Movies – Page 13 – artdiamondblog.com

“I Couldn’t Write a Prescription for Antibiotics, Because There Were None”

"THE DOCTOR MIGHT BE IN Cubans young and old at a Havana clinic in 2004." Source of caption and photo: online version of the NYT article cited below.

CUBA works hard to jam American TV signals and keep out decadent Hollywood films. But it’s a good bet that Fidel Castro’s government will turn a blind eye to bootleg copies of “Sicko,” Michael Moore’s newest movie, if they show up on the streets of Havana.

“Sicko,” the talk of the Cannes Film Festival last week, savages the American health care system — and along the way extols Cuba’s system as the neatest thing since the white linen guayabera.

Mr. Moore transports a handful of sick Americans to Cuba for treatment in the course of the film, . . .

. . .

Universal health care has long given the Cuban regime bragging rights, though there is growing concern about the future. In the decades that Cuba drew financial and military support from the Soviet Union, Mr. Castro poured resources into medical education, creating the largest medical school in Latin America and turning out thousands of doctors to practice around the world.

But that changed after the collapse of the Soviets, according to Cuban defectors like Dr. Leonel Cordova. By the time Dr. Cordova started practicing in 1992, equipment and drugs were already becoming scarce. He said he was assigned to a four-block neighborhood in Havana Province where he was supposed to care for about 600 people.

“But even if I diagnosed something simple like bronchitis,” he said, “I couldn’t write a prescription for antibiotics, because there were none.”

He defected in 2000 while on a medical mission in Zimbabwe and made his way to the United States. He is now an urgent-care physician at Baptist Hospital in Miami.

Having practiced medicine in both Cuba and the United States, Dr. Cordova has an unusual perspective for comparison.

“Actually there are three systems,” Dr. Cordova said, because Cuba has two: one is for party officials and foreigners like those Mr. Moore brought to Havana. “It is as good as this one here, with all the resources, the best doctors, the best medicines, and nobody pays a cent,” he said.

But for the 11 million ordinary Cubans, hospitals are often ill equipped and patients “have to bring their own food, soap, sheets — they have to bring everything.” . . .

. . .

Until he had to have emergency surgery last year, Fidel Castro — who turned 80 this year — was considered a model of vibrant long life in Cuba. But it was only last week that he acknowledged in an open letter that his initial surgery by Cuban doctors had been botched. He did not confirm, however, that a specialist had been flown in from Spain last December to help set things right.

For the full commentary, see:

ANTHONY DePALMA. "‘Sicko,’ Castro and the ‘120 Years Club’." The New York Times, Section 4 (Sun., May 27, 2007): 3.

(Note: ellipses added.)

Fred Thompson Skewers Michael Moore with Wit and Wisdom

Mr. Moore was back from Cuba, where he made a documentary on the superiority of Castro’s health-care system. Mr. Thompson suggested Mr. Moore is just another lefty who loves dictators. Mr. Moore challenged Mr. Thompson to a health-care debate and accused him of smoking embargoed cigars. Within hours Mr. Thompson and his supposedly nonexistent staff had produced a spirited video response that flew through YouTube and the conservative blogosphere. Sitting at a desk and puffing on a fat cigar, Mr. Thompson announces to Mr. Moore he can’t fit him into his schedule. Then: "The next time you’re down in Cuba . . . you might ask them about another documentary maker. His name was Nicolás Guillén. He did something Castro didn’t like, and they put him in a mental institution for several years, giving him devastating electroshock treatments. A mental institution, Michael. Might be something you ought to think about."

You couldn’t quite tell if Mr. Thompson was telling Mr. Moore he ought to think more about Cuba, or might himself benefit from psychiatric treatment. It seemed almost . . . deliberately unclear.

PEGGY NOONAN. "DECLARATIONS; The Man Who Wasn’t There." The Wall Street Journal (Sat., May 19, 2007): P14.

(Note: ellipsis in original.)

