Day 91: Mirrorbox: The Story of How Art Became Science

Today I watched a short documentary about an artist who is using her latest piece to inspire scientific research.

The artist, who is also the filmmaker and narrator, designed a simple device called the mirrorbox that plays with optical illusion, symmetry, and mirrors.

Mirrorbox, AKA Darth Vader's nuts 

Meghan, the artist, built the device to explore human empathy, but soon found it could be more than just art, it could be of scientific use too. By studying people using the box, scientists might be able to learn how and why humans empathize with each other.

I was less than impressed with this film. I think the mirrorbox is a great piece of art, and I do agree that it could have scientific merit. But when the creator of an art piece makes a short film to detail how important said art piece might be, my lips begin to curl. Had someone else taken the initiative to tell this story- great, by all means. Or if she had told the story of how she learned the piece might have value in fields other than art- all for that. But the film is a commercial for the piece, targeted towards the scientific community, asking them to get in on the ground floor on a revolutionary new item that's going to forever merge art and science. 

I get the feeling that Meghan is an artist who, for whatever reason, would have been happier as a scientist, or maybe would like to be as smart as one. In a lot of ways scientists and artists are on the opposite ends of the spectrum in terms of skill sets, tendencies, and how their minds tend to operate. Although it happens, it's rare to see someone who can live (and flourish) in both worlds easily. But, that being said, I don't knock her for trying. 

The great thing about art is that you can never be wrong; you have the ability to call things however you see them. Because of that, art can be safe. But once you enter science, things get definitive; theories, postulates, laws, etc. Sometimes a desire to be considered objectively smart or talented takes us in the wrong direction. I, for example, like to think I'm smart enough to do well on an IQ test. I base this not off hard facts, but just a general sense of relativity about how much I know vs. the general population. I could easily put this to the test by, say, taking an IQ test, but I don't, because I'm terrified I'll be proven dumb, or worse, average. 

Well, in terms of a documentary, I guess it was pretty good. It passed the most important criteria; gave me a lot to think about. 

You can watch it on vimeo here.

Return to Main Page  

Day 90: Making of Universal Pictures Logo

Today I watched a featurette on the making of music for the Universal Pictures Logo. You know the one:

So we meet the composer in charge of redoing the intro for its 100th Anniversary. Apparently that's a job you can have. 

The feature is only 2 1/2 minutes long, but you probably hear the intro music a good 30 times, in various lengths and snippets. I can't imagine how many times the orchestra had to hear it while they played, or the sound guys during editing. 

Reminds me of a Starbucks my friend went into that was playing a 30 second soundbite of a song, over and over and over again. Imagine working an 8 hour shift in there. You'd go insane. 

As tedious as this work seems, designing music for a 10 second clip that most people don't even notice, it's cool and actually admirable how much thought and dedication they put into it. A huge orchestra, an array of exotic instruments, even a choir. 

It made me think of the Brian Wilson scene in Walk Hard, when they are parodying the Beach Boys and their eclectic period:

 

Ugh. Ignore the youtubey crap in between the actual good stuff

Overall, I gained a lot of insight into how things like this are made. 

Return to Main Page

Day 89: Child Full of Rage

Today I watched a shocking documentary called 'Child Full of Rage'. It is the saddest film I've watched all year.

This 30 minute short follows Beth, a young girl with severe problems. Abused and molested as a child, she is extremely aggressive, physically abusive, and verbally hateful to her family. She's threatened them with knives, often tells them how much she wishes they were dead, and must be locked in her room at night to prevent her from terrorizing them. She's only 6 years old.

Beth was adopted by a minister and his wife when she was 19 months old, along with a young baby boy named Jon. The new parents were not informed that both children came from extremely abusive families. The abuse was so extensive it affected their learning capabilities and stunted Beth emotionally. From an early age she was physically aggressive and sexually aware.

What's most shocking about this film is the interviews with Beth. Calmly and straightforwardly, she describes in detail what she has done to her younger brother (abuse both physical and sexual) and her desires to see her entire family killed. She talks about stealing knives from the kitchen and hiding them, planning to stab her family to death. She speaks with such lack of emotion, no shame or remorse in her voice or actions. At points she seems to acknowledge what she does and thinks is wrong, but only on a superficial level; evidence that she has been told it's wrong, but maybe doesn't see it as wrong herself, or understand why it is.

The film has left me with a lot to think about. It shows me that there are no truly evil people; I don't believe you are born good or bad. It is the experiences we have that shape us. She was abused by a sick individual, and thus became sick herself. Probably the person who abused her was also abused, and the cycle continues on and on ad nauseum. When you can't blame a person, but instead the experience, it becomes that much harder to come to terms with it. People stop being predators and start being victims, even when they turn around and prey on others. It's victims hurting victims.

Also, side note: the film states that due to her abuse Beth was unable to develop a conscience, and thus able to perform bad deeds without remorse. It makes it sound like the conscience is a physical function that needs to be set in place by a certain age. I don't know if I believe that. What is the conscience, exactly? A set of moral codes that are handed down through social instructors like family, friends and the media? Couldn't those play a role in influencing you at any stage in your life? Conscience isn't formed as strictly as the brain is formed, is it?

Check out this difficult to watch documentary here:

Return to Main Page 

Day 88: TED Games Can Make a Better World

In honor of my brother's birthday I watched a documentary on something he would enjoy-video games. June McGonigal believes playing video games holds the key to saving the world. She discuses her theory in this 20 minute lecture.

My brother Max loves video games. He always has. I can remember spending hours as a kid watching him play. I was never very good- I don't posses the hand-eye coordination necessary to be a gamer. But I always enjoyed watching him play, if only because he would get so into it. Winning or losing a game could make or break the rest of the day for him. Humans currently play 3 billion hours of video games a week. McGonigal would like to see us amp that to 21 billion hours a week in order to maximally utilize the benefits of gamer culture. 

