Jeezus on a damn cracker, this can’t be true: Medved is doing it again?! Yes, according to James Wolcott:
Unable to impugn (“Brokeback Mountain”) on the caliber of its acting, directing, etc, he’s reduced to whining that the film hasn’t been “honestly advertised,” as if he were some consumer advocate. Medved must think moviegoers are bigger idiots than he is. He couldn’t be more wrong. Nobody’s a bigger idiot than he is. …There are no recorded incidents of someone being lured into the cineplex under false pretenses and coming out Gay.
The “false advertising” crapola was what worked for Medved in the “Million Dollar Baby” flap last year, and I guess he figures that pony has a few more miles in him. Do these conservative culture warriors assume their supporters are dumb enough to beliee this, or are they just so cynical they know that of course they don’t, that of course the problem is with those FAGGOTS, but there are certain things you can’t say in public anymore (dammit!), even on the Factor.
I mean, I just can’t keep up.
OK, then.
Got my eyes checked today, just doing my best to keep the world’s “eyewear designers” in business. Seventy million frames in the store, and they all look the same. I considered some Buddy Holly Specials, but decided against embarrassing my friends and family and opted for the Usual — small horizontal frames that identify me as a pain-in-the-ass yuppie twit.
I should have gone for the Buddy Hollys. What ever happened to those frames so big you could spell your name out in little letters down the side?
The doctor said, “Have you considered Lasik?” I nearly fell on the floor. My old optometrist shared my feelings about Lasik: No. I know it’s worked for many, many people, but for me the calculus has always been, expense + lasers in your eyeballs + risk of losing your night vision + still having to wear reading glasses anyway vs. making peace with glasses. I vote for the latter. Wearing glasses is like smoking in that it gives you something to do with your hands, a way to procrastinate when someone asks you a difficult question — you can take them off, twirl them around, polish the lenses, resettle them on your nose…and then answer.
And yeah, sure, sometimes you lose them, knock them off the nightstand and later step on them. I’d still rather wear glasses than have back pain.
And I’d rather you have a good weekend than a bad one.
Connie said on January 20, 2006 at 6:45 am
Just got my new glasses as well. Much stronger, I’m afraid, but at least I can read wall mounted menus again. I replaced my oldturquoise layered with purple very cool plastic frames with yes, mall horizontal frames, but it most assuredly does not make me a yuppy twit.
270 chars
alex said on January 20, 2006 at 8:01 am
In keeping with my return to my Hoosier roots, my glasses are a dozen years behind the times. So are the lenses, but at least my prescription hasn’t really changed all that much. I do contacts mostly and I don’t care who sees me in my round John Lennon frames here at home. Pretty much only the people who ever see me naked ever get to see me in those.
In other news… I followed the Wolcott link to the Free Republic link and I am once again astounded to see how the have-nots in the culture wars perceive the haves. What’s with these taglines? I notice a lot of Rush Limbaugh-type aphorisms, kind of more hit-you-over-the-head than subtly clever. And so much rage. When I read this shit I become truly concerned that the next terrorist attacks aren’t coming from brown people but white.
792 chars
Dan said on January 20, 2006 at 8:05 am
Someone would have to be pretty sheltered to not realize beforehand what the movie’s about. I read and enjoyed Annie Proulx’ “Close Range” which contains the story “Brokeback Mountain.” From what I’ve read, the movie does a pretty good job with it.
I agree with you on the frames… what’s the deal with that, a thousand frames and little to choose from. Makes me think of Seinfeld’s episode on the frames they all liked.
Like the new look, Nance. 🙂
459 chars
Dwight Brown said on January 20, 2006 at 9:45 am
I’m pretty much in the same boat as you are with respect to Lasik, or anything else that involves shooting lasers into/cutting on my eyes, Ms. Nall.
My standard joke on the subject is, “If I got Lasik, I’d never be able to climb Everest.” Now that I think about it, though, this joke is probably only funny if you’ve actually seen me in person…
349 chars
Dorothy said on January 20, 2006 at 10:40 am
I can barely touch my own eyes when I get an errant eyelash in them. My stomach does somersaults just THINKING of a laser pointed at one of my eyes! I have 2 sisters and 1 brother who have had the surgery. I’ll just wear my glasses for all eternity and say “good for you” to anyone who tells me they’ve had Lasik surgery and it’s changed his/her life.
