Another One Rides The Bus

Awhile back I commented on school bus memories.  After a recent trip up to NJ by “Chinatown” bus, I can comment on inter-city bus travel as well.

 Back when we lived in the US, before moving to Paris in January 1979, we must have taken a few bus trips to New York.  I recall we went to my cousin Colleen’s wedding in Glens Falls.  We had to switch buses in NYC at the main bus terminal.  I do recall at least one other trip to NYC by bus.  We’d take a Greyhound bus from the terminal in DC, which was next to Union Station.

 In 1995 I went up to Flint, Michigan with my best friend Phil, to purchase a 1968 Pontiac Firebird 400.  The owner claimed he’d meet us at the bus terminal in Detroit, then abruptly changed his mind.  We had to get a cab to the airport, rent a car there, and drive up to Flint to see the car – which we couldn’t buy.  The return trip was in the rental car.  Driving back by rental car, we could take a much more direct route than the bus took: no delays going through Pittsburgh or Cleveland on the way back.  The bus trip up was overnight, with a 3 a.m. stopover in Cleveland.  This is, so far as I can remember, the only overnight bus ride I’ve taken, and I had no more luck sleeping than I ever do on overnight flights. 

 More recently, my friend’s younger daughter would travel to and from DC to NYC by BoltBus, for which the drop-off was somewhere in DC (NY Ave).  With my car acting up – a repair should fix the problem soon – making long distance travel iffy, I tried the Chinatown bus, which was just $40 round trip.  I left from Rosslyn and got off in Hoboken, then picked it up in downtown Manhattan for the trip back.  It took a bit longer than it would have had I driven, but I saved $100 in gas and $38 in tolls, a net savings of $100.  I could read, listen to my iPod, and recharge my cell phone with the plug socket. 

 On one hand, it’s a great relief not to have to drive.  There is little risk the bus will break down on you.  You can sit back and relax, and read; and on this trip, the bus made very short trips (15 minute stops) at rest stops along the way.   Since the bus is higher up off the road, you get a better view as you go along, and can pay attention to things which otherwise you’d miss focused on the road ahead of you.

   

 On the other hand, you’re limited to the exact bus schedule:  your ticket is only good for THAT time (no cancellations).  You have to pick up and get off at specific spots which are not all that convenient; it also restricts your flexibility at changing plans.   I’m not convinced the benefits outweigh the costs, even allowing for the lower total price.

 Bus vs. Plane.  For cross-country trips (down to Florida or over to L.A.) you really can’t beat the plane.  But for short hops, e.g. DC to NY, the quick flight is less competitive due to time spent getting to the airport and going through security.  There is NO security on buses: you just hop on.  Your friends, relatives and loved ones can see you off at the bus itself and be there at the stop when you arrive.  

 Bus vs. Train.  Security-wise both are the same: none.  The train is immune to traffic issues which snarl buses as well as your car.  The rail lines typically snake their way through a seedier part of town than the highways, giving a much different view.  I haven’t been on any high speed trains, so most train rides take about as much time as an equivalent bus trip.  

Trial of the Century

As an attorney, I’m often asked by non-attorneys about high profile cases, which in the most recent news would be the Casey Anthony trial.  As a general matter I tend to ignore them, but here I ended up watching some of the proceedings and getting a vague and general idea of what was going on.  The general feeling I could gauge, judged by almost all of the relevant Facebook postings I’ve seen, was that the woman literally got away with murder – that the jury failed in its job.

 My own impression is somewhat different.  There seemed to be absolutely no evidence that Casey actually killed her daughter.  In fact, the jury even returned not guilty verdicts on the manslaughter/neglect charges.  What we really have is a general consensus that Caylee died on her watch – we don’t know how – and Casey covered it up.  The belief that Casey is legally responsible for her daughter’s death, somehow, is difficult to reconcile with a not guilty verdict.

 May I remind the public that the standard of evidence in a criminal case – yes, even in Florida – is “beyond a reasonable doubt”.  “I think she probably did it” does not cut it.  By applying the standard even if they really believe she did it, but aren’t satisfied that the prosecution has met the evidentiary burden required, takes some excellent judgment and discretion on the part of the jury; they should be praised for doing their duty and not condemned for letting a murderer walk free. 

