of sense in cameron or comfort.

i like the idea of putting a forward by dawkins in the bible and distributing it outside churches.

we found evidence that females are as susceptible to pop culture crap as males are! girls buy stuff too! this is new!

all you have to do is switch a little something up and objectify boys and then reinforce outdated modes of socially acceptable behavior for girls and- voila! what's good for the goose is, it turns out, also good for the gander. finally something to prove this five-hundred year old truism...

most criticism of her _isn't_ bullcrap. most criticism of her comes in the form of critiques of the myriad ways in which her views are bullcrap. there is nothing folksy & respectable about tenaciously defending your bullcrap views. she is excused from admiration. next.

that portman's reference to rape was "tone-deaf". painful to consider? sure. but within the larger context of portman's argument it makes perfect sense. she simply employed a philosophical technique of substitution in reasoning. she didn't invent that idea - it's as old as socrates.

i know it may offend some to be forced to consider such arguments in such contexts, but in this case roy's reaction is more off base than portman's argument itself. i would encourage roy to consider more fully why she reacted as strongly as she did to that one sentence, with consideration given to the possibility that she may be pained by sensing some underlying truth.

those who have a problem with this.

it seems the assumption is that PWs process is somehow biased and overlooks or disregards women. but without knowing their process it is impossible to conclude this is so. (they provide a brief & vague overview here: http://www.publishersweekly.com/article/CA6704595.html).

what is most likely is that PW followed the same type of process most magazines do when compiling such lists: individuals submitting lists to committees who look for common denominators first and then lobby for personal favorites. this is what makes ALL such lists lousy indicators of value. want to see a music or film critic's head explode? show him ANY magazine's 'top 10' list.

now what if, having selected their list, the folks at PW discovered there were no female authors & then, in an attempt to CREATE balance, removed a title and replaced it with a book by a woman? what good is THAT list? is such manipulation really the best way to achieve representation?

and couldn't other groups equally claim they wuz robbed? where are the handicapped authors? the native americans?

the point is such lists are rotten indicators of anything but the uselessness of the whole process. even those who point to the nyt bestsellers list are deferring to a fundamentally flawed system which is not based on actual sales, but easily manipulate-able pre-orders.

if spirited away hadn't been at the top of this list i would've thrown the requisite salon commenter hissy fit. as it is, i am merely noting how, in your wisdom, your selection(s) appropriately mirror mine. carry on.

giving me the high hat!

is their best movie. which is saying something, as all their movies are great. but 'no country' is simply as close to a perfect film as any i've seen. after that it's a crapshoot, but i'd probably go with 'Miller's Crossing' followed by 'Fargo'.

& it's good wholesome fun. the opening title/credit sequence is funny & artful at the same time. the movie walks the line between gore & humor quite well, and a 'certain someone' gives an absolutely hilarious performance about 2/3 of the way through. it's well known that zombie movies are typically "about something", and Zacharek notes correctly that this one is about bonhomie, or family, and learning to accept the issues of one's closest fellow travelers.

if i have one problem with the movie it is that columbus, who survives by strictly adhering to a list of do's & dont's, never seems to care that the windows in the car are always down- when everybody knows that zombies love to come through car windows & windows buy you valuable time to get the keys out of your pocket or root around in the glove compartment for a weapon. seems that would be a top five zombie-survival tactic.

this movie shoots to the top ten of my zombie movie list, and is on par with shawn of the dead for humor & craftsmanship. it will go on a permanent double-feature status with shawn on my dvd player beginning next halloween.

by the way - Manohla Dargis, of the NYT, is apparently a moron. the brief review she wrote in friday's times was bizarre & completely off base. ignore it - & her - & see this movie.

this is perfectly understandable and in keeping with what they stand for. after all, conservatives hate America, and welcome any evidence of America's failure. i congratulate them on this victory over...America.

she's the one who only wants one thing

the 2012 movie is hollywood's answer to the question "how will hollywood ever top this?" in the wake of 9/11. it's not enough to destroy a building, or a city, or the white house in a movie anymore - some execs think moviegoers will settle for nothing less than the destruction of the entire world. watch for the concession stands to be selling lotion & hand towels at this one...

but then the whole country will be left to deal with a reform plan which reforms very little.