354 chars
alex said on January 20, 2006 at 10:59 am
I know plenty of people who are happy with the surgery, but has anybody read about Lasiks gone wrong? I have and it’s not pretty. I don’t plan to go under the knife — or the laser — for anything unless it’s a life-or-death situation.
235 chars
nancy said on January 20, 2006 at 11:07 am
Lasik complications are not as uncommon as you’d think. Most people who have problems have them with their night vision — I’ve heard it described as “like looking through a dirty windshield.” And I don’t know if it can be fixed.
That’s why I was surprised that someone like Tiger Woods, whose considerable livelihood depends on his vision, would get it done. As long as you can correct to 20-20 with lenses, why take the risk?
Although, I’ve known a dozen people who had the surgery, had great results, love the new life they’re livin’ and think it’s much improved. So different strokes, etc.
599 chars
Ricardo said on January 20, 2006 at 11:15 am
I got lasik surgery in 2002 at age 52. I’d worn glasses or contacts since age 9. My eyes became too dry to wear contacts so I went back to bifocals by then.
The doctor had performed tens of thousands of operations going back to the days of RK. He is the one that fixes other, cheaper doctor’s mistakes. I opted for the extra cost surgery that cuts the opening with a laser to get a perfect flap on the surface.
While in the pre-exam stage, I was offered a chance to see what monovision would look like. Monovision cuts one eye for reading and one for distance. It was incredible, it took about 30 seconds to want monovision.
I had the work done on a Friday, experienced the most amazing light show ever. Some patients complain about the smell, but I didn’t notice that. The next 24 hours are the hardest, the eyes are completely covered. You should not rub your eyes, especially while sleeping for 2 weeks, but that wasn’t a problem for me having worn contacts. I went back Saturday for a followup and was back at work on Monday. After two months, things were back to normal. Since that day I only wear sunglasses, poloroid because of increased sensitivity to sun.
I work with computers all day, now I don’t have the problem of ‘in between’ that comes with bifocals. With monovision, you do compromise a bit on both ends of the vision spectrum, but I never regret having it done. I was told I probably should get glasses for driving at night, but I can see well enough without. I would especially recommend lasik for the older folks.
1 Usually, your vision will not change that much at a later age so the work will last forever.
2 It makes life less complicated and confusing.
Don’t go to one of those places that is the cheapest or does other kinds of laser surgery/cosmetic work. And don’t get the do-it-yourself lasik kit, you will be disappointed.
1886 chars
nancy said on January 20, 2006 at 11:29 am
Do-it-yourself lasik — snicker.
Ricardo touches on a big problem with lasik — the getting-what-you-pay-for part. I can’t imagine putting my actual eyes in the hands of people who buy billboards advertising their low-low rates.
On the other hand, it ain’t cheap. And it ain’t covered by insurance. If I’m going to spend a few grand for an uninsured vanity procedure, it’s going to be liposuction. Or maybe one of those re-virginization procedures. (Kidding!)
473 chars
mary said on January 20, 2006 at 11:36 am
I hope you didn’t go to Lenscrafters. They wouldn’t let me in once, moments after closing. I saw people in there and everything, just like Oprah at Hermes in Paris.
I am in a wonderful phase of eyesight, when nearsightedness is being corrected, temporarily, by the onset of farsightedness. My glasses are actually less corrective than they were 20 years ago. I am told this will pass, but for a little while, I’m seeing slightly better. I think the next stage is bifocals, when both vision defects win.
509 chars
Connie said on January 20, 2006 at 11:51 am
If I were going to spend a couple thousand on Lasik it would be for my 18 yr old, not my middle aged eyes. I also wore contact lenses starting at age 9, wore them for 40 years, the last 10 with reading glasses. Gave them up a year ago for full time bifocles and am happy. Except for the inability to wear sunglasses or find clip-ons for sale.
Around here one of the big Lasik advertisers gives free Lasik to local celebs who agree to do ads. Like the former Notre Dame football coach. Current ads feature the ND Women’s basketball coach. And what is a grown woman doing with a name like Muffet.
ANd while we’re on the subject of sports (ha) may I brag? My senior swimmer cut an amazing 6 seconds off her time in the 500 free last night, and will be fourth seed in the all conference girl’s swim finals tomorrow.
We still can’t figure out we got this athlete kid, cause it certainly isn’t in our genes.
919 chars
Ricardo said on January 20, 2006 at 11:57 am
I used my medical savings account through work for part of the surgery. At least the first $2000 was tax free.
