Michael Moore's Capitalism: A Love Story

Review: Crest Whitestrips Pro-Effects Enamel Safe Formula

I was on the verge of heading to the dentist to pay anything from £150 to £400 to get my teeth whitened. Fortunately a clever, resourceful wife came to the rescue - as did Crest Whitestrips. A little research revealed that Crest was the preferred brand when it came to teeth whiteners, and that their Pro Effects formula the preferred treatment. I wasn't disappointed.

The product guarantees whiter teeth for 18 months. I've only just finished the regimen so I can't speak to that, but I can safely say that my teeth are at least 6 shades whiter, and for only £22 (including shipping)! You get 40 strips in all, for a 10-day treatment of both upper and lower teeth (you are meant to apply 2 pairs per day - morning and evening for 1 half hour).

The first couple applications may be a bit tricky and uncomfortable but you quickly learn how to put them on with ease. They are very flexible and do indeed mould to the shape of your teeth quite snugly (like cling wrap but thicker). There was a little stinging around my gum line on the first couple applications, but that didn't last long and it wasn't painful.

You do taste a bit of the bleach but it's not horrible - kind of like strong toothpaste, and I have to admit that I was happy for the treatment to come to and end. But that's the cool part; it's over before you know it. Many other whitening treatments tend to result in tooth sensitivity. Happy to say that I have experienced no such sensitivity as the product promises.

I recommend it without reservation and ordering on Amazon was a doddle. It arrived the very next day.

Awards Shows: Everybody Loses but the Winner

I must admit I didn't watch this year's Emmy Awards.  I kind of regret it since at least one review had it as an improvement on last year and quite entertaining.

But I don't regret it that much. Ever since Billy Crystal retired from hosting the Academy Awards, I have genuinely wondered what the point of watching people collect awards is. We like the shows, and yes the actors - but only they really care about the awards. We're just nosing in on the fulfilment of their efforts, their downward spiral into depression because their peers refuse to acknowledge their hard work/talent and the progress, or lack thereof, of Hollywood's ethnic diversity.

Sure, the results are something to grab some interest, for a few seconds, but to have to go through a couple hours of hearing them? I'd rather just get the results after the fact or just watch the highlights. It takes less time and energy.

I counted 36 categories in this year's Emmy Awards and there were apparently 24 categories in last year's Oscars (though it somehow feels like 2, 234 categories). But honestly, we're only interested in the Best Actor and Best Picture awards, and even then we just want to know who wins. Hearing their speech isn't that important - unless it's something tongue-in-cheek and loaded like Denzel Washington's 'Waddya know. Two birds in one night' comment when himself and Halle Berry walked away with the Best Actor/Actress statuettes respectively.

Awards ceremonies are for the industry not the audience. If they want us to care or watch every year then make it as interesting/funny/entertaining as the shows being awarded. One would think that with all the talent around they could do that easily, but no, apparently not.

I am always fascinated that accomplished actors who stun an audience with an amazing and believable (sometimes half or fully nude) on-screen performance, then sound like a 3rd grader acting like a robot reading from the teleprompter. They look shy, awkward and even embarrassed (to be fully clothed?), just to stand for a few seconds before an audience of a few hundred people. What's up with that?

Fine, rehearsed and recorded performance is different from live stage work. But, come on, pretend like everyone is in their underwear then.

Still congrats to all the winn...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

Cartoons: An Animated Discussion

I love cartoons. I've never stopped watching them. Batfink, Top Cat, Captain Caveman, GI Joe and of course Scooby Doo, all when I was a kid (not to mention the Flintstones - and then junk like the Osmonds - ugh). More recently, it's Dragon Ball and DBZ, The Last Airbender, Spongebob Squarepants, Jimmy Neutron and The Powerpuff Girls. But I've noticed something - cartoons nowadays are made for adults. I'm not talking about The Simpsons or Family Guy - they are clearly adult themed. But the stuff for kids is adult targeted as well. So before you accuse me of being immature enough to still relish my Aang and Goku, it's not my fault - the writing is so good and they put references in these toons that only 20 or 30 somethings (and even older) could understand.

 For babies or Baby Boomers?

