I think I can translate...

A few minutes ago, after getting back from Daytona, I observed our new kitten, Friendly, hiding behind the bookcase in the hall in a stalking-pounce position.  Chessie, coming out of the bedroom, also observed her, and gave a small meow.  Not knowing for certain, I imagine the meow would translate as "I'm getting too old for this."

Ford's elves are mostly Mexican

Today on TV, I saw an ad for the "Ford Year End Celebration."  The premise of the ad is that the Ford Focus and Ford Fiesta are on display in a store in a mall, and mall customers are oohing and ahhing over them.

During the commercial, one of the customers asks, "Are these made here?" and the spokesman responds "Right here in this store.  A small group of elves come in."  Yuck yuck yuck.  Very holiday themed.  Very cute.  And it also ignores the question.  I'm not one to put much stock in the "buy America," thing, but "where is this car made?" is a legitimate question.

The real, elf-free answer can be found at Wikipedia's List of Ford Factories -- the Ford Fiesta is made in the AutoAlliance Thailand Plant in Pleukdang, Thailand, the Azambuja Assembly Plant in Azambuja, Portugal, the Bahia Plant in Camaçari, Bahia, Brazil, the Valencia Body and Assembly in Valencia Spain, the Valencia Assembly in Valencia Venezuela (I don't know if or why Ford has a special fondness for places named Valencia), the Cologne Body & Assembly plant in Cologne Germany, the Cuautitlán Assembly in Cuautitlán-Izcalli, Mexico, the Ford India plant in Tamil Nadu, India, the Ford Lio Ho Assembly plant in Chung Li, Taiwan, and the Ford Motor Company of South Africa plant in Silverton, South Africa.  The Focus is made in the Azambuja Assembly Plant in Azambuja, Portugal, the Valencia Body and Assembly in Valencia Spain, the Ford Motor Company Philippines plant in Santa Rosa, Laguna, Philippines (though that plant is closing this month), the Ford Motor Company ZAO plant in St. Petersburg, Russia, the Ford Vietnam Hai Duong Assembly plant in Hai Duong, Vietnam, the Hermosillo Stamping & Assembly in Hermosillo, Mexico, the Michigan Assembly Plant in Wayne, Michigan (though the list specified the 2012 Focus--so they may not make it there anymore), the Pacheco Stamping & Assembly plant in Buenos Aires, Argentina (this plant only makes the Focus II), and the Saarlouis Body & Assembly plant in Saarlouis, Germany.  I strongly suspect that the Fiestas made in the Cuautitlán Assembly in Mexico and the Focuses made in the Hermosillo Stamping & Assembly in Mexico and the Michigan Assembly Plant in Wayne, Michigan are the ones sold in the U.S.  The exact context of the line in the commercial, the question was either about the Focus, or about both the Focus and Fiesta. The answer to the customer's question , however, was, "No, they're mostly made in Mexico."

(As an interesting--and somewhat creepy--aside, as I was writing this post, I got a spam message advertising a Ford Clearance sale.  One wonders what I triggered with my search for information on Ford.)

Some thoughts on one movie rating...

I haven't seen the new "Winnie the Pooh" movie. However, I do have a question about its rating. According to Jay Leno's Headlines, and also seen in this link to a movie review, "Winnie the Pooh" is rated G for "(violence, profanity)." This begs the questions:

1. Exactly how much violence and profanity can a G-rated movie have?

2. Isn't it really rated G for everything? Obviously not "Winnie the Pooh," but, if a movie only has G-rated violence and profanity and several shots of full-frontal nudity, it's rated R for the nudity. (Then again, Winnie the Pooh doesn't wear pants, and I don't think Tigger or Eeyore wear anything.)

3. Exactly how much violence and profanity has there ever been in "Winnie the Pooh?" Is somebody misunderstanding words like "Pooh" and "heffalump?"

(OK, I know I'm making way too much out of what's almost certainly an editing mistake, but the idea of a movie rated G for violence and profanity still amuses me.)

Ramdom thoughts on the Atlas movie...