McGonigal, a video game designer, believes that playing video games brings out the best in people, and that could be harnessed to help solve some of the world's biggest problems. People respond to the world rules of video games because there are clear goals, consistent forms of validation like level-ups and awards, and strong social ties to other players. If people began to think the real world could be affected and saved as easily as the online world, what changes would be made tomorrow?

Overall a really interesting topic and a good lecture. 

You can watch it here: 

Day 87: Afraid of People

Today I watched a documentary about social anxiety disorder called 'Afraid of People'. I randomly found it on youtube.

Random Image Found on Google

I did not expect much going into it. It's been really hit or miss with rando documentaries I find on yotuube. Half the time they are bombass BBC docs, the other half they are crappy low budgets made in someone's basement.

This one turned out to be one of the better docs I've watched all year, for a variety of reasons. It's an interesting topic, (and something I can easily relate to) captivating characters I wanted to know more about, and a good mix of personal testimonies and scientific information.

The film follows a handful of individuals who suffer from social anxiety: a sweet 20-something year old guy who lives at home and can't even go to the grocery store without having a panic attack, a middle aged woman who is worried her anxiety is affecting her performance at work, a young girl in school, and a woman who actually studies social anxiety and also suffers from it. Each of these stories grabs my attention and, more importantly, wins me over. You see these people struggling and worrying over the simplest of activities, things we all do everyday, and you just want them to "get better". You want to seem them overcome their anxiety.

The woman who studies anxiety might be the most interesting story. At one point she actually has to give a speech to a room of people about the people who fear public speaking, and she's absolutely terrified to do it.   After it's over she leaves the room and starts shaking and crying immediately. I can't figure out, and they never explain, why she'd put herself through all that. The very concept sounds like A Mr. Show sketch or something you'd see on SNL: the social anxious public speaker who talks about public speaking fears.

The young child suffers from selective mutism, which is something I've heard of before. Wikipedia defines it as "a person normally capable of speech who is unable to speak in certain situations". At home the girl is perfectly fine; she even seems outgoing. But at school she clams up, unable or unwilling to speak to teachers or other students.

The best part of the film is seeing them make progress. Each person, in their own way, finds a way to overcome their anxiety and get a little more comfortable in public. It's extremely satisfying to watch.

As someone who has dealt with mild social anxiety most of my life, I really appreciated this film. It gave me a better understanding of what causes it, and even more than that, showed me that I'm not the only one who knows what it's like.
You can watch it here:

Return to Main Page 

Day 86: TED Talk Ron Schaich

Monday March 26th

Today I watched a TEDx talk from Ron Schaich, founder of Panera Bread. I had read about the talk in Wired Magazine, which is an awesome publication if you have never checked it out.

First off, I didn't know there was a TEDx. Apparently it's like an official sin-off of the TED series, not necessarily put on by the TED people. My question is, why do they use the name then? It's either part of the TED series or it's not right? It'd be like going to a McDonald'sX and ordering spaghetti.

That being said, I get why TED wouldn't want to include this one in its series. It's less of a lecture and more just a 20 minute commercial for Panera. Schaich beats us over the head with what a great guy he is and how awesome his company is, under the guise of sociological research into the spending habits of customers.

I mean, look at this dude. I hate to stereotype but if I saw this dude's picture I'd assume "oh, this dude owns a billion dollar company. And he likes to talk about it."

old. white. male. bald. I just won "billionaire ceo" bingo

So this is what he talks about- Panera, in an effort to give back to the community, has started a cafe where customers can pay whatever they'd like. There are no set prices, only recommendations, and no one turned away. The proceeds go to charity, and people are getting fed. So that's great. I'm all for that. 

I think the concept is amazing- I'd love to see how people react to a business that allows them to set their own prices. Would people over pay? Under pay? Pay at all? If you relied solely on the kindness of strangers, could you stay open? 

But the way he comes off, man it just drives me up the wall! I should preface that one of my biggest pet peeves in the world is immodesty or a feeling of self-importance. Almost to a fault. Basically I have a hard time liking people that already like themselves. I'm much more apt to admire people who think they should be doing more; who spend time complaining they aren't doing enough instead of patting themselves on the back. Especially when it comes to companies because: 1. they have a million times the resources that individuals do. So a business would have to be doing A LOT of good before I take a minute to applaud them. Considering the amount of revenue companies make. 2. Businesses will only do what makes them a profit. Their goal isn't to make the world a better place, or to help those in need, it's to make a profit. So I'm weary of any company that seems to put profit to the side to help others. It's just a more intricate business plan, one that takes good reputation or tax write offs or something like that into account. 

The whole thing reminded me of the Ben Stiller episode of Extras. His monologue sums up the idea that you can do a good deed and still have selfish motives.

So is Panera, and Ron Schaich, doing a good thing? Yes, absolutely. I wish this project nothing but success. Does that mean I have to pat him on the back, or worse, applaud him for patting his own back? No sir. 

You can watch the talk here:

Return to Main Page 

Day 85: Jeff Broz Star Wars Footage

Today I watched 7 minutes of unauthorized footage of Return of the Jedi being filmed in California in 1982 by someone named Jeff Broz. I have no clue who he is. I get the feeling he worked on the set or maybe he just snuck in one day and started recording.

The footage isn't that great. By that I mean, nothing of note happens. The scenes being filmed take place on Tatooine as Jabba is about to execute Luke, Han and Chewie by throwing them into the Sarlacc Pit. In the movie, this is very exciting. In real life it involves a lot of wires, large animatronic puppets, and a lot of standing around. There are no close up shots, no interviews with the cast or crew, just wide screen shots that look like they might have been captured through a barbed wire fence on a really windy day.