111 chars
MarkH said on January 20, 2006 at 12:28 pm
No unnecessary eye surgery for me, either…EVER. I’ve never even had contacts. I’m more in Dorothy’s camp, especially since an eye doctor blew my older sister’s simple cataract procedure. She’s not blind, but something slipped during the procedure and one eye is definitely impaired. I have done just fine with glasses for 40+ years and will continue to do so. Also, I share other sentiments about eyeglass frame variety; it seems everthing is homogenized-narrow/skinny.
471 chars
Danny said on January 20, 2006 at 12:55 pm
Connie, what was her time? I sometimes swim in a lane adjacent to one of San Diego county’s best girls. She does about a 4:44 500 Y, which pretty much smokes me and even the majority of the boys.
This girl, Whitney Spence, has a swim scholarship to Stanford starting next year.
282 chars
Connie said on January 20, 2006 at 2:19 pm
Nowhere near 4:44, Dorothy, which is Olympic caliber. Looks like there might be a partial swim scholarship to Butler, which officially does not give athletic scholarships. Her previous time was 5:44.72, new best time 5:39.0x, forget the hundredth. So not quite 6, more like 5.68 seconds improvement.
You know Nancy, one thing I miss on the new layout is email links. I could have emailed Dorothy directly and spared all of you my motherly bragging.
456 chars
Danny said on January 20, 2006 at 2:59 pm
Connie, time for a new optical prescription? 😉
48 chars
Dorothy said on January 20, 2006 at 3:18 pm
All those damned “D” names look alike, don’t they?!
Seriously – Connie you need to get a pair of transition lenses!! I wear bifocals – have for at least 9 years – and I love my transitions. They change to a darkish grey color when I’m in sunlight.
Any of you can e-mail me when you like – but I really love the open-mike style of communicating here with each other. We’re like a family, right? And families brag about their kids to each other. At least mine does.
While I’m on the topic of bragging, the Greenville newspaper did a profile of our subdivision in last Sunday’s paper and they photographed the inside of our house! I am clueless how to insert a hyperlink. If you go to my profile at flickr (truvy57) you can click on the link I have there.
770 chars
Dorothy said on January 20, 2006 at 3:24 pm
Transition lenses – I meant the photogray variety – they change to sunglasses in the sunlight. I think transisition lenses refers to the “no line” bifocals. My bad.
166 chars
Michael G said on January 20, 2006 at 3:54 pm
I also just got new glasses in the last two weeks. I’ve been wearing Transitions for some years now and am completely sold. There are only two problems, both easily solvable. One is that, as Ricardo observed, there is often a focus “no-mans” land when working on a computer. I solved that with an $8 pair of supermarket reading glasses. The other problem is the sunglasses one that Connie pointed out. That can be solved as well. As many half blinded drivers have discovered, Transitions lenses must be actually exposed to sunlight to darken. While sitting in the car, one’s head is (usually) in the shade so the lenses don’t turn dark but it is still bright as can be outside. A solution is “Fitovers”. Google it. This is a line of sunglasses that, as the name implies, fit over a pair of regular glasses. I bought a pair and have been a happy driver ever since. They look pretty dorky but I’m just trying to drive, not make a fashion statement. I wouldn’t want any laser surgery for myself but I also have several friends who have had a happy experience with lasik surgery. It’s the weekend!
1108 chars
Connie said on January 20, 2006 at 6:49 pm
Duh. Sorry for ignoring you Danny. It’s even worse you know, since my new stronger glasses are like 3 weeks old. Yes thank you it is the weekend. We are trying to plan one of our occasional dinner treks to meet our dear friends who live 100 miles away somewhere near the halfway point, but the weather forecast has changed to dire warnings of lots of snow tonight, so for now it’s a maybe.
393 chars
brian stouder said on January 20, 2006 at 9:51 pm
OK – so I read Wolcott’s piece, and it raises a few questions. First, why would anyone who dislikes a simplistic cultural sniveler like Medved turn around and enjoy a sneering cultural sniveler like Wolcott? That guy’s snide condescension is always just short of intolerable, except when it simply IS intolerable.
Second – why should anyone (and particularly the oh-so-advanced cultural wonk Wolcott) accept that an industry-invented promotional schtick like an awards show (such as the Golden Globes, or the almighty Oscars) is any sort of indicator of the intrinsic cultural (or artistic) value of any particular movie? I mean, good movies may indeed win awards – but to say “this movie must be significant because the movie industry gave it an award” is no more valid than to say that Haliburton is a great company because the oil industry gave it an award.
