Author: ssw15

Tomorrow – yep, this is it. NCAA championship. Bracket time – watching the teams duke it out. Of course, Alma Mater is not in the tourney (and hasn’t in 30 years; plus, this season ended really poorly for the men’s basketball team, even if with the hope that Alma Mater will be better; it was a rebuilding year, I think; the women’s team had their own strange debacle). Let’s see who’s the Cinderella team this year. I got my brackets ready! (did not make the silly mistake of picking Stanford all the way this time).

Oh, and yeah, Happy St. Patrick’s Day.

Yesterday – I saw “Hitch” with a friend. Fluffy movie, but funny. Will Smith in a romantic comedy – he’s good when he’s not in a blow ’em up movie. He plays Alex “Hitch” Hitchens, the date doctor, who will help hapless men earn their way toward love with women (hmm – the average men getting the beautiful women, by listening to what the women say and trying to be sincere, as per Hitch’s advice. Um, okay, sure, Hitch.). Hitch though won’t take his own advice in pursuing open, honest love, since he was scarred by the adulterous moves of his college sweetheart. He has to learn to be more open with Eve Mendes’ character, a tabloid gossip columnist, who takes his date consulting work the wrong way (at least in her excessive men-are-pigs viewpoint; but don’t women want men who make sincere efforts to want to get to know them and doing interesting and nice things for them? Didn’t get that about her character, since she seem to think all the moves are just to get into the bed).

Loved all the NYC background scenes – they filmed it right around the waterfront/Esplanade of the World Financial Center in downtown. And, Hitch’s Alma Mater (in a funny little flashback scene) – I laughed – it’s my Alma Mater! I swear, Alma Mater’s getting herself in all kinds of NYC setting movies these days, and it just looks great. (old buildings make nice facades, I guess).

NY Times’ editorial on Sunday – Adam Cohen discusses College Board’s dropping the analogies in the SAT (boo/hiss!):

We are living in the age of the false, and often shameless, analogy. A slick advertising campaign compares the politicians working to dismantle Social Security to Franklin D. Roosevelt. In a new documentary, “Enron: The Smartest Guys in the Room,” Kenneth Lay compares attacks on his company to the terrorist attacks on the United States.

Intentionally misleading comparisons are becoming the dominant mode of public discourse. The ability to tell true analogies from false ones has never been more important. But to make room for the new essay portion of the SAT that was rolled out this weekend with much fanfare, the College Board has unceremoniously dropped the test’s analogy questions, saying blandly that analogical reasoning will still be assessed “in the short and long reading passages.”

Replacing logic questions with writing is perfectly in keeping with these instant-messaging, 500-cable-channel times, when the emphasis is on communicating for the sake of communicating rather than on having something meaningful to say. Obviously, every American should be able to write, and write well. But if forced to choose between a citizenry that can produce a good 25-minute writing sample or spot a bad analogy, we would be better off with a nation of analogists. [….]

Questions of this sort are the building blocks of arguments by analogy, which are a mainstay of many disciplines. Philosophers like Aristotle relied on analogies to reason about man and nature. Scientists have long analogized from things they know to things they do not, to form hypotheses and plot experiments.

Law is almost entirely dependent on analogies. In my first year of law school, my contracts professor, Gerald Frug, said something brilliant in its simplicity: “All things are alike in some ways and different in other ways.” It was a warning that for the next three years, we would hear endless arguments that a case must be decided a particular way because a previous case or a statute required it. The two cases, or the case and the statute, would always be alike in some ways and different in others – and law school was really about arguing whether the similarities or the differences were more important.

Nowhere are analogies more central than in politics. When Karl Marx wanted to arouse the workers of the world, he compared the proletariat’s condition to slavery and, in “The Communist Manifesto,” urged them to throw off their figurative chains. [….]

