Friday, June 25, 2010

Who does it better?

Madonna has been one of my idols since I was a teenager.  I still remember the first time I heard her on the radio.  She sang Into the Groove and I was spellbound.  The tune was catchy and fun and you couldn’t sit still.  No matter how many times it was replayed, I always loved it.  And my adoration was born.

I bought that album, Like a Virgin, which was Madonna’s second, and then the previous and then the next and then all the ones that followed, up until a couple years ago, when I started to lose interest in buying new CDs altogether.  I still follow her work though, and not just her music.

I saw and loved her in Desperately Seeking Susan, Who's That Girl, Dick Tracy, and Evita.  Other roles she played rank from weak to terrible, but she was never considered a serious actress (although she did win a Golden Globe for Evita).

Similarly, she doesn’t have a spectacular voice (à la Barbra Streisand, Mariah Carey, or Whitney Houston) and her music if often a generic mixture of pop and rock that lyrically lands on the softer side (she’s no Bruce Springsteen or Bob Dylan if you will), and yet, she’s always very original and often controversial.

She’s also incredibly skilled at marketing her own image.  Coming of age at the dawn of the MTV era, she figured that the best way to sell her music was to pair it up with cutting edge, provocative videos that always positioned her firmly in the center of any media firestorm.  Madonna was also always reinventing her look, which allowed her to remain relevant year after year, decade after decade.

She has also always been a strong supporter of gay rights, always surrounding herself with gay friends and collaborators, and never one to shy away from stating her opinion or courting controversy.  In short, in spite of her limitations as a singer, a musician, and an actress, Madonna has been fun to love and hard to ignore, and through the years she’s given me countless hours of entertainment.

While I’ve fallen in love with many other artists since and for a variety of reasons, no one ever matched Madonna in terms of originality or histrionics.  Until Lady Gaga.

I had been hearing her name and tidbits of her songs for a while without really knowing her work, until one day, wanting to know what the deal really was, I sat down and watched the video for Bad Romance.  The song was so original and the video so over the top that it was instant adoration all over again.

Her second album The Fame Monster, which contains Bad Romance, is, in a word, brilliant, with 6 great songs out of its 8 tracks.  Quite a feat.  Her first album, The Fame, also features great tunes, and I can’t wait to hear/see what she does next.

What I like about Lady Gaga is her willingness to push the envelope and stand up for what she believes in.  Her costumes, makeup, songs, videos, performances, and appearances are always eventful.  She freely states that she always felt (and was treated) like a freak, an outsider, so she wants to make the “freaks” among her fans feel at home around her.  And she’s a big gay rights supporter as well.

On top of all that, she’s also got a very powerful voice that, honestly, can run circles around Madonna’s.  That’s not to say that Lady Gaga has replaced Madonna for me, I’m just saying that Gaga, unlike Madonna, has an incredible voice that shields her from the countless criticism that Madonna had to endure concerning her singing abilities.

Like Madonna before her, Lady Gaga’s tunes are catchy, fun, and original.  Her videos, like Madonna’s, are provocative and cutting edge, but I thought they were also very original … until I saw this montage:

It’s quite impressive how closely the choreography, makeup, costumes, photography, design, and direction of Lady Gaga’s videos mirror Madonna’s isn’t it?

Again, I’m not disparaging anyone here.  I love Madonna.  I love Lady Gaga.  Who knows, maybe Gaga is a huge Madonna fan and all those similarities are just tributes to her (our) idol.

Anyways, to answer the post title’s question, I think that all things considered, Madonna does do it better.

Now I’m waiting for a duet.

Thursday, June 24, 2010

A Quote By

Hillary Clinton, US Secretary of State, marking LGBT Pride month:

"The struggle for equality is never, ever finished. And it is rarely easy, despite how self-evident it should be. But the hardest-fought battles often have the biggest impact. So I hope that each and every one of us will recommit ourselves to building a future in which every person – every, single person can live in dignity, free from violence, free to be themselves, free to live up to their God-given potential wherever they live and whoever they are."

Wednesday, June 16, 2010

Sickening data

I always felt that the estimates of how much oil was flowing into the Gulf of Mexico were grossly underestimated (and I still feel like they might be).
Now the picture is coming into more focus:
A government panel on Tuesday again raised its estimate of the oil escaping from BP’s out-of-control well, to as much as 60,000 barrels a day. The new estimates, made since a damaged riser was cut on June 3, mean that roughly 2.5 million gallons of oil are spilling into the Gulf of Mexico every day, and that an amount equal to the Exxon Valdez spill could be gushing from the well about every four days.
Sickening.

