happy tunesday! ("i'm the urban spaceman" by the bonzo dog doo-dah band)

This week, we commemorate Neil Innes the comedio-musical genius behind the Rutles and The Bonzo Dog Doo-Dah Band. Innes passed away this past Sunday at age 75.

I have long enjoyed Innes' music and humor. RIP.

ca-fiend!

Being that caffeine is one of most important ingestibles, I am trying to keep track of the caffeine content of various soda products. I've known for a while that Pepsi has more caffeine than Coke, and Dr. Pepper has more than Pepsi. Oh, and Mountain Dew has even more. But at some point it gets difficult to remember the entire heirarchy.

Rather than go to a store and just check all the labels, I have gotten into the habit of checking cans when I either have one (Ssshhhh! don't tell Marina!) or see a friend or colleague having one. The table (so far) is shown in the illustration.

Here are a few comments and notes:

• This is still a small sample (maybe if ,my reader is nice I'll post an update when the list is longer)
• It appears that all products with the same branding (e.g., all types of "Coke" or all types of "Pepsi") have the same caffeine content. I assume that the difference between the 12-ounce can of Coke (2.8333 mg caffeine per ounce) and the 20-ounce bottle of Orange Vanilla Coke (2.8500 mg caffeine per ounce) is due to rounding. Similarly for the difference between Cherry Pepsi and Pepsi (with real sugar).
• For now, this is just about sodas. Not iced teas or energy drinks. I may change that approach if I feel like it.

You're welcome.

amazon go: customer service the way it should be

One of the things I've come to appreciate about the new office location is its location near an Amazon Go Store. What I really want to talk about is their ace customer service, but first I have a long digression.

Now, here's where I'm of a mixed mind. As much as there are some modern marvels that amaze me, I generally don't write about them. There are so many ways that I feel as if I'm living in the future, but everyone knows about these technological miracles, so I'm not saying anything new. But as far as I can tell there are only four cities with Amazon Go Stores, so it may be that my reader doesn't live near one and is unfamiliar with them.

So bear with me if you already know about this.

The Amazon Go Store is like a small market. Some groceries. Some prepared foods. It's kind of designed for hardworking Manhattanites who either need to pick up something for lunch, or who want to grab a few groceries quickly to carry out to their uptown apartments. What makes it stand out is how it works. When you enter, you have to scan in with your phone. You and take a bag (or don't), and take the items you want. You put them in your bag or your pocket, or you just carry them out. Somehow the system knows what you've taken, and your credit card gets charged.

Now, I have no idea what technologies they use in order to know what you've taken, but it's very good at it. Sometimes I buy one item. Sometimes a few. On one occasion I bought 20 items (including 17 packaged soups from Hale & Hearty). I've put things in my bag, then changed my mind and put them back. I have a friend at work who has gone out of his way to trick their system -- putting things back in the wrong place -- and his bill has never been wrong. From my experience, they get it right about 94% of the time -- I've purchased stuff there 33 times, and my bill has been incorrect twice. Actually, their success rate is better than that indicates because there have been a couple times that I've gone in, taken things off the shelf, then put them back and left without making a purchase.

Now that that's out of the way, I can talk about what I wanted to talk about -- their customer service. On the two occasions where my bill was wrong, I was charged for an extra item I hadn't taken. But getting it corrected was really a snap. When the itemized bill shows up on my phone, there's an order number at the bottom and a link to contact them about the trip. With a couple clicks, I can have my phone call Amazon (or, more precisely, to have Amazon call me). I have to tell them who they're talking to, but other than that they know what bill I'm calling about and what's on that bill. None of this reading a number to one representative, getting transferred to another, then reading the number again, and telling them my name, address and blood type forty gagillion times. So in both cases I told the representative which item on the bill I hadn't taken. The rep apologized and the bill got corrected in short order.* Easy, peasy, George loves Weezy.

That's what customer service should be.

One final word: As cool as this is, I also find it oddly creepy.

