Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category


Mason’s 12 Favorite Movies of the 2014


This is my third year running, but you wouldn’t know it because the blog in which I wrote the previous entries is down. I’ll try restoring those at some point. Until then, take my word for it that this follows a similar format: I hate “best of” lists, so these are just the movies I personally loved, for various reasons, the most last year. They are also not in any particular order because the only thing I dislike more than most “best of” lists is being forced to rank them.

Without further ado, let’s go against what I just said and start with what is truly my favorite movie of the year:


This blew me away. From the opening scene to the final cut to black, no other movie since GRAVITY has had me so riveted. In fact, as soon as the final, destined-to-be iconic scene ended, I shot up out of my seat and exclaimed “Holy SHIT!” with a huge grin on my face. When’s the last time you’ve done that?

The plot of WHIPLASH is simple: a talented drummer at a top music conservatory endures the torturous teaching methods of the top instructor in order to achieve greatness. But what you’re there to see is a tour-de-force performance by both JK Simmons (who should win the Best Supporting Actor Oscar in a landslide) and Miles Teller – whose ability to play the drums convincingly is an underrated reason why this movie works as well as it does. So often it’s painfully obvious that the actor isn’t even holding the instrument properly despite their character supposedly being a virtuoso. Or the camera lingers on the actor’s face and then obviously cuts to a stand-in performer doing the actual playing. Not so with Teller — and it makes all the difference. Writer/director Damien Chazelle displays masterful talent in his feature-film debut. I never imagined I would ever be that stressed out watching someone play the drums. I hope for amazing things from him in the future, but at the same time, if this is is peak, it’d still be a worthwhile career.


It’s been a while since I’ve seen this one now, but if you’re looking for a sparse yet tense indie thriller, BLUE RUIN is fantastic. Macon Blair gives a captivating performance as a broken man who, years after his parents’ murder, is given an opportunity to exact his revenge. As you can imagine with these sorts of yarns, it doesn’t go quite as planned.

What I find interesting is how both BLUE RUIN and WHIPLASH elicit similar levels of narrative suspense, creating sequences where you find your entire body tense and rigid in anticipation on small budgets, without big name actors (unless you count Devin “Buzz McAllister” Ratray, who is fantastic in BLUE RUIN, actually), and with stakes that are enormous for the characters involved but not remotely “the world is going to end” in scope. Give me movies like this any day, which then should be no surprise that several of the movies on this list fit that description.


This is a truly haunting cinematic experience with the most disturbingly gorgeous imagery captured on film this year. Writer/director Jonathan Glazer stripped down Michel Faber’s eponymous novel into a bare examination on what makes us human, by following the creepy actions of Scarlett Johansson’s female alien as she hunts men in the Scottish hillsides. This is heady sci-fi that’s more interested in emotions and existential ideas than specifics on the alien’s biology, technology, or native world. And like the best in sci-fi, UNDER THE SKIN uses this conceit as a way to explore ourselves, specifically how we dehumanize each other for our own personal needs and how our perspective on this can all change, viscerally, once someone does that same thing to us.

Much was written about Johansson’s full-frontal nudity, but unlike other films where she would be relegated to being merely the focus of the film’s male gaze, she’s not depicted in such a gratuitous way here. It’s necessary for her character and the story. Balancing it out — which is virtually unheard of in mainstream cinema — she’s outnumbered by the number of males shown in similar bare fashion. (Granted, this isn’t exactly a true Hollywood picture, but it does feature a true Hollywood star and got plenty of buzz despite not being a traditional Hollywood movie.) Not unlike how the main character stalks her prey, UNDER THE SKIN will follow you long after you’ve stopped watching.


Damn, this was a good time at the movies. I saw it again over the holidays with family and thoroughly enjoyed it on a second go-round. It’s smart, it has a strong female lead, it has Tom Cruise being every bit the movie star he’s had a tougher time being since the whole Oprah couch fiasco — but most importantly, it’s just plain fun and satisfying.

