Archive for April, 2010

Date Night

Sunday, April 25th, 2010

The consensus among movie critics about Date Night seems to be that it is a big disappointment: Tina Fey and Steve Carrell are two of America’s funniest comic writers and actors, and here they are in a very ordinary comedy. Okay, maybe I’m using the word consensus a bit loosely, since I’m basing that on exactly two reviews, and both from New York at that (the Times and the New Yorker). But there’s a general tendency among movie critics to have a hard time appreciating movies that are not radically new and surprising. This probably has something to do with seeing a couple hundred movies a year, most of them crap, and most of the rest painfully familiar. Having been a 75-movies-a-year critic myself for a few years, I can empathize with those critics’ desire for true originality. I think it’s safe to say that unless you’re going to 100 movies a year or so, you’ll enjoy Date Night.

Carrell and Fey play a typical suburban couple with a couple of exhausting kids and an exhausting routine that finds them in a rut, the spark and romance sapped from their daily lives. The news that their friends are divorcing motivates them to go on a date at a trendy new restaurant in Manhattan. What follows is, to be sure, a relatively formulaic fish-out-of-water comedic plot, featuring the hapless couple on the run from gangsters for a madcap night of ridiculous adventures in Manhattan. But it does have an intelligent edge, and even the big preposterous gags are funny. Mark Wahlberg’s character never appears without a shirt, something that seemed to annoy the New York critics who mysteriously failed to recognize that that was a satirical comment on genre movies with hunks like Wahlberg showing off their buff bods. Carrell even finishes by begging Wahlberg to put on a shirt, using up the PG-13-rated Date Night’s one allotment for an F-bomb in the act.

Fey and Carrell are believable as a long-married couple, but more important, they are believable as an intelligent and witty couple saddled with the weight of routine. In addition to Wahlberg, Ray Liotta, James Franco and Kristen Wiig have funny bit parts. While Date Night does not break comedic ground, why should it have to? It’s simply funny.

The Runaways

Friday, April 16th, 2010

Somewhere in The Runaways, the story of the pathbreaking all-girl rock band in the mid-1970s, are a few photons that were reflected off my daughter Aylia, who spent a day as an extra on the film. Sadly, those photons are indistinguishable from a blurry background. Nevertheless, the movie, starring Kristen Stewart as Joan Jett and Dakota Fanning as Runaways singer Cherie Currie, was an interesting an entertaining tale of an overlooked part of rock history. While Jett has continued as the lead singer, songwriter, and guitarist of Joan Jett and the Blackhearts, Currie has been in and out of music, done some acting, and has frequently been out of show business since leaving the Runaways in 1977. The movie is at least as much Currie’s story as it is Jett’s, and in fact is based on Currie’s autobiography, Neon Angel: The Cherie Currie Story.

The young women of the Runaways are promoted by producer Kim Fowley, a flamboyant loudmouth who pushes Currie to flaunt her sexuality. While Fowley fantasizes about the Runaways being as transformative as the Beatles, as portrayed in the movie, he irresponsibly pushes them, exploits them, and foments controversy within the band. Not surprisingly, drugs become a major part of their lives. One wonders what might have become of the band had they had a producer like the Beatles’ George Martin instead of the narcissistic and irresponsible Fowley.

The movie is directed by Floria Sigismundi in her feature debut. Her inexperience shows perhaps in a general lack of sense of place or passage of time in the movie. When the girls are on the road playing concerts in dives, we don’t get a feel for where they are. On tour in Japan, it feels like LA with asian extras (the cars are shown driving on the right, unlike Japan’s left-side driving, for example). But she does an excellent job of capturing the mood of the girls, their band, and drawing great performances out of Stewart and Fanning.

My Erdös-Bacon Number

Saturday, April 3rd, 2010

My Erdös-Bacon number is 6. This is the sum of my Erdös number (4), which measures the number of degrees of separation I have, through authorship of academic papers, from prolific Hungarian mathematician Paul Erdös, and my Bacon number (2), which measures the number of degrees of separation I have, through movie roles, from American actor Kevin Bacon. My Bacon number is low courtesy of my role in the movie Deep Impact which features a large cast of many veteran actors. My connection to Bacon (or at least the first one I found) is via Maximilian Schell, who was in Telling Lies in America with Kevin Bacon. So Schell has a Bacon number of 1, and since I was in Deep Impact with Schell, I have a Bacon number of 2.

Figuring out my Erdös number required a bit more sleuthing, but was greatly aided by this website, provided by the American Mathematical Society, which will provide the Erdös number of any author in the database of math papers. The difficulty is that I am not in their database. So I made some guesses as to co-authors of mine who might be in their database. The first good hit was Frank Spahn, a dynamicist friend and colleague at the University of Potsdam who has an Erdös number of 5, giving me E=6 and and E-B number of 8. When I thought about other possible connections, though, I hit on Jeff Scargle, a mathematically inclined planetary scientist at NASA’s Ames Research Center. While I have not authored a paper with Jeff Scargle, I have with his Ames colleague, Jeff Cuzzi. Scargle is in the database with an Erdös number of 2, giving Cuzzi an Erdös number of 3, and me E=4.

Why does anyone care about these numbers? Well, most don’t. The idea of degrees of separation has been around for some time, and a game was created around the idea of finding the number of acting degrees of separation from Kevin Bacon. These calculations of degrees of separation are a way to quantify the “small world phenomenon” that posits that the human population is a network of connections where the number of links between any two individuals is small. The world of mathematical journals is sufficiently different, that even having an Erdös number and a Bacon number is fairly unusual. And since the whole connection concept is essentially a mathematical model, it seems fitting to have a small world number based on a mathematician. Paul Erdös wrote well over 1000 scholarly articles, so mathematicians used him as a root for degrees of separation in that particular world. My E-B number of 6 puts me one behind Brian Greene (5) and one better than Stephen Hawking and tied with Richard Feynman.