1, 2, 3, 4 Splendas in your coffee Stanley

“And we’re off like a pack of turtles!” neurotic boss Michael Scott exclaims within the first few scenes of the February 5 episode of “The Office.” This quirky line is just one example of the off-beat humor that is characteristic of the NBC hit show. Michael, played by Steve Carell, is self-absorbed and awkward, and seems to enjoy making his employees at Dunder Mifflin, Inc., squirm and roll their eyes at his antics. Either that or he is completely and blissfully ignorant of their discomfort. It was difficult to tell just from viewing one episode. As someone who had not seen a single episode of “The Office” before now, my only idea of the series was that its style was unique from most network sitcoms, and that it had a British TV predecessor that was different from the current, American version of “The Office.”
The show’s uniqueness from other contemporary TV comedies is the style in which it is filmed, the lack of a laugh track, and the actors’ relationship to and awareness of its audience. At one point or another, all characters directly address the audience by speaking “to” them, through the lens of the camera. It is reminiscent of a documentary, combining both “natural,” filmed action and personal, one-on-one interviews. The surge of reality TV shows in the last decade also employs this style and technique. When characters in “The Office” periodically give their commentary, it gives the viewer an insight into their personalities, and gives the characters an opportunity to say what he or she cannot or did not say within the context of a scene. This particular episode finds Michael Scott on a lecture circuit, touring various branches of the Dunder Mifflin company to speak about his sales success. He is assisted by sweet, mild-mannered Pam, the company’s receptionist who becomes his driver for the trip. At one lecture, Michael shows how he can memorize people’s names by pointing out physical—and pretty insulting—characteristics of a person (“Mole, lazy eye, sugar boobs, black lady”) and somehow connecting it to their names. The camera cuts to Michael telling us that part of his success stems from his “excellent” mnemonic devices and memorization tricks that have helped him in his career. For example, he memorized the Pledge of Allegiance by setting it to the tune of “Old McDonald,” a fact about which he seems very proud and pleased.
Actually, Michael seems really proud of just about everything he does, and fairly unaware of his employees’ reactions to his asinine and inappropriate remarks about every situation. One character, Karen, who appears to have been a key figure on the show in the past, greets Michael and Pam after not seeing them for several months. Karen is pregnant, and Michael responds by saying, “Oh my god, you’re huge! HUGE! Wow! I think my head just exploded…”
This is just one example of how Michael’s capacity for tactfulness is tiny, while his capacity for creating awkwardness is endless. He is also the character who seems to enjoy the presence of the camera the most, often saying a cheesy line, pausing, and then looking at the camera and grinning, expecting some kind of reaction or affirmation. Michael’s shtick seems like it could get really old really fast, and sure enough, I found annoyance rearing its head about ten minutes into the episode. However, the show’s creators, whether they are aware of it or not, give Michael a more humanizing moment, at least in this particular episode. Pam, previously nervous about seeing Karen, who used to somehow be involved with Pam’s fiancé Jim, says that she feels better and gains closure through her meeting with Karen. Michael’s deep well of ridiculous quips and comebacks runs dry, and for once he is dumbfounded by what Pam says.
Meanwhile, there are several sub-stories occurring at the main branch of Dunder Mifflin. There are many minor and major characters who interact with each other in various capacities, but surprisingly it was not that difficult to follow the “who’s who” of the show. Having worked in an office before, I chuckled at situations like that of Kelly, an employee who is angry because none of her co-workers or supervisors remembered her birthday. Subsequently, Dwight and Jim—the latter of which seems to be the most “normal” of the office bunch—try to collect money from the rest of the workers to buy Kelly an ice cream cake, and decorate a conference room with pathetic streamers and balloons that match the dull gray and brown shades of the linoleum carpet. (The office I worked in had a bulletin board up every month with every employee birthday marked, lest no one be forgotten and deprived, like poor Kelly).
Inter-office romance, rivalries, and the redundancy of the workplace seem to be common issues addressed in “The Office.” I watched this episode twice, and both times noticed that it contains elements of what an office is, and also what an office shouldn’t be. Viewers were left with a cliffhanger—Michael, pondering what Pam said about getting a sense of closure, decides to take a detour and gain some closure of his own, with a lost love.
“You remember Holly, from Human Resources? Blonde? Perfect boobs…not too big or too small. She was the love of my life,” Michael tells Pam.
Right. I found myself wanting to watch what happens next, if only to see whether Michael is serious or not, with a description like that. Only time will tell, I suppose. (Okay, I’m actually watching the next episode online right now).
“The Office” airs every Thursday at 9 PM on NBC. Full episodes are also available online at NBC.com.

