Best of Bond, the Blofeld films

The Best of Bond, Part 2

Continuing the series begun earlier. I’m not going to rehash all the plots. This is meant for people who have seen all the films.

I’m looking to judge these films by a number of criteria:

• Bond – who the actor is, how good he is, and what he brings to the role
• the Villain- starting with Dr. No, I judge the films on how compelling the villain is.
• the Bond Women – some films have few, some have many, but I’m pretty sure all have at least one. The quality ranges from Denise Richards’s absurd nuclear physicist to, of course, Mrs. Bond herself, not to mention Pussy Galore
• the Good Guys – M, Q, Moneypenny, Felix Leiter in his many incarnations and other sidekicks
• the Henchmen on the other side like Jaws, Oddjob, and Nick-Nack.
• the gadgets – not just judging how neat the gadgets are, but whether they were unwisely allowed to take over the film (as often happened with the later Roger Moore filims)
• whatever else I happen to think of

I’m not concerned mainly with ordinal values but rather am going to assign a number between 0.0 and 10.0 to each.

Anyway, in Part 1 I addressed the first four Connery films. Part 2 concerns the three Blofeld films, You Only Live Twice, with Sean Connery, On Her Majesty's Secret Service, George Lazenby’s sole contribution to the series, and Diamonds Are Forever, featuring the return of Sean Connery.

Parts 3 & 4 will cover Roger Moore’s many films. Part 5 will cover Never Say Never Again and the two Dalton films, Part 6 will cover the four Brosnan films, and Part 7 will look at the three Daniel Craig films

And now we move on to

You Only Live Twice

Obama caves, again

My comment, submitted to Krugman's blog

I view this offer by Obama as the latest in a long series of actions by DLC members and other "centrists" to kill the liberal wing of the Democratic party and consolidate power for themselves. Making cuts in Social Securiity while simultaneously raising taxes on the middle class (and let's be clear, that's the effect of this change to Chained-CPI) is going to be a political disaster, and will kill any credibility that the party has with anybody moderately liberal.  As a liberal, I had already decided to not vote for Obama based on my belief that he would do exactly this (and exactly now).  Obama has no credibility with me now, and his continuing embrace of conservative policies will only further demoralize liberals.

This is a time in history when the party should be moving to the left with a lot of power.  Politically, the opportunity is there.  The country has been following conservative policies for at least the last twelve years, and the results have been disastrous.  The deregulation of the 90s has led to the profiteering of recent years, and that has led to the market crashes and the "need" to bail out the banks.  None of this has been good for the middle clash.

So, with that as backdrop, Obama's genius idea is to simultaneously preserve the Bush tax cut framework for those earning up to $400k/year while cutting social security brackets and effectively raising taxes for all taxpayers.

That's brilliant.
Looking forward to the next time the terrorists of the House Republican Caucus use the debt ceiling to threaten financial disaster.

Shootings in Connecticut

Well, in this past week we've seen a gunman go nuts and shoot people at a mall in Portland, Oregon, and then a few days later a gunman went nuts and shot his wife, a kindergarten teacher at a school in Newtown, Connecticut.  And then shot 20 kids.

The Best of Bond

The Best of Bond, Part 1

In reponse to this article by Isaac Chotiner, which I feel is deeply flawed, I’ve compiled my ratings of all the Bond films, starting with Dr. No and ending with Skyfall. I’m not including the TV version of Casino Royale from the 1950s, nor the Peter Sellers send-up of the same story. Haven’t seen the former and the latter is simply of a different genre. I’m not going to rehash all the plots. This is meant for people who’ve seen all the films.

I’m looking to judge these films by a number of criteria:

• Bond – who the actor is, how good he is, and what he brings to the role
• the Villain- starting with Dr. No, I judge the films on how compelling the villain is.
• the Bond Women – some films have few, some have many, but I’m pretty sure all have at least one. The quality ranges from Denise Richards’s absurd nuclear physicist to, of course, Mrs. Bond herself, not to mention Pussy Galore
• the Good Guys – M, Q, Moneypenny, Felix Leiter in his many incarnations and other sidekicks
• the Henchmen on the other side like Jaws, Oddjob, and Nick-Nack.
• the gadgets – not just judging how neat the gadgets are, but whether they were unwisely allowed to take over the film (as often happened with the later Roger Moore filims)
• whatever else I happen to think of

I’m not concerned mainly with ordinal values but rather am going to assign a number between 0.0 and 10.0 to each. By way of calibration, 0.0 is reserved for unwatchable films like The Love Guru, while the 10.0 might only go to The Godfather. and Hot Tub Time Machine. Just seeing if you’re paying attention there.
Anyway, in Part 1 I’ll address the first four Connery films. Part 2 will do the other Connery films through Diamonds are Forever, as well as Lazenby’s sole contribution. Part 3 will cover Roger Moore’s many films. Maybe I’ll split that in half. Part 5 will cover Never Say Never Again and the two Dalton films, Part 6 will cover the four Brosnan films, and Part 7 will look at the three Daniel Craig films

Without further ado, we jump in to

Election time

OK, might as well sum up my thoughts about tomorrow's election. It's no secret by now that I'm deeply disappointed in President Obama, especially his continuation and expansion of the worst of the War On Terror(TM) policies of President Bush. But I have no reason to think Mitt Romney would be any better. And I'm quite sure that he'd be far more beholden to the odious right wing theocrats that seem to have captured control of today's Republican party. So I can't vote for him.

