Mister Roberts.

“What the social conservatives want is someone who will overturn Roe. v. Wade and change the court’s direction on privacy…But [Roberts] represents the Washington establishment. These Washington establishment people are not revolutionaries, and they’re not out to shake up constitutional law. They might make course corrections, but they’re not trying to sail the boat to a different port.” So, John Roberts. (I was traveling/working and missed out on yesterday’s Clements bubble.) Early word seems to be that he’s a tried-and-true conservative — A member of the Federalist Society, he was a Rehnquist clerk and a protege of Ken Starr — but not necessarily an ideologue or throwback. He seems a bit shaky on civil liberties, at least if you’re a Guantanamo inmate or a 12-year-old eating fries on the DC Metro. (And, of course, there’s the worrying inconsistency on Roe v. Wade.) But, my first impression, like many, is that Dubya could’ve picked a lot worse. Still, let’s get him before the Senate and see what comes out. Update: Hmmm…questionable on the environment, voting rights, and church-state separation too.

Chesapeake Fury.

Hey…quiet around here again, I know. As of this week, I’ve moved my summer base of operations from New Amsterdam to my folks’ place in Chesapeake, VA. (I’m sure Jack Greene would approve.) And, otherwise, I’m pretty well swamped with some freelance work. So, posting may well be light this week, or it might not…perhaps I can squeeze in some blogging between trips to Chick-Fil-A.

The Trouble For Harry.

This, the sixth volume of the series, [is] the darkest and most unsettling installment yet…” (If you’ve gone completely spoiler-less, do not read this NYT review.) And now, if you’ll excuse me, with book in hand, I’m off to get my Potter on. Update: Done. Another fine outing, I thought — I posted a heavily spoiler-laden reaction over at WebGoddess.

Weird Science.


Before Berk and I head off to procure a Golden Ticket back to Hogwarts, some thoughts on Tim Burton’s Charlie and the Chocolate Factory. Well, for the most part, I dug it — it definitely didn’t feel as throwaway as Burton’s recent Planet of the Apes (or Big Fish, for that matter.) In fact, dare I say, it seemed more subversively Dahl-esque to me than the much beloved Gene Wilder version. That being said, I also thought the film grew forced as it went along — The most magical moments happen before Charlie even ventures onto the factory grounds. Alas, as with many Wonka delicacies, that initial rush doesn’t last, and the film grows less absorbing and more sickly-sweet as the children meander through the Land of Chocolate.

Speaking of the kids, though, they’re all pitch-perfect — it’s hard to imagine a more Charlie-ish Charlie than Freddie Highmore, a more Veruca-ish Veruca than Julia Winter, and so on through the Starting Five. I also found most of the modern tweaks they’d given the contestants quite clever (Mike Teavee as a gamehead, Violet Beaureguard’s mom as an Atlanta suburbanite Showbiz Mom, Violet herself as a kung-fu master.) As for the other denizens of Wonkaland, I frankly grew a bit tired of the Oompa-Loompas’ antics after awhile, although it’s nice to see a journeyman fanboy stalwart like Deep Roy get his moment(s) in the spotlight.

And Depp? Well, he’s weird, and — I’ll give him credit — weird in a totally non-Hunter S. Thompson-ish way. Even with the added-on humanizing backstory and somewhat unnecessary character arc, this Wonka is much more akin to the one the UN should be inspecting than the avuncular, approachable Wilder. To be honest, I can’t really figure out if his performance — part-Batman villain, part-gleeful-pre-teen, part-Rainbow Randolph-style TV host (Depp says he had Capt. Kangaroo types in mind) — is brilliantly off-putting or aggravatingly one-note. I do know that I probably wouldn’t want to sit through a Charlie and the Great Glass Elevator if Depp kept this up…Too much just makes ya sick.

Still, Depp, Burton, & co. deserve points for pushing Wonka in a completely different direction than did Wilder in the 1971 version. And that, in the end, is this Charlie‘s big plus: Unlike entirely too many unnecessary remakes of late, the film seems to have a reason for being other than audience nostalgia, and can co-exist happily with both the Dahl book and the Wilder film without doing dishonor to the memory of either. Just consider it the Sourz or Wild Berry version.

Last Tango in Los Santos.

“The disturbing material in Grand Theft Auto and other games like it is stealing the innocence of our children and it’s making the difficult job of being a parent even harder.” It’s Dem Mods v. dem mods as Senators Hillary Clinton and (surprise, surprise) Joe Lieberman decide to sic the FTC on Rockstar Games for Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas, namely for the “Hot Coffee” PC mod which may or may not have been included in the original source code. (FYI, you can see the controversial game-clip here — It’s not safe for work, but it’s basically two pixellated characters having explicit sex in various positions, a la the puppets in Team America.)

As with most PMRC, V-Chip, and/or anti-Hollywood-style scapegoating for easy moderate bonus points, I don’t particularly think this type of sophomoric tomfoolery in an M-rated (17 and over) game is the central reason for the Decline and Fall of America’s Wayward Children. (And several wry Slashdotters have already pointed out the ridiculousness of the argument being made about GTA here: “I don’t care if my child carjacks a senior…[or] if he takes a golf club and starts clubbing to death pedestrians. But he may never, over my dead body, have adult on adult, consensual sex!“) But Sen. Clinton’s proposed remedy — adding teeth to the ratings system by potentially fining stores who sell M or AO-games to minors — doesn’t sound like the end of the world either. Update: Rockstar fesses up. Update 2: “Maybe she’d be wiser to focus on issues that matter to these people — say, the fighting and dying in Iraq — than on the fighting and the dying in the fake, fun world of ‘Grand Theft Auto.’” Slate‘s Farhad Manjoo calls out Clinton.

Not Cunning Enough.

“‘I fully recognize that I showed poor judgment when I sold my home in Del Mar to a friend who did business with the government,’ Cunningham told supporters.” Um, yeah, for starters. As federal investigators close in on his several shady dealings (re: kickbacks and bribes) with defense contractors before his committee (as well as other ne’er-do-wells), Six-term congressman Randy “Duke” Cunningham (R-CA), who recently invoked the fallen of 9/11 to flog his flag-burning amendment, has announced he won’t seek re-election in 2006. Good riddance…and take a gander, Boss DeLay.