Taxi to the Dark Side- a documentary review

A piece of art so rarely ingrains itself in one’s mind to the point where you find yourself thinking about it when you are awake and when you are asleep. After viewing Alex Gibney’s documentary “Taxi to the Dark Side” at University of San Francisco’s Human Rights Film Festival, I had vivid dreams for two days in a row that referenced the devastating and disturbing images of detainees at Bagram, Abu Ghraib, and Guantanamo Bay prisons, as detailed in Gibney’s film. As the clichéd phrase goes, “A picture is worth a thousand words…” As most clichés go, this one very much rings true in the case of “Taxi to the Dark Side.”
The film’s title refers to the story of an Afghani man named Dilawar, a taxi driver from a small town who is stopped, arrested, and eventually taken to Bagram prison for suspected terrorists and those with ties to Al-Qaida or the Taliban. However, though the film goes into depth about Dilawar and his situation, it is clear that he is just the focal point used to tell the story of many other Arab persons who experienced harsh and often life-threatening forms of treatment when imprisoned in these and other detainment centers. Gibney used footage of interviews with Dilawar’s co-workers and family members, as well as showing his home and where he worked. This is extremely effective in humanizing Dilawar and causing the viewer to connect to him from the get-go, instead of causing one to feel like “something happened to that guy over there,” and now it is over, so who cares? This is not to discount an audience’s ability to associate with who or what they are seeing onscreen. However, frankly, it is sometimes the case that presenting someone of a different culture, ethnicity or circumstance makes us forget that they—whoever “they” are—are also human beings, just like us. Showing Dilawar’s former, daily life is a hook, albeit a terrible and sad one, for the rest of the film.
Gibney lays the foundation of his film by simply yet cleverly combining footage from interviews he personally conducts, and archived footage of government officials. Clips of Dick Cheney, George W. Bush, Donald Rumsfeld, and others from past press conferences and interviews are interposed between Gibney’s footage. In this way, the filmmaker is letting members of the Bush administration “speak for themselves.” Most often, they seem to be speaking against themselves. This is a smart technique, since what these higher-ups said at a given time is recorded and cannot be contested, and goes hand in hand with one of the many points that Gibney is trying to make—people in power abused that power, and lesser people, both prisoners and soldiers, suffered because of it.
Of course, the film is arranged in such a way as to highlight the major fumbles and contradictions of those in power at the time. There are tidbits, like the percentage of detainees found to actually have terrorist ties (apparently a very low number, below 5%), and information, now seemingly incredulous, is presented through the mouths of government “talking heads.” It is simply not conceivable to want “Taxi” to be more fair and balanced; to say so would be missing the point of the documentary. Gibney himself brings the perspective of a liberal American who was shocked and completely dismayed by the happenings at these prisons, and wanted to bring it to light for other citizens of the U.S. and of the world. However, whether or not a person identifies himself as a conservative or liberal, or as a supporter of the Bush White House or not, to see the pictures taken of the tortured prisoners strikes a very human chord—horror—an emotion that has no political or social implications.
The images are indeed some of the most troubling and disturbing that I have ever viewed; I found it very difficult to watch, turning away and looking down at my notebook at several points throughout the viewing. By the middle of the film, I felt nauseated. Seeing the pictures without explanation would have this effect, but might cause one to not go beyond what he or she was seeing. However, giving context for these pictures and digging deeper into the events surrounding these images is what brought them to reality. Even Gibney, in a post-viewing Q&A session, described the toughest task for creating this documentary as having to look at the images of tortured men on a day to day basis. Several techniques are employed throughout the documentary, such as the use of filming reenactments of torturous events in the prisons, filmed in black and white, and ominous, melancholy background music. In my opinion, the most saavy and impressive feature of “Taxi to the Dark Side” was the interviewing of military interrogators who were sentenced to jail time for their actions in the detainment centers. By doing so, Gibney is not avoiding these people, the supposed perpetrators of torture, but directly hearing from them as members of the military, subordinates in the military, and as human beings. His interviewing of these people also reveals that Gibney does not believe that the men and women who tortured prisoners are completely at fault for their actions. While he does not seem to take the blame totally off them, his attention on their unique perspective does not incriminate the interrogators either. Rather, it makes a comment on how easily one can become just one small part of a bigger issue that grows exponentially out of everyone’s control.
Gibney won the Best Documentary Oscar for “Taxi” this year, and while I am certainly no connoisseur of documentaries, I believe that this one was definitely deserving of official recognition. I highly recommend seeing “Taxi to the Dark Side,” and keeping an open mind about its content, regardless of opinions and thoughts you may have concerning the United States government’s handlings of the war on terrorism.