How is your Gaydar?

It looks like there might be a scientific explanation behind gay people’s innate ability to spot like-minded folks out there in the cold, hard world:

"Gaydar," that innate ability gay people supposedly have to zero in on other gays even in a crowd, may really exist.

When Dutch scientists examined how heterosexual and homosexual people focus their attention, they discovered gays are much more detail-oriented.

When the men and women were presented with similar questions about the pictures they had been shown, the straight volunteers answered faster but were less accurate. The gay men and women, on the other hand, were slower to answer but were right more of the time, especially when they were asked about the smaller shapes.

This suggests they are able to hone in on even very small details as well as the bigger picture, according to the research, which appeared in the journal Frontiers in Cognition. In gays' daily routine, researchers believe, this close attention to detail could help them to detect others' sexual preferences.

"This is the first time that scientific proof has been found for the existence of a gaydar mechanism amongst homosexuals," researcher Dr. Lorenza Colzato of Leiden University in the Netherlands told the Daily Mail. "This perceptual skill allows homosexuals to recognize other gay people faster and we think it's because they are much more analytic than heterosexuals."

People who are naturally more perceptive and detail-oriented may have a greater chance of picking up on subtle clues in other people that they may be homosexual, which makes it easier for them to search out gay friends and sexual partners, the study found.

Sounds about right.

Cat’s Eye

cats_eye I watched this movie because it was written by Stephen King, whose books I like very much, and was hoping it wouldn’t be as terrible as some of the movie adaptations of his works have been.  Fortunately, it wasn’t too bad, although it showcased the production values of a made-for-TV movie.

Cat’s Eye is split into three separate stories whose connecting thread is a cat that appears in all three.  Other than that, the three stories have nothing in common.

Some big names star in each tale, like Drew Barrymore, James Woods and Robert Hays, but no one really stands out.

The three tales are fairly interesting but only minimally scary.  The first one is somewhat undermined by Woods’ theatricality, which I’m not a fan of, but you can clearly see King’s mark on it.  The second one is interesting for gauging how far King would actually bring it (the answer is pretty far).  The last one is the only one dealing with a “creature,” but thankfully it’s made fairly well, so it doesn’t suck, although it’s the weakest of the three.

It’s fine for some light viewing on a “night in” but can be easily overlooked.

Grade: 6

Tuesday, June 15, 2010

Inglourious Basterds

I B Teaser 1-Sht. Full disclosure: I’m not a fan of Quentin Tarantino.  He is revered as some kind of cinematic genius, so maybe I just don’t get him, but his work is, in my opinion, hit or miss and had steadily worsened.

While I liked both Reservoir Dogs (his first movie) and Pulp Fiction (the one that propelled him to the A-list) I hated Kill Bill: Vol. 1 so much that I didn’t bother watching Vol. 2 (a rarity for me) and I skipped the poorly reviewed Grindhouse.  I never saw Jackie Brown, which earned good reviews and I’ll watch it at some point, but I couldn’t pass on Inglourious Basterds, given the stellar reviews, good word of mouth and Best Picture Oscar nomination.

Fortunately, Basterds is a pretty good movie, even though there were a couple things that rubbed me the wrong way.  Take Til Schweiger’s character’s introduction, when big, yellow letters are superimposed over his image, on film, like you’d see in a comic book.  I’m sorry, I don’t care if someone thinks that’s part of his “genius,” it just looks odd and silly to me.  It stands out like and eyesore.

At any rate, the script is good and original, especially for taking the liberty to rewrite history on how World War II ended.  That, I grant you, is quite genial, particularly because it’s so unexpected.

Brad Pitt and Diane Kruger do a pretty good job, but it’s Christoph Waltz and Mélanie Laurent that steal the show every time they are on screen.  Waltz very deservedly won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor, even though I’m pretty sure he gets more screen time than Pitt himself, who got top billing.

Technically, the movie is impeccable.  Costumes, art direction, set decoration, cinematography and editing are all great and the score is good too.