 The Founding Fathers were well aware that placing the burden on the prosecution and giving the defendant every benefit of the doubt is going to mean some very lucky (or careful) murderers walking free on the streets.  The alternative is Stalinist Russia:  Stalin himself was aware that many of his victims of the purges in 1937 were probably completely innocent, but he’d rather kill innocents than risk any potential threats to escape revolutionary justice.  I don’t think any of us would want to be convicted of a crime we didn’t commit simply because the jury thinks we “probably did it.” 

 Contrast this with the standard in a civil case, which is “a preponderance of the evidence”.  Here, “I think she probably did it” does cut it.  And the result is not jail time or a gas chamber, but compensatory and punitive damages, possibly in the millions. 

 Look at the O.J. Simpson cases.   In October 1995 the criminal jury acquitted him of murdering Nicole Simpson and Ronald Goldman.  Why they did so is up for speculation:  the general consensus seems to be that the jury had no good faith reasonable doubt as to his guilt but simply acquitted him as a “f**K you” to the LAPD.  I think that’s probably true.  But what people forget is that in February 1997, a completely different jury found Simpson liable for the same deaths in a wrongful death (civil) action: and awarded a $33.5 million verdict against him. 

 If anyone has standing to sue Casey Anthony in a civil case for the death of Caylee – e.g. whoever her father is, and I couldn’t tell who that was – the outcome will probably be considerably different than what happened here.

 Whether it will turn out to be the trial of the century…we’ll have to wait until 2101 to find that out.  Here’s hoping at least one of us, preferably me, is around to make that judgment.

Hell's Angels

“…which was the stage at Altamont

My humble boys of listless power

We’re pain, we’re steel, a plot of knives

We’re Transmaniacon.”

Blue Oyster Cult, “Transmaniacon MC”

 A few weeks ago I read Hunter S. Thompson’s book on the cycle gangs, which I’d picked up at a Borders clearance sale.  It was an intriguing story (though true).  Nothing which spurred me with any inclination to get on a motorcycle, though.  Here’s the story….

 The Wild One.  This is the 1953 black & white movie with Marlon Brando and Lee Marvin as competing gang leaders terrorizing a small town in California, loosely based on the Hollister incident in 1947.  The movie is fairly sympathetic to the bikers whose “abuse” of the locals seems more like nonchalant fun and good-natured teasing than violent terror, much less rape; the sole female character begs Brando to take her with him, but he declines.  The locals come off as hostile, narrow-minded idiots who expect their sheriff to single-handedly evict 100+ outlaw bikers.  Barger (see below) cites this movie as major inspiration to start up with the Angels in California; he preferred Lee Marvin’s character, Chino (see above).

 Hell’s Angels, by Hunter S. Thompson.  This book was written in 1968 after HST had spent some time with the Angels on various rides and got to know quite a few of them.  His depiction is 80% favorable and certainly sympathetic; any more favorable and it would have been nothing more than a PR deal.  While it doesn’t cover as much time as Barger’s book, it’s considerably more objective.

 Hell’s Angel, by Ralph “Sonny” Barger.  Barger wound up as the de facto spiritual leader of the Angels from the late 60s to the present; he now lives in Arizona.  He was an Army veteran in the early 60s (discharged before the war because he lied about his age), served time in jail and prison on various charges, and survived throat cancer.  His book was written in 2000, so he could cover Altamont and a wider range of Angels history than Thompson’s book does.  Although Thompson was very sympathetic to the Angels in his book, Barger slams Thompson as a coward and a poser. 

 Facts.   As culled from Thompson and Barger, here are the most pertinent facts about the gang.

California.  Although by now the club has spread across the country and has chapters across the world, this expansion has been fairly recent.   The source of the Hell’s Angels is California, and Oakland is essentially their original home base.  There have also been chapters in San Francisco, Sacramento and L.A.  Sometimes the chapters wound up fighting each other.  With its year round sunshine and warm weather, California is well suited, if not uniquely so, to cycling – motorcycles are dangerous in the rain and useless in the snow.