The power of an analogy is that it can persuade people to transfer the feeling of certainty they have about one subject to another subject about which they may not have formed an opinion. But analogies are often undependable. Their weakness is that they rely on the dubious principle that, as one logic textbook puts it, “because two things are similar in some respects they are similar in some other respects.” An error-producing “fallacy of weak analogy” results when relevant differences outweigh relevant similarities. [….]

The last election was decided, in significant part, on specious analogies. A man who went to war, and came back to protest that war, was compared – by a group whose name helpfully contained the phrase “for truth” – to men who betray their country. Today, the federal tax system – which through much of the nation’s history kept government income and expenditures in rough balance – is being compared to “theft” and recklessly dismantled.

The College Board’s Web site explanation that analogies are being dropped because they are “less connected to the current high school curriculum” itself shows a stunning lack of logic, since it does not explain what the “less connected” refers to. Less connected than they used to be? Than other parts of the test? But in any case, it is a dangerous concession. Since the SAT no longer contains analogy questions, here is one: A nation whose citizens cannot tell a true analogy from a false one is like – fill in your own image for precipitous decline.

Interesting points; food for thought, I daresay (and the analogies were never my favorite part, either, I might add). Plus, I can say that I do feel bad for high school kids and the new essay portion, but – you know what? – my best advice to high schoolers out there is: Don’t stress it. Do what the test prep people have advised me in my standardized test past – just read the damn question, spend a few minutes thinking and scribble what you’ll say, and then write – intro/middle/end, three sentences for 3 to 4 paragraphs, and move on to the next question. Then pen down and breathe. College Board graders only care if you can write a basic sentence, unless I’m completely wrong on that score. We’ll see how this all comes out after this new SAT grades come out.

So, I get to look forward to making a presentation at work tomorrow, to train others on policy. Umm, okay. We’ll see how that goes. I’m just looking forward to the Law School Alma Mater alumni dinner; mmm, free food…

Have fun travelling, FC. Keep us posted as to what’s up while on the road!

Spent part of today learning how I can be more involved with the Undergrad Alma Mater. Came to the conclusion, once again, the being Asian American isn’t simple; and that the dream that Asian America will one day learn to unite continues (or, as I’d joke, “Can East Asians and South Asians come and work together?” is going to remain a perpetual question). Numerically speaking, East Asians (particularly Chinese/Chinese Americans) outnumber the other Asians in the East coast (I’m just using that by way of example, not trying to be exclusive), which ends up making the East Coast universities’ Asian Alumni groups more East Asian by appearance – but it isn’t really the reality, not quite that. Just my own two cents, really; don’t attribute my opinions to others (particularly with whatever group I’m affiliated), please! Oh, and my own personal questions of how Alma Mater may reach out and be more effective with alumni (both alumni as a general population of the Alma Mater community, and alumni of color specifically) – those continue to persist too. Guess I have to be patient and remain open-minded, and learn more as I go along.

Some snow this morning, but nothing more than a dusting; supposedly warmer (but the air remained chilly; wind chill closer to the 30’s rather than the actual 40 odd degrees temperature).

On the CD player right now: (the best of) NewOrder. That song “Bizarre Love Triangle” is one of my favorite sing-along songs – “Waiting for that final moment…”

Good bye to Dan Rather, the anchorman. I missed watching the actual goodbye itself (I just don’t get home early enough for the weeknight news anymore), but in the primetime slot, CBS broadcasted a tribute show, “Dan Rather: A Reporter Remembers.” Daily News tv critic, David Bianculli, gave it 3 1/2 stars out of the 4 star range – and I have to agree, after watching it, that was a nice tribute. It gave a good roundup of the life and career of Dan Rather, Reporter. Rather the Reporter gave it as good as he got. As Bianculli notes:

[The tribute/retrospective] does exactly what so many of Rather’s critics lately have refused to do: It puts his career in a full and fair context.

“A Reporter Remembers,” airing at 8 p.m., doesn’t shrink from the so-called Memogate that cost four of his colleagues their jobs and shadowed Rather’s exit from the flagship newscast, but he doesn’t lead with or obsess over it, either. […]

This special makes clear, though, that Rather doesn’t feel defeated, and has a lot about which to feel proud. More than that, it shows flashes of defiance that are as much a part of Rather as any colloquial homilies.

