Posted 11:11 PM by Steve
My review of "Kung Fu Hustle".

Wild, wacky, cartoonish at times but entertaining on some level.

This film pushes the limits of believable CGI in conjunction with some out-of-this-world Kung Fu sequences. The comedy is, for the most part, quite obvious and infantile. The love story is brief but surprisingly sweet. The violence is handled in a Busby Berkely fashion and that suits the style of the film. There are some amusing film references sprinkled throughout. I would recommend the film as a renter.

Posted 10:24 PM by Steve
The case of Pretentious Hollywood Directors vs. Cleanflicks/Clear Play edited movies.

Watching a show on A.M.C. about people who want to buy edited versions of Hollywood movies and the whiny, pompous directors who object to people tampering with their "art".

First off, let's be clear. Not all people even look at movies as "art". Even cynical Hollywood is disingenuous about it's "product". They know very well that many of their movies are little more than formulaic, pre-packaged, celebrity ENTERTAINMENT vehicles driven by profit margins.

I happen to look at film-making as "art". I watch try to watch films in their original aspect ratio and as the director intended. But let's be honest. What does the director really intend? What did the WRITER intend? What if he or she is unhappy with the treatment of HIS product by a director? Does the director make a film by simply stringing together every frame of film he has shot during the process of making a movie?

Of course not. The EDITOR gets his hands on the film far before the audience has a chance to judge the director. A great editor can turn a mediocre film into a great film with deft timing and pacing. Studios then show these early cuts to audiences and make changes based upon audience reaction. Making a film is a collaboration, even an "auteur" must admit this much. It's not as if some group of puritanical consumers is out there demanding that Steven Soderbergh not be able to make "Traffic" or Taylor Hackford not be able to make "Ray". It's a group of consumers out there who are willing to buy films with explicit sex, violence or objectionable material removed to make the movies more palatable to their families.

I find it hard to believe any director, no matter how dedicated to their craft, would begrudge a person who wanted to buy a version, any version, of their product, "art", what have you.

If they have objections to the artistic merit of the editing methods, I suggest they quit whining and start working with companies like "Cleanflicks" and "Clear Play"to create versions closer to their original version.

Maybe that is just too much work. If that's the case it isn't that important after all.

Posted 12:17 AM by Steve
Is it possible to "retire" taxes?

Every year, citizens and businesses in this country stop their productive work and labor to comply with the various income tax demands of their state and federal governments. This is in addition to the cost of compliance with the various rules, laws and regulations enacted by these same various levels of government. This is also in addition to numerous costs associated with licensing, tariffs, fees, etc.

In exchange for this outlay of capital the American people get various protections and services from the various levels of government. In effect, the government is an entity which has an income and expenses.

Currently, the expenses of the government exceeds it's income. My goal is to change this situation. I think that taxes should be cut dramatically to increase revenue. Not surprisingly, when the government takes a smaller slice of what we produce, we tend to produce more. Increasing the size of the overall pie increases the GDP. An increased GDP will lead to an increase in tax revenue and prevent the situation of continuing deficits and a growing debt.

Furthermore, any increase in revenue should be accompanied by a spending freeze adjusting for inflation and per capita. Any extra revenue the government takes in must be used to pay off the national debt as soon as possible.

Now comes the exciting part. Once the debt is paid off, the excess revenue created by the lower tax rates would be used in investments. A set figure of the budget could be used solely for the purpose of investing. Eventually, the amount invested would result in a vast amount of capital injected into the economy. Strict controls would be set so as to make any conflict of interest impossible in the government's investment plan. Eventually, the investments would provide the government with a reliable source of income enabling a further lowering of tax rates. This would create a positive cycle of lower taxes-------->growth -------->increased revenue --------->controlled spending-------->increased investment------->increased revenue from investment-------->lower taxes------->growth and so on.

This pro-active solution to the fiscal irresponsibility of the current system would create a period of wealth, abundance, innovation and peace that the world has never seen.