Powerpuff Girls - man Mojo Jojo is the greatest supervillain ever. The humour is fantastic - the colours and slapstick clearly appeal to kids. But the episode called The Beat Alls was a Baby Boomers flashback. The arch villains of the PPG's unite to form the Beat Alls (because they were to 'beat all' others). Well into the evil ensemble's reign, Mojo Jojo was lured away by a Japanese primate, and this of course dissolved the fab troupe. If you don't get the reference yet - it's the Beatles - broken up when Yoko Ono came along and poached Lennon (or so the story goes).

Jimmy Neutron features lots of music, and usually copyright friendly very recognizable versions of popular groups or songs - like Blink 182. There was a very Benny Hill-like chase scene complete with the strikingly similar music in one episode. It included the requisite line of pursuit sped up and goofy as ever in true Hill style. You'd have to have a few years under your belt to get that reference and some of you reading this probably don't know who Benny Hill is! In which case you get my point.

They could never catch this guy - is he Osama?

Death

Then there's death. In GI Joe, no matter how much firepower they threw at Cobra - or vice versa - nobody ever died. Cobra soldiers always parachuted out of their personal flight vehicles just in time, everytime. Then of course after the standard fierce battle and foiled run for world domination, Cobra would escape. The young kid would then shout 'Duke, they're getting away!', Duke would respond 'It's ok. We'll get them next time'. In todays cartoons, bad guys drop like inner city drug dealers. DBZ, Goku, the hero actually died. My all-time favourite episode of DBZ is when Goku returns from the 'other world' after 7 years. Man it was tear jerking - you have to know the story to understand.

I think the first kids cartoon I saw where folks died was Batman Beyond. I was wasn't shocked, it was actually relieving. The idea that no matter what you did, the badguys would always get away conveyed through GI Joe - and most other cartoons where it was always the same villain (like Mumrah, Skeletor and Hugo a Go Go) - was a bit disturbing.

Sometimes a punk needs to get smoked! Come to think of it - did Monstar ever get sent up the river Styx? It makes me wonder what the heck Mumrah was fighting for, cause it was only ever the Thunder Cats on a piece of desertified rock fighting Mumrah for no apparent reason.

Women

There was always only one girl in old-school cartoons. One girl in Thudercats, in He-Man, Silverhawks, The Smurfs and GI Joe. And no one ever seemed to have a romantic interest in her. It was just weird. Why were girls alway outnumbered in older cartoons? Well not always, Scoob and co had some equality of the sexes going on. Spongebob, however, features only one female main - Sandy the butch squirrel. But that raises something rather contraversial.

Hidden Genders?

Wearing his heart on his head?

The Spongy One has had some questionable content. One of the early episodes had Spongbob asking Patrick to be his valentine with a giant chocolate heart-shaped balloon. Kinda odd for children's telly. Spongebob declared in one episode that he 'wasn't on the menu' - what did he mean by that? Maybe the child rearing episode might shed some light. Himself and Patrick raised a baby clam and Sponge became a busy housewife complete with rollers and night dress while Patrick was the tie-wearing, suitcase carrying Dad/husband. Could it be a reference to gay marriage? Squidward is a quintessential urbane character who likes ballet, modern dance and was the make-up artist for a motion picture endeavour - ahem?! You tell me. Then there has been repeated rainbow imagery in Spongebob. From rainbow wigs, 'imagination' rainbows and pretty pattie rainbows.

The colours of an agenda?

In case you don't know, rainbows are the universal gay emblem. I'm not saying the Sponge is gay, just noting what I see in one of my most favourite cartoons. But even if he was gay, that wouldn't be the problem, rather it would be in the transparency (or lack thereof) of the agenda. Then again Bugs Bunny would frequently lay wet kisses on Porky the Pig and Elmer Fudd.

Race

At some point, kids cartoons began to be about 'real' issues (mind you Charlie Brown always was - but I don't think CB was ever for kids as it bored the tar outta me) like crushes and romance, discrimination, single parenting and death and divorce etc. A some point cartoons began to reflect the kids who watched them. More female characters took the fore (As Told by Ginger, Kimpossible, Totally Spies and PPG for example), and there was even some amount of racial diversity. I still think there is a white heavy leaning on the race front - but the new Transformers Animated has a distinctly minority heavy cast, particularly Black and Asian characters.