Usually, I'm not too particular about when I see movies that I want to see. Often, as long as I see it on the big screen, whenever will be fine. The movie "Atlas Shrugged, Part 1" is different--knowing how much stock Hollywood puts into opening weekend returns, I want to see the movie this weekend; I'd have seen it opening night if the mall weren't a madhouse on the weekends. Ever since I heard about it, it's been at the top of my list for upcoming movies.

What I'm trying to figure out is why I want to see the movie so badly when I've already read and reread the book. For movies where I haven't read the book, the movie is a quick and easy way to experience the story. However, my enthusiasm in this case seems more difficult to explain.

I suppose it's possible that it's a quick way to experience the book again. As with the books where the movie is the quick way to see what's it about for a first time, it could also be a quick way to experience it again.

Somewhat going against that idea, though, it occurs to me that seeing the movie is a way to see the book as others envision it and get new perspective on it.

A third idea is that the simple idea that a good novel would represent a solid start on the way to making a good movie. This one may apply a bit less to the "Atlas Shrugged" movie than most cases--the movie was made by an entrepreneur who has never produced a movie before, the director has little experience, and I've never heard of most of the stars, and the budget is small by Hollywood standards. So, while I like the actress who's playing Dagny, I have some apprehensions about how the movie will come out.

I think the main reason I'm looking forward to the movie so much, however, is that it's a way to celebrate the book. It's a way of going out and saying, "this is a great book--pay attention!" One reason why I tend to lean most heavily on this theory is that I've been trying to urge Donald to see the movie--alas, it seems, to no avail. I also tend to think this is the case because I really want to see it opening weekend so it'll have good returns in the way the movie industry seems to care about, and have them despite the limited release.

Regardless, though, I'm glad to finally see that Atlas Shrugged will make it to the big screen.

A flood of puns

I caught a moment of Geraldo's show on Fox News. Apparently Bound Brook, NJ is flooded.

Maybe it's wrong, but I think if it's flooded, it should be UnBound Brook. It may be the Raritan river, but it doesn't seem that rare...

I know I'm being pedantic, but...

I heard TV newscasters say this on TV the other night, and again read it online in the New York Times. "Warren Buffett is buying the Burlington Northern."

No, he isn't. That is, unless he invented a time machine, went back to the mid '90s, and bought it before it could merge with the Santa Fe, in which case I would think the development of time travel would be the main focus of the story. Berkshire Hathaway is buying the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corporation. At least get the railroad's name right.

Resurfacing?

When I was in Cumberland, MD on the Capitol Limited, heading west on our trip to Alaska (so we're talking Monday, August 17 here--I'm writing this on the 18th in Chicago but not posting it immediately), I wanted to access the Internet. There's free WiFi that you can access from the train in Cumberland, so I took advantage of that.

Well, when I completed the now required sign-up page (which seriously limited what I could do online, since that took time and the train's schedule didn't give me much to begin with, and which also made it look like it might not be free next time we pass through, but that's another matter), up popped an ad for "Surface" available on iTunes.

Why on Earth would they advertise a short lived show from so long ago? Was it a new offereing when they WiFi system was set up (they had a copyright date of "2007-2009")? Or has "Surface" developed a cult following that I'm unaware of? Or something else? That one just mystifies me...

Until the cows come home...

My dad recounted a story from his days as a banker the other night: He once asked a prospective dairy farmer if he knew anything about raising cows. The farmer replied that he didn't, but the cows knew.

Happy thoughts?

Last Wednesday, I was having dinner with my dad when I heard The Partridge Family's "C'Mon, Get Happy" on the TV. My first thought was surprise that "The Partridge Family" was on in primetime; before I could turn around and determine that it was, in fact, background music for some Disney movie, the thought occurred to me that it might have been a commercial.

Now, for the core of my thought: You could probably use the song "C'Mon, Get Happy" for ads for any product except life insurance...

Oddball on the tracks...

Every now and then, I'll see something while train watching that will baffle me. Tonight was one such night for me.