Overall, a good movie and another winner for Tarantino (who unfortunately just announced he’s making Kill Bill: Vol. 3 … )

Grade: 8

Thursday, June 10, 2010

Splice

splice Splice tells the story of what can happen when humans decide to “play God” by toying with life forms and creating new living beings.

Given that genetic engineering has already been successfully used with different breeds of animals (the first one was Dolly the sheep) what happens in this movie isn’t that hypothetical.  As a matter of fact, while there are strict bans on some kinds of genetic engineering (specifically, anything dealing with human DNA) in the US and Europe, I can totally picture a multinational running these experiments somewhere in the world where they can escape prying eyes as well as ethical and legal checks.

The gist: two very young and brilliant scientists splice together the genetic material collected from different species’ DNA to create a creature that has the best characteristics of each species.  The goal is a creature that could in turn help discover new types of medicines and compounds that could generate billions for the company paying for the research.

When the couple are told that their work needs to become profitable or their research will be shut down, they decide to buck the ethical dilemmas and secretly splice together human and animal DNA.  The experiment gives birth to Dren, a female creature that displays traits from all the creatures whose DNA was spliced together.

The movie is just average but is ultimately sufficiently enjoyable.  The problem I had was that it required the audience to suspend its disbelief a bit too much.  For instance, while one of the two scientists isn’t fully on board with crossing the ethical divide, he never does anything of substance to slow the process down or put a stop to it, in spite of the dangers that anyone could easily imagine.

Other things were too far fetched or too convenient as well, which in the end brought the overall grade down.  Technically, the movie is very well made.  Adrien Brody and Sarah Polley are both good, but it’s Delphine Chanéac who shines in the part of Dren, helped in no small part by the excellent makeup and visual effects.

I read that because of the recent writers’ strike in Hollywood, a lot of scripts were cursorily greenlit simply to ensure that the market wouldn’t dry up and that a steady stream of films would hit theaters.  Given the fact that the script seems a little rushed, I’d venture to say that this is one of those half baked movies approved as fillers.

Anyway, Splice is a generic enough movie that it can be easily watched on DVD or skipped altogether.

Grade: 6

The Pacific

pacific This HBO miniseries was another terrific production by the Tom Hanks-Steven Spielberg team, following their excellent Band of Brothers.

While Brothers told the story of a platoon fighting the Germans in Europe, Pacific tells the story of the Marines’ First Division, who valiantly fought the Japanese in many key battles on several islands of the Pacific Ocean.

While both wars were horrible, the guys fighting in the Pacific got very little respite.  While the troops fighting in Europe had Paris to look forward to, the islands in the Pacific offered no such “appealing target,” adding to the dampening mood.

The Japanese were also a nastier enemy than the Germans, refusing to surrender even when they clearly had no chance of winning.  Their suicidal attacks kept the American soldiers always on edge.  As despicable as the dropping of 2 nuclear bombs over heavily populated cities was, it seems like such drastic action was the only thing that would have broken the will of the Japanese to never surrender.

The format of each episode follows that of Brothers, opening with real surviving veterans talking about what it was really like without revealing their names, thereby making us wonder who will make it out alive in the end.

I loved both miniseries, but I found Pacific to be much more emotionally engaging, perhaps because of the ongoing debate on repealing “Don’t Ask Don’t Tell,” the discriminatory law that forces honorable gays and lesbians out of the military if their sexual orientation becomes known.  With what these people voluntarily put themselves through in order to serve their country, how could any sane military leader think it wise and smart to get rid of them is beyond my comprehension.

The show is top notch on every aspect: writing, acting, costumes, makeup, visual effects, score, and direction.

Overall, a must see, especially in times like these, when the US is fighting two wars and at least one of them is totally illegitimate.

Grade: 10

Monday, June 07, 2010

The cost of war

War’s worst effect is clearly the loss of life, but the monetary cost can have its consequences as well, even on a country as rich as the United States.

The wars in the Middle East have now cost the US Treasury over $1 trillion:

The cost of the United States' wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have cost taxpayers more than one trillion dollars, a Massachusetts nonprofit said Sunday, marking a grim milestone on the eve of the Memorial Day holiday.

The group, National Priorities Project, conveyed the size of US war spending by highlighting other things that could have been bought with the money. For example, for the price of America's two wars, the US could give $5,500 in Pell grants to all of America's 19 million college students for the next nine years. One trillion would also pay the entire healthcare bill for 294 million people, or 440 million children, the group says.