To sum it up, it’s GROUNDHOG DAY meets INDEPENDENCE DAY: we follow Cruise’s cowardly PR officer as he’s thrown into a futuristic D-Day that he ends up reliving over and over until he can find a way to beat the alien foe that has taken over the world. It may seem silly, but there’s almost a sports-movie feel to this as you root for Cruise’s character to learn how to fight in an ALIENS-inspired mech suit, complete with a laugh-out-loud-and-cheer montage scene. It won’t win any major awards – nor was it even nominated – and it didn’t light up the box office either (which is a shame), but when you’re in the mood for some good old fashioned escapism and have a blast at the movies, EDGE OF TOMORROW is what you hope to see.


I’m surprised, too, that this made my list. No one is talking about DOM HEMINGWAY this awards season, but after watching it at home on Redbox while sick one day months ago, I haven’t been able to shake it from my memory. Jude Law plays an absolutely crass human being, a safecracker who we meet as he’s getting out of prison having served 12 years because he didn’t rat out his criminal employer — a man who he feels owes him for his time segregated from society. (Can you blame him?) As you can imagine, they don’t necessarily see quite eye to eye on this and, well, I won’t say anything more.

Hilarious in a holy-shit-he-actually-said-that kind of way, there’s also genuine tension as well as a bit of heart to it as we get to know Dom, who is endearing in a way that you could only handle by seeing him on a screen, never in real life. It culminates in something that the rest of these movies on this list also possess: a memorable final scene. (Nothing can top WHIPLASH in that category, but I’m notorious for not remembering how movies end, either because I relate more to the characters’ journeys than destinations or many films just don’t offer finales worth remembering; I’m not quite sure. So that makes these films all the more impressive, in my mind, that I remember their endings.) It was a crowded field for Best Actor this year, but, for my money, I think Law deserved this nomination far more than Cumberbatch (more on that later).


This movie had all the makings of a gimmicky, over-praised pretentious mess: a meta-narrative with Michael Keaton playing an aging actor who once played a superhero (get it?); the whole movie being shot in seemingly one continuous take (take that Orson Welles); extremely dour filmmaker Alejandro G. Inarritu tackling comedy for the first time (if you don’t count BABEL, heyo!); all set in one main location: a Broadway stage (time to take ourselves realllly seriously).

Somehow, it works.

Granted, I’m a giant fan of Michael Keaton (who isn’t?) and will watch just about anything he’s in (except the new ROBOCOP, which I had to turn off because even he couldn’t elevate that to the level of being watchable). But it wasn’t just Keaton’s incredible performance. It was Edward Norton brilliantly playing the version of himself that everyone already believe he is: a talented actor who is a total prick and impossible to work with. It was Emma Stone and Naomi Watts stealing scenes left and right. And it was the magical realism and overt commentary on fame and filmmaking that oftentimes, in other movies, tend to pull me out of the cinematic experience, but instead, here, felt all part of the whole. If it wins Best Picture, you’ll hear no complaints from me.


What an achievement. You’ve already heard all about how writer/director Richard Linklater shot this in two-week bursts annually over the course of 12 years, giving it a wholly original feel in a non-documentary film. It’s not flashy. It’s not melodramatic. If you keep waiting for that big, tumultuous event, you’ll be disappointed. Instead we get the simple yet engrossing treat of watching all these actors age in real time along with the characters their portray, an average family of four navigating the life of divorce, re-marriage, and adolescence.

Ethan Hawke is his usual steady self, but Patricia Arquette steals the show with her fully realized and human portrayal of a (more often than not) single mom trying to do her best to raise her two kids. Would love to see her win Best Supporting Actress. I must admit that I find myself thinking about this movie the least of all on my list. And while I don’t like recommending a movie based on pure novelty, BOYHOOD elicits more than enough genuine emotion to elevate it beyond a mere gimmick.


The plot lends itself to being another forgettable Hollywood drama-thiller: a man’s wife goes missing and he’s the number one suspect even though he didn’t do it – probably. If this had been 1995, it would’ve likely been turned into a grimy Joe Eszterhas spectacle. Thankfully times have changed somewhat since then since Gillian Flynn wrote the script herself, based on her own novel.