In some ways cartoons avoided race by having non-human characters. But c'mon, we all know Panthro's a black dude. And Smurfs defintely aren't black cause no black guy would walk around shirtless in white leotards and a jaunty white beret (not according the US black culture). We all know Disney hasn't portrayed a black lead character (though a black female lead is waiting in the wings). The closest they came was the Lion King, and Mufasa died like all black characters do - and he was a lion - so that doesn't count.

I like the turn most cartoons have taken. But it does have a dark side. Are we using kids programming to programme kids? Sometimes the content seems too adult. Whether its overly sexy, underwear prancing, anorexia inducing Brats or the amazing power Power Rangers had to make 4 year olds kick you in the shins. If Spongebob is gay and there is a hidden agenda to advance the cause or promote tolerance (which is not a bad thing if unhidden) is it the right platform to do this? Shouldn't cartoons be just about entertainment? The worst thing old-school cartoons did was plant the desire for kids to join the special forces and kill the never dying enemy....hmmm.

I still love cartoons. Can't imagine I will ever stop. But...here's the pun you've been waiting for....you draw your own conclusions. Booyah!

Kanye & The VMA - Publicity Stunt!

Many have probably seen the footage of Kanye West interrupting Taylor Swift's acceptance speech for best female music video at this year's MTV VMA's.  He, now infamously, declared that Beyonce deserved the Moon Man but has since offered a rambling though emotional apology.

So why a publicity stunt? Well, it's been done before, probably more times than we know but I'll cite two examples both involving the same accomplice: Marshall Mathers a.k.a Eminem. We all know about his collaboration with Sacha Baron Cohen to promote the  Bruno movie. Cohen was lowered from the ceiling, bare butted, onto a disgusted Eminem. The sad part is, many thought it was spontaneous. How do you spontaneously get lowered from the ceiling at a massive awards show...onto Eminem? John Mayer, maybe. Oh, where did this take place? The MTV Movie Awards. Are we seeing a common denominator here?

Next up was the so-called triangular feud between Eminem, Mariah Carey and her toy boy husband, Nick Cannon. What was the product? Carey's new single at the time, Obsessed, which really could have been about any old freak. If Obsessed is about Eminem, then Vision of Love is about Kermit the Frog. Now the beef allegedly continues and new beef-related tunes and lyrics from Eminem are out there. But we just don't care anymore. At any rate the point was to sell, sell, sell. 

Now, back to Kanye. Firstly, why was West allowed to storm the stage? Why did no one try to escort him off? Do they not have stage hands, protocol, backstage managers? Further, the camera was so situated as to catch Beyonce's shock at the very moment his spontaneous announcement was made. How did the cameraman know he should be beside Beyonce just then? Like much of today's Hollywood publicity, the lines between reality and fantasy are blurred. Fiction and reality apparently make more money than fiction alone. Just look at the Iraq War. But this is what the US economy is all about - disaster capitalism. Sell a product without letting anyone know what they are buying, or even that they are buying anything at all.

As long as the ratings go up and the Benjamin's flow. Everybody wins. Kanye is not losing money because of this incident. I wouldn't be surprised if he releases a new tune about the whole harrowing affair. I wager it'll be called Man in the Moon or Swift Me Off My Feet - uh, uh, uh. Remember, you heard it here first! 

So, what was the product this time? Well, it just so happened that the fresh-out-the-oven Jay Leno Show premiered in time to feature who? Kanye West. Coincidence? I think not. What better way to garner viewership and ratings than to have the loony who's been grabbing YouTube by the eyes for the past 24 hrs. This is where Kanye made his  blubbering apology. After the mad rush to YouTube the video disappears and the only place to go to see it again is back to the source. More money is made.

The casting was perfect. Kanye has a decorated history of TV meltdowns, none more famous than his 'George Bush hates black people' post-Katrina declaration. Classic. The goal of course, to kickstart Leno's new NBC show. We know that any PR, no matter how disgusting, only brings notoriety and more money. Hilton's 'leaked' sex video, Tommy Lee had one too as did a slew of other celebrities once they realized it could bring in some cash. 

Conspiracy theory? Well frankly yes. But it's not a secret. Corporations have openly conspired to get your money - as much of it as you will give them (and some you don't want to) and they spend millions on advertising, PR and this new integration of reality and PR in order to get billions. Smart. New. Old.  But it got our attention. We will forget about it in 2 1/2 days. In fact, you're probably wondering what the heck I'm yammering about.

You get my point. Keep an eye out for the next shenanigan.