What Can You Get For $1 Trillion?

* Federal Funding For Higher Education -- $1 trillion would give the maximum Pell Grant award ($5,500) to all 19 million U.S. college and university students for the next 9 years.

* 294,734,961 people with health care for one year, or

* 21,598,789 public safety officers for one year, or

* 17,149,392 music and arts teachers for one year, or

* 7,779,092 affordable housing units, or

* 440,762,472 children with health care for one year, or

* 137,233,969 head start places for children for one year, or

* 16,427,497 elementary school teachers for one year, or

* 1,035,282,468 homes with renewable electricity for one year

The article didn’t have a count for the loss of life, but I do believe that between 4,000 and 5,000 members of the military have been lost between the two wars.

The amount money spent wasted is enraging and outrageous.  The loss of life, however, is the saddest thing of all.

BP’s devastation on wildlife

The oil has now reached the Florida Panhandle and the source of the spill is still pouring around 10,000 barrels of oil in the ocean each day.

The latest attempt to ‘contain’ the spill partially worked, so now BP is actually collecting around 10,000 barrels of oil a day rather than losing them to the ocean forever, because we all know that in the end they don’t want to close the well for good, they just want to get the oil out to sell it.

And the first images of the catastrophe (and the first hints of BP’s attempts to hide their mess) are bubbling to the surface like that foul oil:

Carcass of a decomposing dolphin on rocks at Queen Bess Island in Gulf of Mexico."When we found this dolphin it was filled with oil. Oil was just pouring out of it. It was the saddest darn thing to look at," said a BP contract worker who took the Daily News on a surreptitious tour of the wildlife disaster unfolding in Louisiana.

His motive: simple outrage.

"There is a lot of coverup for BP. They specifically informed us that they don't want these pictures of the dead animals. They know the ocean will wipe away most of the evidence. It's important to me that people know the truth about what's going on here," the contractor said.

The grasses by the shore were littered with tarred marine life, some dead and others struggling under a thick coating of crude.

"When you see some of the things I've seen, it would make you sick," the contractor said. "No living creature should endure that kind of suffering."

The uninhabited barrier islands are surrounded by yellow floating booms, also stained black, that are supposed to keep the oil out. It's not working.

"That grass was green a few weeks ago," the contractor said. "Now look. ... This whole island is destroyed. How do you write a check for something like this?"

He said he recently found five turtles drowning in oil.

BP's central role in the disaster cleanup has apparently given the company a lot of latitude in keeping the press away from beaches where the oil is thickest.

And this is what BP’s gift to humanity looks like:

 

Finally, a sobering video:

Heart wrenching.

Jupiter the cleaner

The biggest planet in the Solar system functions as our biggest protector, sweeping up all sorts of debris and deflecting potential threats in the form of asteroids and meteors thanks to its massive size and gravity.

Last week, it performed its duties once more:

On the third week of July 1994, comet Shoemaker-Levy crashed into Jupiter's fiery atmosphere. NASA says that another "mystery space object" hit during the same week but 15 years later, leaving a bruise as big as the Pacific Ocean.

Mystery Space Object Hits Jupiter

Judging by the series of images taken by Hubble's newly-installed Wide Field Camera 3, the current theory is that the object was a 1,600-foot wide asteroid. Analysis of the angle and size of the bruise reveals that the mystery object possibly came from the Hilda belt, a group of 1,100 asteroids orbiting near Jupiter.

Now take a look at the image above and at the detail of the black ‘scar’ caused by the impact.  That little dot you see is the size of the Pacific Ocean.

Now picture Earth right next to Jupiter.

You can close your mouth now.

The Polar Express

the polar express Nicole picked this movie for Family Night and I’m glad she did because I always wanted to see it.  The Polar Express has now become a Christmas staple in the US, the same way the Grinch has been for decades and it’s even shown in theaters year after year at Christmastime.

The story is very simple: a kid who’s starting to doubt the existence of Santa Claus is given a ride on the Polar Express on Christmas Eve.  The train rides to the North Pole where Santa is getting ready to leave to start delivering his gifts to the children of the world.  On the train there are other doubtful kids and our hero gets to live out more adventures than he could imagine.

