, while "Babe" took the other Globe for Best Musical or Comedy.

But even the Oscar for "Braveheart" wasn’t a complete shock. After all, it led the field in nominations; field-leaders are always the heavy favorite to win. Not only does "Million Dollar Baby" lack a Best Picture Globe for its cache, but "The Aviator" leads all contenders in nominations. You’d have to go all the way back to 1991, with "The Silence of the Lambs," to find an eventual Best Picture Oscar Winner that neither led the field, nor won a Best Picture Globe. That’s 1991, folks. Thirteen years ago. To put that in perspective, I’ve aged 100-percent since that year.

So I feel supremely confident predicting that "The Aviator" will win Best Picture next Sunday. I feel very confident that Cate Blanchett will take home the Best Supporting Actress Oscar. Finally, I am mildly confident that Clint Eastwood will prevail in the Best Director race. Now, would I pull a Howard Hughes, and promise that if "The Aviator" doesn’t get the big prize at the end of the night, I will leave America…? Yes, I will promise that. You heard it here first, ladies and gentlemen. The "Hercules" will fly!

Wednesday, February 16, 2005

CUPID AIMED FOR THE HEART, BUT MUST HAVE TAGGED HER IN THE STOMACH INSTEAD.

Nothing says romance like watching your girlfriend vomit.

That’s the realization I came away with after this past Valentine’s Day weekend. Okay, there was other stuff, too. For example, I realized that giant chain stores like Ikea do have their good points. I also discovered that other urban mass transit systems exist, which are not nearly as decrepit as New York City’s. Finally, I came to the conclusion that little children are kinda neat, and can defecate their body weight in fecal matter. How can you not admire that?

Some background info for everything I just mentioned: K.’s sister, C., and C’s husband, T., are moving to California in a month (I believe they are relocating to a small suburb called San Nuevo, equidistant from Los Angeles and San Francisco). K. and C. are close, and since K. is about to spend two weeks in Japan starting today, a visit to C. and T.’s home in Maryland seemed downright imperative.

Now, as all you readers know, I am K.’s boyfriend. There was no way she was going to spend Valentine’s Day weekend, the premiere weekend for dating couples, away from the city without me. Luckily, K. wanted me to come, and just as important, her sister and sister’s husband invited me, too. Seems K. talked C. up quite a bit about me, and the latter, understandably, was dying to meet me. I wanted to meet K’s family, too, not to mention see Maryland. So I packed a bag, blew off my weekend study plans, and caught a bus with K. to D.C., the first leg of our trip!

DAY ONE, FRIDAY/ WASHINGTON, D.C.—Our bus left 34th Street during the evening, so by the time we arrived at Chinatown, Washington, D.C., it was after 10 p.m. From the Chinatown Metro station, K. and I hopped the Green Line to College Park, Maryland. Throughout the half-hour metro journey, I thought to myself, "Man, these subways are awesome! No wonder so many people in the nation’s capital are corrupt! It makes so much sense! These people-movers run so smoothly, so silently. They allow your mind the opportunity to ponder, unmolested, ways to screw over the American taxpayer…

"Certainly, there are plenty of crooked politicians in New York City. But our politicians’ idea of white-collar crime consists mostly of dodging parking tickets, or finding ways to use public funds to pay for home remodeling. Washington, D.C., on the other hand, is home to the Bush administration. Find me a more ambitious lot of screw-job purveyors! New York City is minor-league compared to this town, and I blame the noisy MTA, where the average subway train (not counting the 4-5-6) clambers chaotically down its tunnel, raising a ruckus louder than an out-of-control robot caterpillar…"

Before I could actually make the connection between our substandard mass transit system and our embarrassing class of crooked politicos, our train reached College Point, and K. and I disembarked.

DAY TWO, SATURDAY—Main highlights:

-C. and T. have an awesome house, the kind of place you think of when you hear the term "suburban living." There is a really cool downstairs den, perfect for T.V.-watching and video game playing. Of course, C. and T. will be moving soon, so I am going to abandon the house and describe their son Kai instead. He will probably be with the family a month from now. The house likely will not.