This "film" made me realize there are limits to my obsessions. As a die hard fan of the first 3 movies I've sat through my share of painful experiences in the name of Star Wars; Jar Jar, Jake Lloyd, and of courses this-

I'll sit through just about anything that has the SW name attached to it, but I draw the line at 7 mins of grainy footage of Boba Fett being tossed around on a mini-crane like Mary Martin in Peter Pan. I'm not offended by it, it doesn't bother me, I'm just not interested. I've reached the edge of my interest in Star Wars and it's this film. 

I found this while googling SW pictures. This falls well into the realm of Star Wars things I like: 

You can watch the film here:

Return to Main Page 

Day 84: Why is 'X' the Unknown?

Today I watched a TED talk about the letter 'x' and its function in mathematics.

The 4 minute lecture is presented by Terry Moore, who is "director of the Radius Foundation, a forum for exploring and gaining insight from different worldviews".  Vague descriptions of large organizations always makes me think they are up to no good, like the evil company in Robocop. Super-villain or not, Moore details the interesting history behind mathematics and use of 'x'  as a symbol for the unknown.

I'm not a math person in any way shape or form. I have not been in a math class in over 5 years, and with the exception of the occasional mental math when dividing pizza slices among large groups of friends at birthday parties, I rarely have a need for math. Had this lecture been longer than 4 minutes I would have assumed it would be over my head and I probably would have skipped it.

Like most things in life, I make fun of that which I don't understand

It turns out math, like the best types of horses, is a export of Arabia. Arabians had a word for the unknown, but it didn't transfer to European language easily and thus was converted to "kai", which in turn was shortened to the "x" sound.

Also did you know 'algebra' comes from the Arabic word 'Al-jebr' which means "reunion of broken parts"? I like that way better. They should call it that instead. Okay kids, take out your reunion of broken parts workbook and turn to page 30.  Let's reunite some broken parts.

You can watch the TED talk here

Return to Main Page 

Day 83: Why We Tell Stories

Today I watched a panel discussion on the science of story-telling. Part of the World Science Festival, the panel includes 3 scientists and 2 authors (Joyce Carol Oates and Jeffery Eugenides), doing a great job of dissecting story telling analytically and abstractly. It's an amazing conversation and it's given me a lot to think about.

I stumbled upon it because of its title, "Why We Tell Stories: The Science of Narrative". I love exploring stories and their role in our culture, but I was worried it'd be too sciency and dry for my taste. My fears quickly subsided when I saw that Eugenides and Oates were on the panel. I read 'Middlesex' last year after millions of people told me to read it, and it was even better than I expected. I knew both of these authors are the kinds of people I'd want to delve into stories on stage.

Author/paisley shirt advocate 

Before the panel began, the audience was treated to a short improv set by NYC's UCB theater. They were brought on to show how stories can be created instantly and still be interesting. This was, without a doubt, the crappiest improv set I've seen in years. Worse then open mic night at the basement bars here in Chicago. Maybe I'm overly critical because I'm living knee deep in good improvisers these days, and I spend most of my free time watching it. I was especially disappointed because UCB is famous for being bold and intellectual, and I thought they'd be the perfect fit for the World Science Fest. But they instead came out and did some of the broadest, most bland improv I could imagine being created. It was laughable how bad it was! The monologist broke every basic rule of improv within his first 4 mins (apologizing for your creation, negation, etc). I think they were just nervous.

The discussion covers some really interesting topics. Why do humans care about stories? Made up tales of fictitious characters that we know don't exist- where is the pull? Why can we find stories, specifically narratives, in every culture around the world since the start of civilization? What are the elements found in the narrative that has helped them survive and thrive over the last 10,000 years?

The scientists on the panel, mainly child and cognitive psychologists, claim that stories stoke something deep within the human brain, citing MRI research that shows the brain reacts differently when reading certain books compared to others, or doing other activities. (Choice quote from Eugenides, "I'd like to see an MRI of a brain reading 'Anna Karenina' versus a brain reading 'Mein Kampf' and see if there are any similarities, or if one is full of sludge")

The panel goes on to discuss what constitutes a story. Children can create elaborate tales based on household objects. When stories are sheared down to its most basic parts, what are we left with? We are shown some interesting research that have been conducted that show our brains require very little information to create stories.

Overall, this gave me a lot to think about regarding the role of stories in our life. Like the best documentary, it inspires me to go out and learn more (and to read more of Eugenides and Oates) It also makes me want go see some improv to get this shitty set out of my brain.

You can watch it here:

http://worldsciencefestival.com/webcasts/science_narrative

Return to Main Page 

Day 82: The Culture of Reddit

Today I watched a short documentary about the culture of Reddit. The doc was made by PBS for the Offbook series of web-shorts. The films seem to revolve around the internet and web culture and how it affects art and society.

Reddit is a social news site that allows readers to promote or demote stories and links, thus allowing the public to determine what goes viral and what doesn't. I don't use the site much myself, but my favorite sites (tumblr, the daily what, etc) seem to pull most of their content from Reddit. The site has become more and more famous over the years for its intense fan base and community, for good and for bad.

The documentary only seems to focus on the good. It paints Reddit as a rich, vibrant collection of people built around altruism and creativity. While that is true, there are many kind people on Reddit, and the site is structured in many ways to aid people all over the world, I think the site is used just as much for "evil" as it is for "good". Bullying, pornography, and the crudest of jokes are what makes Reddit famous.

Well at any rate- here is the film. I've watched a few of these Offbook episodes and they've been less than impressive. This one continues the tradition.

Return to Main Page 

Day 81: The Buddha

Today I watched a documentary on the life and work of Buddha. It was narrated by Richard Gere and featured interviews with various authors, professors, and philosophers.

Richard Gere: A Poor Man's Harrison Ford? 

I've been a Buddhist for about 10 years now. My dad and older sister have both been one since before I can remember. In high school I attended a Buddhist temple in Wichita, KS run by a group of American Buddhist nuns. We would meet in a small, two-room building across the street from a McDonald's.