And – what is Wolcott’s problem with Chris Matthews? Matthews seems to get a particularly large amount of scorn from folks on the left – for no reason that I can understand.
Finally – wasn’t it oddly interesting how Wolcott shifted so effortlessly from utter condemnation of various lampoons of BBM, into issuing imprimaturs for others? To paraphrase Nance, when it comes to Wolcott’s (and other icons of the left side of the blogosphere) arbitrary spinning of current events and pop-cultural, I just can’t keep up…
..except to say, ‘leftwing cultural warrior’ Wolcott is as much a putz as Medved.
1472 chars
Dave said on January 21, 2006 at 11:51 am
I know three lasik surgery gone bad stories, one resulted in the person having to take a disability pension, her vision was screwed up so bad. I’ve lost track and don’t know if she got any settlements or what the final outcome was.
Still, never thought about it in terms of cut rate vs. premium surgery and I’m sure its true. I, too, know others who’ve had it done and love it, including the monovision surgery discussed above. I thought that would set you bonkers looking at the world with two eyes adjusted differently but what do I know?
548 chars
alex said on January 21, 2006 at 7:10 pm
Good point, Brian. But you know what? People who hate demagogues almost always seem to forgive the ones who are basically on their side.
I know plenty of intelligent Republicans who get absolutely enraged about anything Michael Moore says or does, really out of proportion I think. Raise a comparison with what Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter do and the Republican can’t really see it. “Oh, they don’t really represent my point of view and nobody takes them seriously and they’re pretty harmless. Oh, but that Michael Moore… .” Let’s face it, it’s a guilty pleasure having your side represented by someone who really pisses the other side off.
And I find Wolcott very pleasurable to read, by the way.
706 chars
brian stouder said on January 21, 2006 at 8:34 pm
“I know plenty of intelligent Republicans who get absolutely enraged about anything Michael Moore says or does, really out of proportion I think. Raise a comparison with what Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter do and the Republican can’t really see it. ”
Well – I beat a track into the theater to see F-9/11, and I enjoyed the pic very much. The first half was clever and funny, and the second half was suitably serious – even if I don’t share his POV. Moore was also very good with Roger & Me.
For the record, I have always detested Limbaugh from the first time I heard him….he is a condescending lip-flapper who surfs the waves like any skillful demagogue, and he strikes me as being akin to the rooster who proudly takes credit for the sunrise in the morning.
Anyway – I just wanted to emulate Nance’s rant-posture, regarding Wolcott (and indeed, writing in rant-mode is fun!). I probably would have skipped the whole thing, but I was genuinely struck by Wolcott’s inclusion of Chris Matthews – which seems to be a recurring theme on the left side of the blogosphere (or at least, what bits of the left that I see)
And finally for the record, Roger Ebert wrote a very fine review of Brokeback Mountain, which has whetted my appetite to go see it…even despite that he seems to also indicate that the ‘powerful ending’ involves the violent demise of one of the main characters. (in my rapidly advancing old age, I have less and less desire to pay see good folks getting hurt)
1492 chars
alex said on January 21, 2006 at 9:07 pm
Brian, I’m not sure what Wolcott’s or anybody’s antipathy toward Matthews is all about because I really don’t know Matthews. I avoid pundits on TV like the plague that they are.
177 chars
JK said on January 23, 2006 at 8:33 am
What’s wrong with Chris Matthews? How could anyone be so thin-skinned as to be offended by this upstanding, objective paragon of journalism, who recently compared Michael Moore to Osama Bin Laden?
272 chars
brian stouder said on January 23, 2006 at 9:58 am
“who recently compared Michael Moore to Osama Bin Laden?”
Oh, please! If hyperbole is a sin, then anyone who is even slightly entertaining will burn in hell for all eternity.
Chris Matthews has the distinction of having been IN the game, working for Tip O’Neil back in the day, and having worked in election campaigns and so on.
Plus, after college, during the Vietnam war, he served his nation by doing a hitch in the Peace Corps in Africa. So he’s a real-deal guy, I think.
I don’t agree with him all the time, but for God’s sake – how many other folks with yap-shows on cable spend a week or two at Walter Reed talking with – and listening to – some of the soldiers with shattered bodies home from Iraq?
Just sayin’ – I will never disagree with any criticism of fakes and frauds like the Nut Factor guy, or Uncle head-Rush, or Ann Colder…..
Matthews has earned his stripes
897 chars