There were maybe seventy or eighty of us last night at Hurley's, drinking to the memory of Robin Spry. You have to have lived a really good life to have that many people care that you're gone. I can't tell you how many people told me he'd given them their first break -- directors, an editor, a producer. There were people from everywhere in the community, from the board of the CFPTA to aspiring screenwriters to set designers to the Elite casting ladies. Everyone missed him. But he was there in spirit -- the spirit of generosity and kindness he showed everybody who worked in the show business community.
Every year I watch the Oscars, I think that winning an Oscar is one thing, but the greatest tribute is the "In Memoriam" montage. If they still care about you when you're no longer famous, then you really touched people's lives.
Thursday, March 31, 2005
REVOTES
In Number 9, Benari Poulten remarks on how fast American Idol held a revote to correct irregularities, in contrast to, say, the uncorrected mess in Florida in 2000 and the uncorrected mess in Ohio in 2004.
I can't remember where it was, but there was an article a ways back on the rather stringent requirements for slot machines in Vegas -- the software has to be registered with the government, machines are tested at random regularly -- as opposed to voting machines, which are unchecked, with secret software, and quite a lot of glitches, all of which seem to help the Republicans. That is, when there are enough voting machines at all, which only happens in white, upper-class neighborhoods.
I can't remember where it was, but there was an article a ways back on the rather stringent requirements for slot machines in Vegas -- the software has to be registered with the government, machines are tested at random regularly -- as opposed to voting machines, which are unchecked, with secret software, and quite a lot of glitches, all of which seem to help the Republicans. That is, when there are enough voting machines at all, which only happens in white, upper-class neighborhoods.
SPRINGING FORWARD
An Op-ed piece in the Times suggests beginning Daylight Savings Time in March instead of, say, this Sunday -- even though, he says, this means darker mornings for farmers.
I've never understood why farmers should get special treatment -- has Congress ever tried to save the family hair salon? -- but the "dark mornings for farmers" thing has always struck me as particularly silly. Farmers work for themselves. They get up when the cows get up. If you change Daylight Savings Time, do the cows start mooing sooner?
Oy yoy yoy, people!
I've never understood why farmers should get special treatment -- has Congress ever tried to save the family hair salon? -- but the "dark mornings for farmers" thing has always struck me as particularly silly. Farmers work for themselves. They get up when the cows get up. If you change Daylight Savings Time, do the cows start mooing sooner?
Oy yoy yoy, people!
Wednesday, March 30, 2005
UN AUTRE ARTICLE SUR ROBIN SPRY
Si vous lisez français, il y a un article sur Robin Spry dans Le Devoir. -- Merci, Martine.
APPARENTLY THEY'RE NOT EBAYING AFTER IT
Some enterprising fellow has put his script for sale on eBay. All rights for the highest bid, starting at $5K.
Oddly, no bidders yet.
Oddly, no bidders yet.
A CASE OF BAD PAPERWORK
It's frustrating to watch the Schiavo case unfold in the newspapers, because people seem to be drawing moral conclusions from a case that is really about what the facts are.
The facts in question are: did or did not Terry Schiavo want to be kept alive by artificial means if there was no hope of her recovery, and does she have a hope of recovery. Only her husband knows for sure if she did or did not tell him she didn't want to be kept alive by artificial means, and only doctors who have examined her can have a meaningful opinion about whether she has a hope of recovery.
I don't think anyone thinks she should be allowed to die if there were a hope of recovery. And I don't think more than a small minority think she should be kept alive without hope of recovery if she asked not to be.
For my part, I wonder why people who believe in Heaven are so anxious to keep Terry Schiavo from going there. And I wonder how people who object to stem cell research because it's messing with God's domain can insist on keeping someone alive whom God, in the absence of a feeding tube, would allow to die.
And I wonder how people who usually think the federal government should stay out of morality are now trying to get the federal government's mitts on a state case.
But the morality of the case is not really in question. We're just arguing about the facts, and none of us know them.
NOTE: Trev, always good for an intelligent rebuttal, points out in the comments that her parents might also have a good sense of what Terry Schiavo did or didn't want, and that her husband may have a conflict of interest. But still, it's a question of fact. She did or did not want to be kept alive by extraordinary means. Whether a husband or a mother is a better guardian is a matter of custom and law. None of these things really touch on a moral question. It seems to be in the gray area of how much you should err on the side of caution in case when law and court-adjudicated fact point in the direction of death. Arguing about stem cell research addresses a philosophical/spiritual/moral point -- when does life begin? When does human life begin? Is there a difference? It seems crazy that we're spending so much effort on a case which is about facts we can't really know.
The facts in question are: did or did not Terry Schiavo want to be kept alive by artificial means if there was no hope of her recovery, and does she have a hope of recovery. Only her husband knows for sure if she did or did not tell him she didn't want to be kept alive by artificial means, and only doctors who have examined her can have a meaningful opinion about whether she has a hope of recovery.
I don't think anyone thinks she should be allowed to die if there were a hope of recovery. And I don't think more than a small minority think she should be kept alive without hope of recovery if she asked not to be.
For my part, I wonder why people who believe in Heaven are so anxious to keep Terry Schiavo from going there. And I wonder how people who object to stem cell research because it's messing with God's domain can insist on keeping someone alive whom God, in the absence of a feeding tube, would allow to die.
And I wonder how people who usually think the federal government should stay out of morality are now trying to get the federal government's mitts on a state case.
But the morality of the case is not really in question. We're just arguing about the facts, and none of us know them.
NOTE: Trev, always good for an intelligent rebuttal, points out in the comments that her parents might also have a good sense of what Terry Schiavo did or didn't want, and that her husband may have a conflict of interest. But still, it's a question of fact. She did or did not want to be kept alive by extraordinary means. Whether a husband or a mother is a better guardian is a matter of custom and law. None of these things really touch on a moral question. It seems to be in the gray area of how much you should err on the side of caution in case when law and court-adjudicated fact point in the direction of death. Arguing about stem cell research addresses a philosophical/spiritual/moral point -- when does life begin? When does human life begin? Is there a difference? It seems crazy that we're spending so much effort on a case which is about facts we can't really know.
Tuesday, March 29, 2005
MORE BETTER, PLEASE
Had a great lunch with one of Quebec's best directors, a friend of mine from Charlie Jade. He really likes Unseen. He'd like it to be more Lord of the Rings; it's too Harry Potter, he says.
Well, I only made it Harry Potter because I thought LOTR would be too overwhelming. People want to let me rip, I'm delighted. I can mythologize all day long. I just usually try to rein my tendencies back!
Lord of the Rings? I can get behind that!
Well, I only made it Harry Potter because I thought LOTR would be too overwhelming. People want to let me rip, I'm delighted. I can mythologize all day long. I just usually try to rein my tendencies back!
Lord of the Rings? I can get behind that!
HE GAVE US A BREAK
I've been talking with people about Robin Spry all day. There's practically no one in Montreal show business who didn't work with him. A huge number of people - directors, writers, producers, editors - got their start from him. He gave me my first break - and then some more breaks after that.
I'm glad I knew him.
I'm glad I knew him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)