“A Reporter Remembers” doesn’t seek out current colleagues to assess Rather’s personality and legacy. Instead, it turns for perspective to Rather’s former CBS News and network boss, Howard Stringer, who recently was promoted to run all of Sony.

“He’s inclined to be lightning,” Stringer says of Rather. “His personality,” Stringer adds, “resists the idea of anchor.”

Stringer says it, Rather says it, and the footage in “A Reporter Remembers” certainly supports it: Rather thinks of himself as a reporter, first and foremost.

And, I agree – the clips of Rather the Reporter, from his days in Vietnam, in the White House press corps (annoying LBJ and Nixon), were really good compelling stuff. And, Rather telling his anecdotes about being spat at while covering the Civil Rights movement stories were moving stuff, especially coming from his Texas background and having grown up during the segregation era. And, I felt for him as he was being accused of having “liberal bias” (frankly, Rather’s bias always seemed more about personal bias – as in “I’m Rather the Reporter, Out for The Story”; and anyway, I just don’t think “liberal” ought to be seen as some derogatory term). But, I was always underwhelmed by Rather the Anchorman. Maybe his post-anchorman news life can remedy all this that has happened to him. I think Dan deserves better in his twilight years.

Oh, and the way the tribute ended with clips of Rather’s weird commentary from the insane Election Night of 2000 – that was just hilarious. Rather: “The fat lady may not have sung yet, but she’s backstage humming…” 😉

And, other news stuff – Nightline had a story on bloggers last night. Really interesting stuff – the bloggers out there are convinced that they’ll take over the world – but, during a weekly discussion at Harvard Law, they’ll concede that this is still some work in progress, since the rules on blogging aren’t really there, even if, as a form of media, the power to post stuff makes them no less powerful than the NY Times or other media entities on line. Hmm.

I taped last night’s Fox’s “House, M.D.” and watched it – hilarious dramedy. The series has set in the pattern: Dr. House, brilliant diagnostician, is trying to bail out of clinic work, by driving the chief Dr. Cuddy insane; Dr. House all but kills the patient by trying to figure out what the mysterious malady of the week is; Dr. House drives his staff, Drs. Cameron, Foreman, and Chase, insane; Dr. House is ultimately proven right. The medical stuff is still too much to swallow. But, I love the character bits. Too many funny stuff, as the character development takes another notch up – with how Cameron, the young woman doctor who has chemistry with just about all the men in the show, teases Australian dr. Chase, after the patient’s fiancee queried about whether rough sex might have made the patient sick. Cameron pushes Chase’s buttons, making him sweat with her funny monologue on how physically dangerous sex is, but for the fact that “God makes it so much fun.” Hehehe. (Chase obviously thinks Cameron’s hot, but not wanting to admit it; and, anyway, he got all defensive on her last week, when he refused to confess why he was so upset with his own genius doctor dad). So glad to hear that FOX is renewing “House, M.D.” (even if it is a show produced by NBC-Universal’s production company!).

Ah, but I do swear, in an alternate, fantasy SSW universe, the perfect tv network would let me enjoy my shows without over-relying on my VCR. No time slot conflicts – “Amazing Race” and “House” and “American Idol” and “Alias” can happily co-exist. I would still be able to enjoy sampling “Veronica Mars” or PBS shows without feeling too guilty over missing episodes. Oh well.

Comics: “Doonesbury” is currently doing a tribute to the late Hunter S. Thompson, journalist. Thompson has passed away, but the Doonesbury character inspired by him, Uncle Duke, isn’t (well, he’s still more or less among the living, anyway). Even cooler – the Doonesbury website’s honoring Thompson by posting the comic strips that introduced Uncle Duke (ah, so now I see how Uncle Duke isn’t really Zonker’s uncle, but a Zonker Harris family friend. Still – Zonker inherited some of Uncle Duke’s weirdness).

