Oddly enough, Ed Norton is actually the least impressive thing about THE ITALIAN JOB, which is maybe why he bitched and wailed about it so much. I dunno. All I have to say about this movie is that it's extremely fun, beautifully filmed and set-dressed, clever, and the action sequences kick the ass. Liked it even more than I figured I would. It's kind of like picking out a perfect shade of lipstick by chance; or possibly even just like a perfect shade of lipstick.

A few little things, all from the NYTimes:

And now when the census takers here whine about how hard their jobs are, we can ask if they've ever heard of this tiger census.

My high school self, who was completely addicted to Dennis Miller's first late night talk show (I lived in the sticks, and watched it every night, religiously), is totally betrayed by Mr. Conservative Miller, who is profiled in advance of his new CNBC show. CNBC -- oh how the mighty have raked their hands through their hair. (I mean, CHUHRIEST, even on HBO the Rollins Band were the musical interlude before the news...)

And I'm so sorry I have to go here, but let's chat about Mister Mel Gibson for just a second, shall we? Who wants to see this movie? Wait, I know, the article answers that. But what I can't figure is: WHY? There are many things I will sit through in the theater on a lark -- hell, I heard BATTLEFIELD EARTH had its charms if you were high enough to reach the state where the bad hit funny again -- but THE PASSION BLAHBLAHBLAH, I can't remember the full title. I want to see this? Um, no. If I want to watch a thriller about murder, there's already so much to choose from, and SEVEN even has religious overtones.

I just don't get it.

Shaking head.

And, last but not least, the Times also had an editorial piece about making the MARS mission one way, which is quite interesting:

What's more, the president's suggestion of using the Moon as a base - a place to assemble equipment and produce fuel for a Mars mission less expensively - has the potential to turn into a costly sideshow. There is, however, an obvious way to slash the costs and bring Mars within reach of early manned exploration. The answer lies with a one-way mission. Most people react with instinctive horror at the suggestion. I recall my own sense of discomfort when I met an aging American scientist who claimed to have trained for a one-way mission to the Moon in the pre-Apollo days. And in the case of the barren Moon, that reaction is largely justified. There is little on the Moon to sustain human life. Mars, however, is a different story. Because of the planet's relatively benign environment, it is theoretically able to support a permanent human presence. If provided with the right equipment, astronauts would have a chance of living there for years. A one-way trip to Mars need not mean a quick demise.

I'll have more to say about the Moon/Mars proposal soon, but let's all remember the term "underfunded mandate." No Child Left Behind was one, and by all appearances, the funding as planned is too slight for the task here. Let's all be cynical as hell for a minute and reflect on the fact that this is an election year. But, again, not getting into this right now but soon. Too tired.

Night.

earworm: "Desperadoes Waiting for a Train," Guy Clark

rec: THE ITALIAN JOB starring Marky Mark

namecheck: Barth "Future Mexican President" Anderson