Kai is a rambunctious lad who enjoys playing with cats and cars, and appears to be developing his own personal language, composed mostly of hand gestures and single-syllable utterances. Since Kai is only a toddler, he is full of pep. Since Kai’s pep levels read off the proverbial scale, he is a handful to take care of.

According to K., C. told her that having both of us over would, contrary to what logic seems to dictate, actually reduce her stress. Why? Because K. and I could help her take care of Kai. Now, personally, I am not fond of children. However, my personal feelings never stop children from being fascinated by me, and so it was with Kai.

At one point, K. changed Kai’s diaper, a smelly but not entirely unbearable bit of business. In a moment of what can only be described as complete insanity, I agreed to change him the next time. Was there ever a next time!

Kai needed to be changed just a few minutes later. He is a squirmy kid, but once he starts staring absentmindedly at imaginary pixies on the ceiling, complacency kicks in and he relaxes. When it was my turn to change him, it quickly became apparent that Kai’s lower intestine had also recently relaxed. C. mentioned that Kai’s bowels had not moved in over a day. The wait was clearly over, leaving me clutching a diaper full of soft, stinky crud that weighed about as much as a softball. Ultimately, I required an assist from K., who stood nearby, as amazed as I was by how much waste matter a toddler could produce in a single effort. Kai kept trying to grab his feces-encrusted genitalia and anus, so K. held his hands while I managed to clean him with baby wipes.

-Second highlight: After the baby was fresh and clean again, all of us went to the Ikea a few blocks away for lunch. Ikea is full of cheap, superficially-attractive, instantly disposable junk for the home. I was surprised by how much of it I wanted to buy, though I settled for a few rubber trays that make funny-shaped ice cubes.

In a small town setting like College Point, the Ikea seems to serve as a kind of communal marketplace. The parking lot is big enough to accommodate the entire town, and with its vast store space, multiple play areas, clean restrooms, and modestly-priced cafeteria, the Ikea invites families to spend an afternoon, perhaps an entire day within its borders.

The seating area for the cafeteria faces a giant window on one side. Past the glass, one can look out beyond the parking lot, to green hills and municipal buildings in the distance. On a sunny day like this, with the tables only half-full for an early weekend afternoon, it is difficult to imagine a more inviting place anywhere in College Point. As for the food itself, it is clearly a step above the typical fare one expects from a department store cafeteria. I enjoyed a shrimp salad sandwich, made with fresh shrimp, a sliced, hard-boiled egg, and mayonnaise. K. shared her Swedish meatballs, red potatoes, and lingenberries. Food was eaten with silverware; beverages were served in glasses. A polite sign at the entrance to the seating area explained "Why we might dispose of our trays ourselves."

The sign doesn’t urge anything, it isn’t the least bit intimidating. But clearly, it worked like a charm, since you couldn’t find an empty table that hadn’t been cleaned off. C. said that it was always like this; she and I surmised that guilt and peer pressure probably had a lot to do with why the place was so devoid of litter. After all, College Point was a small town environment. What if she actively decided not to put her crumb-laden plates and tableware into the rack located next to the entranceway? Her fellow diners probably wouldn’t give her any dirty looks.

But what if they did? Isn’t that the point? Why take the risk, when the simple alternative is to carry your tray to the conveniently-located disposal area, not twenty feet away…?

DAY THREE, SUNDAY—K. and I were back in Ikea, shopping for more of those small presents she has to bring to Japan, otherwise the country won’t let her in. We were going to pick up a few last things, then C. would drop us off at the Metro station. As we were shopping, K. said she was feeling stressed out, and would rather carefully shop for all the things she needed, and postpone the bus ride home until the next morning. Personally, I was having a great time. I could have stuck around, played legos with Kai, no problem.