The movie, directed by Robert Zemeckis, is famous primarily for vastly improving on the motion capture technique that was available at that time.  After this movie premiered, wowing audiences with its realistic animation – and earning a wallop at the box office, others followed, until James Cameron raised the bar exponentially last year with Avatar.

The movie is just the average family fare, with a mildly original plot but the Christmas cheer is doled out in full force.  The visual effects are impressive though, and watched in 3D it must be quite spectacular.

Grade: 7

Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire

precious Precious is one of those movies that keep you glued to the screen.  Maybe you’re horrified by what’s happening.  Maybe you’re hoping that things will improve for our heroine.  Maybe you can’t believe what you’re seeing, even though deep inside you know perfectly well that this type of things happen everyday.  Maybe it’s like watching a train wreck from which you cannot avert your gaze.

Regardless of the why, a movie like Precious is meant to shock you, to expose the ugly, to show the nasty, and Precious does it all masterfully well.

Precious tells the simple story of a teenage girl named Precious who still lives with her mom and is pregnant.  While that per se isn’t indicative of a hellish life, the conditions in which Precious has to live because of her mother’s constant belittling and beatings make it so.  The reason why Precious is pregnant in the first place also adds to her dire existence.  And her heavyset frame doesn’t help her confidence nor her place in the outside world.

Precious is headlined by two actresses who pretty much own every frame.  Gabourey Sidibe, as Precious, is a revelation.  She plays this enslaved girl with dignity, submission, and inner strength.  Sometimes a simple gaze is enough to make us care and root for Precious.  Although she didn’t win the Oscar for it, a nomination for her first role ever is a triumph in itself.

A comedienne and TV personality, Mo’Nique’s film career was slim and irrelevant up to this role, for which she very deservedly won a Best Supporting Actress Oscar.  Rarely have I seen such rage, such genuine selfishness, self-centeredness, and carelessness in a character portrayed with such raw talent.  All one can say is, BRAVO!!

Two very famous singers also appear in cameo-like roles.  Lenny Kravitz as a nurse and Mariah Carey as the social worker who tries to help Precious live a better life.  While Kravitz simply holds is own, Carey, barely recognizable without her usual glitz, actually gives a performance worth noticing.

Precious isn’t an easy movie to watch, but it’s a must see that will stay with you long after the last harrowing scene in which Mo’Nique looks like a caged wild beast at the end of her run is over.

Grade: 9

Friday, June 04, 2010

Shrek the Third

shrek-the-third I can still remember the elation I felt leaving the theater after watching the first Shrek movie back in 2001.  The screenplay felt fresh, the jokes and gags were hysterical, and the animation was groundbreaking.

The 2004 follow up, Shrek 2, was still pretty good, even though some of the surprise had understandably dissipated by then.

Given the amount of money the first two chapters generated, a Shrek the Third was inevitable, but alas, third time wasn’t the charm.

The movie sees Shrek and his sidekick Donkey going on a quest to find someone who wants to be King, while Fiona stays behind.  The adventure feels less enthralling than it used to, probably because we’ve sort of seen it all before, but it’s the characters themselves who feel tired, even though they’re “not real.”

On top of that, the baddie (Prince Charming) feels weak, and the new addition (Merlin) is nothing more than a petulant adolescent.

The animation is still great and overall the movie is certainly watchable, but I’m glad I didn’t waste my money to watch this in a theater.

The fourth, and supposedly final, chapter of the Shrek saga is in theaters now, and the reviews are less than tepid.  Looks like the brand gets worse with every outing, so I guess I’ll wait for the DVD again, and watch it with the kids on Family Night.

Grade: 5

Thursday, June 03, 2010

The Summons by John Grisham

The Summons The Summons is an enjoyable albeit just average offering by Grisham.

It tells the story of a guy who finds his old father dead in his studio, where he subsequently discovers a large amount of money that he has no idea where it could be coming from.

Although not memorable, the story is well developed (especially the well-rounded characters) and it offers plenty of adventure and even a few twists.

I particularly enjoyed the reading of the book by Michael Beck (whom I remember from the 1979 movie The Warriors), who succeeds in giving each characters his or her own distinct personality.  The various southern accents he does are great to listen to.