            There seems to have been a tendency for police and uptight squares to label all cycle gangs “Hell’s Angels”, but the reality is less tidy.  The club has definite membership requirements and chapters. There are plenty of other cycle gangs which are NOT the Angels – though they may act like them and wish they were them.  Oftentimes crimes or outrages committed by other gangs, many well outside California, were simply blamed on “the Angels” as if they were all-inclusive across the country.    The top rivals to the Angels are the Pagans (East Coast), Outlaws, and Bandidos (“the Big 4”).  Members of the other three are NOT welcome or eligible for membership in the Angels.   By the numbers, outlaw gang members comprise a tiny minority of registered motorcycle owners in the country, leading to the famous “one percenter” label the outlaws proudly use to refer to themselves. 

 Gang.  The police, and particular the Feds, consider Hell’s Angels a criminal organization, like any gang (Mafia, Crips, Bloods, MS-13, etc.).  They even went after the Angels under RICO, a Federal law targeting organized crime.  But the primary form of criminal activity the Angels engaged in was illegal drugs – buying and selling marijuana, heroin, LSD – but this was incidental, as widespread as it may have been.  These were not drug dealers who happened to ride motorcycles.  At worst, the Angels were simply a club of Harley enthusiasts with colorful backgrounds and criminal records, a fierce passion for drugs, sex, and fighting, but above all, riding.

 Harleys.  As a practical matter, you have to ride a Harley-Davidson to be an Angel.  They seem to acknowledge that Harley has no monopoly on good cycles, but out of sheer loyalty they stick with HD exclusively.  The company itself hasn’t always been completely cool about the Angels’ endorsement, nor have all the Harley dealers.  The Angels were among the first to customize their bikes, and HD itself has often incorporated their modifications into its own designs.  The Angels pride themselves on being good bike mechanics and keeping their bikes running well, smoothly, and aggressively. 

 Nazis.  As Barger puts it, none of the Angels are Nazis.  The swastikas, iron crosses, German helmets, etc. are all for shock value.  Having said that, the club is almost exclusively white – however, they have been on modestly friendly terms with black cycle gangs in Oakland. 

            Women are not allowed in the club as members, but they are certainly welcome to hang out.  “Mommas” are women who are somewhat unselective and nonexclusive in the range of their companionship with the Angels.

 Colors.  Only the Angel who earned the patch can wear the colors on the back of his jacket.  Getting your colors taken away from you by someone – usually from members of competing gangs – is among the worst disgraces an Angel can suffer, and cause for dismissal.  Likewise, the Angels look extremely unfavorably on any non-members wearing the colors and will seek out and punish offenders, a form of extrajudicial copyright enforcement.

 Vietnam.  Much to the horror and dismay of the Berkeley leftists who thought of the Angels as fellow travelers – being social outcasts who rejected mainstream American values – the Angels remained fiercely patriotic and vehemently opposed the anti-war movement. 

 Altamont.  Part of the chaos can be seen in the movie “Gimme Shelter”.  The Rolling Stones hired the Angels to provide security at the outdoor festival at the raceway in California in December 1969.  The Grateful Dead declined to play due to the violence, Marty Balin got his butt kicked by the Angels, and a fan – Meredith Hunter – was killed.  It didn’t help that people were knocking over the Angels’ bikes and trying to prove how tough they were by provoking the gang members.  Barger puts the blame on Mick Jagger and the Rolling Stones for being arrogant, clueless, and causing trouble to stoke their own notoriety. 

Trailer Park Boys

More TV!  Yes, I’m inspired yet again, and by yet another “mockumentary” show.  This is a Canadian show (eh) about three very low class Canadian males: Ricky, Julian, and Bubbles.  There have been 10 seasons (season 11 approved) and three full-length movies, of which I’ve seen seasons 1- 6, the three movies, and the European series (8 episodes).  The show takes place in a trailer park in Nova Scotia, Canada.  The Canadian flag is fairly prominent in many scenes.