Still, some saw the film as being misogynistic. Others quite the opposite. Many somewhere in the middle, including myself. A movie can propose misogynistic ideas without actually endorsing them, even if the main character is guilty of those ideas. The reality is that the onus isn’t on the filmmakers to spell it out and tell us exactly how we’re supposed to feel; that’s up to us. And director David Fincher masterfully rides the line between pulpy entertainment and controversial commentary on the roles men and women play in relationships to make our job as the audience that much tougher – but also that much more satisfying. There’s much in GONE GIRL to discuss and dissect, and that’s why it’s one of my favorites of the year. That and Rosamund Pike’s performance. Damn.


As I look at my list, I realize that this was the year of the fun movie. What makes it so is that the filmmakers didn’t sacrifice quality for the fun; in fact, the quality is inherent to what makes them so enjoyable. If I’ve learned anything this year, it’s that big dumb action movies needn’t be dumb any more. Not when this crazy movie — based on a comic book that was obscure even for comic book fans, starring the goofy guy from Parks and Rec, Colombiana, a wise-cracking raccoon, and a sentient tree who can basically only say his own name — ends up being the second-highest grossing film of the year, beating out the latest installments of TRANSFORMERS, CAPTAIN AMERICA, X-MEN, SPIDERMAN, and THE HOBBIT. (Not to give too much credit to box office as a signifier of quality, but it’s still worth noting.)

This is a rare case of something truly great also capturing a zeitgeist amongst the general population. It harkens back to the heydays of when Indiana Jones and Han Solo first graced the silver screen. Depending on my mood on any given day, this could surpass WHIPLASH at the top of my list. Baby Groot forever.


The world didn’t need another vampire movie. But then Jim Jarmusch came around with this and proved everyone wrong. Perfectly cast, Tilda Swinton and Tom Hiddleston play immortal vampires and in true Jarmusch fashion, don’t get up to all that much. Yet it’s all so mesmerizing and entertaining, employing some of the best camerawork of Jarmusch’s long career. Of course, it didn’t hurt that it was shot and set mainly in Detroit and has Hiddleston portraying a depressed musician who prefers to steal blood from the local hospital rather than killing anyone. Again, another movie with a memorable final image leaving you with that indelible sense of joy. Albeit, mischievous joy, in this instance.

JohnWick 2

The “Year of Fun” is complete with JOHN WICK. What a surprising and refreshing, indie actioner that was sheer delight the entire way through. You all know that I’m an unabashed fan of Keanu Reeves. But even with that bias acknowledged, I have no qualms about saying that this is his best performance since THE MATRIX. Defying everything we know about time, Reeves looks no older than he was during that 1999 mega-blockbuster, despite being 50 now. Arguably, he’s even better now since he’s able to kick and punch and shoot (countless bad guys in the head) with just the right touch of self-awareness.

JOHN WICK has the most basic of action movie premises: a mysterious man with a secret past gets yanked back into a violent underground world of the Russian mob to avenge the death of a loved one — it’s almost identical in plot to Denzel Washington’s THE EQUALIZER, which also came out last year, and yet was completely forgettable. Unlike JOHN WICK. The best way I can describe it as the entire world of the film feels alive. It’s a slightly parallel universe to our own (not to say that it’s sci-fi, because it’s not), but feels entirely organic. The plot points are there but masked with instantly memorable characters and ridiculously fun action. I can’t say enough good things about this one. Just see it.


Last but not least, we have NIGHTCRAWLER, with Jake Gyllenhaal giving a career performance as Lou Bloom, a bonafide psychopath with a dream. Quick aside: I hadn’t really given too much thought to Gyllenhaal’s career prior to this film. I’ve always been a fan, ever since DONNIE DARKO blew my 19-year-old brain away with its time-travel brain scrambled plot and 80s music that trumped its silliness. But he never came up in conversations about the next big movie star or serious actor. (Making PRINCE OF PERSIA probably didn’t help but even the greats have their missteps.) It’s not like he hasn’t been acclaimed, having received an Oscar nomination for BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN — but even that was overshadowed by what was deemed the more powerful performance by costar Heath Ledger. But after this year, he’s firmly rooted in my mind as one of the better and more versatile actors of his generation.

