Hersh versus the Pentagon

Hmmm. Who to believe....who to believe...who to believe? Seymour Hersh or the Pentagon. Now, let's see....

Seymour Hersh (Ok, so he has the same first name as both my father and grandfather.) is a Pulitzer Prize winning journalist who exposed the My Lai Massacre back when I was but a young high school student. Versus the Bush Administration who has taken lying, confabulation and misinformation to levels unkown since the days of Richard Nixon.

I highly doubt that Mr. Hersh would put his prestigious reputation on the line by making up an "outlandish, conspiratorial story." Empshasis on the "making up" part. Is the story "outlandish?" Yes it is. Who would believe such a thing? Is the story "conspiratorial?" Indeed. Since it involves a sort of conspiracy...but not on Hersh's part.

I was amused and enlightened by the Bush administration response to the story, which posted on the New Yorker's Website on Saturday and will publish in this week's issue today. The administration "denied" the story by saying it was "outlandish, conspiratorial, and filled with errors." Reading this "denial very closely, one can see that it is not a denial at all, but a classic "non-denial denial." Note that the "denial" didn't say the story wasn't true or had some truth to it. Makes you ponder what else will be revealed in the coming days or hours.

If the the Senate and House democrats continue to find their collective backbones and push for a congressional investigation--not a pentagon investigation--with independent counsel and the works--this will no doubt mean the downfall of the Bush Administration in November. It is a terrible, terrible shame that it would have to have happened on the backs of so many Iraqis and the deaths of so many of our young people.

Barbara Barnett

Barnett's Creative Outlet

Barnett's Creative Outlet

Actors v. Movie Stars

After the heaviness of my first post (don't all be scared away now,) I'd like to lighten it up just a bit, and delve into the world of entertainment.

I've always been drawn to particular actors and actresses and their films more on the basis of their body of work and talent, than on their superstardom. One performance that just grabs me and touches something inside me sends me fleeing to Blockbusters to find every single movie made by that actor, and leaves me wondering why I hadn't discovered him (or her) before. Ususally I find that the actor in question has been around for a while, maybe doing an occasional Hollywood film, but mostly smaller quieter films or theatre; sometimes I'm the last to know about the actor and my friends wonder where I've been. Occasionally, I'm disappointed by the actor's other film work and just relish the one performance that grabbed me. Other times I get positively obsessed. So here's my list of favorite actors and why I like them, and why I recommend that you see their films, superstars or not. In most cases, the reason is that they are ACTORS, no simply stars. They give subtle performances using every muscle, and often especially their eyes.

My first love (at the age of 9)--David McCallum (Ilya Kuryakin on the Man from UNCLE)--it was the only thing I've ever liked him in and in my little girl mindest he was spectacular. He started me on my lifelong preference for British actors (he being Scots) and for actors who had lives and careers informed by things other than stardom (he is a virtuoso musician, as I understand)

Sean Connery (James Bond, himself)--also at the age of 9-ish, I fell in love with 007. Never got obsessed with him, tho. Loved him in "Robin and Marian". Thought he was over-the-top in The Avengers.

(now for the more recent)

Harrison Ford. I did fall for Han Solo (who didn't) when we were all supposed to be in love with Luke Skywalker. The reason that Han became the romantic hero of the series was that Ford put much more complexity into Han than was written. Ford has done that throughout his whole career, making otherwise fair characters into something more and making great characters interesting. I've liked everything he's done that I've seen--even Sabrina.

Kevin Kline. He is an exceptional American actor. One of the few who divide their time between stage and screen. He has a classical theatre training, unlike most American film stars, and more like their British counterparts. And it shows.

David Duchovny--One of those actors (not an ACTOR, I'm afraid) who I adored in one thing (of course, that was the X-Files) until he got bored with the series and phoned in his last two seasons' worth of episodes. Haven't liked him in anything else at all. Even Return to Me made me cringe a little. Evolution was embarassing to me since I forced my husband to see it opening weekend.

Russell Crowe. Ah, here's an interesting case. I don't think Russell ever expected, nor really desired, movie icon status. Then Gladiator hit (while he was off filming Proof of Life) and boom, it smacked him in the jaw and he was totally unprepared for the onslaught of intrusion into his life. Russell had been around for years and has never, ever given a bad performance. Each role is different. He is an ACTOR, a chameleon of a character actor who is also a leading man. I recommend (other than the post-stardom films): Sum of Us, Insider, the Crossing. He is also a decent country rock musician and song writer. His band TOFOG has been round much, much longer than his acting career and they are definitely worth a listen.

