Guess Who's Coming to Dinner (1967)

(Image from Wikipedia)


Guess Who's Coming to Dinner (1967)

This film is probably more famous for what it's about than for being a classic of cinema. And that's probably because it ain't all that great a film. The story in a nutshell - Matt and Christina Drayton (Spencer Tracy and Katherine Hepburn) are a well off liberal married couple whose daughter Joey (Katherine Houghton) surprises them by bringing home a black man she intends to marry, Dr. John Prentice (Sydney Poitier). The parents are forced to confront their own, probably subconscious and unacknowledged racial bias while coming to terms with their daughter's whirlwind romance and the consequences an inter-racial marriage might have for the entire family. The film is basically a talky drama where the characters awkwardly discuss the situation and all of its ramifications as the parents try to decide whether they can give their blessing.

It's an interesting film, one that touches on many of the race issues that were (and are, I suppose) prevalent at the time. The problem is how obvious and unsubtle the film is, verbalizing its ideas in a didactic manner that borders on patronizing. Subtle the script ain't, and it's a testament to the film's powerhouse stars that they managed to allay its failings and elevate the film into something that commands one's attention. While all of the characters are given a fair amount of personality, in the case of daughter Joey her overly overt sweetness and naivety starts to grate after a while.

My main qualm with the film is the way it stacks the odds in favour of its argument before arriving at an ending that, despite all of the hand wringing by the characters, is a foregone conclusion. Consider that the character of Dr. John Prentice is so impossibly awesome and decent that he beggars belief; black or not, the guy's a hell of a catch by any standard. And this is the part that bugs me - it's like the film is saying "look, this guy's black but he's also an incredible human being, alright?" What if he hadn't been such a great guy, would he have somehow been less acceptable to Joey's parents? Now that would have been an interesting scenario! I get that part of what the film is saying is that, despite how great Dr. Prentice is the parents are still filled with doubt, but I think this aspect of the story winds up being a betrayal of the broader theme of racial equality. It's like Dr. Prentice is acceptable because he's exceptional.

The other thing that bugs me is how the parents sit around contemplating the race issue while ignoring the more salient fact that their daughter is about to marry someone she's just met, a notion that would concern parents in the real world, especially ones who have children as seemingly naive as Joey.

Ultimately 'Guess Who's Coming to Dinner' is a decent enough film with a message that it delivers very clearly, but with little subtlety or intelligence. Definitely worth watching at least for its historical significance and for the central performances, but don't expect to be blown away or have your world view shaken, as the film really is unquestionably a product of its time.

Wisdom of the Crowds?

I've been hunting for a new mobile phone - having lost my old one - and have discovered, to my chagrin, that finding something that hits that sweet spot between price and functionality isn't as easy as I'd hoped. I'm not one of those people who is happy with a basic mobile that just does calls - I actually use some of the nifty little utilities like calendars and to do notes (a decent screen makes using these things easier as well!), and I like having a camera in my phone (hey, it's come in handy on several occasions!), so I have some basic requirements.

The thing that I've found off-putting is that every time I read a review for a phone, the comments section or the user submitted reviews are often all over the place. Once you read a few, you learn that the phone has great / mediocre battery life, has a good / crap screen, has an excellent / rubbish keypad, etc... it's amazing, because after reading such verbal diarrhea you end up being less sure about the damned thing than when all you had were an image and the specifications to go by! The fact is, user reviews or reviews by the masses seem to only be good at identifying when things fall into extreme categories - i.e. things that are either brilliant or absolutely rubbish. Things that fall into the grey area in between those extremes tend to have reviews so all over the place that they are often next to useless.

And then there are the so called 'expert' reviews, which are fairly good at presenting the facts but sometimes forget that certain products are targeted at consumers who aren't too concerned with having the best of everything. So, all too often a reviewer will talk about a low or medium end phone and criticize it in the way a guy who drives a Porsche might criticize your Toyota - these reviews will usually have pearls of wisdom like 'for a little bit more you could do better!'. Sadly, that argument applies to pretty much anything; while I'd surely like to get the best of the best, the constraints of this little thing I like to call reality dictate that I settle for something optimal. Unfortunately the genius advice of the type given by some spoiled reviewers is, like the wisdom of the crowds, quite useless when applied to reality.

Having said that, I'll still take the informed expert opinions over the peanut gallery ones nine times out of ten! At least real reviewers tend to be relatively literate!

Hot or Not?

This has been bugging me of late. I've seen it mentioned on several message boards and blogs that Sarah Palin is hot, often jokingly implying that this alone would get her votes despite the fact that she is woefully unqualified in virtually all other respects.

Erm, what? Has the hotness bar really fallen so low, or is there some kind of weird conspiracy to cement at least one 'positive' attribute with regard to this woman? Alright, she's fairly attractive, but why do so many people insist that she's hot? It does not compute!

(As an aside, Tina Fey is hot, despite the passing similarities between the two.)

Mobile phones expose human habits

Interesting BBC article about the use of mobile phones to track people's movements for research purposes. I feel kind of ambivalent about this - on the one hand it's terrific that they can build up data sets on human movement for research purposes that can be used in planning for disease outbreaks, traffic flow analysis, and optimizing pathfinding. On the other, it's kind of frightening how your every move can be so easily tracked; while this study is anonymous, it isn't voluntary either and can so easily be abused by, for instance, unscrupulous governments.

Still, there's already lots of great stuff that can be done with mobiles, and this is yet another. The idea of attaching more sensors that can be used for various purposes - such as studying air quality, as the article mentions - is pretty exciting. We're well on the way to having our own tricorders!

On another note, the findings of the study with regard to human movement patterns is quite interesting (though to my untrained mind, not altogether surprising)!