Combining elements of NETWORK, TAXI DRIVER, and PEEPING TOM, this dark comedy/thriller follows Bloom, an antisocial loner who stumbles upon the ethically questionable profession of filming crimes and accidents as they happen in order to sell the video footage to TV outlets for their outrageously sensationalist nightly news. As you might guess, Bloom takes things a bit overboard. A commentary on our society, on how the news is more about ratings and entertainment than informing the viewers, on the American Dream, and on the perils of unchecked ambition, NIGHTCRAWLER is funny, disturbing, suspenseful, and, dare I say, important.



What can I say? These movies were hilarious. LET’S BE COPS felt like it was written in 1998 with Martin Lawrence in mind to star. Naturally, being a huge fan of BLUE STREAK, this movie was right in my wheelhouse. It’s not a good movie. It’s ridiculous, implausible, and the bad guys do all those things that you know they wouldn’t do in real life, blah blah blah. It made me laugh and that’s just all that you need sometimes. 22 JUMP STREET: more of the same from the first one, only way more meta-jokes about doing the same exact thing over again. But it works.


  • LOCKE – Tom Hardy is such a beast. Even watching him literally just driving a car for 90 minutes is captivating.
  • NOAH – Darren Aronofsky is such a beast. Not the masterpieces that THE FOUNTAIN and REQUIEM FOR A DREAM were, this still was better than it had any business being.
  • OBVIOUS CHILD – Jenny Slate is a beast. This is the anti-JUNO and it was everything I hoped it would be.
  • INTERSTELLAR – Hans Zimmer is a beast. Were it not for his epic musical score and Christopher Nolan’s sound design direction, this would’ve been a laughable mess. As it is, some scenes still are. But overall, the great scenes were great enough to make up for it.
  • FURY – Brad Pitt is a beast. This band-of-brothers WW2 tank movie gets a bit manipulative and obvious at times, but ended up being harrowing, tense, and moving. Also, I didn’t hate seeing Shia LeBeouf on screen. That’s saying something.
  • JOE – Nicolas Cage can be a beast — and was in this case. What an odd guy. Goes from iconic performances in RAISING ARIZONA, LEAVING LAS VEGAS, and CON AIR to making putrid direct-to-video, cookie-cutter action schlock to this: a excellent indie drama about a loner who gets involved in a young boy’s tumultuous family life.
  • SELMA – David Oyelowo is a beast. He gives an incredible performance of Martin Luther King, Jr., in this fact-based story of how the brave people in the civil rights movement changed the country by making sure the Voting Rights Act was passed. The film is flawed, superior to a message-movie-of-the-week, yet not quite a masterpiece. But the parallels to 1965 and today are simultaneously hopeful and depressing, making it definitely a film worth seeing.
  • THE SKELETON TWINS – Kristen Wiig and Bill Hader are on their way to becoming beasts. They’re much more than comedians and that’s evident more than ever here in this dramedy about a couple of estranged siblings who come back into each other’s lives after one attempts suicide. It’s not as dark or pretentious as it might sound based on that synopsis. It’s actually quite touching.
  • CAPTAIN AMERICA: THE WINTER SOLDIER – Robert Redford is a beast. The fact that he’s still making movies at 88(!) would be reason enough; but this is the guy who played The Sundance Kid and created the Sundance Film Festival. I know he’s not why you’ll rent this movie, but I couldn’t quite give beast-credit to Chris Evans just yet. All that aside, the high acclaim this movie received was quite deserving. A thinking man’s conspiracy thriller disguised as a comic book action movie. Enjoy.


  • DEAR WHITE PEOPLE – too heavy handed to be fully immersive, this satire by writer/direct Justin Simien owes as much to Spike Lee as it does to Wes Anderson. With an interesting plot, fantastic set design, and can’t-believe-this-could-easily-still-be-happening-in-this-day-and-age moments, unfortunately it’s brought down by characters mostly consisting of archetypes to be commented on rather than fully realized people. That said, the commentary derived is smart, biting, and necessary. I think I would prefer the discussion with friends after seeing it to the movie itself.
  • SNOWPIERCER – I wanted to like this more than I did, and I honestly did like it more at the time than I do now. But I’m glad this exists as I’m a sucker for interesting sci-fi even if it doesn’t quite end up being as memorable as I’d hoped. That said, Tilda Swinton is absolutely incredible here, to the surprise of no one who has been watching her over the years.
  • PREDESTINATION – I nearly turned this movie off about 35 minutes in. I know that’s not high praise, but I am glad that I stuck it out. I won’t ever watch it again as it’s more of a puzzle that you don’t actually care about enough to be invested in the characters; you just want to know the answer to the riddle. It took way too long to get things rolling – even though the information relayed was vital to figuring out the finale. A case of not finding the best way to get across necessary exposition outside of two people just telling each other things.


