Mida teha "Sirbiga"?

Veidi reflekteerides "Postimehe" avaldatud artiklil
"Peatoimetajaks pürgiv ettevõtja plaanib Sirbile 10 000 tellijat"

— Nimelt soovitas Martin Sookael riputada Internetti kõik "Sirbi" ariklid ja palju muud.

Internetti riputamisega on see kamm, et kunagi väga levinud mudel "kõik artiklid tasuta Internetti reklaamitulu varal" ei pruugi vähemalt päevalehtede näitel olla jätkusuutlik, sest netireklaame osatakse kasutajapoolselt blokeerida.

Seni olen aru saanud, et artikleid ongi kogu aeg nagunii Internetti üles riputatud, küll ilma reklaamita (mis on hea). Isegi kui leht panna maksumüüri taha, tellijate arv sellest eriti ei suurene ning levitatav info ei täida oma ülesannet, sest ei jõua enam kõigini. Viimane peaks olema hoopis eesmärk.

Probleem on justnagu selles, et kõik tahaksid teha "Sirbist" ülipopulaarset väljaannet, mille müüginumbrid ja tellimuste arv oleksid kasvõi ligilähedased tasemele, mis mõnel teiselgi sama hinnaklassi väljaandel — etalonideks siis "Äripäev", "Eesti Päevaleht", "Eesti Ekspress" ja "Postimees", millest kahel-kolmel on omaendagi perioodilised kultuurilisad, mis on "Sirbile" mõeldud või "Sirbi" soovitud turosa aastatega vägagi edukalt endale haaranud ja üle võtnud, jättes teema peategelase nišistaatusesse.

Kui jätta Internet võrrandist välja, siis uusi ja huvitavaid asju, millega "Sirp" kõigi nende aastate jooksul tegelema oleks pidanud, tegivad sama efektiivselt või paremini ära ETV kultuuritoimetus ehk "OP"/"MI", "Klassikaraadio", "Raadio 2", "Teater. Muusika. Kino" ja PÖFF. (Sulgudes: "OP"-i saatejuhiks on olnud "Sirbi" saagast vägagi huvitatud Karl-Martin Sinijärv; R2 saade "Pleier" ei lähe arvesse.)

Kõike seda ja veel, mis kahes eelmises lõigus, seati minu arusaamist mööda ülesandeks Kaur Kenderile ja tema meeskonnale nimega ZA/UM. Võib aduda, et töökava järgi oleks pidanud minema sama lepase reega nagu ka "Nukuteatriga"... (Siiski oli tants "Nukuteatri" ümber väga mitmel põhjusel põhjendatud.) Kenderile õnnetuseks oli "Sirbi" senine seis kivistunud nii kõvaks, et uuristada ei oleks saanud ka vihmavesi. Proov suruõhuvasaraga läks täiega vett vedama, kui oma hoiakutelt muidu eri positsioone evivad kultuuritegelased erutusid sündmuste käigust niivõrd, et nende harilikult laialivalgunud hääled õhkasid kooris üheks. Võidukas tulemus on kõigile teada.

Mis siis teha?
Et suur osa "Sirbi" sisust on nagunii juba ammu üleval rippunud ja ripub edasigi, on selge ja selles osas palju muuta ei saa.

Pigem võiks Interneti-variant täiendada paberlehte ja vastupidi: sisu, mis paberlehte ei mahu, võib panna Internetti, ning see, mida Internetis nii lihtsalt avaldada ei saa, lasta trükki. Koostööd ETV kultuuritoimetusega võiks tihendada ning kumbki võiks teineteist täiendada; samadel rööbastel on nagunii juba sõidetud, miks mitte siis ühe veduri taga?

Kõiki lahendusi pole ajapuudusel detailselt veel pähe tulnud, kuid avaldasin senise ära olemasolevate soovitustega.

Lahtiütlus: Seesinane väljendab minu isiklikku arvamust ja arusaamisi, kõik väited ei pruugi olla faktiliselt tõesed.

