You Are Who You Love, Not Who Loves You

Good Afternoon Ladies & Gentlemen,

Think that I finished up my Christmas shopping today...which is good because it's Thursday or something. Four days until I get to see the family & friends back in Utah again. Week after that, I'll see Bubbles, Barbie & Keanna again in Vegas for New Year's. Can't wait...but apparently gonna have to. Oh...and I found a good deal on my battery charger for my camera that US Airways lost for me.

Last night, I watched an interesting show. I don't know what it is...but the more Nicolas Cage movies that I watch, the more I like him as an actor. I used to really wonder what the hell people saw in him back when the only movies that I had seen him in were like "Face/Off" and "Con Air" and that's about it. However, after watching...now, just about every move starring him (even "Family Man") I see that he's a pretty damn good actor. Anyway, the one I saw last night not only had one Nicolas Cage...but TWO Cages. It's the Spike-Jonze directed "Adaptation" starring Cage, Meryl Streep, Chris Cooper and others like Maggie Gyllenhaal. The interesting thing was that this movie was basically about screenwriter Charlie Kaufman (wrote "Being John Malkovich" among others), who I saw on the Colbert Report a few days ago...and he's a neurotic writer...and Nicolas Cage portrayed him very well...and his twin brother Donald. The story's about a screenwriter who's trying to adapt a novel called "The Orchid Thief" by Sue Orleans (Streep) about a horticulturist (Cooper) but is having problems concentrating, sleeping and just finding out how to make this a movie. He's very self-conscious, has low self esteem and basically your typical self-loathing Jew...but his twin brother's very outgoing and helps him along the way...in his own weird way.

Basically, I liked this movie a lot...because I've had similar thoughts to Kaufman like "Oh, you're too ugly, what would she see in you? You're not rich, you're not talented, blah blah blah" and my brother has probably never had a thought like that in his life, so there's some personalization there. Also, it was told in a very odd way that made you pay attention, which I like...and it was just quirky and crazy like you would expect from a Spike Jonze music video...but two hours long. There's some profound statements made in the movie like "Adaptation is a profound process" and "You are who you Love, not who Loves you" and it's really just a great movie. If you haven't seen it, I would highly recommend it...and don't be worried that I said you had to pay attention. It's a lot easier than you think...and there's not really a dull moment for you lose interest. Give it a shot. Doctor's orders. Now, here's the news...

Baz Luhrmann + Great Gatsby = Fear!!! - According to The Hollywood Reporter, the "Moulin Rouge" and "Australia" filmmaker Baz Luhrmann has officially acquired rights to the F. Scott Fitzgerald classic, considered to be one of the great American novels of all time. The story, set in pre-Depression era New York, deals with a young Midwestern man who becomes involved in the romantic entanglements of a group of overly wealthy socialites and his mysterious self-made neighbor. Luhrmann says that he sees story as a wake-up call as the economy comes crashing down and another gilded age, as he sees it, comes to an end. "If you wanted to show a mirror to people that says, 'You've been drunk on money,' they're not going to want to see it. But if you reflected that mirror on another time they'd be willing to. People will need an explanation of where we are and where we've been, and 'The Great Gatsby' can provide that explanation" says Luhrmann. The filmmaker is famous though for taking his time with breaks of four, five and seven years between his film projects in the past…so it may be a while. This time though he says he wants to move quickly on the project and that it might not be with Fox where he's been a stable filmmaker in the past. No word on the tone yet, but one wonders what he'll do with the metaphors of the green light and that giant billboard with Dr. Eckleburg's eyes overlooking the valley of ashes…and I'm personally curious how many musical numbers will be thrown in…but probably not a lot. You know, to keep with the tone. That being said, I ugh…I don't know if I'd watch this one. We shall see when the details come out, I guess.

Robbins in Iron Man 2 - Tim Robbins is tipped to play Howard Stark, father of Tony Stark (Robert Downey Jr.) in the "Iron Man" sequel reports Latino Review. Gerard Sanders (who?) played Howard in a montage during the first film. The reason for the recasting is due to an important flashback sequence in the feature that helps set up both "The Avengers" and "Captain America" films. Thus it seems likely Howard Stark's character is involved in the Super Soldier program. Hawkeye and Black Widow (hotchuma hotchuma) are also said to be a part of the story of the next film. Looks like it's going to be a star-studded sequel for the Iron Man series. Still no word on whether Susan Sarandon will play Tony Stark's grandmother...