See Fred Thompson’s response to Michael Moore on YouTube at:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ds_GhRxivOI

Source: screen capture from Fred Thompson’s response to Michael Moore at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ds_GhRxivOI

Sometimes “A Strongly Worded Letter” Is in Order

The Titanic sinks. Source of drawing: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:St%C3%B6wer_Titanic.jpg

Here is one of my favorite lines from the "Titanic" movie. It is spoken by the hero, as the Titanic sinks:

Jack Dawson: I don’t know about you, but I intend to go write a strongly worded letter to the White Star Line about all this.

Source:

"Titanic" movie (1997), as recorded in: http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Titanic

To the Ultimate Luddites: “Build Coffins, That’s All You’ll Need”

Charlton Heston as Robert Neville, the last scientist on earth. Source of photo: http://datacore.sciflicks.com/the_omega_man/images/the_omega_man_large_09.jpg

In the 1970s, one of my favorite films was "The Omega Man" (1971) starring Charlton Heston as the doctor/scientist who was the last healthy man on earth. A plague had killed most of humanity, leaving a few in a demented "tertiary" condition. Heston as "Robert Neville" had developed a vaccine, but only had been able to test it on himself, as the world collapsed.

Those in the "tertiary" state had been organized by a former broadcast commentator named "Matthias" into the "family" whose goal it was to burn books, and destroy all remnants of science and technology.

At one point near the end, the family captures Neville, and as the family destroys Neville’s paintings, and laboratory, Matthias rants that Neville is the last scientist, the last remnant of the old world, and that all will be well when they have destroyed him. Then comes one of my favorite exchanges.

Matthias: Now we must build.

Robert Neville: Build coffins, that’s all you’ll need.

When I saw the movie again today (3/16/07) for the first time in decades, I was worried that I had built it up in my memory, and that the reality would be way disappointing.

I was relieved to see that the movie, though not perfect, was still plenty good enough.

The Case Against Gun Control

Venus Ramey shows how she balanced her pistol on her walker to shoot out the tires of an intruder on her farm. Source of photo: screen capture from CNN clip "Granny’s Packing Heat" as viewed on 4/23/07.

In the wake of the Virginia Tech killings, there have been some renewed calls for more gun control (see the WSJ and NYT articles cited way below). But we should not forget that a gun can also be a leveler; it gives the ordinary citizen a fighting chance against the thief and the murderer.

There was a great scene in the first Indiana Jones movie (Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, 1984) where Indy is being chased by a huge bad guy armed with swords. The crowd clears, and the the huge man confidently and ominously twirls his swords. Indy looks at him quizzically for a couple of seconds, pulls out a pistol, and shoots him.

When I first saw that scene, the theater erupted in laughter and applause.

Laughter and applause are also appropriate responses to the story of 82 year old, former Miss America, Venus Ramey:

Miss America 1944 has a talent that likely has never appeared on a beauty pageant stage: She fired a handgun to shoot out a vehicle’s tires and stop an intruder. Venus Ramey, 82, confronted a man on her farm in south-central Kentucky last week after she saw her dog run into a storage building where thieves had previously made off with old farm equipment.

Ramey said the man told her he would leave. "I said, ‘Oh, no you won’t,’ and I shot their tires so they couldn’t leave," Ramey said.

She had to balance on her walker as she pulled out a snub-nosed .38-caliber handgun.

"I didn’t even think twice. I just went and did it," she said. "If they’d even dared come close to me, they’d be 6 feet under by now."

For the full story, see:

Associated Press. "Armed Miss America 1944 Stops Intruder." Forbes.com Posted 04.21.07, 5:00 AM ET Downloaded on 4/23/07 from http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/04/21/ap3637737.html

CNN has a great clip on this story, under the heading "Granny’s Packing Heat."

The WSJ article mentioned above, is:

VANESSA O’CONNELL, GARY FIELDS and DEAN TREFTZ. "Next Debate: Should Colleges Ban Firearms? The Wall Street Journal (Weds., April 18, 2007): B1 & B10.