Coming home from dinner tonight, we were stopped at the crossing for Greenridge, (I think the exact time was 10:24 PM, but I'm not sure--it was close to that, but I didn't look at the clock at the exact moment the train passed). A CSX engine (a wide cab model, but I don't know the exact type of engine) passed southbound with a single Amtrak Auto Train car carrier. I know it was an Amtrak carrier--I could read that in the streetlight.

My first thought was that something went wrong with the carrier and it was being taken back to Sanford. However, that doesn't seem to make sense to me--it seemed to be running at normal track speed--at least for a freight train. If there were a serious enough problem to require it to be pulled from the consist, wouldn't they need to move it beck to Sanford more slowly, and why not take it to Lorton? On the other hand, I'm hard-pressed to think about where else the carrier might come from. If it were accidentally left off yesterday's train, I'd think it would have simply been put on today's train. If it's returning from maintenance in Beech Grove, I'd think Amtrak trains would take it to the Washington area (perhaps not D.C. per se due to wire clearances, but the Cardinal could take it to Charlottesville or Alexandria, and CSX only handle it to Lorton), or mix it in with freight cars (though all Amtrak cars have "do not hump" written all over them--that seems like it might be problematical)--a special CSX move from Indiana seems wasteful and unlikely.

I've also got to wonder if passengers cars were in the carrier. If so, there will be some seriously ticked-off and upset people in Lorton tomorrow morning.
'

My old movie review website is closing!

Well, an era of indecision is ending.

Eleven years ago, I started an online movie review service. For about a year and a half, I posted regular movie reviews on the web on GeoCities (free web-hosting--an essential component when no one is paying you), and sent them out in e-mails to subscribers (also free). Then I got a writing job with a magazine in Washington, and subsequently, burnout. The result of that was that since 2000, my website had been in limbo--I never officially closed it, but didn't post any new reviews either.

Yahoo!, for whatever reason, is closing down GeoCities for good. I can only fault Yahoo! for this--it was great to have free web-hosting even if it meant carrying their ads and bandwidth limitations. Corporate greed (there‘s a heavy push for us on GeoCities to move to their very expensive paid hosting--I'm not going to pay), incompetence (blogger.com, YouTube, MySpace, and a zillion other sites prove there‘s still a place for free hosting online), and shortsightedness (there are very few web services with a 15 year history--that alone would be a reason to try to keep it open) are the only explanations I can imagine.

In the meantime, I’m going to officially pull the plug. I plan to redirect the domain name here (another free writing project I don’t tend to as often as I should, but that’s another issue), and copy the content over here (marking it with the tag "ReviewsbyJohn"). That way, I’ll be able to keep the reviews online without having to maintain a new site. However, ReviewsbyJohn as a separate service is no more. I will, however, leave the reviews over there for the benefit of anyone with old links, and so they’ll still be available here, if Yahoo! reconsiders.

And I will miss the film-reel graphic--I made that myself with Windows Paint.

Here’s looking at you, kid.

Old English/New Mistake

"Monday on 'Good Morning Jacksonville,' the works of Shakespeare were done in Old English, but one performance troupe has found a way to translate it into hip hop."

The above quote is from a commercial that aired during Saturday's "Jeopardy!" I caught one grammatical error (the antecedent for "it" is "the works of Shakespeare") and one factual error (Shakespeare wrote in Early Modern English). I don't think I can deal with journalism such as this at 6AM on Monday.

Dulcinea's shocking experience

It was cold here the other day. (OK--not cold by objective standards--but it got below freezing, which is cold by Florida standards.) And Dulcinea was rolling around on the new carpet for reasons known only to her. And she meowed, and I knew she wanted me to pet her. And I did--and zap! A nice, pretty strong, static shock. The poor cat was so scared she took off and ran under the bed.

And the chicken said...?

Earlier today, I was trying to think about what my earliest memory was. One of the candidates was a memory of a trip to the Staten Island Zoo when I was very young (three or four--so this trip would have been in 1977 or 1978). What I remembered in particular was a talking chicken exhibit. I think the chicken had a name (I want to say Rodrigo or something like that, but I'm very, very far from certain about the bird's name). I also remember seeing a speaker (a metal box with slats on a post)--which makes me think that the whole thing was faked. At the very least, I'd be sure that the chicken's vocal talents were played-up greatly.