Grade: 7

A preventable catastrophe

It looks more and more like the environmental catastrophe brought about by the Deepwater Horizon oil rig explosion and subsequent collapse could (and should) have been avoided if the people in charge weren’t greedy bastards and heeded the warning signs.
From the NYTimes.com:
Internal documents from BP show that there were serious problems and safety concerns with the Deepwater Horizon rig far earlier than those the company described to Congress last week.
The problems involved the well casing and the blowout preventer, which are considered critical pieces in the chain of events that led to the disaster on the rig.
The documents show that in March, after several weeks of problems on the rig, BP was struggling with a loss of “well control.” And as far back as 11 months ago, it was concerned about the well casing and the blowout preventer.
On June 22, for example, BP engineers expressed concerns that the metal casing the company wanted to use might collapse under high pressure.
BP documents released last week to The Times revealed that company officials knew the casing was the riskier of two options.
In April of this year, BP engineers concluded that the casing was “unlikely to be a successful cement job,” according to a document, referring to how the casing would be sealed to prevent gases from escaping up the well.
The document also says that the plan for casing the well is “unable to fulfill M.M.S. regulations,” referring to the Minerals Management Service.
On Tuesday Congress released a memorandum with preliminary findings from BP’s internal investigation, which indicated that there were warning signs immediately before the explosion on April 20, including equipment readings suggesting that gas was bubbling into the well, a potential sign of an impending blowout.
A parade of witnesses at hearings last week told about bad decisions and cut corners in the days and hours before the explosion of the rig, but BP’s internal documents provide a clearer picture of when company and federal officials saw problems emerging.
The documents show that in March, after problems on the rig that included drilling mud falling into the formation, sudden gas releases known as “kicks” and a pipe falling into the well, BP officials informed federal regulators that they were struggling with a loss of “well control.”
On at least three occasions, BP records indicate, the blowout preventer was leaking fluid, which the manufacturer of the device has said limits its ability to operate properly.
Bob Sherrill, an expert on blowout preventers and the owner of Blackwater Subsea, an engineering consulting firm, said the conditions on the rig in February and March and the language used by the operator referring to a loss of well control “sounds like they were facing a blowout scenario.”
So, the government agency that should supervise the oil companies didn’t do its job, sweeping warning signs under the rug and allowing BP to continue drilling even though this could lead to a “blowout scenario.”
And BP cut corners to save money, made risky decisions even though it knew they were the riskier of the choices it had, and shrugged at the warning signs that seem to have been numerous.
When are some heads going to start rolling?  Are we ever going to see some of these people behind bars?  Wouldn’t that, coupled with gigantic fines, be the only way to discourage oil executives from making the same careless decisions again?

In Memoriam

dennis hopper
Dennis Hopper
1936 – 2010

One of the most recognizable names of the old Hollywood generation, Dennis Hopper succumbed to cancer this past weekend at the age of 74.

Famous primarily for his turn in Easy Rider, which he also co-wrote and directed (and which I never saw), he gave us memorable roles in later movies, like Blue Velvet, Apocalypse Now, and Speed.

His career, however, had started long ago, when he worked with a great star who unfortunately left us too early, James Dean.  Hopper starred in two of the only three movies that Dean ever made, Rebel Without a Cause and Giant.

Hopper, who had a reputation for being tough to work with, fought many demons throughout his life, including alcohol and drug addictions, but was ultimately able to clean himself up and put his career back on track.  He recently top-billed the TV series Crash, based on the Oscar winning movie with the same title.

His talent will be missed.

http://www.efitnessnow.com/images/Dennis-Hopper-Prostate-Cancer-Bones.jpg
R.I.P.

Have we reached the bottom of the list yet?