Then in the parking lot, K. said she wasn’t feeling too good, that she might throw up. This prompted C. to say, "Uh-oh," and with good reason. The week before we showed up, C., T., and Kai had alternated suffering from a short-lived, but extremely potent stomach flu. K. mentioned this to me before the trip, and even offered it as a reason why I might not want to come along. Ironically, I had been illness-free all three days in Maryland, whereas now she was feeling really bad. I might have mentioned what a funny turn of events this was, if I hadn’t been worried by the fact that K. had turned a shade of green ordinarily associated with St. Patrick’s Day.

My poor girlfriend spent the rest of the evening running to the bathroom to throw up. C. and T. moved us out of the guestroom next to the den, up to the bedroom on the first floor. The first floor bathroom was warmer and closer to where K. lay ill. Poor K. She could not eat, and was urged by her virus-ridden stomach to continue vomiting, even when there was nothing left in her belly to force out. Meanwhile, C. and T., great hosts that they were, made hamburgers flavored with jerk seasoning, and I tried my best to eat a cheerful meal with them. C. doubted K. would be ready to travel the next day. I said I would be surprised if she could. All through the night, K. drank water to keep her body from drying, and made periodic trips to the bathroom, as the same liquid angrily wrenched its way back out.

DAY FOUR, MONDAY—K. felt better, but was still too sick to travel. That was okay by me. Since it was Valentine’s Day, I did good boyfriend stuff, like reading articles out of old New York Times magazines to her. K. seemed to enjoy it, but she also seemed to want to get out of bed. I kept bringing her thermoses full of water and ice. Gigi, C. and T.’s fat black cat, rolled up next to K. in the bed, warming himself and purring softly as she rubbed him.

During the late part of the morning, C. entered with two glass flutes filled with apple juice and ice. She gave one to K., and one to me, and took photos of us together. Then C. and I switched, and I snapped photos of her and her sister together. When you compare the three of us in subsequent photographs, it is apparent that we are all tired. Still, K. looks great to me, and the pictures are a fine memento of a Valentine’s Day where I got to pamper my girlfriend rotten.

DAY FIVE, TUESDAY—K. felt well enough to travel, so we caught the 7:30 a.m. bus back to New York City.

Most of K’s vomiting seemed to be over by now. Still, a bumpy bus ride is never good for a sour stomach, so I bought her tea at a rest stop. She said it made her feel better.

We got back to the city by the early afternoon. K. went to her job in order to fill out her timecard, and I went home to take a long nap. Since K. had a 7:30 flight to Japan the next morning, she and I made plans to get together that night. It would be the last time we’d see each other for a few weeks.

I started this essay with the line, "Nothing says romance like watching your girlfriend vomit," and I probably spent a significant portion of the weekend watching her do just that. However, it’s not nearly as smarmy a line as it may sound. My poor K. was ill; I couldn’t just sit around doing nothing while she suffered. Bringing her fresh water, reading to her, holding her hand—it may not seem like much, but keep in mind, I do not enjoy being around sick people!

It’s a lot easier to be selfless when someone you care about is in need. In those situations, you pull yourself together, and overlook little things, like germs. You are willing to get close to someone, even if there is a risk they will vomit on you without a moment’s warning. Because selflessness is what romance is all about. It’s about giving of yourself, in order to try and fill the emotional (and yes, physical) vacancies in the person across from you. Like puzzle pieces interlocking, you give a little, and at the same time, get a little back in return. There truly is nothing more romantic than watching your girlfriend vomit, because when she vomits, you know she’s going to need you, either to hold her hair as she upchucks, or to comfort her afterward.

The only thing that might be more romantic than watching your girlfriend vomit, is if your girlfriend watches you vomit. Unfortunately, as we speak, K. is probably somewhere over the western United States, facing the land of the Rising Sun, opposite the direction of the vomiting Phil.

Okay, I’m not actually vomiting as we speak. But if you were here right now, K., I might stick my finger down my neck, just to gain your empathy. Or maybe I wouldn’t have to go that far. Maybe all I’d really need to do is say I miss you.

Fourteen more days. Nothing says romance like counting down the days until your girlfriend’s home again.