GODZILLA – Give me kaiju and jaegers any day over Godzilla and Aaron Taylor-Johnson’s oaky performance. It did have some good moments and concepts – the opening conceit was great. It just wasn’t nearly as fun as PACIFIC RIM.


  • THE IMITATION GAME – There are always one or two movies that get massive critical acclaim and you just cannot understand why. This is one of those. I’m a fan of Benedict Cumberbatch, especially in Sherlock, but I couldn’t ever shake the feeling that I was watching him act rather than seeing him lost inside the character. To top it off, the script was sneakily weak, masked by an incredible score by Alexandre Desplat and solid cinematography. In the hands of lesser filmmakers, this script could easily have been a History Channel original.
  • THE GRAND BUDAPEST HOTEL – I go back and forth with Wes Anderson. I love RUSHMORE, THE ROYAL TENENBAUMS, and THE FANTASTIC MR. FOX. I hate MOONRISE KINGDOM and THE GRAND BUDAPEST HOTEL, with the latter being, by far, my least favorite of them all. I couldn’t even finish it. I was bored to tears and just so tired of all the Andersonian trappings that people either love or hate. Although I don’t think it’s quite that simple. His camera flourishes, meticulous set design, and quirky casting choices work when the story works. But, to me, they don’t elevate it when the story doesn’t. Here, I unfortunately couldn’t even connect with even one of the myriad stories he tried to weave together.


Always so many that I wanted to see but didn’t get around to in time. This is that list:
American Sniper
The Theory Of Everything
Top Five
The Immigrant
The Drop
Inherent Vice
Last Days in Vietnam
The Babadook
A Most Wanted Man
St. Vincent
The Raid 2
Force Majeure
Jodorowsky’s Dune
Beyond the Lights

Chart Of The Day


“So it seems that the theory behind trickle-down economics has been empirically refuted: its impact has been overwhelmingly trickle-up. It is also quite clear by now that huge tax cuts do not remotely pay for themselves – and the recent experience in Kansas only adds a final coda to this. And yet the GOP shows absolutely no sign of absorbing these facts, or having anything to say about the dangerous political instability of huge social and economic inequality and crippling debt that are their consequence.”

The GOP is more of a religion than a reality-based political party. It’s one thing to adhere to dogma when it comes to things that cannot be disproven, like what happens after you die, but it’s quite another when there are decades (or more) of empirical data supporting concepts like trickle-down economics doesn’t work at all, or evolution is real, or tax cuts don’t pay for themselves, or climate change is real and greatly influenced by humans. No surprise then that many Evangelicals are also Republican. Both require blind faith in the face of contradictory evidence.

The Dish

Income Distribution

Drum flags the above one – and it is truly staggering:

The precise numbers (from Piketty and Saez) can always be argued with, but the basic trend is hard to deny. After the end of each recession, the well-off have pocketed an ever greater share of the income growth from the subsequent expansion. Unsurprisingly, there’s an especially big bump after 1975, but this is basically a secular trend that’s been showing a steady rise toward nosebleed territory for more than half a century. Welcome to the 21st century.

Jordan Weissmann chimes in:

Through mid-century, when times were good economically, most of the benefits trickled down to the bottom 90 percent of households. Then came the Reagan era and actual trickle-down economics. Suddenly, the benefits started sticking with the rich. Since 2001, the top 10 percent have enjoyed virtually all of the gains.

This isn’t a totally new story. But…

View original post 180 more words


New Arizona Immigration Law Could Increase Undocumented Crime


Many people on both sides of the argument have already spoken their piece about the new immigration law in Arizona – the toughest in the country – that requires law enforcement officials to question people if there is a doubt about the legality of their citizenship.