On the other hand, if I vote for a person who is governing with a policy that denies basic rights of due process, I feel that some of that responsibility for this abuse of power would be validated by my vote. So I don't want to do that.

Luckily, as a resident of Maryland, I can vote my conscience without feeling that I'm helping Mitt Romney. I'll probably vote Green, as I think that's the best way of expressing my preferred direction for the country. At least for the Presidential race.

For Congress, I remember a couple years ago telling Chris Van Hollen that if he went with the tax cut deal of the lame duck Congress last time, I would oppose him. He has foiled my intent by redistricting me so I cannot vote against him. Damn you, Chris Van Hollen! My only possible retaliation will be to vote against the re-districting map with the hope that I can vote against him in the future.

On question 7, the motion to allow gambling at the National Harbor, I'm going to vote against it. Why? Because I'm morally opposed to gambling? No, not really. Because I don't care about a new revenue stream for schools? Well, here's my attitude about that. Money is fungible. So, every time the state wants to do something new to please some private special interest, all they need to do is hold education hostage to the promise of more dollars to spend. If the state wants to spend money on schools, they have the power to do so. It's not immediately clear to me that opening casinos will lead to a net gain in tax revenue to the state, or to educational revenue. I really strongly dislike this practice of holding the schools hostage. I suspect the measure will pass easily, even though I haven't seen any polling on it.

Oh wait, just checked. Polling says this is a close call. Also, I'm not saying I would boycott the casino if it opened. I'd be more likely to visit it than I am to go to Charlestown, WV.

Appalachia scares me.

The question about gay marriage rights is a no-brainer for me. I'll always support gay rights on this issue. My Ph.D. advisor is gay man. He and his partner are raising two young boys and are, to all appearances, doing as good as or a better job than most hetero couples that I know. The presumption of hetero superiority has no basis in fact.

Finally, there is the dispute about union powers in the police force. I don't exactly understand the issue. The pro- and anti-sides aren't exactly doing a favor with how they explain it. It seems basically to be this: the union has more power than the county government wants them to have.

I'm inclined to go pro-union here, for a number of reasons

1. in general, I support public sector unions
2. I strongly dislike Ike Leggett's usage of county funds to support a ballot measure
3. PoD lobbies for the union involved.

Aside from that, on other races I'll look for the Apple Ballot and go with that. #mindlessdrone

Debacle

Really?

This is what the NFL is putting out as their product to save a few million dollars annually of pension fund contributions?

Today's American executive justifies his existence by finding ways to cut corners. And the class warfare approach of demonizing unions and demanding concessions is one of the most popular ways to go. Why? Why do this? The league office is attacking the integrity of its product for pocket change.

What really gets me are the libertarians who show up at all the chat rooms and bulletin boards muttering their inane anti-union diatribes. "Why isn't anybody blaming the refs?" Well, the refs are willing to work under the prior conditions, that's why. Management locked them out.

Reminds me a lot of the teacher strike in Chicago. It's sad that class warfare is a growth industry.

For the edification of future generations, the picture above shows two officials in the end zone at the very end of last night's Seahawks-Packers game. One is signalling touchdown, the other is signalling an interception and touchback. The referee/crew chief didn't consult with both of these guys, but simply walked away to do a video replay. For some reason (inexplicable to anybody who saw a replay), the ruling that this crew settled upon was touchdown.

Another complaint: for some reason, Blogger has degraded the quality of its WYSIWYG editor. It no longer makes proper paragraph breaks. Now I have to do the HTML myself. :(

Phylogeny cross-posting

New post on phylogeny research. Basics of Phylogeny Estimation Enjoy.

Coming attractions: more posting

- Is it possible that a ball that could fly over the Green Monster wouldn't make it out of Dodger Stadium? This mathematician says no!

- What is left of the Republican Party? Their entire campaign is based on a willful distortion of "You didn't build that!" I explore the pathology

- A new post at my science blog, Pineapples in Alaska, as I try my hand at a bit of science writing.

I seem to have decided to not review Prometheus as it would probably become embarrassing.

So much fear in America

Maybe I shouldn't pay so much attention to what the government and media do. Probably I would be a happier person if I did.

This may seem apropos of nothing, but it's a general reaction to how this country has been going over the past decade or so.

Our policies are predicated on a few things

- We are the good guys

- Terrorists hate us because they are bad guys

- The best approach is to take the fight to them

It's just so hard to hear all sorts of things motivated in the name of "fighting terror". We're engaged in a shooting war in Yemen (without any Congressional vote on it, naturally) and it's really hard to know what the reason is supposed to be. And since we don't really know what the goal is, there's no possible way the process can resolve itself.

