maestro-1

Once again, uninformed activist journalists perhaps meaning well botch up a simple concept such as the free-market. Some diagrams drawn by a decently trained high school economics teacher might have helped. For a better treatment on the subject, read some von Mises, Friedman & Smith. You might still not answer in the affirmative to the central question--you might not like the free market; fair enough--but at least you'll actually come away with an understanding of the issue, not a "aren't they bad guys for offering low priced products!" platitudes. Most astounding quote: Wal-Mart is damaging America because "Americans have the higher incomes that allow them to purchase China's products while China has lower salaries & can not buy American products." Umm? So America can afford China's labor, America has the wealth where China does not, but somehow Americans being rich is damaging to America. Something wrong with that statement. It's gems like that which go unchallenged because I don't think the journalist has the depth of the subject to push the interviewee to actually make his case.

Again, whether you agree with the show's premise or not, the show, though intoned in a low, sophisticated but foreboding voice fails to really address the issues.

I've always loved Star Trek. I was 13 in 1979 when the first motion picture based on the popular TV series came out. I waited so long to see it and ultimately was disappointed. I remember being dismayed that the producers/director passed up on exploiting a great idea in favor of what seems to be two hours of blue cloud visual effects. And not very good blue cloud visual effects--the whole film looked like an amorphous blue blob. For years I called it "Star Trek--The Motion Boredom." Then the new Director's Cut came out on DVD...and WOW!! What a difference! From the documentary included with the release, it seems Robert Wise was very rushed to get the film out on time and had to release the film in it's original below standard shape. THIS DVD release is the movie he says he wanted to make. Everything looks less stilted, the special effects actually add to the awe and provide context for the events on screen. Gone are the endless blue sparkling clouds. Now we SEE the VGer vessel and its activities with clarity.

But the greatest improvement is in the sound department. Gone are the annoying faux-computer klaxon's announcing everything from a red alert to the flushing of the officer's head. Everything, audio & visual, enhances the viewing experience, ceases to distract and really makes for a much better film.

If you've only seen the old one, give this one another try.

Bond returns to what made Bond great and Moore finally fits the character. This was a watershed film for Moore's Bond. Prior to this one, he seemed awkward in the role, not the suave super spy Connery made. After this one, the character degenerated into something of a farce, poking fun at the genre while cracking bad one-liners with every bad guy knocked off.

The friction between the two competing spies (Bond and Russian super spy "Triple X") is genuinely sexy and engaging. Of all the Bond babes, I've always felt Moore had the best chemistry here.

The bad guy is good too. Reminiscent of Thunderball, he is out to conquer the world with nuclear bombs so he can start his own civilization under the sea. After the risible Live & Let Die, it's good to see that hardcore megalomaniacs are still able to be found.

If you're new to Bond, I highly recommend you start here.