What I like about Buddhism is the sense of control. I'm in control of my emotions, my attitude, and thus, my future. No higher beings, no sense of predetermination, nothing to worry about but my own actions and consequences. It's also a lot of responsibility.

This documentary was very slow and very hard to get through. I stopped and started it 3 different times. I guess it was because it was so calm and peaceful, as Buddha would be, that it couldn't keep my attention.

We are told the story of Buddha's life; his upbringing as a rich prince, his rejection of material goods and wealth, his search for enlightenment, and his impact on the world. We review the 4 Noble Truths, which are as follows:

1. Life means suffering.

2. The origin of suffering is attachment.

3. The cessation of suffering is attainable.

4. The path to the cessation of suffering.

Pretty depressing, I'll admit. But the possibility of escaping the trappings of attachment is so present and so seemingly attainable, it keeps one excited to keep trying.

Anyway watch this doc if you want some really basic info on Buddha, and to see some funny clips of The Dalai Lama's adorable broken English.

Adorable and enlightened 

The film is available on Netlfix watch instant. 

Return to Main Page 

Day 80: Ze Frank TED

Today I watched a crappy TED talk with "internet humorist" ze Frank. The whole thing made me embarrassed for the internet.

I don't know who Ze Frank is. Apparently he got really popular in the early 00's for a dance video he made that got a bunch of hits. So he became an internet phenom and started sharing his views on the future and possibilities of the internet. Considering he got famous by accident, I wouldn't put a lot of weight behind what he says. It'd be like asking for stock market advice from a guy who won the lottery.

He basically just did standup the whole time. He's got a weird, awkward presence that I didn't really get into. Remember how Jim Carey used to be on 'In Living Color?' It was like that- really spazzy, lots of smirking, lots of weird voices. I'd say only about 2/3rds of his jokes got a laugh.

ah, the subtle comedic genius of Jim Carey

So I guess he was invited to TED because he was on the cutting edge of internet memes. This was back in 2004 before Facebook, youtube, twitter, and just about anything else cool online. I think all they had back then was email and homestar runner. I guess it was still a novel idea to think the internet could do more than just share numbers and letters and watch porn. 

As someone heavily obsessed with internet humor, I feel almost nothing towards this guy. I'm sure I should feel some level of reverence, a "respect your elders" mentality, but I don't. Same with how I feel about people like Thomas Edison and Ben Franklin; their achievements, however grand they were, occurred so long ago it's difficult for me to put them in the same category as recent heroes like Bill Clinton or Steve Jobs. Ze Frank might have been pushing some envelopes 8 years ago but I don't think he's got what it takes to stand the test of time online. The shelf life of an online entertainer is razor thin, and you have to be able to adapt before your audience even realize they are getting sick of you. 

This is, of course, just my opinion. The dude has a wildly successful webseries (that he recently brought back) that's probably made him a millionaire. But I wasn't on that bandwagon when it started, and after watching this talk I'm making no plans to jump on. 

Also, the dude made jokes about being embarrassed about his age AND about having 'relationship' talks with significant others. In 2005! Those jokes tasted old 20 years ago on 'Mad About You!" You can't expect to be a comedy vanguard and cough up old stuff like that. 

Anyway you can watch it here. 

Return to Main Page 

Day 79: A Cry From the Grave

Today I watched an incredibly sad documentary called A Cry From the Grave about the Srebrenica Massacre in Europe. In 1995 more than 7,000 Bosnian Muslims were executed in the small town of Srebrenica by the Bosnian Serb Army, led by General Ratko Mladic. The Muslims and Serbs were in conflict over territory stemming from the breakup of Yugoslavia. By 1995 the majority of the fighting had stopped, but the Serbs were still seeking control of Muslim cities. On July 10th 1995 the Serb army took over Srebrenica and began a massacre that lasted more than a week. Muslim refugees fled into the mountains to escape certain death. Some 7,000 civilians were killed, raped and tortured.

Srebrenica 

The film follows the widows and refugees as they seek justice and closure. We follow the events of the massacre as they unfolded hour by hour, watching from all sides; the Muslims, the Serbs, and the UN troops. A group of Dutch UN soldiers had been deployed earlier in the summer to maintain peace between the two factions and to keep the Serbs from attacking Srebrenica outright. Most of the film is made up of first hand footage taken from all three sides.

The film was very hard to watch. For a variety of reasons. Obviously the gravity of the situation, the heart-wrenching footage of widows and refugees detailing their experiences, and the grotesqueness of the mass graves. But it was also striking to see constant reminders of how recent this genocide was. Personal camcorders capture the invading troops as they lay siege to the city. Men wear Nike shirts as they flee. It's easy to displace the events as something that happened long ago, like the Holocaust. But this was only 16 years ago- long after the horrors of WWII. This was the age of Clinton, Post-Desert Storm, in the midst of the rising dotcom boom. Incredible to think of the progress one side of the world was making while others were slipping into savage barbarianism.

I know enough about history and war to know you shouldn't pick sides. History, unlike film and fiction, rarely divides itself neatly between heroes and villains: even in the most dire of situations there are two sides to every story. But the Srebrenica Massacre seems completely unwarranted. It was a peaceful, quiet town (a health resort for tourism) filled with civilian families. The Serbs had occupied it earlier in 1992, and I suppose they wanted it back again, despite the lack of any military or economic infrastructure. The Serb general, Mladic, is shown briefly in some footage his soldiers took. He comes off as a cold, merciless man more at home in a 80's action movie than real life. There's an eerie scene of him walking the deserted streets of Srebrenica moments after the invasion. He's cheerful and proud, commanding his men to tear down street signs and Muslim flags from windows.