 Ricky is kind of stout, has a poofed up hairdo, huge sideburns and a semi-goatee, usually wearing flashy but trashy clothes.  He’s usually either smoking or toking or drinking and almost always up to no good.  Ricky is a brash, arrogant fast-talker who blames everyone else for his problems.  I’ve yet to see him take responsibility for anything.  His brief bits of normalcy were mall security cop (butting heads with Bubbles over shopping cart theft) and completing the 10^th grade.  Jail is a very real possibility for him, and he’s no stranger to the orange jumpsuit.  When he’s not in jail he’s usually living in Julian’s old car, a full-size American car missing the front passenger door.  His romance with Lucy was broken up by jail the first time – arrested at his own wedding – and later he hooked up with her former roommate, Sarah.

 Julian is more well-adjusted, but he’s simply hiding a more devious criminal mind behind a mask of complacent conformity.  He usually wears a plain black t-shirt, has well-groomed black hair and goatee, and is rarely seen without a glass tumbler of rum & coke in his hand (even while driving).  I’d say he’s the most likable of the three.  By the end of the first season he’s scored a 1976 Pontiac Firebird as his ride, with a matt maroon finish, black interior, Rally II wheels, and aluminum dash.  By season 6 he's driving a mid-80s Monte Carlo.

 Bubbles is just plain…weird.  He wears Coke bottle glasses which magnify his beady eyes, mumbles, swears, lives with cats, and hustles shopping carts – steals them from one chain, fixes them, and then sells them to the competing chain.  He reminds me of Milton from “Office Space”.

 Trevor & Cory.  This pair are always up to no good, and are easily the dumbest crooks in the park. Cory has dreadlocks, Trevor just has longish hair.  Usually they act as incompetent backups to RJB’s plans.  They idolize Ricky and Julian, who in turn abuse them and constantly bum cigarettes from them.

 Lahey & Randy.  Lahey is the unpopular and rarely sober Park Supervisor, a failed ex-cop with a chip on his shoulder.  He’s the consistent nemesis of Ricky and Julian, vowing to put an end to their criminal exploits – if he can emerge from a drunken stupor long enough to do anything.  His assistant, Randy, is a chunky doofus who never wears a shirt.  (All the episodes take place in warm weather – what does Randy do during the winter?).  Despite the conflicts with Lahey, there is a “devil you know” deal with him, so when Sam Losco tries to get elected park supervisor, the boys rally behind Lahey to clean him up and discredit and defeat Losco.  

 J-Roc and T.  T is a black guy who teams up with J-Roc, who is white but talks and dresses like a rapper.  Every other sentence from J-Roc is “knowwhatI’msayin’?”  Unlike Trevor and Cory, J-Roc usually brings the goods, so to speak.  He tends to be Ricky and Julian’s go-to guy for nefarious deeds, be it setting up a nightclub in the trailer, getting Julian his Firebird, or framing Sam Losco in an amateur porn film to shoot down his engagement to Lahey’s ex-wife (who actually owns the trailer park).  Although he’s partners with T, T has practically no lines and doesn’t seem to do anything.   

 Ellen Page shows up in Season 2 as Lahey’s daughter Treena.  Although she was about 14 at the time, she looks more like 10.  Even today she still looks like a teenager.

Alex Lifeson is in TWO episodes: first as himself when Bubbles tries to get Rush tickets and Ricky ends up kidnapping him - so Alex is wearing HIS clothes; then in a later episode he plays a local vice squad cop in drag, but I recognized him anyway.  

 For years I have never thought there was a “Canadian” accent, per se.  To my ears, most English-speaking Canadians speak with what I would consider a normal “American” accent.  But here I hear a few items:  the word “about” pronounced “aboot”, and “Car” consistently pronounced “cah” (like in New England).   But none of these guys sound like Kennedys. 

PHISH

Last weekend I saw Phish in concert at Merriweather Post Pavilion, in Columbia, Maryland.  There was no opening act, and the band played two sets.  I enjoyed myself, as I imagined I would (although I did start getting tired towards the end of the second set).  Most of my analysis on this band, however, will have to involve the obvious comparisons with the Grateful Dead.