I will unfortunately miss the Law School Alma Mater’s auction tomorrow – ah, the amusing law school social event. But, maybe I can catch something of it, assuming I head back to Brooklyn at an early enough hour. We’ll see.

Here’s a suggestion to the creative minds out there – invent a way to find missing keys (there was that episode on the Cosby show where the family bought Cliff a key chain that made noise when it’d go missing, assuming one has the remote control to set off the noise; what I wouldn’t do to have that right now). I’m just tossing the house upside down trying to find my keys…

Oh — Yay! I’m not insane after all – keys were in the pants pocket all along (ok, so I am insane after all for not having realized that at all – but oh well).

“Amazing Race” – Rob and Amber – I thought the part at the end where Amber says, “I could never have done it without him!” was too funny – I mean, yeah, Amber, you could never do anything without Rob (and that smirky lying self of his) (not to mention winning the million on “Survivor”). (on the other hand, what does Rob see in her anyway? other than being his ticket to championhood and another million, that is).

Hate frigid cold winter. Icy streets. Sucky subway. (the lousy MTA strikes again; not telling people why the train isn’t working isn’t a way to win over customers in the land of Bensonhurst, my friends). Two more weeks before spring…

Well, getting a voice back is nice. 😉 Hating the cold/flu season.

Saw most of the movie “Ray” on DVD – pretty good movie on Saturday. Jamie Foxx was good, so I can see how he won the Oscar. But, the ending of the movie was a little disappointing for me.

Today, I saw “Sideways”with my siblings – very funny movie. Paul Giamatti plays the sad sack Miles, a failed writer/8th Grade English teacher, who takes his best friend, groom Jack, on a one-week road trip before Jack’s wedding. They enjoy wine tasting in California wine country and golfing. But, hijinks ensue, since Jack, a soap star actor, has to sow his wild oats, and Miles gives in to lying to the local waitress/co-oneophile, Mia. Too bad that Virginia Madsen, who played Mia, didn’t win the Oscar; her monologue on the virtues of wine was great. Such a shame that Paul Giamatti wasn’t even nominated at all for an Oscar; he had strong range of angst and humor at once.

Enjoy the latest work week ahead.

Blech – I think this cold is going around; I’m hoping I won’t lose my voice but I do sound awful, and I ought to/want to just sleep, but I can’t (cold medicine side effects are lousy stuff).

Well, some legal stuff – the oral arguments on the Ten Commandments displays in courthouses cases sounded like interesting stuff. Dahlia Lithwick of Slate.com had good, funny comments. The idea that Scalia is the honest analyst in this situation may very well be true – you kind of have to be that honest intellectually and spiritually to have the viewpoint that is essentially: “well, just shield your eyes if you’ve a problem, but this is a God-fearing country.” Umm. Okay. Not sure if I would agree with that or not, but this would be interesting to see what the Supreme Court can come up with.

Law.com had posted this interesting article (Yahoo! cross-posted, so I’m putting up the Yahoo link to the article): “Law Firms Mulls the ‘Gen Y’ Equation.” Leigh Jones of the National Law Journal reports:

Attorneys from Generation Y — those born in 1978 or later — are plenty smart and generally well educated, say firm leaders and industry experts. But these young attorneys also are lacking in loyalty, initiative and energy, so the criticism goes.

And though some associates sharply dispute the assessment, the perception is forcing managing partners to rethink their motivation strategies and their expectations for their firms’ future.

Big money at large firms may be intoxicating for young lawyers with mounds of school debt, but new associates often are not willing to make the sacrifice that those salaries demand, said Bruce McLean, chairman of Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld.

“It entices people to come to big firms who really don’t want to do what we do,” said McLean, adding that Akin Gump has a “significant number” of hardworking associates. [….]

But third-year associate Moe Keshavarzi at Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton in Los Angeles said that firms with unhappy Generation Y associates are not tapping into their potential.

“I have friends who are fourth-year associates at other firms who are sitting in the library researching,” he said.