So the town was taken over, with little resistance from the UN soldiers. As one soldier put it, it wasn't "their war" and that made it difficult to put up much of a fight. There's footage of the commander of the UN troops meeting with Mladic, over drinks and cigars, calmly negotiating the fate of the town and its people. Mladic demands that all guns are turned over to the Serbs.They shake hands as they part. Within days the UN had turned over the city to the Serbs, and kicked the Muslims out of their base. The massacre began the following day.

This film left me with two big questions; where was the United States, or the rest of the world, during all this? What role were we playing, if any? I don't mean the Bosnian/Serb War, I mean the Srebrenica Massacre. Is it possible we just didn't know this was happening? If so, what did we do once we found out about it? Mladic was not officially charged with war crimes until last year, and has yet to be sentenced. Before I watched this I had never heard of the Srebrenica massacre. It was never discussed in school, by my family, my friends, the media, no one. Why? What purpose does silence serve here? Reverence? Respect? The survivors would ask for the very opposite, I would think; that everyone know what happened here. That is what the survivors of the Holocaust would want.

Which leads me to my second question; why are genocides still happening? Why are we allowing them to happen? I thought the lesson we were supposed to pull from the Holocaust, the terrible story we are told over and over again in school, was to stop things as terrible as genocide from ever occurring again. To speak up, to become involved at the slightest sign of trouble, despite the political or financial obligations it might create. We all regret the Holocaust, so why aren't we doing more to ensure it is never done again? In Bosnia, in Africa, in Syria, everywhere?

You can watch the documentary here:

Return to the Main Page 

Day 74: Reggie Watts TED Talk

Today I watched comedian/musician Reggie Watt's TED talk. It was short, bizarre and wonderful. I've been a fan of his for a few years, enjoying his comedy and his music both. I saw him perform at Bonnaroo a couple years back and loved it.

Reggie Watts

Reggie basically parodies TED. He pokes fun at the long winded lectures with big words and rambling structure and its overly-indulgent tone. I love TED talks as much as anyone but Watts does a good job pointing out how tedious they can seem. 

His poetic parodies are segmented by his special brand of beatboxing and vocal mixing. His use of technology and his skills with beat boxing are out of this world. He creates things you will not believe can be man-made. 

You can watch the video here. 

And here's one of his awesome music videos, "Fuck Shit Stack". It's NSFW, obviously:

Return to Main Page 

What are Leprechauns About?

Happy St. Patrick's Day! Instead of looking into the history of Patrick (something about snakes? I think?) I decided to learn about something even more interesting (by that I mean creepy); leprechauns. Slate wrote an awesome article about the history of Leprechauns.

First of all, they are supposed to be much smaller than they are in movies. Traditional leprechauns are the size of mice. Secondly, there aren't really 'good' leprechauns (like the Lucky Charms guy) and 'bad' leprechauns (like 'Leprechaun in the Hood')- each has the capacity to bring great fortune or misfortune, depending on how it's treated. They'll grant you wishes and show you to gold, but if you try to cheat them or take their food, they will kill you and steal your firstborn.

Though the myths are hundreds of years old Leprechauns didn't enter American pop culture till Lucky Charms put one on their box as a mascot.

The moral is, let's never forget that Jennifer Anniston was in Leprechaun. 

Return to the Main Page 

Day 73: Johnny Carson King of Late Night

Today I watched an amazing documentary on the career of Johnny Carson, host of the Tonight Show for 30 years. The film, from PBS, chronicled his life from the heart of Nebraska to his rise as one of the most famous television personalities in America. At its height The Tonight Show garnered 15 million viewers a night which is more than the combined current viewers of Leno and Letterman combined. Carson's complicated personality is discussed and the dichotomous relationship between his onstage persona and his off-screen lifestyle.

My dream in life is to be the host of my own talk show. I've wanted to do it since I was a kid. The idea of getting paid to talk to people and crack jokes is still hard to fathom. I've spent countless hours watching late night shows, trying to learn what I can from men like Conan and Colbert. Now my interests are growing further, I want to learn more about the men who came before- Steve Allen, Jack Paar, and Johnny Carson. This gave me more information than I could ever want.

What I learned: A lot about Carson's personal life. A notoriously private man, I had never known a lot about his life or relationships. This film does a good job of balancing his career with his private life; his tumultuous relationship with his parents, his multiple marriages, and his less than strong connection to his sons. Again and again the film pressed the theme of dichotomy; on stage Carson was a virtuoso able to talk to anyone about anything. But off stage he was cold and distant, preferring solitude over the company of friends and family. Carson admitted it was because of social anxiety; never really knowing where to fit in at parties or with people. It's a feeling I can easily relate to.

 “I can get in front of an audience and be in control. I suppose it’s manipulation. Offstage, I’m aloof because I’m not very comfortable.”

What I liked: All of it. Not only was it a well put together documentary, I loved Carson. A talented, hard working person with strong morals and a clear idea of what he wanted. He credits most of these traits to his Midwestern upbringing, which I can definitely relate to. The Midwest knows how instill those virtues. I was continuously impressed with him throughout the movie. He goes up against NBC for creative control of his show and doesn't back down, eventually getting the amount of control he thought he deserved. It's a great lesson to never compromise on something you care about.

Watch this if you want to be inspired, while at the same time do some laughing.

It's available on the PBS website. Watch it here

There's a lot of amazing clips I could show you, but here's a fun one with Steve Martin:

Return to Main Page 

Day 72: Being Elmo

Today I finally watched "Being Elmo", one of the documentaries I've been most excited to watch since starting this project. The film follows Kevin Clash the creator, voice and puppeteer behind Elmo. We learn how Elmo was created, how Kevin got into the world of puppetry, and how his life has changed since Elmo and Sesame Street became international sensations.

What I learned: It was very rewarding learning about Kevin Clash, his life, and his dedication to his craft. The man knew he wanted to work with puppets from a very early age and was willing to tolerate any name calling or misunderstandings that come along with a young black boy wanting to work with "dolls". It was also very cool seeing the process of creating the Elmo character and how much input Clash had.