Staving off Gattaca

"My father was right. It didn't matter how much I lied on my resume. My real resume was in my cells. Why should anybody invest all that money to train me when there were a thousand other applicants with a far cleaner profile? Of course, it's illegal to discriminate, 'genoism' it's called. But no one takes the law seriously. If you refuse to disclose, they can always take a sample from a door handle or a handshake, even the saliva on your application form. If in doubt, a legal drug test can just as easily become an illegal peek at your future in the company." - Vincent Freeman (Ethan Hawke), Gattaca, 1997

In a surprisingly lucid move, the US Senate is pushing through laws to prevent insurance companies and employers from discriminating against people based on their genetic makeup. So maybe the future depicted in the terrific Gattaca isn't quite on the horizon.

Hang on though, in that movie genetic discrimination was illegal but it happened anyway. I suspect that, eventually, it will happen in reality at some level or the other.

And while I generally abhor the notion, a part of me does wonder whether it might not be logical in some situations, such as working in particular environments or fields. But then, where would one possibly draw the cutoff lines for eligibility? And what of people like the character of Vincent in the film, who wish to do something with every ounce of their being and could perhaps do it better than someone who was genetically more acceptable?

It's a messy question, but I think it's one of those situations where ethics ought to trump cold logic.

*Edited to add the quote & clarity (proofreading is your friend!)

A dog that's not for life

Holy shit. There's a dog rental service. I'm not sure why I'm surprised to be honest, but somehow the fact that this is really real is just... too much! Yes folks, you can rent dogs for walking and absolve yourself of all the real fun and responsiblity of having a canine companion in the first place! What possible satisfaction can one get out of this? Isn't this like dog prostitution or something?

Most hilarious is the woman who cycles through dogs depending on the occasion, probably in the same manner in which she cycles through shoes. Yet another stark reminder that there are sad sacks in the world desperately in need of a clue. I mean seriously, renting animal companionship to fill some kind of void in your pathetic life or as a status symbol? WTF?

What next, rent a baby? ...For all I know, it's already here.

Anonymous is for real

I saw this video recently where a group called 'Anonymous' claimed that they would destroy the Church of Scientology - that pseudo religious cult that seems way more evil and harmful than regular religions. I thought this was just a practical joke of sorts, but it turns out that these guys mean business. This Newsweek article offers some insight into the group (warning: there's a picture of Mad Tom Cruise in the article that may be harmful to your psyche), which has apparently been around for a few years and has a membership numbering in the thousands. And yesterday the groups members took to the streets in front of various Scientology centres around the world in peaceful protest. The BBC article's photos indicates that the protesters wore Guy Fawkes masks to protect their identities, creating a scene somewhat reminiscent of the climax of the excellent 'V for Vendetta'. Intriguing. It seems that 'Anonymous' started off their campaign last month with some illegal activities against Scientology but have now shifted to more civilized methods. I don't know if any of this will be effective, but I hope they succeed with their goals. And stick to legal activities.

People who break your stuff

Maybe I'm overly cautious, or maybe I'm just an asshole (probably both), but I tend not to lend stuff to people. And by stuff I mean stuff that can be easily broken or damaged... like DVDs. I'll admit it, sometimes I even lie about having stuff that people might want to borrow. Why, you might ask? Experience tells me that, apart from a few who are reliable and trusted, most people that borrow your stuff act like it's some freebie piece of junk they can use to play fetch with their dog. Or do something even more destructive with. I've had stuff of mine never returned or returned in an unusable state more often than I care to remember.

What I hate even more than getting something back like this are the lame excuses people come up with. I once lent a 'friend' a CD many years ago, which he returned in a really bad state - the thing was scratched like it had been taken back to medieval times and used as a shield in a jousting tournament. Needless to say, it didn't work anymore. My buddy was nonchalant and said it wasn't his fault as he had lent it to his cousin, who was probably the guilty party. His cousin! Well that made everything better, didn't it? Because when I lent it to him, I obviously meant for him to integrate it into his personal lending library! I guess it's a more original reply than the usual 'it must have been like that when you gave it to me' routine. Then there was that time someone ERASED over my VHS copy of Street Fighter the Movie - is there no decency???

Is it really that hard to not destroy things that other people have trustingly given you under the assumption that you won't treat it like you'd treat a Jar Jar Binks fan at a Star Wars convention? What the hell is up with people? I tend to be organized and take care of my stuff without tossing them here and there; I take even better care of things I've borrowed, because whoever gave it to me was doing me a favour, and it's the least I can do to repay their generosity.

So as a result of these bad experiences, these days I'm more miserly than I used to be. Whenever I do lend something to someone, I always make it explicit that I expect it back in good condition, meaning I don't expect the borrower to give it to their retarded brother-in-law to use as a teething instrument.

Yeah, I just needed to rant.

The Darwin Awards

The compilation of 2007's Darwin Awards are up now. The Darwin Awards are... well, I'll quote the site directly:

Named in honor of Charles Darwin, the father of evolution, the Darwin Awards commemorate those who improve our gene pool by removing themselves from it.

Removing themselves from it, usually in quite amusing ways. Yes these poor sods gave up the ghost, and maybe it's a little mean to laugh, but they did it in such ignominious style! All of the winners are quite amusing, but the top rated one, 'coitus interruptus', is the cream of the crop!

Culture of Fear

This story on the BBC site is indicative of the insane level of paranoia and fear out there in the world today. The statistics show that there's not really much to be worried about, and yet kids are being tucked away to keep them safe from the evil bogeymen and other horrors of society. Admittedly, the current stats themselves could be influenced by the state of things, but the odds of horrible things happening have never been all that bad. Why is everyone so damned afraid? At this rate, the next generation will be composed of overweight, video game addicted weaklings who've never climbed a tree. Oh, wait...