The Lemming Watch

Peg the pundit

I used to like to read Peggy Noonan. She was interesting, usually choosing appealing subjects to write about; and she wrote in an engaging style. She was a good columnist.

But now she's just a pundit and I’ve gotten tired of her. She’s getting old, and with age I suppose goes some crankiness. Also, usually with age, one foregoes—at least outwardly—the certain fullness of one’s self, the conceit that the youthful often muster. But dear old Peg seems to be still in that arrogant (pundit) mode. 

I began to suspect her when she backed Obama for president. She had allowed other left of center ideas to creep into her work too. But what is really upsetting is her hostility to Sarah Palin. Now Sarah Palin is good, and Peg may be a little jealous of that. It may be she has a concern that one may not be as good as one thinks herself to be. Palin is probably the most prominent and newsworthy politician after the president. Yes, she may be a bit inexperienced in national politics; she may be a little weak in international relations; she may not be a foremost economist. But these are not fundamental personality or knowledge flaws. The lady does know right from wrong—more than one can say about ninety-five percent of current politicians.

For nine months now, old Peg has been acting the harpy against Governor Palin. She picks on this popular favorite with a sour wit. (but then she also backed Barak Obama). One wonders if she left all her rational thinking in the Reagan White House. Back in October Noonan raked Ms. Palin over the coals; and again, recently, she took Ms. Palin to task after her thoughtful resignation as Alaska’s governor.

Part of the isue with Noonan and other writers, both left and right, seems to be that Ms. Palin is not of the Ivy League, BosNYWash corridor pundit corps. But stop and think Peg—maybe that’s why she is popular. Maybe the citizenry of the U.S. is getting tired of the elites of the East and their haughty attitude and “we know what is best for all of you” thinking.

It seems that Ms. Noonan might want to consider why Palin is so popular instead of just blasting away with a venomous pen and, even if she does not agree with her, give her the credit she deserves for what she has done in Alaska and to the grassroots base of her party..

I don’t know why the WSJ keeps Noonan on their columnist roles There are better writers out there more in tune with the Journal’s ideals.

Going to the Movies

I think the last time we went to the movies was more than a year ago. It isn’t that it’s too difficult to get there; but there is just not much the movie makers produce that is worth the effort and the price of admission. So we pretty much stay away. We do watch a lot of the older movies because most of those older movies have some merit—interesting and rational story lines, great acting, good direction, wonderful photography. We record them from Turner Classic Movies (TCM) or rent them from Netflix.

 

But the other night my wife and I went to see a movie. We wanted to see the latest Star Trek movie on the big screen. We weren’t disappointed; the special effects were—well, special; maybe they were a little overdone, but they were impressive. The story line could have been good; it was ruined by poor screenplay, mediocre acting, and weak direction. The idea was good but it was not well written. It was a typical Hollywood modern day production with slam bang, destroy most everything in sight, and make it all move too fast for the eye and mind to follow. The action, along with the huge screen and the booming sound cause sensory overload for me. But, for our normal lemming viewers, it obviates the need to have a good story and good direction.

 

I think Gene Roddenbury would have been disappointed too. So, as far as a production is concerned, it is a good example of why we don’t bother to go to modern, big screen movies.

 

But there is much more to the movie experience. This link shows what it cost to see Star Wars in 1977—a whole $2.00. The other night we paid $7.50, but that was only because we qualify for senior discount; the standard ticket price is $13.00—an astounding 550% increase in the price since 1977!

 

So, that’s a 17 percent per year average increase over those 32 years. What gives? The average increase in inflation over those years is just about four percent. Do you think maybe Hollywood is taking a page from congress’s book on how to take your money?

 

The theater, however, isn’t satisfied with this mega-inflated pricing; to add insult to injury, once we were in the theater and waiting for the movie, we were subjected to one commercial after another using their slam-bang sound system to drown out any conversation. It would have been nice to have some quiet background music. Why should I pay their exorbitant ticket price and then have to watch commercials? I can watch commercials on my TV at home for free.

 

Okay, it’s time for the movie to start. But wait, no movie yet. We get a series of at least eight previews. Most of them are previews of shows in other elements of the theater's array of about 20 separate movie houses under this one roof.

 

I wonder no longer why I don’t go to the movies anymore.

 

But the lemmings still do go, and they pay those prices, one individual following the other following what the movie mags tell them they must see. The multi-venue movie houses are a hang out—a place for the teeny-bopper girls to show off, and for the guys of all ages hitting on them. More fun to watch than the movie.