What I liked: Clash is just an all around cool guy. He comes off as funny, smart, and very hard working. I really appreciated how supportive his family was and is. It wasn't usual for a boy in his time to be so taken with puppetry, but his parents were willing to do whatever they could to help him meet his dreams, and that's awesome.

What I didn't like: I really liked the whole film, but I would have liked to have heard more about Jim Henson. Everyone knows I'm a huge Henson fan, so maybe I should just go watch docs about him. But I just thought he'd play a bigger role in Clash's path to puppets and the rise of Elmo but it felt like Henson was more of a producer than the driving force. Clash seemed more influenced by men like Capt. Kangaroo than Henson.

Obligatory Jim Henson photo

I highly recommend this movie. To anyone who loves Sesame Street, the world of children's entertainment, or watching someone go after their life's dream with unabashed enthusiasm.

Here is the trailer:

The film is currently on Netflix Watch Instant.

Here's Elmo palling around with Ricky Gervais:

Return to the Main Page 

Day 71: Hans Rosling TED

Today I watched the shortest TED talk to date, an impressive 52 second lecture on the future of global inequality. Hans Rosling is a European professor who has lead TED talks in the past. Here he offers some impromptu thoughts on the world's current 7 billion person population and where it will go in the future. For being less than a minute it gave me a lot to think about!

Return to Main Page

Day 70: Lot 63, grave C

Today I watched a short film about Meredith Hunter, the man killed during the infamous Rolling Stones concert at Altamont in 1969. The details of his death are still mysterious, but it's believed he was stabbed to death by a member of the Hell's Angels, who served as security for the concert, after Hunter drew a gun in the crowded concert.

The film, only ten minutes long, focuses on Hunter's time at the concert, his unmarked grave in the Skyview Cemetery, and Edward Wilkes, general manager of the cemetery. Wilkes shows us around the grounds, offering information on the spot where Hunter is buried. For unknown reasons Hunter's family declined to purchase a headstone for the plot, so Hunter is buried without any markers or identification. The film plays up the contrast between Hunter's role in Altamont and his relative obscurity today.

hard to be obscure in a lime green suit

What I learned: I didn't know much the incident. I knew it involved the Rolling Stones and The Hell's Angels, and that's about it. I learned that the concert was supposed to be the West Coast's version of Woodstock, that there was only one death (I figured it was much more for some reason) and that the Hell's Angel who did the deed was never convicted, since it was self-defense. What really interested me was how the incident was used to signify the real "end" to the peace and love mentality of the 60's. This film made it seem like it was the final nail in the coffin.

What I liked: Though the film's focus is on Hunter, Wilkes steals the show. He's got a calming, thoughtful manner that captures attention in a subtle way. He's allowed to speak about his views on death and legacy, first relating to Hunter than opening up more broadly. The film directly discusses the death of Meredith Hunter, but it also speaks to the nature of death itself.

You could watch the trailer, but with it only being 10 mins long, why not just watch the whole thing?

It's worth noting that after the film was released donations were raised and in 2008 a headstone was purchased for Meredith Hunter. 

Return to Main Page

Day 69: Lovely Monster

What a piece of crap! "Lovely Monster'" has earned the award for worst documentary I've watched all year!

First of all it's not a documentary, it's a short film. I saw it posted on several different sites listed as a 'doc' and thought, "I'll like anything about monsters!" Oh how wrong I was.

The description is as follows; '"Lovely Monster" tells the true story of Sophia, a young woman dealing with a rare and very dangerous condition." 


Okay so spoiler alert- it's just a weird monster in  her chest. A poorly CGI'd monster that you see for like 3 secs after sitting through a very slow 5 minutes of people talking about how messed up she is. You meet the girl's parents and boyfriend, and there's narration from Sophia about how isolated and alone she feels. If you only watched the first 4 and a half minutes it could be a story about anyone trying to survive being a teenager- awkwardness, uncertainty, low self esteem.  I think the point was to be purposefully vague to create an air of mystery, but all it did for me was build a sense of "okay this is boring."

I wish it had been about the monster inside the dude from Total Recall. I'd watch a movie about him. Does he have to be fed? What does he eat? Does he ever have to go to the bathroom? Does he wear clothes?

He should wear a tiny hat, like a bowler or something

If you want to watch it, it's on vimeo. One thing I thought was interesting was the difference in comments from vimeo and youtube. The comments on vimeo seemed mainly positive, with a lot of focus on how it was shot and less about the plot. Youtubers were much more critical, making fun of how low budget the alien monster thing was. 

Lovely Monster

Return to Main Page 

Day 68: What is the Self?

Today I watched a short youtube doc about the self and how we define it.

The video is only 3 minutes long and because of way it's shot it feels more like an intellectual commercial than a real documentary. Though thought provoking the overly cliche shots of a guy paragliding and a ballerina dancing and all that seem more at home in an insurance commercial than a film about philosophy.

The main point is to determine how the self is defined- we consider ourselves to be unique and independent individuals separate from those around us. What are the qualities that grant us that classification? The film states that we are made of billions of tiny organisms that all operate independently of each other (though they serve a mutual function, or greater good, for the body, they all have individual agendas), thus are they not individuals as well? Or maybe we, as humans, are just parts of a larger whole- society, the Earth's ecosystem, etc?

Gave me a little bit to think about today.

It can be viewed here:

Return to Main Page 

Day 67: When I Die

Today I watched "When I Die", a short film about a man coming to terms with his own eminent death.

Philip Gould was a British political adviser who was diagnosed with esophageal cancer and was given only a few months to live. Gould used his remaining months to spend time with his family, conduct interviews and write a book. This film is a conversation during his final weeks.

What I learned: I didn't know who Philip Gould was but that doesn't really matter. He was a man about to die, and that was his most distinguishing characteristic. The film is just short of 9 minutes- basically a monologue about his views on his life and death.