Those opposed to the law argue that it will cause racial profiling because, well, let’s just say Arizona isn’t worried about the growing immigrant population coming over illegally from Sweden.  Those in favor of the law argue that illegal immigrants are living in their state unlawfully and this law simply pushes the authorities to enforce those laws.

And really, the issue isn’t simply that people live here unlawfully.  It’s because of the increased amount of violence in cities near the Mexican border and the belief out there that illegal immigrants are the cause of this increased violence from the drug trade.

I wonder, though, that in trying to ease criminal activity and prevent violence in American cities, this law might actually increase the crime rate, specifically the number of undocumented crimes.  Let’s say you’re an illegal immigrant living in Tucson when your home gets burglarized.  Broken windows.  Stolen TV.  The works.  Do you call the police?  Now that this law has gone into effect, I’d say there’s a high chance that you don’t.  Even though you work hard to earn your money through legitimate means and you were the victim of a crime, it’s going to be better to just absorb the loss on your own and go about your business rather than involve the police and risk being arrested, jailed or deported, and separated from your family.

There’s a danger that this law will cause illegal immigrants to become this odd form of marginalized resident in Arizona: one who remains a vital part of the American economy and workforce yet is forced to essentially live in hiding, unable to report lawlessness – the very kind that this new measure purports to ebb – for fear of losing everything they have.

And if that’s the case, this law will be a total failure.


Texan “Monster” Not Guilty?


Another execution in Texas.

And another murky question as to the possible innocence of the condemned.

I don’t know a thing about this case.  I hadn’t heard about it until I read this article.  The governor clearly has no doubts in his mind as to the guilt of Cameron Todd Willingham, who was convicted of killing his children by setting their house on fire while they were trapped inside.

There’s no way for me to know this man’s guilt.  There are political issues involved regarding Tex. Gov. Rick Perry changing out a panel just before they were to review a report that shed some doubts about the science used to convict Willingham of arson, the charge that pushed him into the realm of getting the death penalty.

There’s a chance that certain evidence could end up exonerating Willingham of the murders.  The case is essentially still be investigated AFTER the suspect has already been executed for the crimes.  That’s what you can expect when you have the government in the business of murdering citizens.

Luckily, there’s a really easy way to avoid all of this: abolish the death penalty.  At least if someone is wrongfully incarcerated and new evidence clears his or her name, that person can be set free.  But, once you plunge those toxins into someone’s body, there’s no turning back.

The truth is, it doesn’t matter if Willingham was guilty or not.  There shouldn’t be a death penalty.  Executing a man as disturbed as one would have to be to murder his own children by burning down his own home won’t do a thing to deter other equally disturbed people from doing such horrible acts.

It’s insane that we still have the death penalty.  For being so advanced and civilized, we sure do like to stick to our barbaric roots.


Polanski – Investigated and Revisited


In order to get more of a grasp on the Polanski situation, I  just watched the documentary “Roman Polanski: Wanted and Desired” and it shed some light on the case that I hadn’t known and I don’t think is widely known to the general population.

Apparently, Polanski made a deal with the prosecutor.  He pled guilty to unlawful sex with a minor in exchange for the rest of the charges to be dropped, which included rape, giving a minor drugs, sodomy, and perversion.  The law apparently is very vague on what kind of sentence to give to someone guilty of his crime – six months to fifty years.  And no one convicted of that crime had been incarcerated in the year preceding Polanski’s conviction.  The recommended sentence was probation.

Long story short, the judge in the case was an attention hound and didn’t want his image tarnished by looking like he was soft on Polanski or if the outcome ended up making Polanski look like he got the best of the judge.   The prosecuting attorney wasn’t going to push for incarceration.  But, the judge couldn’t be trusted to adhere to his word regarding what Polanski’s sentence would be, and could’ve included forcing Polanski to agree to voluntary deportation after spending 48 days in county jail.  Or worse.

So Polanski fled to France.

