This Texas judge refused to hold open the clerk's office for a last-minute death row inmate appeal, based on the Supreme Court's announcement earlier that day that it would consider a case with potential ramifications for this inmate. The appeal was not filed in time, and the inmate was executed later that night.
That judge is now on trial for her job. The NYTimes argues that she is unfit for the job: "Judge Keller’s callous indifference in a case where the stakes could not have been higher makes her unfit for office."
I'm not sure I agree. Certainly, I think the judge showed a callousness and lack of compassion in refusing to hold the office open. A man's life was at stake, fercryinoutloud, and you couldn't keep the office open for, what, 30 more minutes? But on the other hand, random last-minute appeals are filed all the time. I'm betting the majority of them have no chance of actually changing the outcome. I don't think the refusal to bend the rules makes a person unfit to be a judge...
Of course, there are other issues here as well - something about the court not following its own procedures. But that's the court, not the judge, right? The cynical side of me says, yeah, she's a heartless bastard, but . . . he probably would've lost his appeal anyway, even if his lawyers had filed it on time. C'est la vie. Or, peut-ĂȘtre, la mort.
Monday, August 24, 2009
Saturday, August 22, 2009
Review: "Sozin's Comet"
I recently finished watching all of Nickolodeon's Avatar: The Last Airbender. Overall, I loved it; it's definitely on my list of my top animated series of all time. It was a fantastic series - something I never expected from a channel like Nickolodeon. Everything from the animation (especially the animation), to the writing, to the music, to the characters was superbly done. Although the dialogue was, at times, juvenile, that quickly fell away as the story matured. As a Miyazaki fan, I very much appreciated the clear Miyazaki influences (such as the Owl in the episode "The Library" and Koh the face-stealer). Also, as a Batman: The Animated Series fan, I also appreciated the generally excellent voice acting -- particularly Mark Hamill (the Joker in BTAS) as Fire Lord Ozai, and Dante Basco (who I only know as Rufio from "Hook") as Zuko.
A four-part two-hour movie, "Sozin's Comet," functioned as the series finale, tying together all of the loose ends and showcasing all of the characters on their way to fulfilling their destinies. All I can say is, "Sozin's Comet" was absolutely amazing, possibly the best two hours of TV (animated or not) I've ever watched. So, what was so amazing about it?
(1) First off, the animation. Some of the action sequences - particularly the agni kai between Zuko and Azula - were breathtakingly beautiful. The pacing in that fight scene was just stunning, and the music was perfect as well. Really, just everything was perfect. The use of color. The interplay of light and dark. The use of shadows. Certainly, the animation style was fantastic throughout the whole show, but in "Sozin's Comet" three scenes totally blew me away: the scene when Ozai and the airships light the world on fire, the aforementioned Zuko v. Azula fight; and the Ozai v. Avatar fight. Seriously, the Zuko v. Azula fight scene ... best animated sequence EVER. (I think it's superior to even the Ozai v. Avatar fight, although that fight is also superbly done.)
(2) Second, the character development. The series was fantastic about developing its characters (including the villains) overall. But even in the series finale, the writers took time to flesh out Azula's character. I won't spoil it, but Azula's scenes are picture perfect. And you really see characters like Zuko and Sokka come into their own, see how far they've come. You even see Toph shed a tear.
(3) Third, the writing. Other reviewers have written this as well, but every scene in "Sozin's Comet" seems to have a purpose. There's nothing extra, and every scene is doing work in adding value to the show. There are some comical scenes (like the birthday party in the bomb bay) which are probably unnecessary, but because they're well written, they fit in well with the rest of the movie. There were some great one-liners, and some really moving scenes (like the Zuko and Uncle reunion, and the Zuko and Aang talk & hug at the very end). There were also great (though sometimes cryptic) scenes that showed Aang's struggle with his pre-ordained mission.
(4) Fourth, the music. Actually, now that I've watched "Sozin's Comet" something like 4 or 5 times, I've really noticed how much work the music does in the movie. Three sequences where the music is just chillingly EXCELLENT are: the aforementioned agni kai scene (the slow music there is just stunning, a beautiful contrast against the flames that are swirling on the screen), the scene where Aang redirects Ozai's lightning strike, and, of course, the energybending scene.