He seems incredibly at peace with his situation and not afraid at all. He states again and again that he has accepted his fate and no longer has a fear of whatever comes next. He made his peace with God and has decided to spend the rest of his time enjoying the company of his family and friends. He had some calming platitudes about the cycles of life and death and how we should spend less time worried about what we can't change and more time enjoying what we have.

You can watch it online here:

Return to Main Page 

Day 66: Cruise Inc

Today I watched a crappy little CNBC special called "Cruise Inc: Big Money on the High Seas". It was basically a 45 minute commercial for cruise lines.

What I learned: I know very little about how cruises operate, so I was ready to learn. I was taught a handful of fascinating trivia that has already escaped my memory (stuff like, every day the ship goes through a million pounds of bacon). All the information presented was to further the underlying point that: the boat is very successful, popular, and well off.

What I liked: Easily the best part was when they talked about the entertainment. Among young improvisers here in Chicago, the prospect of working cruise ships ranks just below SNL and above Madtv. You get to perform for boring rich white people all day, who will about laugh at anything, you get to live on a boat and see the world, and you get all the buffet you can handle. What's not to like?

What I didn't like: Seriously the whole thing felt like one big commercial. But to be fair all of the CNBC specials do.

So if you have 45 mins to kill and want to learn about boats, check this out.

You can watch it on netflix instant.

You can watch the cool seen about the boat entertainment here.

Return to Main Page

Day 65: James Hansen Why I must speak out about climate change

Netflix has recently added a TON of TED talks to their watch instant category, and I plan to reap the benefits big time. It's like a super documentary- all the information in half the time.

Today I watched a talk from leading NASA scientist and one of my personal heroes Dr. James Hansen. He leads the Goddard Institute in NYC and has been speaking on the growing concerns of climate change for over a decade. Personally I enjoy hearing someone with so much scientific experience and respect in his field say not only is climate change a real thing, but it's a big problem that's not being treated as the threat that it is. I certainly have always felt that way, but I'm just a dude, what do I know? It's nice to hear really smart people who know what they are talking about.

Dr. Hansen with his grandkids.

Hansen was recently in the news for being arrested in front of the White House during a protest against the Keystone oil pipeline.This was one of the topics he discusses in his speech.

Instead of filling his time with the expected amount of scientific data to prove his points, Hansen's lecture is deeply emotional and personal, focusing on why he personally is concerned with climate change. The evidence proves that it's happening and is a problem, but the reason Hansen cares so deeply about stopping it is for the sake of his children and grandchildren: those who will grow up in the world he's helped create. Hansen believes we all have a responsibility to future generations to preserve the world around us, to ensure there is clean air, water and land for all those to come. Not what I expected from a NASA scientist, for sure.

You can watch the 17 minute lecture here.

Return to Main Page

Day 64: Steven Pinker on the Myth of Violence

Today I watched a TED talk my friend Laura shared with me. I was having a discussion about the death of Osama Bin Laden and whether it was ethical for America to kill him without a trial or arrest. I was closer to be undecided about it following his death, but now that it's been almost a year my mind is pretty made up. It was wrong of us to kill him. Though he was a terrible man, everyone has the right to a trial, a lawyer, and a jail cell. Even Nazis got trials.

So this TED talk is about the misconception that we live in a more violent world than our ancestors. Steven Pinker is a linguist who refutes the assumption, instead asserting that we are experiencing the most peaceful chapter in human existence.

Though he had some interesting points, I disagree with his overall message. Yes, when compared to the Middle Ages or the barbaric actions of the Roman Age we are living in a pretty civil time. We no longer hold public executions or feed Christians to the lions. But what is the point of making this claim? What is to be gained by dispelling this myth that we are still violent? Seems like he wants us to say, "sure the wars in the Middle East are bad, but it could always be worse!"

You can watch the 20 minute lecture here:

The Myth of Violence 

One interesting piece of information he shared was the old French pastime of burning cats. In the 17th century Parisians would round up cats and burn them alive in the public square for the entertainment of the people. Glad we don't do that anymore.

Return to Main Page

Day 63: Talking Funny

I went to the library today and read Jerry Seinfeld's book 'Seinlanguage' in one sitting. It was the first time I've done that in a while, and it felt awesome to tear through a book that fast. It was a collection of his thoughts and observations and most of it would later appear on his show. It reminded me a lot of Bill Cosby's books. Reading it made me want to watch some of his standup again, or the short HBO special he made last year, 'Talking Funny'.

'Talking Funny' is one long conversation with Jerry Seinfeld, Chris Rock, Louis CK and Ricky Gervais. They discuss their careers in comedy, their views on standup, and their favorite jokes from each other's sets.

What I learned: This is basically my comedy Bible. Getting to hear this much from 4 of my favorite comedians is a dream come true. I appreciate just about anything Seinfeld and Louis have to say- they are 2 of my biggest comedic influences. One thing that really stuck with me was when Louis said he starts every new tour by taking his old closer and making it his new opener, thus forcing the rest of his set to be that much better. Take your best stuff and throw it out in the first 5 minutes? That blows my mind. It's my new goal.

What I liked: Even more than hearing their views and tips I liked watching the 4 of them interact. It was cool to hear how long they've all known each other; Louis used to open for Seinfeld like 10 years ago and used to write for Chris Rock. At one point Seinfeld tells his favorite Chris Rock joke, and says "I probably think about that joke once a month". It's nuts to think a world famous comic has his own favorite jokes from other people.

What I didn't like: My only complaint was that it was a one time deal. It should be a show! I heard rumors they are putting together another one based on talk shows with Conan, Stephen Colbert and Jon Stewart but we'll see.