Tuesday, February 01, 2005

DOG DAZE AFTERNOON

Before we baked muffins Monday night, K. and I encountered what appeared to be a homeless man pushing a shopping cart up Avenue U. After he passed us (we were going opposite ways), he turned around and said,

"HEY! ARE YOU JESSICA?"

K. and I both turned around, and saw him looking at us. I indicated myself, and said, "Who, me?" The man nodded, before repeating,

"ARE YOU JESSICA?"

"No, my name is not Jessica," I said.

"NO! HER!" the man said, pointing to K.

K. said, "No!"

The man said, "Okay," and we continued our respective ways.

The thing is, while we had been "conversing," I noticed there was a dog underneath some blankets in the homeless-looking guy’s shopping cart. It was a cute dog, the same kind I grew up with back in Miami. A full-size Pomeranian, with fox-like face and thick coat of orange-brown fur! It snuck its sniffing snout up from underneath the blankets, and I thought, "Man, I would love to buy that dog from this homeless guy, but it would probably deprive him of his sole means of companionship." So I didn’t.

But I did turn around and give him a dollar. I told him to buy the dog something to eat, and to get himself something, too, if needs be. He might have thanked me, but I was too busy admiring his dog to notice. It seemed very comfortable in the shopping cart. I would have named it Yoshimi, or Walter.

That homeless man better take good care of Yoshimi (Or Walter), and not spend my whole dollar on booze.

"MUFFIN-MAKING MONDAY," OR, "MUFFIN TINS ARE NOT ICE TRAYS."

One quick blog post, then it’s back to studying.

In case any of you readers were wondering, yes, I am still taking Speech-Language Pathology courses during the 1999/2000 academic year. Also, yes, I am still surfing the timestream in my trusty time capsule, the "Mr. Peabody." However, Rupert Zwevoid, the extra-terrestrial visitor/ video store clerk who first loaned me the secret of time travel, insists that I cease my adventures by the end of the semester. There’s a very good reason why, beyond the most logical one: I am crazy. Someday soon, I will explain Rupert’s reasons for cutting off my time travel privileges. In the meantime, any events from 1999/2000 will be posted from the perspective of 2004, since I commute back and forth pretty regularly, anyway.

But enough regarding such mundane subjects as time travel. Yesterday (Monday, January 31, 2005), K. and I hung out and made muffins. Corn muffins with bacon! I quite enjoy baking, though my method leaves something to be desired. I don’t know about other baking enthusiasts, but my kitchen modus operandi involves becoming a whirling dervish of powdery ingredients, melted fats, and clanging pans. Luckily, I had K. to help me maintain focus. She suggested several brilliant ideas, like not putting the bacon in the freezer two hours prior to making the muffins, since I would then need to defrost it. Also, storing the unused cornmeal in one large tupperware container, instead of several small ones. Finally, she suggested that I not stir the muffin batter too much, since the finished muffins might end up hard. Unfortunately, by that point, I had already stirred too much, which leads to the next paragraph…

K. is definitely a better baker than me. She probably won’t read this post until after she eats one or two muffins, and maybe that’s a good thing. Because I just ate one, and good lord, it’s like a corn-flavored brick! Maybe I added too much baking powder, or too much cornmeal. Or maybe I stirred too much. It couldn’t have been the recipe, since I got it out of a cookbook my mom gave me for Christmas back in 1999, and everything else from that book turned out great. But jeez, these muffins taste like I baked them back in 1999…


Oh yeah, I should explain that second title. See, there was another piece of really good advice K. gave me: Muffin tins are not ice trays.

The muffins had been cooling, and it was time to remove them. I picked up one of the tins, then began trying to bend and flex it. K. said, "Phil, I don't think you should do that."

Me: Yeah, but... isn't that how you're supposed to remove them? You manipulate the tray in order to loosen them, then you turn the tray over so the muffins fall out.

K. (Looking at me incredulously, then...): I think that's for ice trays.

Heh-heh. Clearly, when it comes to cooking, K. is the brains of the operation.