Rocket ship Auction - NASA's soon-to-be-retired space shuttles are up for grabs. The space agency said Wednesday it's looking for ideas on where and how best to display its space shuttles once they stop flying in a few years. It's put out a call to schools, science museums and "other appropriate organizations" that might be interested in showcasing one of the three remaining shuttles. Beware: NASA estimates it will cost about $42 million to get each shuttle ready and get it where it needs to go...and the final tab could end up much more. The estimate includes $6 million to ferry the spaceship atop a modified jumbo jet to the closest major airport…so the price could skyrocket depending on how far the display site is from the airport. Only indoor, climate-controlled displays will be considered. "The orbiters will not be disassembled for transportation or storage," NASA insists in its nine-page request for information. One space shuttle appears headed to the Smithsonian Institution's National Air and Space Museum in Washington. The remaining two would be placed in storage ("No Disassemble!!!" - Brownie points for the reference) at Kennedy Space Center until their final homes are decided. If a space shuttle is too pricey, NASA is offering some of its shuttle main engines for anywhere between $400,000 and $800,000, not counting shipping costs (imagine the racecar you could make with that). The space shuttles, so you know, will not come with any main engines (NASA's version of batteries not included). NASA plans to retire Discovery, Atlantis and Endeavour by Sept. 30, 2010, in keeping with President George Bush's initiative calling for a return by astronauts to the moon by 2020 (when our natural resources have been depleted). A transition team set up by President-elect Barack Obama is reviewing all the options, however, including the possibility of keeping the shuttles flying beyond 2010. If that happens, then all space shuttle deals are off. So yeah…if you're interested in having your very own rocket ship…and you have $40-50 million in expendable income…then please loan me a few grand…and you can get a space shuttle…but please consider that you heard it from me first…and loan me a few grand. It'll go to good use, I swear. Pinky swear.

The Perfect Mate: What We Really Want - For years, the evolutionary psychologists have been saying that men want young pretty women for their mates and women want older men with money. This party line was recently underscored when scientists from the University of Gothenburg and the University of Oxford analyzed 400 personal ads in newspapers and Web sites and found that, indeed, men want attractive young women and women want older men with resources…but the big news in this study was that women stated in their ads that they also wanted nice-looking partners (Seriously? This is our research material now? Personal ads?). We eat this stuff up because the biggest mystery in everyone's life is why in the world we are attracted to one person and not another. Is it the face, body, personality or promises? The evolutionary psychologists claim they have the answer. It all started with the work of psychologist David Buss of the University of Texas. In 1985, Buss published an article based on interviews with more than 10,000 people from 37 cultures. Subjects were given a list of 18 possible characteristics of a mate and asked to rate those characteristics. Almost universally, both sexes put love, dependable character, emotional stability, and pleasing disposition first, and it wasn't until character number 5 that men and women differed. Men said looks were more important than women did, and status and money were more important to women. That study and the endless, mind-numbing studies of mate choice that followed all claimed that it must be in our genes for men to want young pretty women and women to want older established men because these result make "evolutionary sense." Young women are more fertile than old women and so they would pass on a man's genes, and men with resources can provide for offspring and improve a woman's reproductive success…but all these studies are deeply flawed for the simple reason that they ask people what they want in their mates, not what the actually get…and evolution only works on what we do, not on what we desire. From an evolutionary standpoint, it's not our ideal that counts, but who we actually make babies with.

For example, the author of this article said that George Clooney is her ideal mate. He's rich, popular, and I bet he'd make a great father. Problem is, as far as I know, George is not interested in her. Although she might pencil him in as my ideal mate, the person she got, the person she has a child with, is nothing like George. Instead, he is younger than she is, without many resources…and obviously he got the older, less fertile woman from that standpoint. She is not alone in not getting her ideal mate. Do most men end up with young, pretty women? No, people tend to marry mates close to their same age. That's why those rich old guy/young buxom babe marriages are always in the tabloids, because they are so unusual. Do women always end up with hard working older men? No. Women marry guys their own age and social status and end up working just as hard as men to support a family. No matter what we might say to researchers, the truth is we all end up mating with people who are interested in us, people we run into, people who happen to look our way…and our "choices," more often than not, make no sense at all. It's usually a matter of being with people that make them happy…and if the chips fall as they may, sometimes they get married & have kids, sometimes they migrate to different demographic regions, sometimes they go with other mates they find more suitable, it's not exactly a primal instinctual thing like you see on the Discovery Channel where there's the one alpha male and his harem of baby mamas. It's more complicated than that. Why? Well, that's the mystery of free choice or Fate or whatever other theories are out there…and that's why we play the game. Have fun with it. Like I mentioned earlier...and Nicolas Cage said before me, "You are who you Love."

Anyway, that'll do it for today. No big plans tonight...but I'll probably hit the gym and walk around downtown to see some lights (Photo Project Day tomorrow) or watch a movie or something. I know, partying hard on a Saturday night, huh? Have a great weekend everybody!!!