SMYTHE'S WORLD SCOOP: Apple Blythe?!?
UPDATE: At least we know where the name came from.
UPDATE [2]: Turns out I scooped the rest of the media by some ten hours on this story. I rule.

Works for me....

The Very Ugly American: Apparently the ability to craft the hackneyed conventions of chop-socky and spaghetti-western dross into cinematic gold has not gone to the lanternine head of Quentin Tarantino, or at least not in such a way so that he would feel the need to show that he actually thinks before opening his mouth. Apparently threatened by the articulate actress seated next to him on the dais, he used the occasion of a press conference at the opening of the Cannes Film Festival to slight the British film industry. To wit,

Tarantino, set on edge at a press conference by (Tilda) Swinton's cut-glass accent - she graduated from Cambridge in political sciences before making Wittgenstein with the late Derek Jarman - hit back acidly.

Why if Hollywood was such a "bad boy" monster, he wondered, did British actors "get the hell out of there" and head for Beverly Hills once they hit fame?

(snip)

Then, getting into his stride, he argued that despite all the money, direction, acting and scriptwriting that went into a film, the reality was that audiences "showed up" for one reason: to see "the stars". They paid for tickets to watch actors they knew and were comfortable with.

He said that this was why America, India and Hong Kong - and not Britain - managed to sustain a flourishing domestic film industry.

Swinton, noted for art films such as The Deep End, said that she was not especially anxious to disagree with the jury president, but the "Hollywood product" was not the only one on the cinematic map.

"I speak as someone who comes from a country, which like so many others, is experiencing the loud voice of the multiplexes, which outnumber art cinemas, ten to one. It is jolly difficult for audiences looking for another kind of cinema, and very difficult for filmmakers and critics to have the confidence to look for another kind of cinema, and have the confidence to make another cinema.

First, lets give Tarantino his props for correctly observing that three of the largest film industries in the world are in China, India, and the US, although it shouldn't surprise anyone that the three most populous countries in the world, each with different primary languages, and with long cinematic traditions, have profitable film industries. That Great Britain does not have a film industry to rival the U.S. or, for that matter, two nations with over a billion people, is not much of a shock.

Second, there is another rather obvious reason the U.K. lags behind the U.S. in filmmaking: both countries speak the same language. No matter how much of a movie geek you are, going to see a foreign language film can be disconcerting, and the barrier imposed does not provide the optimum filmgoing experience. It's one thing for America to export films to China and India, where English is spoken, if at all, as an elite language. It's another to export them to a country where the mother tongue is the same; it's much easier to draw the casual filmgoer into the multiplex if he knows he's not going to have to look at sub-titles for two hours.

The competition, therefore, isn't between Hollywood and "Bollywood" or Hong Kong; each territory is pretty much exclusive and is run as a de facto monopoly by the local studios. It's between the U.S. and any other English-speaking country, and when it comes to corporations, our economies of scale kick theirs in the ass every day of the week. At least Great Britain still generates some home-grown product (ie., "Bend It Like Beckham", "Calendar Girls", and "28 Days Later", all of which were released in the U.S. within the last year), and keeps some of their stars at home; in entertainment terms, Australia has pretty much become the San Pedro de Macoris of the American film industry, and New Zealand, South Africa and Canada, while producing plenty of talent, pretty much exist only as location shoots for American movies, as far as the "Industry" is concerned. As the corporations running the studios become larger and more multi-national, the power of this oligopoly will only increase.

So inevitably, then, British "stars" are going to go where the money is, and if they want to make the money that comes from appearing in movies, it means appearing in films made and distributed by American companies; that was as true eighty years ago as it is today. If they don't, they can always work on TV or the stage, both of which are vibrant and healthy in Great Britain, or appear in the odd British flic, and not need "get the hell out of there", to use Tarantino's unfortunate line. That choice has nothing to do with greed, any more then the recent decisions by Kevin Spacey and Gwyneth Paltrow to relocate to London in order to pursue stage careers is motivated by greed.

Swinton's point, then, is dead-on correct. The near-monopoly that Hollywood studios possess in the English-language film market is going to have consequences down the line, in the same way that American fast-food chains have, or WalMart has. Crowding out smaller businesses means limiting the options people have, and thus restricts our imagination of alternatives; the same is true in the cinema. Tarantino would be wise to show greater consideration of that point, since there is no reason that the same stranglehold can't be applied to choke off creativity in other parts of the world as well.

