It’s someone’s birthday today, but we’re afraid to tell you more because of a bunch of Mickey Mouse Copyright Laws
It’s someone’s birthday today. I’d love to tell you about it, but I’m not sure if the use of his name (clue: he’s a duck) is a violation of trademark or copyright law. You see, the individual in question is a property (and you thought slavery had been abolished!) of a large media company that regularly protects its intellectual property with considerable aggression. Back in 2005, I got intrigued with the copyfight movement and created a couple of parody products on CafePress – the CopyReich Shop , which pretty heavy-handedly pointed a finger at the RIAA and MPAA’s fascist behavior, and the Copyfight Shop, which poked fun at the Creative Commons license. I suggested them for BoingBoing.net, and got this reply from Cory Doctorow: “This stuff is funny, Ian! I’m uncomfortable with the Nazi stuff, though — I’m a believer in Godwin’s Law and worry that the discreditation that accrues to its violators would outweigh the humor. Sorry.” I guess I was too edgy for the edgy. Oddly, CafePress didn’t mind the images, although recently they wouldn’t let me use these images. Maybe they’re anti-gay. Who knows. In any case, something that’s often overlooked when people discuss copyrights is who they were intended to protect, and what their purpose really was. In the United States, the government gave itself the right to copyright material ostensibly to: “…promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries” (US Constitution, Section 8, Clause 8). The idea being that if a creative person could gain an exclusive financial benefit from their creation for a time, there would be plenty of motivation to create wonderful things that would benefit mankind later, when these creations entered the public domain. In my opinion, this has all been completely perverted by the copyright extension act to protect the profits of corporations, at the expense of the individual. What do you think? Below are the images from the CafePress shops.
[ Comments Off ]Posted on June 5, 2009 by admin in Popular Media
Friday, June 5th, 2009
Moon, a movie directed by David Bowie’s son Duncan Jones and starring Sam Rockwell, is slated for release June 12 and features a voice appearance by an aptly-named Mr. Spacey.
You will rarely see the words “$5 million low-budget indy sci-fi film” in the same sentence, but this is one possible description of the film Moon, starring Sam Rockwell (Hitchhiker’s Guide, Assassination of Jesse James, Frost/Nixon), and slated for release June 12. Another description could be “brave foray into familiar yet unexplored territory”. The film, directed by Duncan Jones (née Zowie Bowie) is – on the surface – a retro-styled sci-fi film that visually suggests older films like Silent Running, 2001, Alien, or Outland. However, beneath the familiar but striking visual style (which was actually dictated to some degree by the film’s low budget) is a story that, in the director’s words, is “…about alienation; it’s about how we anthropomorphize technology; it’s about the paranoia that strikes you when you are in a long distance relationship; and it’s about learning to accept yourself…” The film was originally inspired by the book Entering Space by Robert Zubrin, and explores questions raised by the specter of space exploration driven by profit rather than pure scientific interest, which may reasonably raise questions like “without any locals, without human rights groups or oversight to keep an eye on things, what might a company try to get away with?”. The film was shot in just 33 days, with the budget mentioned, and a cast that is primarily comprised of Sam Rockwell in multiple roles, with Kevin Spacey providing the voice of the moon base’s computer Gerty.
[ Comments Off ]Posted on May 31, 2009 by admin in Popular Media
Sunday, May 31st, 2009
Or, why Jesus Camp will be your favorite new horror film.
Though the lady in this clip speaks in
tongues, her message of “Dubya
stands for WORSHIP” gets through.
Well, if God is the one highlighted in the film Jesus Camp, you should be afraid. Very afraid. I usually find it in poor taste to denigrate the faiths of others (admittedly, I’ve made an exception for Mormons and Scientologists), but in the case of Kids In Ministry International (the organization featured in the film), I don’t see how I can keep my mouth shut. From the opening scenes, in which the rather hefty, third-generation Pentecostal preacher Becky Fischer preaches about fasting while her gut seeks escape from her waistband, to the creepy scene in which a church full of children reaches out their hands and weepingly prays to a life-size cutout of George W. Bush, the rather even-handed documentary calmy reveals a horror of child indocrination into a politicized, bellicose form of Christianity that is only equalled by the stories one hears about the madrassas in Pakistan and Afghanistan. With no voiceover or commentary, the film paints a picture of an overweight, ignorant, and self-righteous group of people convinced that their militant, idioglottic (see Becky Fischer’s bizarre and convoluted rationalization for speaking in tongues) form of Christianity will save the world from itself, and probably within a generation. If you haven’t seen a chilling horror film in a while, Jesus Camp should be on your list. Because of the friend who recommended it to me (thanks a bunch, Sasha!) I think I’ll be having nightmares tonight.