"Shut up, Kid"

For all those who only saw "Shut up, Kid", and "Shut up, Wesley".
wrt this

I know y'all are happy about "Shut up, Kid", but the point of Guinan's admonishment is that she and Riker are doing their best to give Wesley expert advice in which their almost mock-flirtation shows a combination of situations one might encounter, and by drawing from their own experiences and ways of how they would really flirt with someone. People are usually too egotistical to show this many ways of intelligently attracting a mate. Whereas Wesley fails to see the forest behind the trees...

The Great Gatsby and critique of the rich

This was a reply to a slightly-unrelated IMDb reply post, which eventually transformed into something resembling a review.

I see the the critique of the old money in almost every part of the film in the portrayal of the vile, overbearing racist of Tom Buchanan (Joel Edgerton), and the evident misplacement of evil and wrong betwix him and the kind Jay Gatsby (DiCaprio). — In which Gatsby was not inherently evil, but ran a 'wrong' business; whereas Tom ran the 'right' business, and was almost the manifestation of evil.

The main point of the critique shows through in the latter part of the film in the hotel room conflict between Tom and Gatsby. The criticism of the rich need not necessarily be told to the viewer outright, but subtly shown through a series of events and decisions of each participant.

Independence Day and the gays

This is in reply to a forum post on IMDb.

There was Capt. Jimmy Wilder (Harry Connick, Jr.), a fighter pilot and best buddy of Hiller (Will Smith). Wilder is used as this "fun sidekick", but is never directly said to be gay, despite sometimes unintentionally creating or getting into gay situations, including his on-screen mannerisms that suggested gayness. Because of the ambiguity around Wilder's sexuality, the gays can take it that Wilder was gay, and straight people can argue that he wasn't, and that he was just comic relief.

Yet the characterization of Wilder showed him as gay to the best of my mind, then two years into Don't Ask Don't Tell (at which time I didn't know anything about), so he was the non-offensive gay character to me, despite all the ambiguity.

The end result is that I remember that for a very long time this was the only big sci-fi blockbuster that featured gays in a positive light in the military, or anywhere at all in the movie space of the genre. Wilder was then killed, and Smith was outraged. And that was that.

In conclusion, the scene between Wilder and Hiller of the proposal that wasn't was one of the cutest in the movie.

Today in History (04.07.2013)

* News that Douglas Engelbart, inventor of the computer mouse, has died at 88 (passed away on 02.07.2013);
* NASA decommissions weather satellite Jason-I (11), because the satellite's last transmitter finally failed;
* King Albert II of Belgium (79) announced that he will abdicate on July 21.

In other news:

Europe
* France apologizes: Je Suis Sorry;
* And now it's been reported that France's own French Fries are not much different from Freedom Fries somewhere far, far away;
* while in

United States
* ...most everyone else rather ungratiously confirms what has been going on all along at the Ministries of Peace, Love, and Truth.
* A huge wildfire in Arizona still remains out of control.

Middle East
* Egypt's military stage a coup yesterday, installing a judge to be acting president today. The U.S. threatens withdrawal of aid to Egypt, while Israel tries to be nice.

Science and tech
* Vine and Instagram fight like a cat and dog: competition in video sharing functionality heats up. Ten years ago we would not have known what these things even are;
* Livers can be grown in laboratory from stem cells. We really are living the future.

Independence Day 2. What might have happened in-between

This was in reply to a similar post in IMDb, a post which speculated on what might have happened in the 15-odd years on Earth since the events set in "Independence Day" (1996). Because IMDb forums for a movie or personality are cleaned up from time to time, I've decided to simultaneously publish this here along with the reply on IMDb.

Disclaimer: This blogpost does not contain spoilers to the movie, because I am not aware of its actual content.

My favourite ideas revolve around relations between humans and surviving aliens from the first war.

Of the surviving party (parties), there would be at least two or three 'factions', put this way:
* Those that want to destroy humanity and much of Earth and reconnect with whatever future mothership comes. These would be fighters and their ilk (the alien hard-liners);
* Those who somehow automagically decide that humans are worth something, too, and the Earth preserving.
* And maybe those that kinda-sorta like Earth, but not humans, only that they can't do much about it. The undecided (?).