I have redesigned the blog, but it may be a few days until I can figure out how to return some of the links to the side. In the meantime, if you visit any of the random archive pages, the old blogroll is still listed.

The Spurs really don't have much game in the second half, do they?

Truth be told, one of the reasons why Abu Ghraib has already become such a dark page in American history is that public sentiment had already begun to turn against the war, in particular the question as to whether the U.S. was justified in starting this adventure. If Americans no longer overwhelmingly believed in The Cause, it stands to reason that actions which are the inevitable by-product of a war (including the abuse and dehumanization of the enemy) would be less tolerated. Still, the belief by some that the captives at Abu Ghraib represented the most malignant of the former allies of Saddam has been used to rationalize the behavior of their guards; surely, no one would weep if G.I.'s had treated captured members of the S.S. the same way after WW2, or if Bin Laden and friends were similarly humiliated.

That's why this story is all the more important. Between 70 and 80% of all Iraqis captured during the war were arrested by mistake, according to the Red Cross' report, and were treated in a manner that violated the Geneva Convention. The pictures we are now seeing have shown Americans an ugly side to our nature, a side that believes that because we are more powerful than our adversaries our actions must, inevitably, be morally correct. Abu Ghraib was only the tip of that iceberg; considering the way in which we treated Native Americans and the descendents of slaves, it is the flip side to an American exceptionalism which characterizes so much of the foulest aspects of our political culture.

Pulitzer Watch: The Los Angeles Times is reporting that actor Corbin Bernson [L.A. Law, (1986-93); Celebrity Mole (2004)] and his wife, Amanda Pays [some movie with Rob Lowe twenty years ago] have remodeled their home, and intend to put it on the market for $1.5 million. Natch...Brian and Laurie Czamecki of Troop Real Estate have the listing. The same article hints that LA Dodger middle reliever Tom Martin and his wife may soon lease a townhome in Manhatten Beach, thanks to the efforts of Phyllis Cohen-Edwards of Shorewood Realtors.

The chickenhawks reap the whirlwind:

From tomorrow's Washington Post:

Tolerance of the situation in Iraq also appears to be declining within the U.S. military. Especially among career Army officers, an extraordinary anger is building at Rumsfeld and his top advisers. "Like a lot of senior Army guys, I'm quite angry" with Rumsfeld and the rest of the Bush administration, the young general said. He listed two reasons. "One is, I think they are going to break the Army." But what really incites him, he said, is, "I don't think they care." Jeff Smith, a former general counsel of the CIA who has close ties to many senior officers, said, "Some of my friends in the military are exceedingly angry." In the Army, he said, "It's pretty bitter."

"The people in the military are mad as hell," said retired Army Col. Robert Killebrew, a frequent Pentagon consultant. He said that the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force Gen. Richard B. Myers, should be fired. A spokesman for Myers declined to comment. A Special Forces officer aimed higher, saying that, "Rumsfeld needs to go, as does Wolfowitz."

Asked about such antagonism, Wolfowitz said, "I wish they'd have the -- whatever it takes -- to come tell me to my face."[emphasis added]

I dunno, Paul, it may have something to do with the fact that they're over there fighting, while you sit comfortably behind a desk.

Idiot son update: After spending his first eight months with Serie A also-ran Perugia on the bench, including a three-month stint in the doghouse for failing a drug test, Saadi Ghadafi, son of the Libyan strongman and U.S. ally in the War on Terror, finally made his debut in Italian soccer, playing 15 minutes as a substitute in his team's 1-0 upset victory over Juventus. His coach, Serse Cosmi, explained later that "Gaddafi came on because he is a player and not because any one of us wanted to go into history as the one who first played the son of a head of state in the Italian championship".

I've never been one to compare Bush with Hitler, but his apologists continued use of the line that "if Bush had known about what was happening at Abu Ghraib, he would have stopped it", is really starting to creep me out.

Gore's worst decision:

In his questioning of the panel, Connecticut Sen. Joe Lieberman contrasted the U.S. response to the abuse scandal and terrorist responses to acts perpetrated against Americans. He noted that American leaders apologized to the Iraqi people for the outrages in Abu Ghraib, but he hasn't heard anyone apologize for the 3,000 Americans killed in the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, or an apology for the hundreds of Americans killed in liberating Iraq or an apology for the killing and desecration of four security persons in Fallujah.

Perhaps he should take that issue up with the President; certainly, the blood of any American killed in Iraq is as much on Lieberman as anyone else in our government. In the meantime, we have to find a primary challenger (or better yet, an independent), who will challenge this asshole in '06.