The best foreign film of 2009 was made in America in 2007
Although Harold and Maude pulled it off, it’s hard to imagine a light-hearted quirky romance that begins with a suicide. Wristcutters – A Love Story manages this, and is one of those rare creations that actually gives the term sui generis a purpose. You are unlikely to see another film that you will easily compare to it – the best I might come up with would be Box of Moonlight, Leningrad Cowboys, or Bagdad Cafe – which is why you might as well just go ahead and see it. If you didn’t know otherwise, you might assume the film to be one of the best foreign films of 2009 because of its unique pacing, atmosphere, and weak distribution, but it was in fact produced in America, and released in 2007. If you’ve ever been close to suicide, whether yours or someone close to you, you’ll appreciate an aspect of the film that may be lost on some. Although there’s a sort of glib humorous tone, the acting and direction throughout brilliantly maintains a more subtle, powerful feeling of a bleak, humorous, detached hopefulness that only those who have experienced some real depth of feeling will recognize. The visual style of the film – you feel like you’re in a perpetual southwestern U.S. netherworld of monochromatic modern ghost towns – was created digitally, but evolved out of the filmmaker’s original intention to shoot on infrared Super 16 film stock, which proved too costly. Tom Waits turns in a great performance, the acting across the board is perfectly pitched, and the soundtrack is excellent on its own. Where else will you find Joy Division flowing effortlessly into Russian folk punk? I look forward to any future projects by director Goran Dukic, and I just ordered the book of short stories by Etgar Keret that the film’s story was taken from (the specific story was “Kneller’s Happy Campers”); I’m dying to see if the writing is as good as the concepts.
Why is Kim Schifino always smiling? Because she knows she’s going to be famous! Matt and Kim and Make The Girl Dance get naked for their music.
It seems the latest thing in pop song promotion is to GET NAKED. For the record, Matt & Kim did it first, stripping down as they walked through the streets of New York to their song Lessons Learned, from their 2009 release Grand. Following suit (well, they take the suit off), we have the French band Make The Girl Dance (also a duo, but two guys) with their song “Baby, Baby, Baby”. Matt & Kim stick to the fashionably gritty do-it-yourself ethic, while Make The Girl Dance do it in a more Parisian style, hiring beautiful models. Models who frankly look like they “need a sammich”, in my opinion. Matt & Kim’s fun “let’s just do it” vibe is nowhere more evident than in this “unplugged” version of Yeah Yeah, performed live in a park on Roosevelt Island. I think I have a crush on the drummer, Kim Schifino; she’s ALWAYS smiling, probably because she knows they’re going to be famous! Both videos are below, with links to the full-size clips.
It’s someone’s birthday today. I’d love to tell you about it, but I’m not sure if the use of his name (clue: he’s a duck) is a violation of trademark or copyright law. You see, the individual in question is a property (and you thought slavery had been abolished!) of a large media company that regularly protects its intellectual property with considerable aggression. Back in 2005, I got intrigued with the copyfight movement and created a couple of parody products on CafePress – the CopyReich Shop , which pretty heavy-handedly pointed a finger at the RIAA and MPAA’s fascist behavior, and the Copyfight Shop, which poked fun at the Creative Commons license. I suggested them for BoingBoing.net, and got this reply from Cory Doctorow: “This stuff is funny, Ian! I’m uncomfortable with the Nazi stuff, though — I’m a believer in Godwin’s Law and worry that the discreditation that accrues to its violators would outweigh the humor. Sorry.” I guess I was too edgy for the edgy. Oddly, CafePress didn’t mind the images, although recently they wouldn’t let me use these images. Maybe they’re anti-gay. Who knows. In any case, something that’s often overlooked when people discuss copyrights is who they were intended to protect, and what their purpose really was. In the United States, the government gave itself the right to copyright material ostensibly to: “…promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, by securing for limited Times to Authors and Inventors the exclusive Right to their respective Writings and Discoveries” (US Constitution, Section 8, Clause 8). The idea being that if a creative person could gain an exclusive financial benefit from their creation for a time, there would be plenty of motivation to create wonderful things that would benefit mankind later, when these creations entered the public domain. In my opinion, this has all been completely perverted by the copyright extension act to protect the profits of corporations, at the expense of the individual. What do you think? Below are the images from the CafePress shops.
Although Harold and Maude