It's possible that maybe one of the city-ships somehow survived to the point that it's established a state-like territory on its own, but that the ship itself is unable to become airborne. Maybe there are more than one and each has formed a different faction and attitude towards Earth and humanity.

Then the structure of the alien society: What was it like before, during, and after the invasion?

Then the very serious problems around whether and how to integrate surviving aliens into society (à la "Alien Nation", but it wouldn't work out like that anyway) — Because if we're better than them, then we can't just kill them all off. I'm aware it's very pacifist and stuff.

And then about how humans treat or mistreat the surviving aliens — look at Guantánamo; and would there even be trials? Does the whole species need to be convicted, or just the ones who set the agenda? How do you find out the surviving alien leaders (given that they all seem to look alike), and whether there are any, if the social structure and ways of communication are so different?

It's likely that humans and (former) invaders would mostly feel mutually repelled by one another and keep up some form of segregation ("District 9"). Would be interesting to know if that's in the new movie.

Then all the issues wrt biocontamination. Organic as they all are, there must be observable changes in Earth's nature. Did the first strikes also hit nuclear plants and was there any fallout and thus any possibility of a nuclear winter? Then I'd imagine the use of cars with internal combustion engines has perhaps lessened alot first due to destruction of major population centres and because of new technology.

The idea of a third and fourth species is also very intersting, given that a large explosion in space can be noticed by a civilization with at least similar advancement.

Oh, the "Pocahontas" scenario of two kindred spirits meeting one another would never work. No, no. But I wouldn't rule out several accidental hybrids. There's a possibility that if some alien surviors managed to form a workable faction within the confines of their previous social structure, then they might have made several experiments with human survivors until releasing one or more, or even a group of human-alien hybrids. And I suppose those in turn would have very dangerous properties. Maybe alien-human infiltrators.

Then what has happened to different human societies on Earth. Suppose some states rebuild and develop military technology, but at the cost of freedom. Some countries decide to keep individual freedoms, but maybe or maybe not risk being less secure. Or countries who decide not to adopt alien technologies and develop native technologies (Not Invented Here syndrome), or countries that don't want to sacrifice freedoms and develop slower and on their own pace compared to those that might sacrifice freedoms and might want to adopt all the latest alien tech.

Vertigo. Review. Analysis.

Reaction and reply to this IMDb post
Agree about the time capsule effect; pity they didn't show the trolleybuses.

I just saw the movie a few hours ago and thought it this way:

Judy Barton somehow decides to start dating Scottie, afraid that Scottie — having recognized Barton — has already put all the pieces of the puzzle together, while in fact he has yet not. This probably hints to the less sophisticated background of both, despite Scottie being a detective and Judy being part of an elaborate plan.

Were the actor playing Scottie different than John Ferguson, who was 49 at the time, the interpretation of the film could have been different, too. — Such that if the actor were much younger and more handsome, it would have been much more plausible to believe Judy's claims of loving Scottie in the final scenes of the movie. This also applies to the relationship between Midge and Scottie, where in some scenes Midge plays the mother figure.

Hitchcock was therefore correct to complain about mis/casting an older guy, despite 'early retirement' at 49 (going on 50) still sounding about right in 1958.

Midge is clearly smarter than Scottie and knows what Scottie is looking for in a woman (a mother-like figure, that is). Scottie hasn't so far taken the bait from Midge, and it is likely that he innately knows that she knows what he wants and so would feel uncomfortable to progress from friendship to something else, as Midge's play would feel unauthentic just because she knows and that Scottie knows that she knows.

The other reason could be that Midge is far too independent; Scottie wants to dominate, but knows that Midge wouldn't let him. Scottie is also old-fashioned, as he doesn't know much about women's wear.

This is when Scottie, after meeting "Madeleine", sees in her exactly what he wants to see: a young and pretty woman with the look and mannerisms of a lady, reasonably independent, but apparently subservient on an interpersonal level. Here we see how Scottie exercises his right to dominate by saving "Madeleine" from drowning, by taking care of her, and so on.