*Notably, I assume that part of the reason I have had no trouble getting my bills corrected is that I've only had to do it a couple times. Presumably if I went in there every day and complained after each visit I'd start to get push back. I don't know what technologies they use, so it could also be that they have full video surveilance and someone can review the footage to check up on me.

cinema history class: shock

Session: Horror-Noir—Does It Exist, Week 3
Movie: Shock (1946)
Directed by Alfred Werker

As always, there may be spoilers here. And the trailer may be NSFW and/or NSFL

Plot:
A woman goes into shock when she witnesses a murder. A psychiatrist is called in to treat her, but guess what... Hilarity ensues.

Reaction:

I had a bit of trouble categorizing this movie. Horror? Not really. A whodunnit? No, since we the viewers know exactly what happened. A caper film? That implies more planning on the part of the criminals. I eventually settled on psychological thriller.

With that part out of the way, I couldn't help wondering if it was really a flim noir. It had the nervous-making use of shadows that I've come to expect from films noir, but it was missing the clever rapid fire dialog that I've come to expect from the genre. Keith and Dave defended the film's status as noir, noting that there's no one element that's required. They also noted that that's why it's so hard to define film noir as a genre.

Unlike the rest of the class, I'm not a huge Vincent Price fan. I've seen a bunch of those gothic horrors and Poe adaptations that he's in, and I often find him too over the top to enjoy. So I was pleasantly surprised to see this, made before Price had made it big. He was subdued but fascinating. And that's a Vincent Price I like much better than the hammy winking Price.

Ratings:

Me: 9
Dave: 9.8
Ethan: 8

a bunch o' christmas songs

Since I am not a religious Christian, but Christmas is all around me, I figure I'd remind people of a a dozen great but nonreligious Christmas songs. Of course, once I got started I blew right past twelve, and Blair had to drag me away from my computer. I am in no way representing this list as complete, so feel free to suggest others in the comments section. Except for McCartney's "A Wonderful Christmastime." That song annoys the spleen out of me.

Run Rudolph Run
Chuck Berry

Father Christmas
The Kinks

Stop the Cavalry
Jona Lewie

Christmas at the Airport
Nick Lowe

The Only Present I Want This Year
Eytan Mirsky

The Eleven Cats of Christmas
Trout Fishing in America

Merry Christmas (I Don't Want to Fight Tonight)
The Ramones

Christmas Wrapping
The Waitresses

Christmas on the M62
Wreckless Eric

Christmas Christmas
Mojo Nixon

Christmas in Hollis
Run DMC

Space Christmas
Shonen Knife

Merry Christmas
Wesley Willis

A Christmas Carol
Tom Lehrer

Christmas at Ground Zero
"Weird Al" Yankovic

happy zmedsday!! (lvii)

happy tunesday! ("jelly donuts" by dick curless)

OK...it's not really a Khannukah song, but it's about sufganiyot so...good enough.

PS, I really like Dick Curless' music.

on presidential stability

America's first 13 presidential terms (from Washington's first through Van Buren's only) all went off without a hitch. By that I mean they began and ended at the scheduled inauguration date -- none of them died or otherwise left office during a term, or started in the middle of a term. Since then we have not had as long a string of stability. The second longest streak, our current one. It started with Jimmy Carter, and has had ten complete terms with no interruption. Assuming President Trump doesn't die or get removed in the next 13 months, current streak will hit 11. After that, it's a long way down to the third longest streak, which lasted five terms. That was the one that began with the term to which Coolidge was elected in 1924 and ran through Roosevelt's third term. Note that Coolidge became President in 1923 when Harding died, and Roosevelt was elected to a fourth term, but died shortly into it. So, yay for us!

willy wonka and the raw deal

Augustus Gloop got a raw deal.

We were watching Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory (the original 1971 movie...duh), when I realized it. For the remainder of this post I will assume some degree of familiarity with the film.