The NYT article mentioned above, is:

LESLIE EATON and MICHAEL LUO. "Shooting Rekindles Issues of Gun Rights and Restrictions." The New York Times (Weds., April 18, 2007): A19.

“Work Hard at Work Worth Doing”

We went to see "The Bridge to Tarabithia" this afternoon (2/25/07), which I thought was a sad, but good, movie aimed at older children, but with enough plot and enough characters to care about, to be of interest to adults too.

I heard a quote in the movie that I liked and I don’t remember having heard before. It’s source was given as Teddy Roosevelt, who is not one of my favorite presidents, because of his efforts to increase the size and power of government. But he wasn’t all bad, and he sometimes spoke well:

Far and away the best prize that life offers is the chance to work hard at work worth doing.

Theodore Roosevelt, Speech in New York, September 7, 1903 [26th president of US (1858 – 1919)]

Source of quote, and information about quote: http://www.quotationspage.com/quote/2056.html

Hope for Film Version of Atlas Shrugged

Rand, Ruddy, Wallace, and Jolie. Source of photos: http://ustimes.us/ayn_rand_no_longer_has_script_approval.htm

(p. 9) BACK in the 1970s Albert S. Ruddy, the producer of ”The Godfather,” first approached Ayn Rand to make a movie of her novel ”Atlas Shrugged.” But Rand, who had fled the Soviet Union and gone on to inspire capitalists and egoists everywhere, worried aloud, apparently in all seriousness, that the Soviets might try to take over Paramount to block the project.

”I told her, ‘The Russians aren’t that desperate to wreck your book,’ ” Mr. Ruddy recalled in a recent interview.

Rand’s paranoia, as Mr. Ruddy remembers it, seems laughable. But perhaps it was merely misplaced. For so many people have tried and failed to turn the book she considered her masterpiece into a movie that it could easily strike a suspicious person as evidence of a nefarious collectivist conspiracy. Or at least of Hollywood’s mediocrity.

Of course Rand herself had a hand in blocking some of those attempts before she died in 1982. Her heirs in the Objectivist school of thought helped sink some others. And plans for at least a couple of television mini-series fell to the vicissitudes of network politics and media mergers.

But Rand’s grand polemical novel keeps selling, and her admirers in Hollywood keep trying, and the latest effort involves a lineup of heavy hitters, starting with Angelina Jolie. Randall Wallace, who wrote ”Braveheart” and ”We Were Soldiers,” is working on compressing the nearly 1,200-page book into a conventional two-hour screenplay. Howard and Karen Baldwin, the husband-and-wife producers of ”Ray,” are overseeing the project, and Lions Gate Entertainment is footing the bill.

Whether Ms. Jolie, who has called herself something of a Rand fan, will bring the novel’s heroine, Dagny Taggart, to life on screen, or merely wind up on a list with other actresses who sought or were sought for the role — including Barbara Stanwyck, Faye Dunaway, Raquel Welch, Farrah Fawcett and Sharon Stone — remains to be seen. Until now, at least, no one in Hollywood has figured out a formula that promises both to sell popcorn and to do justice to the original text, let alone to the philosophy that it hammers home endlessly, at times in lengthy speeches. (The final one is 60 pages long.)

But Mr. Baldwin said he believed that Mr. Wallace and the rest of their team were up to the task. ”We all believe in the book, and will be true to the book,” he said.

For the full story, see:

KIMBERLY BROWN. "FILM; Ayn Rand No Longer Has Script Approval." The New York Times, Section 2 (Sun., January 14, 2007): 9 & 14.