Book Review: The Abolition of Man by CS Lewis

CS Lewis proves again why he is the master moralist in this near prophetic reflection on man and his destiny as it relates to the growing tendency to moral relativism and how that may influence science and technology.

Lewis slowly builds his argument with a seemingly  tangential reference to a children's English Language text and the difference between true literary academia and a weak diluted version thereof. He uses the illustration to compare moral relativism to what he calls the Natural Law or The Tao.

His argument slowly builds to a proposition that moral relativism will grow in prominence and lead mankind to a point where he can adjust ethical standards according to his own agenda (he makes reference to the Nazi regime - it would have been a more recent occurrence in his lifetime). Lewis suggests that mankind, in his quest to 'remake himself' according to his own amorphous ethics, will embark upon determining future generations even through something like genetic manipulation. This, Lewis suggests, will effectively rob all future generations of the ability to be men,  hence 'the Abolition of Man'.

The essence of Lewis' argument is that the sloughing off of the Natural Law will be man's ultimate demise and instinct alone (as a product of evolution)  is no reliable moral guide. He suggests that a purely scientific approach to man is not advisable, but manages to anticipate some current secular arguments by implying that science and faith/morality are complimentary rather than contradictory.  Lewis was way ahead of his time.

However, the most insightful idea that Lewis proposes (at least in my mind) is regarding his observation that man's 'dominance of nature' does not include all men by any means. He points out that each culture, generation and community is effectively ruled by a few specific groups who truly do hold most of the power, while many others are very much subject to nature. It is these dominant groups among men that potentially hold the keys to man's destruction.

Interestingly, this idea of man's extermination at the hands of his own ingenuity has been expressed through contemporary pop culture in the iconic Martix Trilogy, the Terminator series and the animated feature, 9.  Perhaps the Tower of Babel story depicting God, wary of a mankind for whom anything is possible, was a warning of what could happen should the darker side of man attain 'the power of the gods'. 

My only criticism of the book is that it is too short. He could have countered more of the alternative arguments to the Natural Law. Still he ends the book brilliantly, citing universal ethical standards like fidelity, care for the poor and respect for parents across culture, creeds and history as evidence of the Natural Law.

It's an excellent read and great guide to methodical thinking and construction of apologetic argument. You won't be disappointed.

iTunes Prices: The Worm in the Apple

I love Apple and its products. I own a Macbook and an iPod and regularly purchase music from iTunes. But that's the problem.

iTunes has long been a sore point for many in the music industry. Some bands have actually boycotted the service because of its slice-and-dice approach to music sales - they want to sell albums, not singles. There was the furore over Digital Rights Management (DRM) that effectively locked users music to Apple products and then to specific products. You couldn't (and still can't) easily migrate music from one piece of hardware to another. On the face of it Apple appears to be protecting the music owners, but having been the dominant force in legal music downloads they hold the handle, not the musicians, and certainly not the consumer.

Fortunately Apple dropped the pursuit of DRM, but not out of magnanimity. I surmise Amazon.com came to the rescue with their DRM-free MP3 download service launched in 2007 and forced Apple to make a competitive choice. Amazon also came to our rescue by offering tracks at a lower cost than iTunes with prices from 69p to 79p.

So as a consumer my major gripe is with the cost of music. For years one could purchase a song for 99 cents from the US iTunes service, but the UK service offered songs for the unfair price of 99 pence. Eventually the cost was brought down to 79 pence across the board, but  is creeping back up to the price gouging 99p once again. I noticed this when purchasing some music the other day. While many songs still cost 79p, the most popular new and even older tracks were back at 99p. As a result I turned to Amazon to purchase the same music available on iTunes but for 20p less.

Apple has always had a great image. It's an icon of innovation, creativity, freedom and reliability. One feels there is real value for money with Apple products, and indeed there is. But let's face it - Apple is a profit-making enterprise and is led by a very savvy and shrewd businessman. Steve Jobs is not just a creative genius - he's a business genius and that ruthless edge of Apple is what makes it so popular. It is its own monopoly. 

But for Apple to be what its image reflects it must stay with the bounds of fair play. The battle between corporations is one they must fight, but its obligation to the customer is not and should not be a battle. So let me just ask Apple and Steve (I hope you're in good health) to keep it fair - keep it honest. Think differently.