 This was a band I only got into very recently – just as it took me ages to get into the Grateful Dead long after having first been exposed to them.  The similarities between the two are far more materially significant than the differences, which are more superficial than meaningful:  missing one guitarist and one drummer, and from Vermont instead of San Francisco.  Both bands are jam bands, both bands play two sets per show, both bands play different sets each night, and both bands encourage taping and even release shows to the fans.  Trey Anastasio (a slimmed down, mellower Chuck Norris) and Jerry Garcia both play obscure custom guitars instead of well-known professional models from Gibson or Fender. 

            Even more than being structurally identical, is the substantive identicality as well. I solicited my Facebook friends to tell me about Dead covers performed by Phish, and the only example which came up was “Terrapin Station”.  By now I have a live album, Live in Brooklyn, and multiple nights on this tour, and there are no Dead covers to be found.  The reason for this seems to be mere redundancy:  musically, for all intents and purposes, Phish are a Dead cover band.  About the most tangible and articulable difference I can perceive in the music itself is that Phish are a bit heavier and more intense, sort of a Dead-on-steroids deal. 

             Having said that, Jerry Garcia is still dead, Jim.  I’ve seen “The Dead” (the post-Garcia reunited band) three times, Ratdog (Bobby Weir’s solo band) once, and Dark Star Orchestra (premier Dead tribute band) once.  My experience with Garcia-era Dead is limited to three shows:  Grateful Dead at RFK in 1992, again in 1995 (Jerry’s last tour), and the Jerry Garcia Band at the Capital Center (yes, I know JGB is different than GD).  All the post-Garcia shows were well-attended by an aging crowd which, from what I can see, consists of 70% Garcia-era veterans.  While I heard no complaints about the quality of the post-Garcia shows, I haven’t heard anyone claim they were just as good, or better, nor do I expect anyone to say so.  The Phish show was about 80% identical to all of these in sound, in experience, by every conceivable measure.  While I smell marijuana at practically every concert I attend – somewhere, at least ONE person is toking up within sniffing range of me – here I was surrounded by no less than 10 separate people in different parts of the audience, none of whom were hassled or arrested by security or police (of course, they were all discreetly puffing from an easily concealable pipe or rolled joint and not from a 12” bong).  Aside from some bitter resentment that Phish are somehow ripping off the Dead and claiming to be original – which I don’t share, as similar as they may be – I see no reason why any diehard Deadhead would choose to miss out on a Phish show, or why they wouldn’t enjoy the show if they chose to go. 

Modern Family

[Updated 4/23/21 – originally posted 6/10/11 after season 2]

 I recently finished the eleventh and final season of this TV show from ABC, I was very impressed and amused by the whole thing – from start to finish.  Amidst mediocre, lackluster and dull programming half-heartedly offered to us as “entertainment”, there are still remarkable gems to be found on the “idiot tube” for those with the patience to look hard enough.

 Premise.  Three separate households, linked by a common family bond.

 Jay (Ed O’Neill), Gloria (Sofia Vergara) and their son Manny (Rico Rodriguez).   Jay is an older guy (think Al Bundy with marginally more charm) with his trophy Colombian wife Gloria and her son Manny.  Her ex-husband Javier (Benjamin Bratt) is kind of a wild stallion who periodically shows up to make Jay uneasy but ultimately shows that Jay, despite his age and conservative nature, represents a stable father figure and provider which Gloria needs for herself and Manny.  For her part, Sofia Vergara has to be, bar none, the hottest female actress on TV – Catherine Zeta-Jones dialed up a few notches in hotness.  She is constant eye candy in every scene, even her accent is delicious.  The show is worth watching for her alone.  While there is some friction, and some cross-cultural issues, this family mostly gets along pretty well, and Jay makes an honest attempt to bond with Manny, not merely tolerate him as the baggage he has to accept to sleep with Gloria. 

 Jay and Gloria managed to have their own child Joe, who is still about 5 years old when the show ends, but already shows an implausible degree of business sense, practically a Ferengi.  Gloria remains as hot in season 11 as she was in season 2.