A 1957 photo of Rand in New York. Source of photo: http://www.iht.com/articles/2007/01/11/news/atlas.php

At Screen Actors Guild, Communists Threatened to Disfigure His Face

Source of book image: http://www.shopaim.org/assets/images/large/458i.jpg

There are better books on Reagan. But Bosch’s book has a few illuminating anecdotes. Here is one:

(p. 63) Reagan first learned about Communists and their intentions as a member of a Hollywood union, the Screen Actors Guild (SAG). He had been introduced to the Screen actors Guild by his wife Jane Wyman and had quickly risen to become a member of the Guild’s board. As a SAG Board member, and later as its president, he mediated a dispute between two rival unions. One of the unions, the Conference of Studio Unions (CSU), was led by a suspected Communist, Herb Sorrell.

. . .

(p. 64) Sorrell and Reagan went head to head. When Reagan crossed a picket line outside Warner Brothers, Sorrell called for a boycott of his movies. Reagan was called a fascist. An anonymous phone caller threatened to disfigure his face so he could never act again. He began to carry a gun and accepted police protection. He became an informant for the FBI

"These were eye-opening years for me," he later wrote. "Now I knew form first-hand experience how Communists used lies, deceit, violence, or any other tactic that suited them to advance the cause of Soviet expansionism."

Source:

Bosch, Adriana. Reagan: An American Story. TV Books Inc., 1998.

Jeffrey Sachs “Has Apparently Spent More Time Studying the Economic Thinking of Salma Hayek than that of Friedrich”

Salma Hayek. Source of image: http://www.imdb.com/gallery/granitz/0273-spe/Events/0273-spe/hayek_sa.lma?path=pgallery&path_key=Hayek,%20Salma

(p. A18) Scientific American, in its November 2006 issue, reaches a "scientific judgment" that the great Nobel Prize-winning economist Friedrich Hayek "was wrong" about free markets and prosperity in his classic, "The Road to Serfdom." The natural scientists’ favorite economist — Prof. Jeffrey Sachs of Columbia University — announces this new scientific breakthrough in a column, saying "the evidence is now in." To dispel any remaining doubts, Mr. Sachs clarifies that anyone who disagrees with him "is clouded by vested interests and by ideology."

This sounds like one of those moments in which the zeitgeist of mass confusion about national poverty, world poverty and prosperity comes together in one mad tragicomic brew.

. . .

Mr. Sachs, who is currently best known for his star-driven campaign to end world poverty, has apparently spent more time studying the economic thinking of Salma Hayek than that of Friedrich.

. . .

Mr. Sachs’s empirical analysis purports to show that Nordic welfare states are outperforming those states that follow the "English-speaking" tradition of laissez-faire, like the U.K. or the U.S. Poverty rates are indeed lower in the Nordic countries, although the skeptical reader (probably an ideologue) might wonder if the poverty outcome in, say, the U.S., with its tortured history of a black underclass and its de facto openness to impoverished but upwardly mobile immigrants, is really comparable to that of Nordic countries.

Then there is the big picture, where those laissez-faire Anglophones in, first, the U.K. and, then, the U.S., just happened to have been the leaders of the ongoing global industrial revolution that abolished far more poverty over the past two centuries than a few modest Scandinavian redistribution schemes. Mr. Sachs apparently thinks the industrial revolution was led by IKEA. Lastly, let’s hear from the Nordics themselves, who have been busily moving away from the social welfare state back toward laissez-faire. According to the English-speaking ideologues that composed the Heritage Foundation/Wall Street Journal Index of Economic Freedom, Denmark, Finland and Sweden were all included in the 20 countries classified as "free" in 2006 (with Denmark actually ranked ahead of the U.S.). Only Norway missed the cut — barely.

Mr. Sachs is wrong that Hayek was wrong. In his own global antipoverty work, he is unintentionally demonstrating why more scientists, Hollywood actors and the rest of us should go back and read "The Road to Serfdom" if we want to know what will not work to achieve "The End of Poverty." Hayek gave the best exposition ever of the unpopular ideas of economic freedom that somehow triumph anyway, alleviating far more national and global poverty than more fashionable Scandinavia-envy and grandiose plans to "make poverty history."