That's all I've got, really. I can't say enough about how "Sozin's Comet" really just blew me away. The series was great overall, with only a few episodes that were blah-dee-blah, but I don't think I would be as enamored with Avatar: The Last Airbender if "Sozin's Comet" hadn't been so well executed. (To a lesser extent, I think I feel the same way about Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker, in relation to Batman Beyond, though I think I like Avatar more.)
In any case, that's my review of "Sozin's Comet." Just, really really fantastic. I don't even know if I have any complaints!
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Misinformation or disinformation
In discussing the Obama administration's healthcare plan, it seems like a lot of false details have been proliferated. I've heard from various sources that the plan would include plans to encourage euthanasia of the elderly and the ability of the government to stop treatment of the elderly who have expensive treatments but not a long life-expectancy. CNN has a "Truth Squad" whose sole goal is to measure the veracity of such claims and has been busy investigating one false rumor after another about the health plan.
I'm wondering who is to blame for these misconceptions, and worse whether it's misinformation or deliberate disinformation. I think it's easy to jump to the conclusion that opponents of the health plan have tried to create a climate of fear surrounding the reforms. At the same time, I can't help but think that the administration has done a very poor job in giving the facts to the people. This is complicated by the fact that this reform is HUGE. Getting the government involved directly in healthcare and in determining appropriate treatments for various diagnoses creates an entirely new role for the government. Also remember that healthcare represents a large and growing percentage of the entire economy (I think around 10%).
I think the truth is that no one really knows what the reforms will ultimately look like, so it's difficult for the legislators to convey what will happen to the public. When there is such uncertainty, people are understandably scared and prone to misinformation and disinformation. In my opinion, the reforms should be much more narrow in scope. For example, programs to encourage preventive medicine through government agencies or subsidies to healthcare providers. That would narrow the conversation down to the merit of preventive medicine, which has often come up in discussions of the health plan, without conflating it with the myriad of other changes that are occurring. In the end, I'm personally skeptical of government involvement when it's not clearly delineated. The biggest reason for intervention seems to be rising healthcare costs and to provide universal coverage. I'd prefer to see plans to address those issues separately so I could better understand the logic of the reforms. The bogus rumors are just a result of the fact that no one, including a lot of the legislators, really knows what this plan will do.
I'm wondering who is to blame for these misconceptions, and worse whether it's misinformation or deliberate disinformation. I think it's easy to jump to the conclusion that opponents of the health plan have tried to create a climate of fear surrounding the reforms. At the same time, I can't help but think that the administration has done a very poor job in giving the facts to the people. This is complicated by the fact that this reform is HUGE. Getting the government involved directly in healthcare and in determining appropriate treatments for various diagnoses creates an entirely new role for the government. Also remember that healthcare represents a large and growing percentage of the entire economy (I think around 10%).
I think the truth is that no one really knows what the reforms will ultimately look like, so it's difficult for the legislators to convey what will happen to the public. When there is such uncertainty, people are understandably scared and prone to misinformation and disinformation. In my opinion, the reforms should be much more narrow in scope. For example, programs to encourage preventive medicine through government agencies or subsidies to healthcare providers. That would narrow the conversation down to the merit of preventive medicine, which has often come up in discussions of the health plan, without conflating it with the myriad of other changes that are occurring. In the end, I'm personally skeptical of government involvement when it's not clearly delineated. The biggest reason for intervention seems to be rising healthcare costs and to provide universal coverage. I'd prefer to see plans to address those issues separately so I could better understand the logic of the reforms. The bogus rumors are just a result of the fact that no one, including a lot of the legislators, really knows what this plan will do.
