Hard to believe that I've been doing this blog thing for over a year now. Still, I haven't been as regular in updates as I should be. I'm going to blame it on every one else who hasn't been regular (except Caitlin who has an excuse, what with being in England and Luke who actually has been very regular). When there's nothing new for me to read, it doesn't really encourage me to blog.
Still, I said I was going to get back to you in the morning after seeing Batman Begins. I didn't. And for that I'm sorry. It was good. I've seen it twice. You can all forget that Tim Burton and Joel Schumacher's films exist, as this films sets a new precedence for all comic book based films. This is a legitimately great film with a compelling story, great acting (Christian Bale IS Batman; Caine, Freeman and Neeson are fantastic; Holmes is cute and Cillian Murphy is creepy) and a top notch director in Christopher Nolan. Go see it. Even if you think you don't like Batman.
Regarding my post about Russell Crowe's newest film, Cinderella Man, some people get kind of grated by Russell's character. His recent "phone throwing incident" hasn't done much to help people's image of him. However, I encountered this interesting bit somewhere on the web. If this is all true, these people were lucky and were I in Russell's position I probably would have done something similar.
"As to the arrest itself, let's try for a few facts, just for a laugh...
"1. Russell Crowe was paying the better part of $4,000 per night for the use of a room which was supposed, among other things, to contain a working international telephone.
"2. By the time of the disputed incident he had been staying there for a week and the telephone had not worked properly in all that time.
"3. The hotel had failed to address the problem in any way, despite by this point having taken nearly $28,000 from Russell.
"4. After finding the phone to be no use for making an international call yet again Russell tried calling down to Reception to sort out the problem for the 7th time.
"5. Apparently being unable to make himself clearly understood he disconnected the phone, which he was entitled to do as its licensed user having given valuable consideration (nearly $28,000) for the duration of his booking, and took it downstairs to prove that it was not working.
"6. The receptionist was apparently unhelpful and rude, to the point where Russell lost his temper, (what on earth did the man say to get such a reaction?!), and threw the telephone at the wall, from where it rebounded and hit the recalcitrant clerk. This DOES NOT constitute assault in the 4th or indeed any other degree as again there is no evidence of intent to cause injury - an absolute prerequisite when bringing a charge of assault. What it does constitute is disorderly conduct and possibly criminal damage.
"7. Why was the receptionist so rude to a man known to have a short fuse, and at a time of day (4.20am) which repeated academic research has shown to be the lowest point of the human psyche?
"8. What if any training policy and customer service policy does the hotel have and did the receptionist comply with them?
"9. Why did the hotel make no effort to provide a working telephone after receiving complaints every day for a week? What is the hotel's equipment replacement policy and did the hotel's staff comply with it? The Mercer's contract with Russell included the use of a working telephone for which, and for other services including common courtesy from the hotel's staff, he had paid nearly $28,000.
"10. Where has the figure of $1,000,000 in damages come from? No jury, American or otherwise, is going to award such a sum for a 1" long cut, which has caused no permanent damage of any kind and which will be invisible to the naked eye in six months' time. If a jury did make such an award it would be struck down on appeal for being a perverse award, as the law requires.
"Moreover, Russell has an overwhelming case for a counterclaim of contributory negligence which could reduce any award by as much as 50%." -- Amelie Smith, London, England.