Studies indicate that young workers are less willing to put in long hours and instead are more focused on pursuing interests outside work than were their predecessors. A report issued by the Families and Work Institute in October, Generation and Gender in the Workplace, found that younger employees are less likely to be “work-centric.” The study also found that young men and women are more interested in staying at the same rung on the career ladder in order to preserve their quality of life.

With regard to law firms specifically, a study conducted by Edge International, a professional services consulting firm, found that the 25- to 30-year-old group ranked the following factors as motivators at their jobs: time for personal life; opportunities for advancement; professional growth; achievement; intrinsic nature of work; security; leadership; and being a member of a team.

“This group wants to grow professionally and advance to partnership, but not while compromising their personal lives,” said Karen MacKay, a partner with Edge International. The survey, “Motivating the Next Generation,” was sent to about 4,000 members of the law firm network Multilaw. About 800 attorneys responded.

It may be that new associates simply are more vocal about what they perceive as meaningless work, even if they are handsomely paid, said Reed Smith fifth-year associate Alicia Powell.

“After you make so much money, it’s enough,” Powell said.

[….] Generation Y workers may be too smart for their own good, which contributes to management’s perceptions, said Carolyn Martin, co-author of “Managing Generation Y” (HRD Press, 2001).

Employees in that generation, especially those in professional positions, place a high value on education, something their parents drilled into them, she said. Consequently, young associates have a low tolerance for less-than-challenging tasks that management often relegates to them, she said.

In addition, the group has a greater degree of cynicism than in generations past, she said, stemming from the dot-com failure and 9/11 terrorist attacks. The result is diminished long-term loyalty to their employers.

“They’re saying, ‘I’ve looked at the world and there’s no such thing as job security,’” she said.

I’m right at the edge of Gen Y – indeed, being between Gen X and Gen Y leaves one feeling just being in the middle a lot (like how when I was in college, the College Grad Class of ’00 were the ones who acted like they’d take over the world, and the Class of ’98 had cool slackers/protesters and my class was just… well, just us). So, this Law.com article left me feeling more than a little empathetic – I mean, what do these Big Firms expect? Loyalty to a Firm that Makes Big Moola-la-la? The Class of 00 (and pretty much the rest of us children of Baby Boomers in general) had great ambitions to make the world a better place while making ourselves feel good. The usual way of practicing (Big Firm) law just doesn’t cut it. But, then again, too many of us may are willing to go that route – so Great Cultural Shift isn’t happening too soon or too fast.

“Alias” – wow. The two part episode (or is it two serialized episodes? whichever) with the return of the series’ two favorite villains (well, besides Sloane and Irina Derevko): Sark and Anna Espinosa. Plus Crazy Plots and Crazed Characters!

In fact, it’s really cool to see Anna again – she hasn’t been on the show since Season 1 – and she’s still nasty as heck toward CIA Secret Agent Sydney (and Sydney still hasn’t gained any love for Anna either). Scene: Anna, former Soviet-Cuban agent (or Cuban/Soviet? I never quite figured which) – turned freelance – fighting Sydney in a mall over a bomb. Sydney punches her and says, “She can have the blouse” to the befuddled mall security officer (who hasn’t a clue that these were spies trying to maul each other). Hehehe.

And, the return of the crazy stuff – Vaughn facing his wife’s corpse, not an easy thing because he’s the one who killed that trecherous woman; Sark bawling over the late Mrs. Vaughn because he supposedly loved her (yeah, adultery was just one of Lauren’s sins); Sark insisting that Sydney pose as Lauren to infiltrate the bad terrorist group; Vaughn setting himself up for psychological punishment by watching his girlfriend dress up as Lauren and use Lauren’s weird Anglo-American accent. Sark doublecrossing people, as usual – aiding Sydney and Vaughn but then joining forces with Anna, and then turning on Anna by letting Sydney loose on her. Headtwisting stuff.