The four kids who got eliminated from the factory tour all got eliminated for disobeying instructions and for some other underlying sin that's part of the kids' basic personality. These aren't all seven deadly sins-types of things. Augustus' is, since he's a glutton. But Violet's sin (as explained by the Oopa-Loompas) was habitual gum-chewing.

To recap, Violet grabs and, contrary to explicit instructions, chews gum which Wonka has been developing, but which has not been perfected. Veruca throws a tantrum (along with a musical number) because she wants a golden goose. And Mike impetuously (and against instructions) miniaturizes himself via the modern miracle of Wonkavision. There are varying levels of wrongdoing here, and arguably the threat of death or major injury is a bit severe, given the nature of the crimes. It's fair to note that at the end of the movie, Wonka does say that these kids will all emerge none the worse for wear. So ultimately their punishment is removal from the tour and loss of their chance to win the grand prize. The key, though, is that each of those three broke the rules and is therefore getting his or her comeuppance.

But I view Augustus Gloop's case differently. His crime was drinking from the chocolate river. But when he did that, he had no way of knowing that it was wrong. Wonka brought everyone into the great candy room, telling them that everything in the room is edible. He never told them not to drink the river, so it seemed only reasonable to young Gloop that he could drink the river. So he should not have lost out.

In fact, Charlie should have been eliminated from the tour for stealing some of the Fizzy Lifting Drink. The fact that he, through a combination of luck and cleverness, avoided injury doesn't change the fact of the theft. At the end of the movie, he does appear to lose his prize as a result of the theft, but he redeems himself by returning the gobstopper -- even when an angry Grandpa Joe is swearing to give it to Slugworth. Now, I'm all for the concept of repentance and redemption. But none of the other kids were given a chance to redeem themselves. And Augustus didn't even do anything wrong that should require him to earn his redemption.

Fuck Willy Wonka.

cinema history class: detour

Session: Horror-Noir—Does It Exist, Week 2
Movie: Detour (1945)
Directed by Edward G. Ulmer

As always, there may be spoilers here. And the trailer may be NSFW and/or NSFL

Plot:
Hitchhiking across the country to meet up with his girlfriend. But the trip doesn't go as planned. Hilarity ensues.

Reaction:

Well, this was definitely a film noir. You had the dramatic use of shadow, the German expressionist-inspired camera angles, the snappy clever dialogue. But was it a horror film? I didn't see the connection. Keith explained afterwards that this crossed the line into horror because Vera, the female lead, rather than being a femme fatale, was an out and out psycho who had grabbed complete control of Al's life. That explanation was good enough for me at the moment, though the more I think about it the less I'm convinced. But, whatever...I enjoyed the movie whether its was a horror film or not.

But Keith is definitely right about Vera being an out and out psycho. And she was brilliantly portrayed by Ann Savage who, Keith explained, established a template of sorts with this character.

This was a short movie, clocking in at just over an hour, but it was well paced and suspenseful. It did keep me guessing. As far as predictions go, I guessed some of what would happen. But my big guess -- that we would find that the actual Charlie Haskell was an imposter -- was never borne out. The guess made perfect sense to me, but since nothing was said of it, I guess I was completely off base.

The only thing I really didn't like was the very ending. I would have preferred to have the voice over trail off as he wandered off. The final touch, in which he gets picked up by the police was a bit of heavy-handed moralism. I should note though, that this was forced on Ulmer because of the Hays code.

Ratigs:

Me: 8.4
Dave: 9.5
Ethan: 8
Joe: 10
Sean: 2 out of 4

it's zmedsday!! (lvi)

happy tunesday! ("k'she'at bochah at lo yafa" by arik einstein)

This song has been on my mind a bit lately. I'm not sure how it entered my head, but it did. This is one of those situations where I found out that a recording I love is actually a cover version. I first knew the version by T-Slam, and only years later came across the original version by Arik Einstein.
I like them both, but have a strong preference for the original.

The title translates to "You're Not Pretty When You Cry." There are other Youtube videos of Arik Einstein's recording that have better sound quality. But they don;t have the groovy visuals.