Scottie has become completely obsessed with Judy/"Madeleine".

As Judy and Scottie keep on dating, Judy realizes that Scottie doesn't know about the ruse and lets her guard loose. She chooses to be with Scottie with designs for a better life with him (We see from Judy's family photos that she seems to be from modest surroundings in the state she grew up in).

Maybe she'd thought that Scottie, almost 50 and still not married yet, might be gay and is perhaps looking for a beard. This is alluded to in "Madeleine"'s question about why he hasn't been married yet.

At the time of the ruse, Judy as "Madeleine" was willing to appear subservient, as she was instructed to be like that by Elster. Scottie falls for it.

I remember Elster at the beginning of the movie had no intention to go and wanted to stay with his enterprise. In the scene where Judy has walked up the stairs of the church tower and Elster throws his real wife down, Judy screams and Elster realizes that this could give away the charade, which causes him (uncharacteristically) to part ways with the city and his company as soon as possible. Scottie only attributes this to Elster's grief.

Once Judy has fulfilled her role as "Madeleine", she doesn't need to appear subservient and we get to see a decidedly more independent Judy than Scottie ever thought. It's hinted about when she decides to leave Scottie's home on her own, instead of letting Scottie bring her to Elster.

The masks start falling when Scottie demands Judy to be more like Madeleine and Judy thinks that Scotty is on to something; and while she plays along out of fear of discovery, she is also pushing back, because Scottie 'doth protest too much.'

The masks fall futher after the detective in Scottie has realized that Judy was in on the charade and when Scottie takes Judy to the murder site.

Several scenes follow where Scottie is overly dominant with Judy, short of being violent. It shows why Scottie is unable to have steady relationships with women, and how this is the real reason for his being unmarried.

Scottie forcibly takes Judy up the tower while overcoming his fear of heights, tells all to Judy and forces her to confess. Judy, trying to save herself both from the situation and to tame the much too overbearing Scottie, expresses the words of love to him, but is startled by the nun, who I think was there all along, who heard everything and only used the excuse of having heard voices to appear as if she just arrived.

Whether Judy was startled or felt no other way than to fall to her death is a matter of debate.

The reason why I think the nun heard everything was because after Judy fell to her death, the nun started pulling the bell ropes and so ringing the bell right away. — A person who just woke up usually takes some time to wholly wake up, so I understood that the nun was completely alert by the time Judy's confession escaped her lips.

The ending is left a bit open, because Scottie could be implicated in Judy's death. His saving grace is the nun, who apparently heard everything... but chose not to reveal this.

Or, if the nun really heard "some sounds," and only witnessed Judy fall down, then Scottie would be in a difficult position. Scottie would think that the nun would tell and would want for the nun to be silent. The old and wise nun probably knows this, too (by way of having observed Scottie's mannerisms with Judy), and rings the bells as soon as possible to make sure Scottie doesn't get any chance to impove his position on account of another person's life.

---

In a later post, I added this:
I remember the "gay old bohemian days" phrase was uttered by Midge's librarian friend.

If we allow ourselves to assume that Scottie might be gay, then the librarian friend somehow recognizes this in Scottie, but Scottie dismisses it, because he doesn't know it yet himself. We might see it when Judy (perhaps still as "Madeleine") and Scottie stroll in a park full of young people being together and cuddling. I then saw a cut to Scottie and Judy, where Judy seems to wistfully look at the young people with want, but Scottie appears conflicted — almost wanting to be there, too, but restraining himself.

Then what I forgot to add to my original writeup is this point:

While Judy is actually more independent and despite that still willing to be with Scottie for various reasons, then by very the end of the film she sees her decision backfire, as Scottie becomes more dominant. By the time Judy actually realizes this and starts pushing back, it's too late to break free, as Scottie is almost violent and takes Judy out of the car to the church tower.

Scottie's demands on Judy to be like "Madeleine" is an exercize of a series of warning signs, which Judy doesn't recognize.

So, if the actor playing Scottie were younger, I'd more readily believe Judy's love for Scottie, while with the current version of her "love" might more than anything be for reasons of fear.