I think our processes have completely detached from any plausible rationales. Why is the US fighting in Yemen? Because continued war is good for the people pursuing the war.

Anyway, the war thing is just one of many things that make me feel like I cannot vote for Obama come November. There's just way too much abuse of power going on. Maybe I cannot stop it. But I don't have to act like I approve of it. And given that Obama deceived people like me to get his vote in 2008, I'd feel like a jerk to go along with him regardless of his many broken promises.

Many posting ideas this week:

- the imminent end of the Garnett/Allen/Pierce era for the Celtics

- Prometheus: Noomi Rapace as an academic. My reaction is predictable

- time to play with some science policy posts

But back to the topic. I am tired of being flooded with negativity and fear. I feel like I resist the propaganda, but I'm suspecting that's not entirely true. Not that I'm living in fear, but it's a bummer when so many people are so frightened about everything.

p.s. I wonder what happened to the paragraphs? Apparently I have to do my own HTML now?

bad journalism, example #145356

Dear SI and AP,

About this story:
http://bit.ly/xV0spX

On the one hand, the guy who collected Ryan Braun's urine sample said that there were no locations "within 50 miles of Miller Park that would ship the sample" on the Saturday it was collected or on the day after.

Ryan Braun's camp contends that there are plenty of FedEx locations, at least one of which was open 24 hours.

Two competing claims, only one of which is true, right? So the job of a reporter is to report both claims and let the reader sort it out?

WRONG!!!
So here's what an actual reporter could do.

Get on the damned phone and call FedEx. There is an objective answer to this question and the truth should be easily obtained. If, in fact, the drug collector is full of shit, that's something the readers should be told. If, on the other hand, Ryan Braun is full of shit, that's something the readers should be told. Leaving the question unanswered? That's not journalism.

criticizing movies I haven't seen yet

So, it's Oscar time. And the nominees are named, and I hate most of them. Even though I haven't seen them yet. After the debacle of "The King's Speech" getting Best Picture for a story about an extremely wealthy man who had his life handed to him on a plate, well, I was hoping for more this year.

Let's look at what's going on:

The Artist: apparently the favorite. The strikes against it are
a) it's black-and-white
b) it's a silent film
c) it's about Hollywood.

Because of (c), it's going to win. That's because Hollywood is self-absorbed.

The Descendants
Apparently this is some kind of film with George Clooney. Hollywood loves George Clooney. I think he's pretty good, but you don't have to give him a nomination every year. Apparently the film is about how hard it is for a man to be a parent. Yawn.

Extremely Loud and Incredibly Close.
I'm really looking forward to 9/11 replacing the Holocaust as the best option for Oscar bait. After all, it was uber-tragic. Not just regularly tragic.
Tom Hanks dies. Deal with it. At least they didn't kill his dog (Turner & Hooch).

The Help:
Apparently black domestic women in the South have lessons for all of us. I'll pop in reruns of Good Times first.

Hugo:
It's OK to not nominate every single freakin' Scorcese film! It's too late, Hollywood. You dropped the ball with Taxi Driver and Goodfellas. I don't even know what this one is about.

Midnight in Paris:
aka 6 p.m. on the East Coast. Owen Wilson plays a screenwriter. Please, screenwriters, stop writing films about screenwriters!!! Nobody else cares! There are 6.8 billion people on the planet, and like 43 of them are screenwriters. Surely you people can do a little legwork and write stories about other people!

Moneyball:
Yay, Billy Beane turned a last place team into a playoff contender that never won a post-season series. Worse, Jonah Hill got an Oscar nomination. Jonah Hill? What's up with that?

The Tree of Life:
I feel obliged to favor this film because the title mentions the subject of phylogeny, which paid my rent for a few years. OTOH, I ultimately found phylogeny to be not exciting enough to stay in. I bet the film isn't even about phylogenetic reconstruction algorithms!! Or, if it is, they probably like Neighbor Joining, like all the drones in computational biology who use an inferior algorithm just because it was published first. Read a book!

War Horse:
See Hugo, above, and replace Scorcese with Spielberg.

And they couldn't find a tenth film? Here's a suggestion: Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. Or maybe include Inception again and make up for 2011!

Two more films from Best Actress:

Albert Nobbs. Um, Glenn Close still looks like Glenn Close. She's got to do more than get a haircut to look like a man. For one thing, she's only 5'4.5" tall. For a guy, that's midget-sized. And she has the facial structure of a women. The sad thing is that Glenn Close really deserves an Oscar for something. But I think I'd giggle a lot if I went to see this film.

Iron Lady. Could we please stop worshiping right-wingers? In the past decade, we've seen a Best Actor go to an English King and a Best Actress go to an English Queen. Enough already! We've had the revolution. And Margaret Thatcher was a terrible PM. If the UK hadn't been lucky enough to find oil in the North Sea, her austerity measures would have succeeded in destroying the economy completely.

Oh, but she beat up Argentina. Wow. Enough wars already. Yes, Meryl Streep should have about five more Oscars by now. But not for this one.

I'm off to see a black-and-white silent film because apparently I live in 1926 and that's all the cinema has.