As a side note, New York musician Eyta Mirsky recorded an accoustic version for his Youtube channel. That one is here:

And, hell, while I'm presenting different vesrsions, here's the T-Slam recording that I first knew:

cinema history class: the leopard man

Session: Horror-Noir—Does It Exist, Week 1
Movie: The The Leopard Man (1943)
Directed by Jacques Tourneur

As always, there may be spoilers here. And the trailer may be NSFW and/or NSFL

Plot:
After a leopard escapes its handler, people start dying -- apparently by leopard attack.  Hilarity ensues.

Reaction:

The story was interesting enough, and there were a few good moments -- notably the blood ozzing under the door during the first attack. And the story was kind of interesting. But there really wasn't enough in this movie to really grab my attention. Joe adamantly disagreed with me, which prompted me to rewatch the movie on the intertubes (thanks, dailymotion.com). It's just too slow-moving to hold my interest. In class, I gave it a 7 (as reflected below). After trying to rewatch it, I need to revise my grade down to a 6.

But I should note that this did clearly make the case that there is a nonempty intersection of film noir and horror. Logically speaking, I don't see how that's even a question. Film noir is about style -- lighting, camera angles, tone. Horror is defined by the story. There's really nothing to make the two incompatible.

Ratings:

Me: 7
Dave: 9
Ethan: 7
Joe: 10

cinema history class: the new york ripper

NOTE: I have corrected this. As initially posted, it had incorrect ratings.

Session: Welcome to My Nightmare, Week 4
Movie: The New York Ripper (1982)
Directed by Lucio Fulci

As always, there may be spoilers here. And the trailer may be NSFW and/or NSFL

Plot:
Young women i New York City are being stalked and viciously murdered by a serial killer. A grizzled police detective teams up with an academic psychologist to solve the case  Hilarity ensues.

Reaction:

I'm glad this wasn't the first Fulci film I ever saw because, frankly, it was more graphic and brutal in its violence than his others, and it's good to have gotten my feet wet with the others.*

If you want a solid hardcore slasher movie, this may be just right for you. The blood was gross. The plot was interesting, and everything was tied together pretty well. There were some good red herrings that kind of threw me off, and that's good to see.

I also liked it because I'm into movies having good realistic footage of the New York subway (as opposed to scenes meant to be set on the New York subway that obviously weren't filmed on it). But, in general, this had some good scenes of the gritty pre-Giuliani New York City. This was the city of my high school years. It's easy to romanticize it -- and I have plenty of friends who do -- but I don't really want to go back to it. That said, it's fun to see it portrayed in the movies.

But that damn duck voice was really frickin' annoying. It actually was important for the plot, but I hated it. I wish they could have worked without it.

Ratings:

Me: 8
Dave: 9.9
Ethan: 10
Joe: 10
Sean: 3 out of 4

*Analogous to this, the first Elvis Costello album I ever bought was Imperial Bedroom, and my first Bob Dylan album was Desire. It was hard to appreciate these works without having the context of their previous careers.

father/daughet breakfast -- a new tradition

Sharon and I are working on building a new tradition -- weekly father/daughter breakfasts.

The idea came to me a few weeks ago. Sharon wants to get a part-time job, and needed paperwork from the Department of Education. Afterwards, she was hungry so we went for a bite to eat.

And it was nice. Hanging out and chatting with her. Neither one of us staring at our phones.

I already spend a lot of time with Ethan. We have our (more or less) weekly cinema history class, and our weekly trips to the farmers' markets. And Asher gets a lot of my attention because, well, at home he demands it. But Sharon spends a lot of time at home working with the Overwatch team that she manages, and on her artwork. It would be easy enough to simply forget to interact with her, and I don;t want that to happen.

Since our unplanned lunch, I have started making it a habit to go out with her Saturday mornings (or early afternoon, if that's what works). We've done it now for two week,s and will be doing it again next week. It's great to spend the time with her. Just chatting and eating. I hope this tradition lasts.