Billy Crudup. Another American ACTOR. Divides his time between theatre and film, mostly focusing on independent and smaller films. Tony award nominations and other stage acting citations take him out of the realm of "movie star" He was wonderful in "without limits" "waking the dead" "charlotte gray" and "almost famous" His performances are always good, although I haven't cared for all of his films. Like most of my favorite actors, he is extremely shy off camera/stage, and is intensely private.

Viggo Mortensen. Here's another one I've liked only in one film: Lord of the Rings. He was Aragorn, just as I'd pictured him in the novels. He was perfect, and perfectly cast. I like the fact that he is also an artist and writer and has a life outside movies. I think he is likely to abandon manistream film because he dislikes the machine and the intrusions into his privacy. i like that he is upfront about his politics as well.

Ralph Fiennes. Why it took me so long to "discover" him, I'll never know. I'd seen him in Schindler where he horrified me with a striking performance; and blew me away in Quiz Show, one of my favorite movies. It wasn't until I saw him on cable in "Oscar and Lucinda" that his performance just struck some deep chord inside. It was a sweet, raw and poetic performance that sent me to the video store to find out more. My appetite for his film and stage work is nearly insatiable. He is the most subtle and brilliant of ACTORs. A chameleon; a leading man. Hell, I even liked him in the Avengers (but I thought the movie was stupid, even tho I loved the series). What I've read (and briefly seen) of his stage work leaves me wishing to live in London so that I can see more of it. His work with the UNICEFF in some of the most Hellish places on earth is unsung and wonderful. Again, a shy and quiet man, protective of his privacy, he felt invaded and unprepared when the press descended after The English Patient made him a star, he seems to prefer to do smaller, well done films (with an occasional hollywood film) but always interpsersed with critically received film work. Won a Tony for his Hamlet, which he may be reprising in London next year.

Jeremy Northam. Ah, Jeremy. Some say he looks like David Duchovny's English brother. I can't see it. They are both tall and slim of build, but the resemblence ends there, I think. Jeremy is a brilliant ACTOR (as opposed to movie star). He has a way of totally changing himself for roles. One need only look at the years when JN has done several role in that year. In 1999, for example, he played in The Winslow Boy, An Ideal Husband and Happy Texas. One could argue that his two characters in WB and AIH were similar. They had the same name and were, more or less, in the same Edwardian Era. The characters could not have been more different, however, And Happy Texas? A 180 degree turn round. JN can go from British to American in the blink of an eye. Who else could have played Morgan Sullivan in the paranoid film Cypher (which still has not been released here in the US)? He is also incredibly handsome, did I mention?

End of rant.

The State of Affairs

This morning's news tells us that Donald Rumsfeld has gone to Iraq. No doubt, it is to show us how concerned he his about the debacle he created. The administration has no one to blame but itself for this terrible, terrible mess. It can all be traced to arrogance. Supreme and extreme arrogance.

Dubya the cowboy's: "You're either with us or against us" attitude, conveyed through layers and layers of the chain of command (isn't he the "commander in chief?") The equating of Iraqui insurgents and combatants as Sadam-ists and terrorists; lumping everyone together in crowded understaffed prisons--exhausted, ill-trained reservists, frustrated, and ill-prepared for this duty--a recipe for THIS disaster.

Rumsfeld's dismissal of the Geneva conventions for some (ah yes, terrorists)--but with line between terrorist and legitimate combatant very very blurred by everyone from Scott McLellan to Rummy, to Wolfy to Dubya, himself. How in the heck are the privates supposed to understand where the faded and blurred line is drawn? Even the military brass and Pentagon civillians don't know who controls the prisons: regular military or millitary intelligence?

Or is it that now that the horror has been exposed for what it is, is the administration feigning disbelief, when, in fact, it really more than understood what was happening in Abu Ghraib? Nod, nod, wink, wink. Maybe now that the world is outraged, and the torture of prisoners has gotten out beyond the reach of the Bush administration secrecy, the administration has to be shocked. Really to acknowledge something it's already known about, but believed was safely secure secret that the sheep in most of the media and the cowed and terrified legislative branch wouldn't question? Now that it's out, it's time to acknowledge the adminstration's role in creating the kind of atmosphere in which atrocities were allowed and encouraged? We must keep this front and center as spring moves into summer and fall. The Dubya adminstration has made one mistake after the next, taking good will and squandering it, getting away with it and going on to the next disastrous move. We cannot forget this; we cannot let the press forget it and most of all we cannot let the voters forget this by November!

End of rant