My dad had no recollection of the chicken, and a Google search found nothing that stuck out. So, I thought I'd ask if anyone out there had a memory of the "talking" chicken.

Black friday run amok...

I will defend the commercialism of the holidays as much as anyone. Gift giving is an ancient way to reinforce friendships, and goes back to the very origins of Christmas. (I'd like to think the wise men bought their gifts.)

However, I don't participate in Black Friday. The malls and stores are too crowded--and it's not like there aren't other chances to buy Christmas presents.

The story about the Wal-Mart worker trampled to death really, really disturbs me. I have one very close friend who works in Wal-Mart in the Daytona area, and another in Indiana who recently quit her job with the store, so the thought of a worker at the chain being killed is especially chilling to me. What the HELL was wrong with the shoppers who burst into the store? Never mind the employee who was killed--once he fell, shoppers further back wouldn't have known he was there, and could have tripped over him unaware it was a person. It's horrible that the man was killed, but it was arguably an accident. But the shoppers who wouldn't leave are deeply disturbing--the shoppers who refused to leave the store and said "I've been on line since yesterday morning," are just insane--they not only apparently blew off Thanksgiving with their families to go to Wal-Mart (hello--Wal-Mart will be open again between Friday morning and Christmas), but they wouldn't leave even after someone had died! I'm cheap, but a Ferrari for $1 isn't a big enough bargain to make that behavior to seem reasonable to me.

I'd also add my condolences to the family of Jdimytai Damour; whether it was an accident or homicide, what happened to him is undeniably a tragedy.

Lipstick on a pig

If you're wondering why I'm already sick to death of the election cycle, this whole "lipstick on a pig" brouhaha is a perfect example. Let me share a few thoughts on the subject.

1. I don't for one moment believe McCain, Palin, or any of their partisans actually believe that Obama called Palin a pig, or meant to. Cut the crap. If this is a comment that merits an apology, then let's also demand to hear one from McCain, Cheney, Petraeus, and everyone else who has used this expression also.

2. As long as I'm questioning the sincerity of the Republicans' indignation, I would note that Palin compared herself to a dog with the original joke. "Pig" is not much better or worse than "dog." "Bitch" and "dog" are insults themselves. At this point, I would wonder if the whole point of that stupid joke was to create a lipstick reference so that if Obama used the cliche, they could cry foul over nothing.

3. Being fair to both sides, if Obama is as great a rhetorician as his partisans claim he is, why on earth is he using such a hackneyed old cliche?

4. Getting back to McCain and Palin, if they're really this mad over such a trivial perceived insult, then you certainly shouldn't want either in the oval office. It would be extraordinarily dangerous to the human race to have such a sensitive temper in control of the nuclear trigger. If these two get elected, you can count on four years of Ahmadinejad, Chavez, Castro, etc., using the word pig to excess.

5. Am I the only person who has noticed that there is very little discussion of agricultural policy in all this discussion of pigs? Or any real issue, for that matter?

Don't tell me this is news.

Pretty much ALL of ABC's 6:30 nightly newscast was devoted to the Democratic National Convention. Specifically, to the fact that they nominated Obama to be their presidential candidate.

If they had nominated (either) Clinton, that would be news. If that had nominated Richardson, that would be news. If they had nominated Ron Paul, it would REALLY be news since he's a Republican. The fact that they nominated Obama--the apparent candidate for several months--simply makes it an orchestrated and ridiculous formality to confirm what had previously been decided. Not news. It merits a one-sentence mention on the news broadcast; it doesn't warrant more than 24 minutes of live coverage.

The only news on the show was the story about Olympian Dara Torres getting surgery on her shoulder. So we're talking about six minutes. Give me a break!

The only interesting thing about such fluff is is thet don't do it again for the Republican Convention, does it reveal bias or learning that it was a waste of time with the Democrats?