I didn’t know the entire story.  In fact, I knew very little.  All I had really heard was Polanski, rape, and 13 year old girl.  I also didn’t realize that he was actually convicted of a lesser charge and only fled before sentencing.  I thought he had fled after being charged with all those original crimes.  If he ends up back in California, it’s unlikely he will be handed a stiff penalty at this point.  According to the documentary, the two lawyers (the prosecutor and Polanski’s counsel) both approached a new judge regarding the case who agreed to simply give Polanski probation were he to return… only if it were a televised event.

Polanski refused.

I have to say I’m much more conflicted on my opinion of this case than I was before.  It’s never as black and white as it’s made out to be.   It’s hard to see how having sexual intercourse with a 13-year-old – which by our society’s definition cannot be consentual – would only bring the punishment of probation, much less when drugs and alcohol are involved.  But I’m not sure that is Polanski’s fault as much as it’s an indictment on the justice system and the law, in general.  It also shows just how different things are treated when celebrities are involved.

Polanski’s case makes me wonder why the prosecution would even think of a plea bargain with so much evidence stacked up against him.  One reason: the victim.  She didn’t want to go on the stand.  She was a 13-year-old girl not wanting the spotlight, not wanting the ridicule.  She wanted it to be over with.  It’d be hard to convict if the victim was refusing to testify.  Getting Polanski convicted of anything at that point would be better than going to trial and watching him exonerated of all charges.

I don’t know how I feel about this case anymore.  The girl ended up filing a civil suit against Polanski and then forgave him.  At what point does that end up being enough?  When should the state simply stay out of people’s affairs if they can deal with them on their own?  Especially when the victim is a traumatized teenager who could arguably be affected even worse with a long, drawn-out, public trial.  I don’t think there’s a clear answer.

Regardless of how a victim feels, when a person breaks the law, there should be consequences.  The idea is that the law treats everyone the same and objectively.  We all know that’s not really true since people run the justice system and people are inherently flawed, some more than others. And this is evident in the Polanski case with the self-serving judge making a show of the whole ordeal, which did made a mockery of justice.

Either way, Polanski ran off.  He didn’t want to risk excessive punishment so he fled and avoided all punishment. Had he stayed and taken the sentence from the judge, he may have only gotten the 48 days in jail and then deported, so he would essentially be right where he is now.  Or he could’ve stayed and maybe the judge gives him a year in prison to help the judge’s public image.  Or more.  Who knows?  Would it have been fair?  Well, if he were incarcerated solely for the judge’s personal image reason, no, it would not be fair.

But I can’t exactly see spending a year in prison excessive punishment for having sex with a middle-schooler by any means.  In fact, one could consider that getting off fairly light.  At the same time, what does that say about justice system when the sentence doled out is simply for the judge to save face instead of the being proper punishment for the crime committed?


Pray For Students Day


Let’s just say a little prayer for all of those poor, defenseless students out there in our schools being indoctrinated by Obama.

Because if it’s one thing we need in public schools, it’s God, not the President.


New Hampshire Makes It Official


Today, Gov. John Lynch signed off on the bill to legalize same-sex marriage in the state of New Hampshire.  This makes it the sixth state in the union to allow gay marriage.

I wrote about this before when the state legislature passed a bill that was dependent on the Democratic governor’s approval.  He promised to veto it originally if the congress didn’t make some changes, most notably specific language that spelled out the separation of church and state.  It’s pretty unnecessary as those rights are already secured in the Bill of Rights, but if it means passing the bill into law, then so be it.

Honestly, if all it takes is an extra clause reiterating the point that no religious groups or churches would be required by law to preside over any gay marriages if they chose not to, then bring on the legislature.  Draw up the bills now and let’s get this thing moving.  I think this is a strong precedent that will most likely be replicated in all subsequent bills going through states’ legislatures.  I’m really looking forward to seeing these ideas take off.

It also speaks loudly that the governor himself opposes gay marriage yet he signed the bill into law.  That again opens up the field to equality amongst those politicians who may not personally agree with gay marriage, yet understand their duty to personal freedoms.

The people have spoken.

Six down, 44 to go.


If I “Quote” It, I Don’t Have to “Believe” It


This has been really annoying the hell out of me lately.  It’s nothing new but it has been getting way more acceptable in everyday conversation and writing that people aren’t even questioning it anymore.