The first Woody film I've ever seen...I've heard his older stuff is much better

My review of "Vicky Cristina Barcelona"-

The very beginning of the Woody Allen film, Vicky Cristina Barcelona, presents two characters that each fit into very specific and stereotypical roles. The narrator tells the audience of Vicky (British actress Rebecca Hall) the uptight, ambitious and seemingly grounded twenty-something who knows exactly what she wants out of life and love, and often gets it. Cristina, played by the gorgeous Scarlett Johansson, is her polar-opposite best friend from college, a stunning and adventurous woman who feels that love should always be dangerous, beautiful, and even painful. As expected, the two women meet new people and experience change on their summer trip to Barcelona, Spain. Not expected, however, were the turns the movie took that made this skeptical viewer both shocked and pleasantly surprised.
The character of Javier Bardem, Juan Antonio, first comes off as a totally clichéd, Don Juan of Barcelona, spying the two friends across a restaurant and boldly inviting them to spend the weekend with him in the Spanish town of Oviedo. The way he speaks makes him seem like a hero out of a romance novel. One of his many unbelievable lines: “I'll show you around the city, and we'll eat well. We'll drink good wine. We'll make love.”
Imagine that said with a sexy Spanish accent, and you too will find yourself asking, “Is this guy a real person?” It seemed that at any moment he would toss his dark, silky hair and laugh heartily, telling the women and everyone watching that actually, he was just kidding, no one in real life talks like that. However, this is a movie. And as the movie progressed, it is clear that Juan Antonio truly is a free-thinking, romantic, Spanish painter who begins interesting and unique relationships with both Vicky and Cristina.
The narration—apparently a “Woody Allen-ism”—does give some background information that might be left out otherwise, but initially, it is slightly irritating to be told what is happening as it is happening. It becomes more tolerable, and actually very hilarious, as it occurs less frequently. The narrator gives melodramatic descriptions of particular situations and people, in a very self-aware, tongue-in-cheek manner that adds laughter to somewhat serious scenes. This technique felt reminiscent of the now-cancelled television comedy “Arrested Development.” Whereas the narration felt contrived in the first half of the film, it became a comedic treat by the second half.
Another treat is found in the beautiful but alarming presence of Maria Elena, Juan Antonio’s volatile and artistic ex-wife, played by Penelope Cruz. She re-enters the life of Juan Antonio after an unsuccessful attempt to kill herself, and comes to stay with her former husband and Cristina. Even Cristina’s free-spirited view of love is shaken up by the intrusion of Maria Elena. What is different and shocking about the situation is the way it plays out, and the eventually friendly and intimate connections made between Maria Elena and Cristina. In one scene, the ex-wife and the current girlfriend of Juan Antonio discuss in detail what it is like to make love to him. Seems extremely implausible, but then, more bizarre things have happened. The little twists in Vicky Cristina Barcelona seem to contribute to the idea that, while situations such as this one seem unlikely to transpire in real life, there is validity in the maxim “Truth is stranger than fiction.”
Besides all the beautiful actors who appeared in this film, the most visually stunning feature was the backdrop and culture of Spain. Rich, lush reds, greens, and browns color the buildings, streets, art, clothing, and landscape of this gorgeous country. Allen’s sweeping camera shots simultaneously makes the viewer feel like he or she is in Spain with the actors, and also makes one want to jump on a plane and literally fly there. The soothing yet upbeat soundtrack, consisting of Spanish guitar and lyrics in the country’s native language, adds the perfect musical touch to the film.
What really drew me into VCB came at the conclusion of the film. Though both women had experiences and felt emotions completely out of their comfort zones, they are both in the same place romantically as they were before. If anything, their respective personality types, though challenged, are strengthened by their time in Spain. Vicky and Cristina leave Barcelona at the end of the summer essentially as the same people they were when they arrived, albeit with a few character insights into their neurotic and very different selves.