Two (somewhat belated) thoughts about Sen. Edwards

I watched Sen Edwards' interview on ABC's Nightline on August 8. The truth be known, I did so more from habit than desire. I don't like him (or most politicians) and didn't really care what he had to say about his adultery. However, having done so, I did have two quickthoughts on the interview. Cheap shots, perhaps, but I feel they're fair.

1. I have a hard time thinking of a case where a politician seemed sleazier to me than that interview. Being in the Senate alone is usually enough to earn my mistrust, but in this case, the feeling I had after watching the interview wasscuzzy in the same way, but to a worse degree, that I felt after dealing with the flood when the toilet overflowed.

2. Although John Edwards said in the interview that, “My Lord and my wife have forgiven me.” I would note that neither of them actually appeared on the program to confirm this. We have only the word of an admitted liar.

Fielding questions

Some news stories just leave me skeptical. The recent investigations about lead in AstroTurf is a case in point.

On the one hand, I don't trust the government to look honestly into the safety of AstroTurf. Not with who know how many public schools on the hook to replace the stuff if it were dangerous.

On the other hand, I question whether this might not be a tempest in a teapot. After all, it's not like people are eating the stuff. You walk or run on it, wearing shoes typically. Isn't it possible, even if there is lead in the stuff, that it still might not be worth the expense to remove it?

Out of season springs to mind.

We're waiting on the AC repairman. So I'm answering the phone more quickly than usual, and generally trying to keep the line clear. (Of course, this trip online is an exception to that, but we'll let that pass.)

We got a call from a telemarketer. Female voice--99.999% sure she was recorded--selling satellites. I hung up, and them I had a "did she just say..." moment.

She said (I believe), "we're calling to promote our new spring packages." [Emphasis mine.]

Is once a quarter too often to change the recording? It hasn't been spring in several weeks. Or they're way early.

Missed it by that much

"Get Smart:" *** (out of 5)


Warning: here be spoilers!

30

29

28

27

26

25

24

23

22

21

20

19

18

17

16

15

14

13

12

11

10

9

8

7

6

5

4

3

2

1

With the AC on the fritz, my dad and I decided to take in a movie after dinner. We had both wanted to see "Get Smart," and the timing worked well, so that's what we saw.
It has been eight years since I shut down my movie review service. I want to get in the habit of blogging more, so I thought I'd try writing reviews here. This movie is not an easy one to review, either.
"Get Smart" pretty-much takes its cue from the '60s TV show of the same title. Maxwell Smart (played by Steve Carell) is an analyst from Control who desperately wants to become a field agent. When the terrorist organization Kaos attacks Control Headquarters and steals files with the identities of most of the field agents, he gets his chance.
In the end, Carell holds his own as Smart, and the chemistry between Smart and Agent 99 (Anne Hathaway) is very good. The film also does one thing that the original series never did--it explains how the bumbling Max got to be Agent 86 in the first place.
The real problem with the movie is that it never makes it out of the shadow of the original TV series--which was one of the best shows in the history of television. Two prominent gags in the movie--the fly and the beaded curtain--are lifted straight from the television series, and the cone of silence gets an electronic makeover. There are also nods to the original show--an amusing cameo by Bernie Kopell (the original Siegfried), and a Control Museum that figures prominently. With the museum, however, we do, however, come perilously close to suggesting that there's a new Maxwell Smart and Siegfried in the same universe as the old ones.
The movie also contains some iffy elements. At one point, Siegfried--who is described in the film as the leader of Kaos--gets a call from someone who seems to be his superior, but that idea is never developed. (Sequel setup-perhaps? There does seem to be a spin-off DVD in the can already.) There are also sequences in the film where the Chief (Alan Arkin) is inexplicably violent (and not towards Kaos agents). It also stretches credibility that even an agent as bumbling as Maxwell Smart would use a match to remove gum from his shoe while on an airplane. Some muddled "fat acceptance" messages also appear, but still feel out of place.
The movie does take advantage of the new medium--the stunt sequences go beyond what could readily be done for the TV show. For example, the miniature crossbow and flamethrower on Smart's Swiss Army knife are both put to very good effect. There is also one very funny sight gag at the end that simply could not have been on 1960's TV. The movie definitely earns its PG-13 rating.
I enjoyed "Get Smart." The challenge in reviewing it is that I'm having trouble figuring out how much I enjoyed the movie on its own merits, and how much it was simply making me nostalgic for the superior television show.