 Phil (Ty Burrell), Claire (Julie Bowen, formerly Denise Bauer on “Boston Legal”), and their children Haley (Sarah Hyland), Alex (Ariel Winter), and Luke (Nolan Gould).  This is the standard family unit.  Claire is Jay’s daughter; Phil’s father is played by Fred Willard.  Haley is the typical “hot but stupid” teen girl, Alex is the “smart but snotty and fairly plain” (Daria) teen girl, and Luke is hopelessly stupid.  For his part, Phil isn’t particularly bright but has NO CLUE how clueless he really is as a father; he thinks he has all the angles worked out but the results never support this assumption.  He’s the typical real estate guy who’s overly impressed with his own charm and wit, always cracking lame jokes (aka “dad jokes”), a trait he clearly picked up from his father. He has some idiotic fixation on doing magic tricks.  Claire is a decent mother but doesn’t always have all the answers herself, but at least she doesn’t seem to assume she already knows it all, unlike Phil.  Both of them give the appearance of muddling through parenthood with only the vaguest of clues but all the best intentions.

 After being involved with various different men – one played by Nathan Fillion – Haley returns to Dylan (Reid Ewing), the offbeat stoner type (though we never see him smoke).  They have twins.  By the way, Gloria came on the scene, so to speak, far too late to be Claire and Mitchell’s mother: she is Deedee, played by Shelley Long, who we might remember from “Cheers”.  Her character was a bit unhinged and killed off at some point.  By season 11 she’s actually a tree (!). 

 Mitchell (Jesse Tyler Ferguson), Cameron (Eric Stonestreet) (gay couple) and their adopted Vietnamese baby girl, Lily.  I found baby Lily to be amazingly cute.   By season 11 Lily has grown up to be an attractive teenage girl (Aubrey Anderson-Emmons), though somewhat eye-rolling and snarky – not particularly likable.  Mitchell is Jay’s son and Claire’s sister.  By now gays are sufficiently positively portrayed on network TV that we can enjoy a flamboyantly ridiculous depiction of this couple.  On “Desperate Housewives”, Bob plays the “normal” gay partner who could easily pass for straight, while Lee is the “flamer” who embodies all the stereotypes.   With Mitchell and Cameron, they BOTH illustrate the stereotypes with hilarious regularity.   I suppose they get away with it because everyone else on the show is equally lampooned.  Even beautiful Gloria makes remarks about Colombians re: drug dealers, murders, violence, etc.  The fathers attempt to do their best for her, but like the others, often fail as much through sheer misadventure rather than incompetence (Phil) or indifference.  Mitch and Claire seem to be from California, while Cam is from a farm in Missouri and often makes farm jokes.  By season 11 he’s been an assistant coach for the high school football team and manages to snag the head coach job at a university in Missouri.  I actually watched “Bad Teacher” (with Cameron Diaz) just to see Stonestreet play a straight guy, though he only appears briefly as Diaz’ character’s grumpy and unfriendly roommate. 

 The show is filmed in the familiar “mockumentary” format where the characters frequently talk directly to the audience (e.g. “The Office” and “Trailer Park Boys”).   They all share Michael Scott’s tendency to make inadvertently negative revelations they believe are positive.  The show is definitely a comedy and has as much misadventure as any other – including “Two and a Half Men”, which had previously been my standard for current TV quality.  But as entertaining as Charlie Sheen and Jon Cryer have been, Sofia Vergara is certainly much more enjoyable to watch.

 From season 3 to 11, Ariel Winter managed to….develop considerably, making her competitive with Hyland, though still very much a nerd.  Luke also grew up into a teenage boy.  Almost all of the adult characters remain essentially the same throughout the series.  I found the writing to also remain consistent in nature and quality with no peak or “jumping the shark”, to borrow the Happy Days expression.  