For the full commentary, see:

WILLIAM EASTERLY. "Dismal Science." Wall Street Journal (Weds., November 15, 2006): A18.

(Note: ellipses added.)

Hayek’s courageous masterpiece is:

Hayek, Friedrich A. Von. The Road to Serfdom. Chicago: Univ of Chicago Press, 1944.

Easterly’s great book on how to encourage economic development in poor countries, is:

Easterly, William. The Elusive Quest for Growth: Economists’ Adventures and Misadventures in the Tropics. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press, 2002.

“Come With Me, If You Want to Live”

Schumpeter famously stated that creative destruction is "the essential fact" about capitalism. Was he right?

To determine what is "the essential fact" you need to first answer the question "essential for what purpose?" If the purpose is "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness" then I think you can show that creative detruction is indeed the essential fact about capitalism; in the key sense that with creative destruction you have a form of capitalism that is best able to enhance "live, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness."

The Terminator famously said "Come with me, if you want to live!" ("Terminator 2: Judgment Day," 1991). Life is a choice. You can choose death instead. Most people, most of the time, choose life. But there are examples of choosing death. E.g., Leon Kass, an oft-quoted "expert" on medical ethics issues, is against current efforts to lengthen the human life span:

(p. D4) While an anti-aging pill may be the next big blockbuster, some ethicists believe that the all-out determination to extend life span is veined with arrogance. As appointments with death are postponed, says Dr. Leon R. Kass, former chairman of the President’s Council on Bioethics, human lives may become less engaging, less meaningful, even less beautiful.

“Mortality makes life matter,” Dr. Kass recently wrote. “Immortality is a kind of oblivion — like death itself.”

That man’s time on this planet is limited, and rightfully so, is a cultural belief deeply held by many. But whether an increasing life span affords greater opportunity to find meaning or distracts from the pursuit, the prospect has become too great a temptation to ignore — least of all, for scientists.

“It’s a just big waste of talent and wisdom to have people die in their 60s and 70s,” said Dr. Sinclair of Harvard.

(And there’s the occasional hermit, like the unibomber, who chooses to live a brutish life without electricity and indoor plumbing.) So long as I, Arnold, and our compatriots, are allowed an island somewhere to peacefully pursue life, I do not much care what Leon and his friends do. My argument, and the book I am writing on creative destruction, are not written for Leon. They are written for all those who choose life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.

The NYT quote related to Leon Kass’s praise of mortality, is from p. D4 of:

MICHAEL MASON. "One for the Ages: A Prescription That May Extend Life." The New York Times (Tues., October 31, 2006): D1 & D4.

“Man in White Suit” Science Fiction, Now Nearly Science Fact

PART of what sold James Tirey on a change in attire was the coffee spilled on his legs during a rough flight. ”It stayed sticky until it dried,” he said, ”about mid-Atlantic.”

To avoid such incidents, he bought a new pair of pants with an invisible, high-tech surface suited to the exigencies of business travel. These pants look and feel like most others, but the ingenious finish on the fabric is different: it is made of tiny, nanosized particles that repel water, ketchup, honey, blood, vinaigrette and a thousand other potential indignities. With such a surface, he said, ”if coffee is spilled on you, it just beads up” or runs off. The pants can be wiped with a paper napkin — even the skimpy cocktail kind handed out on airplanes — leaving the material dry and unscathed.

Mr. Tirey, who lives in northern Virginia, bought his pants, called the Steel Pant, at Beyond, a Eugene, Ore., company that makes and sells outerwear for men and women at BeyondFleece.com. The material is manufactured by the Swiss company Schoeller Textil, which makes both the weave and the nanofinish, called NanoSphere. On the Beyond Web site, the pants cost $119, the nanocoating an additional $15. ”It was definitely worth the money,” Mr. Tirey said of the purchase.

For the full story, see:

ANNE EISENBERG. "NOVELTIES; The Chemist’s Find: A Way to Shrug Off Spills." The New York Times , Section 3(Sun., August 27, 2006): 5.