Home on derange

In my blog entry about the railroad sites in Colorado, I just want to know why the spell checker thought it would be a good idea to change "Durango" to "Derange."

They're helpful for proofreading, but sometimes the spellchecker is just deranged.

The AC unit is dead--and nearly took the house with it!

While we were out on the road, we got a call from Donald--the AC unit died.

We got home at 11 on Friday night. I tried calling the AC repairman--to my amazement (since they didn't with American Home Shield), they came on a Saturday!

To make a long story short, the problem is that the cutoff switch basically fried itself. It's not clear whether it burned, blew up, or simply melted. One thing is sure--it very nearly burned the house down: what was left was clearly charred. The outside unit has been nothing but trouble since we got it--ever since American Home Shield had it installed in 1997, we've had an average of at least one heating or AC failure each year. It was clear they only paid for the cheapest unit possible and they installed a piece of junk. The failure of the unit in 2004 is why we finally dumped the company, and the cutoff switch that the outside unit overloaded was installed in 2005. (That was because of a crooked repairman: he said that it wasn't safe to work on the unit without a cutoff switch, and that he could install it for a couple of hundred extra. When I asked him to sign a paper to the effect of the work being substandard, he backtracked--we still needed the switch installed, but all of a sudden, he couldn't install it; we'd need to get an electrician.)

The repairman today recommended that we replace the outside unit, saying he thought it overloaded the cutoff switch. Since it has caused so many problems--including an obviously serious one this week, I agreed to replace it. We're even getting a new cutoff switch and a new thermostat thrown into the deal.

And good riddance to the old unit!

The Great Railroad Tour of Colorado

I was lax blogging from the road this last trip. Mainly, I wanted to recover from the chaos of the flood, and unwind. A big part of the trip was the Mensa AG, but the other half which was just for my father and myself was our great railroad tour of Colorado. We got to six railroad-related landmarks. I enjoyed all six greatly.

The Monday before the AG, I went to the Colorado Railroad Museum. It's a nice museum. One highlight for me was seeing the Galloping Geese--the first time I'd seen one. (They have two: #2 and #6; I have always had an odd fascination for those railcars.) The other highlight was the Santa Fe Super Chief observation car Navajo; I kept going back in my mind to the thought that my mother may have ridden in that car on her west coast trip when she was young. (Perhaps a longshot, I know, but possible.)

The Monday after the AG, I rode the Georgetown Loop Railroad. That was my least favorite of the narrow gauge railroads--mainly because it's shorter than the others and is currently using diesels. However, I feel it's unfair to describe it negatively--it's still pretty good, and well worth the ride. Also, if you're there, take the mine tour.

On Tuesday, I took the Pikes Peak Cog Railway. That was definitely a high-point of the trip! (Sorry--I couldn't resist a pun.) I was pleased that I had few problems at 14,110 feet. (I was a little short of breath for a moment up there--enough to make me glad my dad elected to remain at the hotel.) I lucked out with my ticket--I had a seat right in front of the cab window of the downhill side of the train. I've never summited a mountain even nearly that high before, and that is definitely the easy way to do it.

On Thursday, my dad and I took the Royal Gorge train. That is a beautiful line--and I recommend spending the extra money for the dome car.

On Friday, we took the Cumbres and Toltec. As a libertarian, I hate to admit this--since this is the only government run operation of the five railroads--but this is probably the best of the five railroads. The scenery along the line is great. The only downside if the line is that you need to ride a bus one way to take the whole line in one day.

The final line we took was the Durango and Silverton. Like the Cumbres and Toltec, it is also a very well-run scenic railroad. The scenery is perhaps the most spectacular of the five routes I mentioned--especially along the High Line. They also have a nice museum at the Durango station. The biggest downside is that it was very crowded.

In short, if you're out in that part of the country, all five railroads are well worth taking and the museum is worth a visit, and all six attractions are very enjoyable.