The Best of War on Film

Memorial Day just passed.  This is an American holiday celebrated on the last Monday of May, and it honors the men and women of our armed forces who have died in the course of duty.  Veterans’ Day, on the other hand, honors all of our veterans, living and dead, and is marked on November 11, the date of the Armistice of WWI.  I have lots of relatives who served in the military, but I’m not aware of any who have died in any wars.  For all I know I may have a relative who died in the 100 Years War (probably on the English side) or died fighting for Poland or Russia.  Who knows.   But in any case, it’s fitting that we review the topic of war once again, by way of appropriate movie reviews.  I can’t review every movie, but I will pick my favorites and discuss the more well known films.

 Civil War (1861-65).  The US Civil War, that is; for the Spanish Civil War, there’s “For Whom The Bell Tolls” (with Gary Cooper), and for the Russian Civil War, there’s the interminable “Dr. Zhivago”.  The US version is a popular setting for many films:  “Birth of a Nation” and “Gone With The Wind” are probably the most famous, but my favorite is “Gettysburg”.  It has an impressive cast of Jeff Daniels as Joshua Chamberlain, Tom Berenger as Longstreet (see above), and Martin Sheen as Robert E. Lee, and it’s only about what was arguably the most important battle of the war.  So instead of the dull tedium of Stonewall Jackson rambling on about God and Jesus, or Lincoln stressed out about slavery and unruly Copperheads, or even brother against brother or slaves and the Underground Railroad, the war is truncated down to 3 days in July, 1863 in Pennsylvania. 

 Boer War (1899-1903).  “Breaker Morant”.  Enough said.

 World War I (1914-18).  Trenches, poison gas, biplanes, puttees, and lots of mud.  “Private York” (another one with Gary Cooper) was dull as hell – only the last 25% was in France.  “Wings” was an excellent 1927 silent film about the air war, followed up more recently (2006) with “Flyboys”.  “Joyeux Noel” covers the Christmas Truce of 1914, and “A Very Long Engagement” is 1/3 mystery, 1/3 chick flick, and 1/3 WWI drama.  “Gallipoli” has a young Mel Gibson as an Australian soldier fighting the Turks, “Lawrence of Arabia” has Peter O’Toole as the title character, and “Blue Max” has George Peppard as an ambitious German pilot.

            But the best has to be “All Quiet On the Western Front”, the original 1931 version in black & white with Lew Ayres as Paul Baumer.  Not only because it’s from the point of view of the Germans, but also it gives us a sense both of the heroism of the soldiers on both sides and the slaughter and pointlessness of it all.  The B&W really adds to the idea that “this war happened a long time ago”. 

“The Lost Battalion” is a close 2^nd.  Ricky Shroeder plays a US officer in a unit of New York misfits surrounded by Germans.  A German lieutenant complains about the Americans, “They don’t retreat when they’re supposed to!”  His superior cooly replies, “how inconsiderate of them.”

 World War II (1939-1945).  I’ll divide this into Europe (enemy: Nazi Germany) and the Pacific (enemy: Imperial Japan). While there is no lack of WWII films set in Europe – “The Longest Day”, “Kelly’s Heroes”, “Where Eagles Dare”, “The Dirty Dozen”, “The Big Red One”, “The Eagle Has Landed”, “Downfall”, etc., I like “Saving Private Ryan” the most.  Spielberg definitely kicked it up a notch.  The problem with most WWII films is that, as history buffs, we already know the Allies won and the Germans lost, so there is little drama amidst the so-called action.  The Germans may kill off a few Americans or British, but we know they’ll lose.  Here, however, Tom Hanks, Matt Damon (no Ben Affleck), and the rest of the gang are clearly in danger of being overrun by crack Waffen SS units.  I like how Spielberg puts the good guys at a temporary tactical disadvantage to dial the drama and excitement up to 11.  My heart was pounding when I saw this in the movie theater, even when I watch it at home and know what’s going to happen.  Nothing like that occurs in “The Longest Day”, which had previously been the top D-Day movie.

            An honorable mention should go to “To Hell And Back”, which was the story of Audie Murphy, the most highly decorated US soldier of WWII.  He actually played himself in the film, which is why it seems far more realistic than most other films.  And we have to give “The Guns of Navarone” credit as a classic as well.