In the hagiography of Pat Tillman, one of the aspects to the story that the media has focused on is that he enlisted in the Rangers "in the wake of 9/11"; once The Towers fell, he had an epiphany about the relative lack of importance of playing football, and decided to immediately fight for Uncle Sam. Actually, what is much more interesting is that he didn't enlist immediately. Lots of people rallied round the flag after that fateful Tuesday, sang "God Bless America" and put the Stars and Stripes on their car antennas. Tillman, rather than abandoning his teammates, played out the 2001 season, starting every game, and by turning in another quality season, made himself more marketable as a football player. He didn't actually enlist until May, 2002, when he had nine months to think about the ramifications of what he was doing. His was not an emotional decision, but a reasoned one, and in my view a more patriotic act because of it.

Giving credit where it's due: Andrew Sullivan takes on the rightists' attempts to excommunicate John Kerry from the Catholic Church. Unlike my April 24 post on the same subject, which dealt with the anticipated political fallout, his article focuses on those attempting to lobby the Church, and the unsound religious position they put forward.

Beating and torturing prisoners is not "the America he knows"? Didn't Bush used to be the governor of Texas? Also, good move not going on Al Jazeera; the last thing you want to do is appear on an independent Arab-language station that people actually watch. Those who get suckered by a politician's faux-religiosity are already going to vote for Bush, so why bother with this P.R. stunt if you aren't going to make an appeal to at least some of the people turned off by the revelations of the past week.

What Chalabi Wrought:

In the popular political imagination we're familiar with the neocons as conniving militarists, masters of intrigue and cabals, graspers for the oil supplies of the world, and all the rest. But here we have them in what I suspect is the truest light: as college kid rubes who head out for a weekend in Vegas, get scammed out of their money by a two-bit hustler on the first night and then get played for fools by a couple hookers who leave them naked and handcuffed to their hotel beds. [link mine]

--Joshua Marshall

NaziPundit grows tired of the 14th Amendment, waxes poetically on the benefits of racial profiling. [link via Media Matter] I suppose this story would warm Ilsa's heart, though.

For the duration of the de facto NBA Finals, Matt Yglesias' smug, toxic Lakerphobic site is banned from my blogroll, to be replaced by the wise, sensible analysis of Roger L. Simon. Kobe Akbar !!

Two important stories of note: Josh Marshall, on the increasingly suspicious role that Ahmed Chalabi is playing in the alleged "Oil-for-Food" scandal, and this L.A. Times scoop, on Kenneth "Babyface" Edmonds' purchase of a new home in a gated Beverly Hills community. No word yet on who brokered the sale.

Another perspective on the maltreatment of Iraqi POW's, by Sgt. Stryker. Regarding the excuse made by the staff sergeant in charge of the prison, he writes:

[H]e says that he and the others received no formal Geneva Convention training, which would've instructed them that stacking a bunch of naked men in a pyramid and posing for a trophy picture are inappropriate. I mean, until I was trained in LOAC, I thought I could just walk around shooting people at random if the whim caught me. Without that invaluable training, I'd have no idea that there indeed exist basic standards of human decency. Who knew?

Link via Matt Welch

When any war goes out of control, stories like this one, from the Guardian, are inevitable:

Graphic photographs showing the torture and sexual abuse of Iraqi prisoners in a US-run prison outside Baghdad emerged yesterday from a military inquiry which has left six soldiers facing a possible court martial and a general under investigation. The scandal has also brought to light the growing and largely unregulated role of private contractors in the interrogation of detainees. According to lawyers for some of the soldiers, they claimed to be acting in part under the instruction of mercenary interrogators hired by the Pentagon.

(snip)

The US army confirmed that the general in charge of Abu Ghraib jail is facing disciplinary measures and that six low-ranking soldiers have been charged with abusing and sexually humiliating detainees. Lawyers for the soldiers argue they are being made scapegoats for a rogue military prison system in which mercenaries give orders without legal accountability.

A military report into the Abu Ghraib case - parts of which were made available to the Guardian - makes it clear that private contractors were supervising interrogations in the prison, which was notorious for torture and executions under Saddam Hussein. One civilian contractor was accused of raping a young male prisoner but has not been charged because military law has no jurisdiction over him.

It should also be noted that the Senate today approved the nomination of former death squad enabler John Negroponte as Ambassador to Iraq.