MyEye: Apple's Snow Leopard Upgrade

I'm not a computer geek so there won't be any jargon and I might miss out a few things, but if you use your Mac daily for work/play and know how to get around it, this'll help.

Is it worth getting? Yes, if you love speed. It is genuinely faster, but it might take a little while to 'warm up'. It took my Macbook a couple restarts and a little while of usage before the fullness of the speed (web browser especially) settled in - and it seems it only finds this fullness with Safari. I think they've rigged it so Firefox works slower. Still, it starts up and shuts down a good bit faster and let's face it, 1 second in the cyber world equals 60 seconds in the real world - and that could mean one whole Tweet!

The Safari is a nice edition with the grid button of your fave sites. However, I downloaded that before I got Snow and use nothing else, BUT I have to use Firefox for Google Voice and Video cause it doesn't seem to work with Safari...sucks.  The dock has more refined pop up menus for the applications therein - seamless - and you'll forget what it was like before (I already have). But I can't seem to get the stacks function to do the nice fan format - now it's just grid or list. But in the downloads and documents folders you can scroll and search folders even in the stacks view - that helps a lot.

Quicktime does look better with a more viewer friendly screen, and has two smart additions: you can upload video to YouTube or MobileMe (or move video to iTunes) and edit video length at a click - very clever. The edit function is a simple drag-bar reminiscent of Garageband.

They don't mention this in the marketing material but they do sneak some new wallpaper in which is a nice little surprise.

The big function addition I don't use, and that's the compatibility of the Apple Mail with Exchange so you can synch it with your work email (or something like that). Can't comment. Sad really because it's probably the major functional upgrade offered  by Snow Leopard. Everything else, as Apple says, is refinement.

Indeed it is an incremental move ever closer to user perfection. It is the intuitive and insightful change that we love about Macs, and they have made the interface even smoother and more sensible. This is why a person should convert to Mac or stay put. Unlike Microsoft that often sends out updates to fix problems - Apple sends out upgrades to enhance usage. Well done.

It cost me about £27 but the upgrade is free if you purchased your Mac from July 09 (check that). You can live happily without Snow Leopard - but you will be that much more happier with it, and in this world we need all the ups we can get right?

District 9 - a pointed commentary on Capitalism & Prejudice - but with holes

Peter Jackson's (Lord of the Rings) and Neill Blomkamp's (Smallville and other TV series with lots of CGI) District 9 is a masterful demonstration of Sci-Fi Realism, if there is such a thing.

The structure is 50% flashback documentary style story-telling and straight forward action CGI but with voyeuristic effect. The lead actor, Sharlto Copely, is a no-name like everyone else in the film, but does a great job nonetheless. We witness his descent into the extra-terrestrial society he is commissioned to sequester in a Post-Apartheid South Africa.

The messages of the film are in no way subtle and aren't meant to be - systemic prejudice and its attendant effects on the victims of it are pointedly explored. We see this sociological study illustrated in Copely's character as he becomes everything (both behaviourally and physically) he was once disgusted by  - he is a victim of circumstances forced upon him by the powers that be. The setting is poignant and points not only to the evil of Apartheid but also to prejudice of all sorts especially xenophobia, particularly relevant in a world riddled with war and its resulting refugees. We are left to ponder how inhumane we are to each other in the face of inhumanity to another sentient species. And the main character in losing his humanity, finds it.

Capitalism is also a primary target represented in the all-powerful MNU arms corporation commissioned to relocate the extra-terrestrial outcasts. This corporation will stop at nothing to seek profit including engage in dehumanizing torture and biological experimentation. D9 takes a swipe at the Nazi's, the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq (and the rationalization of torture by the Bush Administration), the massive immigration (illegal and otherwise) to First World countries, the role of Western corporations in war torn Africa and the role of media in the pursuit of profit (and by extension injustice), all in one fell swoop.

It ends with very strong hints at a sequel. But unless the same team manages it, there is a very strong likelihood it will disappoint.

The Holes? One never learns why the aliens ended up on earth in the first place, or why they were marooned. Though with access to superior technology and weaponry they never use it (but that may be a testament to human depravity) and there are couple instances of editing that could have been done differently like a fire fight that pauses so the main characters can have a brief but touching conversation. But again, the holes could be filled nicely with a proper follow-up.

Still, an instant classic with all the right ingredients.