A Little Taste of North Beach- Bocce Cafe

If one were to wander off the main path in North Beach—the main “path” being the long stretch of Columbus Street—he or she would find themselves faced with dauntingly steep hills, quirky boutiques, and quite a few delicious restaurants that might otherwise go unnoticed by tourists or unadventurous locals. Among these restaurants is Bocce Café, an Italian eatery that seems small and modest from the outside. Once you go through its entrance, however, you realize that there is more to Bocce than there appears. This means going through fancy double doors, taking a few steps down a tree-lined walkway, and entering the restaurant through a nondescript door on your right-hand side. Sounds mysterious, no? Well, not exactly, but that doesn’t mean that what awaits you isn’t satisfying.
Last Friday evening I dined at Bocce Café with a group of friends and acquaintances for the 21st birthday celebration of a friend and his roommate. Though our large party of about sixteen people was almost 45 minutes late for our 7:30 PM reservation, the cafe held our table, albeit with a slight irritation, seen in the face of our waiter. Despite this, we were promptly given steaming baskets of bread, of which there were three varieties—good, savory, and absolutely delicious. Everyone in my party was freezing and famished, so we gobbled down the fluffy and satisfying appetizer, complimented with balsamic vinegar and olive oil, very quickly. A downside to dining at Italian restaurants is sometimes ending up with hard-as-a-rock bread that, I suppose, they expect their guests to attempt to gnaw on while waiting for their meal. Thankfully, this was not the case at Bocce.
As we filled up on bread and waited for our drinks, I looked around for the “live jazz band” that was promised on the sign in front of the café. Hidden in a corner was a group of 4 to 5 musicians who soon after began to play some jazz and Frank Sinatra tunes. Later in the night, after catching on to the birthday festivities of our party, the musicians broke out in a resounding rendition of “Happy Birthday,” to the delight of us and the other restaurant patrons.
The live music aspect and the setup of the restaurant seemed to make it a good place for special occasions and birthday dinners. The main floor was spacious yet cozy, and dimly lit. This made the place feel classy and romantic, but it wasn’t so dark that you couldn’t read your menu. There was a beautiful outdoor patio, decorated with white twinkle lights, but it was empty the entire time we were having dinner. It is possible it was reserved for a later party. Besides the group I was with, there were two other large parties of people celebrating birthdays, both which consisted of 30-somethings who mingled by the bar before being seated. These people were dressed up as if Bocce Café was just a stop on the way to an evening of bar and club hopping. The way that bottles of wine were being ordered—I counted five at a table of twelve—led me to believe that Bocce’s clientele is definitely of a certain income bracket, which in turn left me dreading our table’s bill.
However, poor college students that we are, everyone seemed to order carefully and simply. I shared a Margherita pizza with a friend of mine, which came to a very reasonable price of $9, for eight small but filling slices. As basic as pizza is, sometimes a restaurant can mess it up—not enough sauce, too much sauce, etc. However, this pie was delicious, very cheesy, and somewhat greasy, which, in my opinion, is how pizza should be. My friend Chris Begley, also the birthday boy, ordered a three-pasta platter, which came with small portions of fettuccine alfredo, gnocchi (small potatoes) covered in a creamy tomato sauce, and cheese ravioli. He said that all three pastas were equally appetizing, and the price—$14.95—was just right for what he ordered. As alcoholic drink prices go, Bocce’s fares were not that terrible. A couple of glasses of the house Chianti, at $5.50 a glass, were ordered by my friend Nick Minnott. He let me have a few sips, and I enjoyed what I tasted. The birthday boys ordered Hefeweizen on tap, at $4.50 each. With such a large party, the bill is going to be astronomical anyway, but it was made less so by the fact that most of our group simply had water or another non-alcoholic beverage. The evening ended with complimentary desserts of tiramisu and a giant piece of chocolate cake, which all members of a party passed around and nibbled on as we waited for our bill.
Unfortunately, our waiter refused to split our bill into separate checks. As a former waitress, I know that the restaurant’s computer system is probably perfectly capable of doing this, but also as a former waitress, I definitely don’t blame the waiter for not wanting to deal with sixteen different credit cards. It turned out not to matter anyway, as basically every person had cash, and our bill was paid quickly and easily.
Overall the experience was wonderful, and worth the long trek by bus. The next time I’m in North Beach and actually have some money to spend, I will definitely be taking my friends to Bocce Café.