You can watch the full thing here:

Talking Funny 

And of course I'd be remiss not to throw out some stand up clips:

This was the joke that made me fall in love with him. I'd seen his previous special and wasn't blown away. But when I caught this one on tv half way through, and heard this joke, and I realized he'd transformed from a vague, run of the mill comic to something all his own. I still remember the specific line that did it for me: "I had to get in, and no one was in my car to judge me"; with that one line he established how little he thinks of himself. While the other guy is crazy for saying something like 'suck a bag of dicks', Louis has no problem showing us that's he's far from perfect himself.

This Seinfeld bit borders on a magic act: he tells you what he's going to do (prove that sucks and great are one and the same), then turns around and does it. Before you know it, he's convinced you, if only for a moment, that it's true. And even has the balls to throw in some tangents in the middle about eating out, because he's confident enough in his closer to allow the attention of the bit to wander. Amazing.

Return to Main Page

Day 62: The Scott Hall Story

Today I watched a short doc. about the life of Scott Hall, pro-wrestler. Apparently ESPN makes mini-docs that  are waaaay different than anything I've ever seen them air before. This was an intimate, well put-together film about the terrible life of a one-time famous wrestler.

Full disclosure here; I was obsessed with pro-wrestling as a kid. The years between 5th and 8th grade were a flurry of wrestling t-shirts, action figures, and being glued to the tv every Monday, Thursday and Sunday evenings. I loved it because it was entertaining- it was like a soap opera with punching and kicking. I cheered for the heroes, booed the villains and laughed along with the clowns like Mankind. Eventually I grew out of it but I still kept a eye out for plot lines and new wrestlers as they appear.

What I learned: The guy is a mess, a total train wreck. Back in the 90's Scott Hall was one of the biggest names in wrestling up there with Hulk Hogan and Andre the Giant. He was big, tough, and handsome and one of the biggest 'heels' the WWF had ever seen.

That sneer was painted on, I think. 

So he was on top of the world, and of course it went to his head. He started abusing drugs and alcohol and steroids. And...that's it. He went through rehab 10 different times, he got fired from WWF, sunk lower and lower to smaller federations, his wife and kids left him, he received multiple DUI's, and spent some time in jail. Exactly what you'd expect to happen from someone who shot to popularity from relative obscurity in a really short amount of time.  

One of his many mugshots. 

What I liked: Never have I seen a fall from grace tale as clear cut as this. He goes from sold out arenas of 10,000 fans to school gyms of 40 people. From being in the best shape of his life to a "shell of his former self" as his son describes it. From coke and booze to anti-seizure medication and 10 other meds he's forced to take daily. It's like The Wrestler, but in real life.

So the dude just spends his time going from wrestling gig to gig, not really able to perform anymore but just making appearances I guess? Everyone kinda agrees he's not gonna be around much longer due to his health issues.

You can watch the full documentary here:

Here's one of his more recent 'appearances' at a wrestling event. It's tough to watch, as it's clear he is so out of it he doesn't really know what's going on: 

Return to Main Page

Day 61: Paneful Business

Today I watched a bizarre little short about window-cleaners on the Empire State Building. The film was made in 1938 and seems to be one of those short newsreels they'd show before movies back then.

The whole things only a few minutes long and consists mainly of window cleaners climbing the long building floor by floor, sticking their heads out each window grabbing onto the ledge for dear life, and trying to clean the windows. Meanwhile the narration is cheese-tastic and filled with window puns (hence the title).

For such a short film it gave me a lot to think about; why are the windows cleaned? Obviously for aesthetic purposes, but is that it? Is it worth the hard, dangerous work just to have shiny windows? How many window washers have fallen or died while on the job? How has window washing changed over time, with the invention of new technology and safeguards and whatnot? Why would someone want to be a window washer?

I also love the old timey-ness of the video. It makes me want to watch more of these newsreel type things.

I just looked up how many windows the Empire State Building has- 6,500 windows over 102 floors. Wowee.

Here's the video. The youtube page is filled with old clips like this.

Return to the Main Page

Day 60: Tetris; From Russia With Love

Today I randomly found a documentary about the creation of Tetris. I knew nothing about its history, so I learned a lot.

What I learned: The game was invented in Russia by bored computer programmers. I guess computer programming is basically like slave labor is Communist Russia- you just had to work on whatever the government wanted you to work on forever and ever till they told you to work on something else. So one day a computer programmer decided he would invent a computer game to keep himself entertained when not inundated with work. He took an old card/puzzle game and built it for the computer. And thus Tetris was born.

The rest of the film is about distributing the game, and how numerous individuals and companies have owned the rights to it over the years, sometimes without realizing they were infringing on already established copyright laws.

What I liked: I was interested in the commentary on Russian/communist life and how they regarded concepts like intellectual property. I also really loved how obsessed everyone who tried the game became- the guy who invented it couldn't stop playing and was missing meals and family time to sneak downstairs and play it. Eventually his family found out about it, and they instantly got hooked on the game as well.

What I didn't like: All the woo-ha about legal troubles. I couldn't care less who owned the game or who was making profits off it. Really slowed the whole thing down.

Overall an educational and semi-entertaining film. Not as fun as just playing Tetris, but still alright.

Here is the film.

And here's an Wiki article about the Tetris Effect: 
           "The Tetris effect (also known as Tetris Syndrome) occurs when people devote sufficient time and attention to an activity that it begins to overshadow theirthoughts, mental images, and dreams. It is named after the video game Tetris.

People who play Tetris for a prolonged amount of time may then find themselves thinking about ways different shapes in the real world can fit together, such as the boxes on a supermarket shelf or the buildings on a street.^[1] In this sense, the Tetris effect is a form of habit. They might also dream about falling Tetrisshapes when drifting off to sleep or see images of falling Tetris shapes at the edges of their visual fields or when they close their eyes.^[1] In this sense, the Tetriseffect is a form of hallucination or hypnagogic imagery."

Return to the Main Page