Meanwhile, Sloane’s not supposed to be involved in the mission against Anna; but Jack Bristow, Sydney’s messed up dad, got him involved anyway. Sloane as a father in grief – ugh, the actor playing the character is great, but the character is a slimey sort. Jack taking a chance on dragging medically- induced- comatosed Nadia out of her coma to get the info on the bomb. Trying to even figure out why Anna had shot Nadia in the first place. And, Jack lying (or lying by omission) to Sydney. And, Sloane pissed with Jack for endangering Nadia, that Jack should have informed him as a father – as a courtesy, even if there was professional justification. Jack snapping back along the lines of “Well, you mean like how I have to endure watching you endanger my daughter on a daily basis?” Yeah, Jack. That’s right.

Oh, but then Sloane told him, “Well, how can I trust you?” Umm, geez, Sloane, didn’t you get the memo that spy people aren’t, well, trustworthy? Jack only gave Sloane the silent Jack look. Ha. Great Alias stuff.

I’m tired of snow. Really I am. Unless I get an actual day off, I don’t think the snow does for much (besides helping us avoid a drought).

Travelocity’s latest commercial – the Traveling Gnome is sounding less British. He loses his cuteness that way, even as he attempts to make us go travel more.

So, okay, I didn’t watch very much of the Oscars (because I was busy doing stuff for Alma Mater). Some great comment from Slate.com’s movie critic David Edelstein:

Hilary Swank and Morgan Freeman were gracious and touching, although Swank should not use the word “humbled” when she means “honored.” Someday I’d like to meet the person who devises the music cues, to ascertain why the orchestra sent Freeman off the stage to the strains of the theme from Star Trek: The Motion Picture (and The Next Generation). Was this a way of working in a tribute to the late Jerry Goldsmith?

I did watch the Morgan Freeman speech and thought it was great (but kind of predictable) that he won. I remembered that part where they played the Star Trek: The Next Generation theme song (for me, it is TNG’s theme song; no offense to The Motion Picture, but I saw TNG first). I was thinking why was this being played before we go to a commercial? It surely had to be to honor Jerry Goldsmith, but if you were going to do that, why not tell your viewers that that’s why you’re doing it? And, Clint Eastwood was gracious, although I felt a little bad for Martin Scorsese. He ought to win something already. (I just didn’t think “The Aviator” was it, and it wasn’t even a movie I had seen, so perhaps I shouldn’t say?).

The Oscars show was too fast – it was too strange to see it actually end before midnight. And, it made no sense to put some of the sound/technical awards nominees on stage and then other sound/technical awards nominees from the floor. It’s just silly.

NY Times article by Jane L. Levere – “Busman’s Holiday, Famous Chef Edition” – when famous chefs are traveling, they eat healthy food and food that the rest of us eat:

What do famous chefs have for breakfast when they travel? Oatmeal, mostly.

For lunch? Something light, perhaps grilled fish or an egg salad sandwich on whole-wheat toast. For a quick bite? A Whopper and fries will do nicely.

After 8 p.m., they get serious. They are adept at finding the best local restaurants, even in out-of-the-way villages, and they tuck into the foie gras and grilled turbot with gusto. But in general, they prefer simplicity at breakfast and lunch.

That early in the day, “I don’t want an intellectual meal where you have to engage your critical facilities,” said Patrick O’Connell, the chef at the Inn at Little Washington in Washington, Va. “I only wish to engage these once a day, at night. The rest of the time I like to be normal. It can be exhausting listening to your inner voice analyzing the food you’re consuming.”

Some chefs do indulge in elaborate breakfasts from time to time. Daniel Boulud, the chef at Daniel and restaurants elsewhere, prepares a fancy breakfast for his family on special occasions that includes scrambled eggs garnished with chives and grated lemon zest, accompanied by steamed Yukon gold or German Butterball potatoes, plus smoked salmon or caviar served with crème fraîche.

But for breakfast on the road, Mr. Boulud is content with granola, plain yogurt, fresh fruit, orange juice and coffee. “Granola’s much healthier than a croissant,” said Mr. Boulud, a native of Lyon, France. [….]

