Safe Haven

The professor that taught my two favorite classes during my undergraduate days--L. Marvin Overby--taught his last undergraduate classes for Mizzou today. I have very fond memories of those 2 courses: Congress and Legislative Policy/Politics, and Politics of the American South. It was a memorable experience. I'm not sure he knew he was my favorite, because quite honestly, he scared the crap out of me at the time. It was like something out of a movie: the scary professor who'd shut you down if you weren't prepared, like an edgy, off-color John Keating. I can't really explain what that was like, except to say this: I never missed a lecture, and I never wanted to. This dude is a throwback to the days when a university and the exchange of knowledge was for its own sake. It was good, because it was the truth, and no matter how indirect, it's for the good of others. He's good at playing the roguish cynic, but really, some pretty high ideals are lurking behind the prese

I don't mean to say they don't have a place. They do. Drama is good. And sometimes a longer running time is just necessary. But I think Serious Films are like beer or kale: we're all pretending to like them, because nobody wants to break first. It's like a game of chicken, over dumb things. Wes Anderson makes weird movies. They're comedic, in a sense. You're not allowed to laugh like at a comedy show. You chuckle awkwardly, and salute the irony. It's some kind of surrealism, but let's be honest: if you met these characters, you'd call the cops, or some doctors. The longer a movie goes, the more Serious it is. It can't win an Oscar, unless someone is black, brown, and/or gay, unless a white person learns a lesson. In which case, the underrepresented characters will be utterly ignored in terms of development. Under no circumstances will a Serious Film be popular with ordinary people. If a film is popular with ordinary people, it must be simpl

I'm going to start a new tag called, "Observations." It's going to be what some call, "observational comedy." I could use a few laughs, and so I'm sure could you. The Editor is sure to make a few appearances. [What?! I mean, yeah, I wasn't paying attention. I was at the fridge.--ed.] Anyway, have you noticed that a standard-size water bottle contains precisely 16.9 ounces? Not 16. Not 17. An integer would make too much sense. Can you imagine that marketing meeting? "OK, people. We obviously don't use metric here in the US. How many ounces should we sell at the price we determined?" "12!" "16!" "18!" [pregnant pause] "How about 16.9?" "Genius!" -- Now, some enterprising soul has noticed that 16.9 ounces is precisely 500 milliliters. So we've caved to our European betters after all. I have a couple of questions here, though. Does anyone know why we don't just go