            “Enemy At The Gates” is a rare treat: Eastern Front action, in Stalingrad.  Jude Law plays a Russian sniper, Rachel Weisz his beloved (Red Army babe), and Ed Harris plays the German sniper who is his nemesis amidst the carnage and rubble of the city.  We even have Bob Hoskins as Krushchev.  The book, however, was much better.

            For the Pacific, there are options:  “Tora! Tora! Tora!” views Pearl Harbor half from the Japanese perspective.  “Guadalcanal Diary”, “The Sands of Iwo Jima”, “Flying Tigers” (John Wayne film about the American Volunteer Group, better known as the “Flying Tigers”), and “The Thin Red Line”, which I really hated.  While Spielberg did make “The Pacific” miniseries to mirror “Band of Brothers”, he made no Pacific equivalent of “Saving Private Ryan”.  Clint Eastwood did “Flags of Our Fathers” and “Letters From Iwo Jima”, a pair of films which complement each other, dovetailing the two stories.  The first takes the perspective of the Americans, with particular emphasis on the bond-selling tour of the flag-raisers; the second takes the view of the Japanese – and Eastwood manages to be sympathetic without dividing his loyalties equally. 

            “Fires on the Plain” is an excellent Japanese film.  I see that most Japanese movies about WWII tend to focus on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, i.e. “woe is us, those damn Americans wiped out two whole innocent cities!”  This movie is somewhat less apologetic.  The story is about Japanese soldiers isolated in the Philippines, starving and outmatched by Americans.  The soldiers are young and not particularly interested in blowing themselves up or committing seppuku; they’d rather surrender to the apparently invincible and well-fed Americans and at least finally get something to eat. 

 Korea (1950-53).  Actually, the war is still going on, as what stopped the war in 1953 was a cease-fire.  “M*A*S*H” was funny, but had no combat in it.  “Tae Guk Gi” is my favorite.  This movie (in Korean with English subtitles) is about two South Korean brothers; the older joined the ROK army to look after his younger brother, who had been drafted – but when he gets home and finds his fiance has been executed by South Korean forces for allegedly “collaborating” with the Reds while their village was occupied by the North Koreans, he goes nuts and switches sides, becoming a maniacal leader of an elite North Korean unit (above lower left).  The movie is filmed with the same direction technique as “Saving Private Ryan” – that intense, confused, style which made “SPR” so remarkable and exciting.

 Vietnam.  “Dead Presidents”, “Casualties of War”, “Forrest Gump”, and “Good Morning Vietnam”, are a few of them.  “Go Tell The Spartans” takes place earlier, before the US sent ground troops.  ‘We Were Soldiers” comes right on its tail, 1965.  “Deer Hunter” has to be the worst Vietnam War movie I’ve seen:  too much “wedding and hunting in Pennsylvania” and not enough “combat in Vietnam”, and no – Christopher Walken playing Russian Roulette doesn’t count as combat.  My favorite is “Platoon”.  What I don’t like about “Apocalypse Now” was that it wasn’t a typical combat film.  It was more of a clever adaptation of Heart of Darkness to Vietnam than an attempt to show us what the war was like, or about.  “Captain Willard” from “A-Now”, Martin Sheen’s son Charlie (“winning!”) was excellent in “Platoon”, as were Willem Dafoe as Sgt. Elias and Tom Berenger as Sgt Barnes.  Even John C. McGinley (“are you a fan of Michael Bolton?  I worship the man!”) is in here.   “Hamburger Hill” I thought was too much...(A) racial tension?  CHECK!, (B) Vietnamese prostitutes? CHECK!, (C) unpopular officers?  CHECK! 

            “Full Metal Jacket” gets my #2 vote.   The dialogue alone is fantastic.

             “Me so horny, love you long time!”

            “Too beaucoup!  Too beaucoup!”

            “WHAT IS YOUR MAJOR MALFUNCTION??” and

            “It’s a huge shit sandwich, and we’re all going to have to take a bite.” “Does this mean Ann-Margret’s NOT coming?”

 And I’ll wrap up with three: Grenada (“Heartbreak Ridge”), Desert Storm (“Three Kings”) and Iraq War (“Hurt Locker”).