The chefs are equally unfussy about lunch, generally choosing sparse fare like fish or a salad, and asking for bottled water rather than a glass of wine. Why such restraint? “A lot of food with wine makes me sleepy,” said Wolfgang Puck, the chef at Spago in Los Angeles.

Others tuck unapologetically into fat-laden fast food or calorie-rich soul food. Recently, Mr. Boulud went out of his way to try the hamburger at a Los Angeles landmark, the Apple Pan; while visiting Nashville, he lined up for grits, barbecued ribs and chicken, pulled pork, collard greens and cornbread at Nick’s Famous Barbecue.

[Thomas Keller of French Laundry in Yountville, Ca.] says he used to have a weakness for Burger King’s Whopper with extra cheese and French fries, but now that he lives in California, he has switched his allegiance to the cheeseburgers at In-N-Out Burger, with French fries and a milkshake. He also favors Krispy Kreme doughnuts. “I like pretty much all junk food,” he said. [….]

Wow. What a thought – famous chefs actually liking junk food? Who’d a thunk it? And, yeah, I’d say that granola is healthier than croissants.

“American Idol” – the men and the women seemed a little less showy than they were last week. The women certainly were, anyway. They just seemed subdued, less energy. We’ll see who’s out tomorrow.

Wow – watching the first installment of the latest “Amazing Race” – quite good. “Survivors” Rob and Amber are the people you’d love to hate. Then again, why all the hating? The drive to go against them may backfire on the people. One quibble – couldn’t they make the Amazing Racers more… well, racially diverse? It’s just me, maybe. Fun tv anyway – real character building stuff.

For now, I’ll say this – Congratulations to “Million Dollar Baby.” Kudos to Eastwood, Freeman, and Swanks.

More comments may be pending. Stay tuned.

So, it’s the Oscars tonight. Chris Rock as host – so something amusing is bound to be said.

My siblings and I saw “Million Dollar Baby” last night. Well-made, but sad movie. Clint Eastwood, Hilary Swank, and Morgan Freeman were all good. Would like to see Freeman win an Oscar already (although, I think he has done more powerful work in the past). Don’t think that Eastwood should necessarily win the Oscar (as an actor or director, not sure) – but it’ll be interesting to see if the movie will be Best Movie.

I am now fully caught up on “Alias” episodes, and I shall have to say that Secret Agent Sydney’s got to be crazy to trust Evil Man Sloane (whose agenda is still unclear). But, she has serious issues about her father and her boyfriend – i.e., the episode where she’s under the influence of a powerful hallucinogenic drug has her acting out her worst fears. She attempts to kill her dad, the tragic Jack, believing that he would kill her and that he never really loved her. Then, she tries to aim the gun at Vaughn, because she (while still under the drugs) believes he would “betray” her “again,” especially since Sydney is still mad at him for having gotten married to someone else – while she, Sydney, was presumed dead. (gee, Sydney, would you rather he remained in a paralyzing mournful state, much like your father? And, I could have sworn you got over that last year). Hmm. Whatever happened to the CIA psychiatrist would had to treat Sydney, Jack, and Vaughn, to help them deal with their personal stuff? (I forget – she might have been arrested/killed/taken to jail or whatnot).

Still, the most recent episode was crazy stuff (Sydney, Dixon, Vaughn cutting off a bad guy’s finger and then pretending to have killed him, so that Sydney could save her sister’s life). We might actually be back in the ballpark of Crazy Serial Alias, rather than the lately one-plot standalone episode stuff. I prefer the serial stuff, since each episode carried over themes and character development and left one so breathless that it was fun, even if it made no sense. The standalone stuff felt like they repeated plots from other shows (like “X-Files”) – even though I do understand that “Alias” doesn’t want to rely on its serial form so much such that it milks its internal mythology to the point of destroying itself (like “X-Files” did to itself).

Enjoy the Oscars.