Just because you put quotes around a word doesn’t invalidate its meaning simply because you don’t want to acknowledge it.

Gay is a word.  It doesn’t require quotes.  If you refer to gay marriage: no quotes.  Or gay couples.  No quotes.  On the same token, marriage shouldn’t be quoted either.

People love throwing quotes around incorrectly.  And it’s not just in print anymore.  It’s during conversation, too.   This happened to me the other day while having a conversation with someone about psychiatry and when he came to that one word he regretfully had to say, he rolled his eyes and threw up his hands and gave me those air quotes when he said it.


Sorry, but psychiatry is a real scientific field of study.  Same with psychology (he used quotes around that one, too).  I have no problem if someone doesn’t personally agree with going to a psychiatrist (and lucky for them to not have any serious health issues that would require visiting such a doctor), but just because you have a differing opinion on science doesn’t automatically refute its legitimacy.

People seem to be using quotes to further sink themselves into a world of their own creation.  One that completely conforms to their own paranoia, prejudices, and personal views.  One that casts out any dissenting information, or at the very least, marginalizes the facts as being the fringe ideas.

Enough, already.

Lose the incorrect quotes.  Look up the AP style book on Google.  Read up on the use of quotation marks.  I hate to break the news, but these things you don’t believe in still exist with or without quotes.


New Location, Same Mason Ranting


I’ve been wanting to upgrade from my faux-blog Facebook Notes for quite some time and even went so far as to set myself up over at Blogger to continue the oftentimes controversial discussion, but it just never materialized.  I didn’t feel cozy over there in Bloggerville.  I needed a change of scenery.

So, here I am!  Time to get moving on some real blog-and-comment action in true WordPress style!  Let’s see if the new digs will aid in my still nascent blogging abilities.  Here’s hoping.

For the inaugural post I really wanted to dig into some meaty material and give Number 43 a real tongue lashing that would be a good signal of what to expect from future posts (in case you’re just reading my thoughts for the first time) but I need more time to compile my list of grievances before I can really do that topic justice.  Plus, Lance did such a great job in his Facebook note a week or so ago that I really need to collect my thoughts before I do a half-ass job.

Instead, let’s tackle a nice, shiny news item!

House Republicans have offered up an alternative stimulus plan to President Obama that proposes tax cuts instead of government spending.  According to the Yahoo! News article:

“The alternative includes across-the-board cuts in the two lowest income tax brackets, placing unemployment benefits off-limits to taxation and a new $7,500 break for home buyers who make a minimum down payment of 5 percent.”

Having spent a short time in the third tax bracket, I’m now firmly in the second lowest tier, which means that the proposed tax cut would help me.  It sounds great, sure, but I can’t remember the last time I actually paid income taxes in April of any year, so I don’t know that this will really affect me enough to help stimulate the economy.

Also, I’m not going to be buying a house any time in the foreseeable future: I live in one of the most expensive markets in the country, as indicated above I am in the second lowest tax bracket so you can guess I don’t exactly have much expendable income laying around, and, frankly, the housing market isn’t the solid investment it used to be.

The plan banks on the concept that with more incentives and fewer tax burdens, people will spend more to jump-start the economy.  Problem is, so many people are out of jobs, how does this plan factor in unemployment?  Without a job, buying a home is out of the question.  They address it here:

“Another provision would also cut taxes for small businesses.”

With unemployment rates soaring and a potential disaster looming with the Big Three I just don’t see small business entrepreneurs saving us.  We need something else.

As well as offering $275 billion in tax cuts, Obama and the House Democrats propose spending $550 billion thusly:

“Much of the spending would come in politically popular areas such as health care, food stamps and road construction and would include money designed to blunt the impact of state budget cuts affecting schools.”

We just got out of an administration that claimed conservatism yet practiced uncontrolled fiscal irresponsibility.  If we’re going to be spending hundreds of billions of dollars, I’d MUCH rather see it go to help AMERICANS instead of paying for a war in Iraq.  Investing in health care, social programs, and road construction will create jobs here at home instead of lining the pocketbooks of independent contractors overseas.