I’m referring to the list of possible solutions for the devastating Gulf of Mexico oil spill that’s endangering countless species of animals in the water and outside and is wreaking the environment along the fragile coast.
The question is, Should we nuke the well in order to close it?
The Russians have used this method successfully several times in the past and more and more scientists and experts seem to start warming up to the idea too:
As the latest effort to plug the oil leak in the Gulf of Mexico meets with failure, the idea of nuking the immediate area to seal the oil underground is gaining steam among some energy experts and researchers.
One prominent energy expert known for predicting the oil price spike of 2008 says sending a small nuclear bomb down the leaking well is "probably the only thing we can do" to stop the leak.
Matt Simmons, founder of energy investment bank Simmons & Company, also says that there is evidence of a second oil leak about five to seven miles from the initial leak that BP has focused on fixing. That second leak, he says, is so large that the initial one is "minor" in comparison.
"Probably the only thing we can do is create a weapons system and send it down 18,000 feet and detonate it, hopefully encasing the oil," he said.
His idea echoes that of a Russian newspaper that earlier this month suggested the US detonate a small nuclear bomb to seal the oil beneath the sea. Komsomoloskaya Pravda argued in an editorial that Russia had successfully used nuclear weapons to seal oil spills on five occasions in the past.
Asked by a Bloomberg reporter about the risks involved in setting off a nuclear bomb off the coast of Louisiana, Simmons argued that a nuclear explosion deep inside a well bore would have little effect on surrounding areas.
"If you're 18,000 feet under the sea bed, it basically wont do anything [on the surface]," he said.
My answer would be yes, let’s nuke the damn thing and close it shut once and for all.  Especially since there wouldn’t be any real risk of radiation leaking out from such a depth, I don’t see why that solution has not already been put into play.
I can only guess that BP doesn’t want to risk making the well unusable by detonating a nuclear device right next to it, but if the solution could work I believe that Obama should order it.
And what’s that tidbit about a second leak a few miles off that the we never heard of before?  Is that true?  Is it really much bigger than the one BP is trying to plug?  If the answers are yes and yes, then is anything being done to plug that one too?  What’s going on here?  Obama?  Hello?

Wednesday, June 02, 2010

“Too bad your class is all boys…”

I’m not a fan of McDonald’s food (although I do occasionally crave their fries and sundaes…) but I have to give them props for this wonderful ad.  It’s well executed, very professional and has a great message:

Too bad we likely will never see it on US TV stations.

Gulf spill update

BP’s latest attempt to stop the flow of oil into the ocean via the so called ‘top kill’ failed.  Now they’re trying to slash the top of the well to then fit a new cap on it, which seems to me even less likely to succeed.
Meanwhile, the oil that had already reached the Louisiana shores, has now spread to Mississippi and Alabama, and Florida is only a few miles away:
BP early Wednesday used robot submarines and a complex maneuver in an attempt to stop the massive flow of crude oil spilling into the Gulf of Mexico.
The company appeared to be making its second cut into the undersea well's riser pipe, the initial steps toward placing a cap over the well that has spewed hundreds of thousands of gallons of oil into the Gulf of Mexico every day since late April.
Meanwhile, rust-colored oil washed ashore Tuesday on barrier islands off Alabama and Mississippi as a beleaguered BP tried to stop the continued flow of the largest spill in U.S. history.
And forget about the 5,000 barrels a day figure.  That number now stands at 19,000, with a 20% projected increase after the cut is performed, and with the caveat that the figure is likely higher still given that we’re quite likely fed lies by BP and probably the government:
But the operation carries the risk that the flow of crude from the ruptured well could increase by up to 20 percent once the damaged riser is cut away.
And the gusher may not be shut down until August when BP expects to complete relief wells that will take the pressure off the one now spewing into the Gulf.
The 5,000-foot-deep well erupted after an explosion and fire aboard the Deepwater Horizon drilling rig on April 20. Eleven people were killed. The rig sank two days later, leaving up to 19,000 barrels (798,000 gallons) of oil pouring into the Gulf, according to federal estimates.
After fouling sections of Louisiana's marshes over the past two weeks, the oil was spreading toward the northeast on Tuesday. Tar balls and patches of reddish-brown "weathered" oil came ashore on Dauphin Island, Alabama, south of Mobile, Alabama, and on Mississippi's Petit Bois Island, off Pascagoula, Mississippi, authorities reported.
And the last bit of terrifying news is that the hurricane season started yesterday and if one hits, it’s going to multiply the disaster:
In Louisiana, Plaquemines Parish President Billy Nungesser warned a hurricane in the area could drive more oil ashore.
"We don't want to scare anybody, but we need to be realistic about it," Nungesser said. "If a storm does top out levees, it will probably bring oil with it."
He said residents who evacuate ahead of a hurricane might return "not to a flooded home, but to a home that is completely contaminated with this oil."
Charming.  Thanks oil companies!

Tuesday, June 01, 2010

Fun graphs

Ray pointed Graphjam.com out to me.  Some of the graphs are hysterical:

clip_image002

image