Bocce Café
478 Green St. (At Grant Ave.)
San Francisco, CA 94133
(415) 981-2044
http://www.boccecafe.com

Hours:
Sun.-Thu. 11:30 a.m. - 10:30 p.m.
Fri.-Sat. 11:30 a.m. - 11:30 p.m.

Price Range: $$
Take Out: Yes
Full Bar: Yes

Prop 8- The Musical

Celebrities came together to produce this funny yet sharp comment on the passing of California's Proposition 8. Jack Black plays Jesus...this alone makes the video worth watching.

http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/c0cf508ff8
/prop-8-the-musical-starring-jack-black-john-c-reilly-
and-many-more-from-fod-team-jack-black-craig-robinson-
john-c-reilly-and-rashida-jones

Obama's use of technology

Interesting NYtimes.com article that came from Prof. John Kim...It talks about the Obama campaign using social networks as a resource of power to garner support and strengthen Obama's connection to the public...It obviously worked.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/10/business/media/10carr.html

Politically Persuasive Web Ads

The other day I wandered on to a website called theromantic.com to read love letters written by celebrities and important people throughout history (If you've seen the "Sex and the City" movie, you'll know where my interest in old love letters came from). While I'm used to websites like Facebook using advertising on the sides and top of their pages-you know, "McCain or Obama? Register to Vote!" or "Celebrity diet tricks," etc. etc., I was surprised to see a pretty politically charged ad on this website; it said "Find out more about Prop 8 and what really happens if we don't pass this measure." You click on the ad banner, and it takes you to the "Yes on Prop 8" campaign page.
This raised several questions for me...
The ads on theromantic.com are generated by Google. Does that mean that ad was just randomly selected for this site, and could easily be found on some recipe website, or dog lovers website, or Halloween costume website? Or are the website's managers inferring something about their political beliefs and values through the choosing of this ad?
If it was just a random selection, I for one would be offended by something being depicted on my website that I don't believe in. People are free to say what they think about topics like politics and religion through any type of media, including web ads; however, it gets dicey if the content of the ad somehow relates to the content of the website, and therefore could be misconstrued by site visitors.
In this case, through this "Yes on Prop 8" ad, theromantic.com, a site that has everything from love song lyrics to creative date ideas to love poems, is giving off the message that they celebrate love and want you to, too, but only in the "traditional" sense, between a man and a woman.
I'm not saying this site absolutely needs to include content specifically involving gay and lesbian couples (It would be awesome if they did), just that this small ad is saying a mouthful, whether it's intended to or not.
I really have no idea if the people at theromantic.com are die-hard supporters of Prop 8 or not, but it's just interesting how a simple ad can make you wonder what a particular type of media is saying to its audience.
Any thoughts?