Friday, August 7, 2009
Book Review
Title: A Drink Before the War
Author: Dennis Lehane
I thought it might be fun to put up book reviews as I read. I have a strange relationship with books. Growing up, I didn't read that much. I preferred watching cartoons and playing computer games. I read an odd book every couple of months but most of my reading was confined to assigned books for school. Now it seems a bit odd, because I enjoy science fiction and fantasy fiction so reading in those genres would have been a great outlet. Surprisingly, this changed post college, and I have been reading a lot for pleasure the last 6 years.
What drew me to A Drink Before the War? XX and I are fans of the movie "Gone, Baby, Gone" which is based on Dennis Lehane's novel. I absolutely love that movie and thought it had a great blend of suspense and twists. My one complaint is that I didn't find necessarily find Casey Affleck to be quite believable as the lead character. He's a bit scrawny and I didn't necessarily think that his wise-cracking was suitable to the character. At the time, I assumed that the Patrick Kenzie character would be a more hard-nosed tough guy and that his portrayal strayed from the book. Rather than pick up the book of the same title I started started with the first book of the series.
Patrick Kenzie and Angela Gennaro are private detectives who are hired by a state politician to track down a person and certain "documents" that she has. This leads to the detectives discovering some pretty dark secrets involving the nature of these documents and the persons involved. The book has a few twists, but none that are particularly mind-blowing. I'm not the type who tries to guess things ahead in the novel but I think observant readers would not find the twists surprising either. The subject nature is definitely dark, I don't want to give away too much of the content of the book but I was surprised by how evil some of the characters are.
The book does make me re-evaluate Casey Affleck's performance. He absolutely nailed it. The novel is written fron Kenzie's perspective, and he has the same wise-cracking wit and sarcasm that he portrayed in the movie. In retrospect, his performance, which I always thought was good, was actually great.
The most appealling parts of the book for me are the details of Boston. I grew up in the suburbs and am very familiar with the city, but not the poorer neighborhoods where a lot of the story takes place. I love how scenes take place in South Station or at Downtown Crossing, mentioning stores and locations that I personally am familiar with. It added a lot of background and visualization to the story.
Overall a very solid book, if not spectacular. I give it a B+.
Author: Dennis Lehane
I thought it might be fun to put up book reviews as I read. I have a strange relationship with books. Growing up, I didn't read that much. I preferred watching cartoons and playing computer games. I read an odd book every couple of months but most of my reading was confined to assigned books for school. Now it seems a bit odd, because I enjoy science fiction and fantasy fiction so reading in those genres would have been a great outlet. Surprisingly, this changed post college, and I have been reading a lot for pleasure the last 6 years.
What drew me to A Drink Before the War? XX and I are fans of the movie "Gone, Baby, Gone" which is based on Dennis Lehane's novel. I absolutely love that movie and thought it had a great blend of suspense and twists. My one complaint is that I didn't find necessarily find Casey Affleck to be quite believable as the lead character. He's a bit scrawny and I didn't necessarily think that his wise-cracking was suitable to the character. At the time, I assumed that the Patrick Kenzie character would be a more hard-nosed tough guy and that his portrayal strayed from the book. Rather than pick up the book of the same title I started started with the first book of the series.
Patrick Kenzie and Angela Gennaro are private detectives who are hired by a state politician to track down a person and certain "documents" that she has. This leads to the detectives discovering some pretty dark secrets involving the nature of these documents and the persons involved. The book has a few twists, but none that are particularly mind-blowing. I'm not the type who tries to guess things ahead in the novel but I think observant readers would not find the twists surprising either. The subject nature is definitely dark, I don't want to give away too much of the content of the book but I was surprised by how evil some of the characters are.
The book does make me re-evaluate Casey Affleck's performance. He absolutely nailed it. The novel is written fron Kenzie's perspective, and he has the same wise-cracking wit and sarcasm that he portrayed in the movie. In retrospect, his performance, which I always thought was good, was actually great.
The most appealling parts of the book for me are the details of Boston. I grew up in the suburbs and am very familiar with the city, but not the poorer neighborhoods where a lot of the story takes place. I love how scenes take place in South Station or at Downtown Crossing, mentioning stores and locations that I personally am familiar with. It added a lot of background and visualization to the story.
Overall a very solid book, if not spectacular. I give it a B+.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)